Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 24, 2021 at 11:47 comment added ScottishTapWater Plagiarism requires intent to deceive or at least reckless disregard for the impression you're giving the reader as to whether or not work is yours. At worst, this is just poor citation hygeine. Although in this instance, a block quote is probably worthwhile
Dec 23, 2021 at 11:08 history edited WoJ CC BY-SA 4.0
typo, removing thanks in advance, ...
Dec 22, 2021 at 7:40 comment added IY2 I do not think it is plagiarism. If it is, then we should normalize quoting complete paragraphs taken from other research papers. If the original text is simpler to read then why to make it complicated by paraphrasing it.
Dec 22, 2021 at 0:00 history tweeted twitter.com/StackAcademia/status/1473443192385245184
Dec 21, 2021 at 22:39 history became hot network question
Dec 21, 2021 at 20:40 comment added henning no longer feeds AI Why would you do this?
Dec 21, 2021 at 15:57 comment added Louic You should consider reading and understanding the original text, then keeping only the parts that are directly relevant for your research. It is unlikely that both the details of the bone regeneration process at the cellular level, and the precise timings of the resorption phases are relevant for your research. This may not be plagiarism, but it is most likely an indication of lack of understanding and / or lazyness. On top of that, you have made the original text worse by paraphrasing it (harder to read and understand).
Dec 21, 2021 at 15:21 answer added Scott Seidman timeline score: 16
Dec 21, 2021 at 14:54 history edited Snijderfrey CC BY-SA 4.0
fixed a typo
Dec 21, 2021 at 14:49 answer added Arno timeline score: 41
Dec 21, 2021 at 14:39 answer added Buffy timeline score: 2
S Dec 21, 2021 at 14:31 review First questions
Dec 21, 2021 at 14:49
S Dec 21, 2021 at 14:31 history asked Raymond CC BY-SA 4.0