FANDOM


  • Thanks for rewriting the "Marshmallow Surprise" page. Every bit of plagiarism-removal helps.

      Loading editor
    • Hey, no problem. Happy to help.

        Loading editor
    • Quick note: if you have a rewritebox, normally, you'd leave your writing there until it's been reviewed. That way it can be proofread before being added to an article.

      Also, two small critiques:

      • Using "then" in the middle of a sentence usually isn't necessary.
      • You only put a comma before the word "and" if the second part of the sentence states the subject. (Or when you're listing things.) I don't know if that made a lot of sense... Here are some examples.
        • Correct: He went to the store, and he ate.
        • Correct: He went to the store and ate.
        • Inorrect: He went to the store, and ate.
        Loading editor
    • Ah, alright. Thanks for the notice.

        Loading editor
    • I'm worried that your plot summaries are just rewordings — and not actual rewrites — of stolen plots. Revenge of the Lawn Gnomes and some of the other summaries you've done still seem to follow the same structure as the original summary.

      I'm not sure we can say that these are "original" — if they were influenced by something else.

        Loading editor
    • How so? I feel I've kept my summaries as different as possible. I've added details that aren't in the stolen plots, and I've followed the stories in the correct order of events, as opposed to many of BB's summaries which have events completely out of order. You can remove the lawn gnomes summary if you want, but I don't personally feel it's a rewrite at all.

        Loading editor
    • >I feel I've kept my summaries as different as possible.

      I just thought there were some wording/structure similarities — which could be coincidental — but I wanted to double check with you. Were you reading BB's summary when you wrote the new summary?

        Loading editor
    • Sorry, I hope I didn't come across as rude. I did look over BB's summary a bit, but all words are my own and I tried to keep it as different as possible. I looked over my summary, and there definitely are some similarities, so I understand your suspicion. I altered a few sentences to get rid of those, so hopefully it's better and more original sounding now. If you want if altered further, or removed, I don't mind.

        Loading editor
    • >I hope I didn't come across as rude.

      Not really.

      >I did look over BB's summary a bit, but all words are my own and I tried to keep it as different as possible.

      It was just little things. As an example, the use of the word "produce" in the first paragraph.

      >If you want if altered further, or removed, I don't mind.

      But, if it's in any way based on his work, is it fair to call it original?

        Loading editor
    • I guess that's your call. I would never pass off his work as my own, and I've always tried to avoid making my summaries sound like rewordings, I'm sorry if this, or any other I've written comes off as that, but it was never intentional. I can see the similarities you're talking about, but I really don't think my summaries sound anything like his. 

        Loading editor
    • I suppose there's a distinction to be made between "influenced by" and "based on".

      Did you write the summary using the book or just using the existing summary?

        Loading editor
    • As I read the book, I wrote the summary.

        Loading editor
    • Okay, then I'd say that's original.

      Thanks for helping to clear this up!

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, no problem.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.