-1

I am not sure if this is the right way to post it:

https://stackoverflow.com/review/low-quality-posts/24859866

The answer may or may not be a good answer (pretty sure it's a bad answer), but I don't see how it's obviously something that should be deleted. It (badly) described what XSS was and why it was bad and then provided a valid link to an article about the subject.

Maybe it's close to being a link-only answer, but not completely. Or maybe it's spam? Advertising a blog article? But we can't just call any answer with a blog link spam. (Or do we?)

Basically, I can see that it's a bad answer, but that doesn't make it a "delete this" answer.

  • @RobertLongson hmmm, I had almost noticed that, but missed it. Is that sufficient to make it more than just a bad answer, and turn it into an answer that should be outright deleted? I won't always be able to tell what is or isn't copied from somewhere else, though in this case I could have. (could very easily have been posted as a quote, too, though it wasn't.) thanks – Dave Cousineau Dec 15 '19 at 12:06
14

The answer text is plagiarised from the link. We need people to answer in their own words, not just copy potentially copyrighted content to create their answer.

Plagiarism is not allowed

  • 1
    Well darn, if I knew that I would flag a lot more answers. I see a lot of people just copying from the sites they link to to make their answers answers. – S.S. Anne Dec 16 '19 at 1:27
  • 1
    @JL2210 indeed, this is news to me as well. I was under the impression that giving proper attribution would be enough. – Gimby Dec 16 '19 at 12:00
  • @Gimby the answer has no attribution. Just a link and some text. It doesn't say the text comes from the link. If you go to the link and read the page you'd find that text on the page. – Robert Longson Dec 16 '19 at 12:59
  • 2
    So all the OP would've needed to do was add "Source:" or even, god forbid, put a colon after the link? That could've easily been fixed – S.S. Anne Dec 16 '19 at 14:06
  • 2
    We're really looking for more from answers than a link and a copy of some of the text found at that link. Attribution would avoid plagiarism but we'd still end up potentially having to remove pages because of DMCA requests. Much better would be to write a response in your own words and include links as supporting evidence where necessary. – Robert Longson Dec 16 '19 at 14:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/392196/not-clear-on-why-i-failed-this-audit
meta.stackoverflow.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2020-10
118559
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:YHCBQIGVA3FE7LO7SFT4UAO5J43NKERJ
<urn:uuid:05d6ec22-3503-4a5e-a189-5baadb1ec395>
2020-02-19T12:19:56Z
151.101.193.69
text/html
sha1:TGAX6COOE5VBGUKOEUS4KSEKBMW5ZOFX
<urn:uuid:c7c1b39d-cb56-47ca-8ea3-df550ae76c8e>
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/392196/not-clear-on-why-i-failed-this-audit
response
<urn:uuid:33929450-7864-43ab-81b3-1f57bb0208c3>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2020-10
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for February 2020
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-52.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/