Talk:Germanic New Medicine

Plagiarized article.

This article is plagiarizedRaoulDuke 18:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The user who created it appears also to be the user at the other Wiki who wrote the article. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah. We're okay with that, I assume? RaoulDuke 19:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Listener, where are you getting that info from? All he said on his talk page is "I have the rights to copy the full stuff from these articles", which doesn't necessarily make him the author. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The article on the other Wiki (which looks like a single-user Wiki) had only one author, but someone should sign up on that Wiki and make sure that the users are the same. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

please look here: http://www.ariplex.com/nmwiki/index.php?title=License AnonG 19:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

(EC)The article having a single author doesn't mean that guy is our perp. Don't see why signing up at that wiki would be necessary to clarify it - we could just ask AnonG whether he's the author. Thing is, will it make any difference to whether we use it? Their content is free to use either way (see the site's license statement!) but I don't much like using articles on RationalWiki which were written for some other site or purpose. At least not without a major overhaul to RWify them. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:20, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Methinks these articles need major overhauls to make them legible, not to mention their lack of specific references. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

well, the texts are not identic. References are available: court rules (in german language however), many newspaper articles (mostly in german, some in italian, a few in french and norwegian), and about 4 or 5 articles in (peer reviwed) scientific journals. I will add that lated today. AnonG 19:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)