Plagarism ?

Someone has been filling significant amounts of the body of this text with plagarized material from "How To Think Like A Computer Scientist: Learning with C++" by Allen B. Downey.

The two sentences that struck me as odd were: "So far we have looked at the elements of a programming language---variables, expressions, and statements---in isolation, without talking about how to combine them." in the "Composition (Operator Precedence)" section and "A natural way to represent a point in C++ is with two doubles." in the "Structures" section of the book. The former sentence is from chapter 2, section 2.19, while the latter is from chapter 8, section 8.2 of the aforementioned book by Allen Downey. A cursory check of the surrounding text seems to have also been copied.

If this work was copied with the permission of Allen Downey, I apologize for playing Chicken Little. --Chuck Hoffmann 08:01, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've checked that on google and it seems there are also references to "So far we have looked at the elements of a programming language" in other works like "How to Think Like a Computer Scientist von Allen B. Downey: Java Version" http://ada.rg16.asn-wien.ac.at/~javafs/cs/ and then found http://allendowney.com/cs230spring02/code/hw09/text.txt that has the GNU Free Documentation License (Ive downloaded the last one) ... so we are cool, I'll add the last work to the list of docs that can be "predated" on as soon as you or any other user checks that what I said is correct (no need to remove that frases of the work so far...), I not calling ya "Chicken Little" :) at this moment (do you know a reference to the story in question? I get the general ideia but dont have a cultural reference)

Humm Ive found this...

"Chicken Little" is a story for teaching courage.
Don't be a chicken little.
Don't be afraid.
The sky is not falling.

http://eleaston.com/chicken.html is this it ? (I think its a bed time story right ?, it seems that there are some movies about it also :) )

PS: Ill add the actions taken by me to verify that the work did in deed have the right copyrights (or not) to the forword/reader section so to prevent erroneos warnings (or reduce them) --Panic 20:29, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Just copied the http://allendowney.com/cs230spring02/code/hw09/text.txt Programming:The_way_of_the_program --Panic 00:40, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You have only found additional versions of the work Chuck is referencing. The first is a translation of Mr. Downey's text, so I don't know what it says; but the second is in fact a GNUFDL'ed version of Mr. Downey's work. However, there are several problems with its use. First, Mr. Downey's work is GNU-FDL version 1.1, while we use version 1.2.; as the source text does not declare "GFDL version 1.1 and all future versions", but only states version 1.1, it can not be used under our license. Secondly, just because a work is GFDL'ed doesn't give us the right to simply copy and paste portions of that work here. The GFDL requires appropiate credit be given to the author of a work, and right now that has not happened. I'm considering labeling this entire work a copyright violation, and listing it for deletion on those grounds. Gentgeen 20:24, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ok found the original source...

http://web.archive.org/web/20030211041642/www.ibiblio.org/obp/thinkCScpp/

How To Think Like A Computer Scientist Learning with C++ by Allen B. Downey

referred as an open textbook and as no direct reference to a license is given it falls under the Public Domain it seems that many other sources may exist and many other works may have "cross polarizations" from it...

" Allen B. Downey, professor of Computer Science at Wellesley College, originally wrote "How to Think Like a Computer Scientist"in Java, as a textbook for his computer science class. Over the summer of 1998, Professor Downey converted the Java version of "How to Think Like a Computer Scientist" into C++. Since then, the Java version has undergone several major changes, including the addition of Abstract Data Types such as Stacks, Queues, and Heaps. The C++ version of the open textbook however, did not receive these changes, that is...until now."

humm... and then the copy I have posted in wikibooks has GFDL 1.1 that states

"Aggregation with Independent Works

A compilation of the Document or its derivatives with other separate and independent documents or works, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, does not as a whole count as a Modified Version of the Document, provided no compilation copyright is claimed for the compilation. Such a compilation is called an ``aggregate, and this License does not apply to the other self-contained works thus compiled with the Document, on account of their being thus compiled, if they are not themselves derivative works of the Document."

Even worse, that book, article has/includes a license in it raw state (not filled in) so even if we can attest that it intended to use it, if it's not filled it would fall under published under the Public Domain, right ?

GNU-FDL version 1.1 and GNU-FDL version 1.2+ all have references that allow the use of "snips"

as for: "Secondly, just because a work is GFDL'ed doesn't give us the right to simply copy and paste portions of that work here."

Most of the the work here is on Wikipedia GFDL texts/articles so it will also suffer from that problem ?

I'm not a lawier but that is my interpretation, as for the stated problem this is an open book you can add yourself the needed references to Allen B. Downey in an appropriate section, as you can see was already some actions had already been to rectify this, it's better than removing all of the content...--Panic 21:56, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have also checked that some other works on wikibooks have snips from other works on wikibooks (not only references from wikipedia) --Panic 22:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The first version you said you couldn't read is in English (one topic seems that to be in German, enter any one of the topics and you will see...)

As for the Java references that not the problem as many of the content applies to any other programming language.

A clarification that is missing (and your comment made me check into) and other readers/users should be able to read (you should have put a link to it), is that even if a grave problem arises the work WILL NOT BE DELETED, the page will be blanked but the work accessible with the history function (moderators should have a template for that).

As far as I know no author has made a claim, not even wikipedians, a reader made a remark that was correct but was checked and does have some very good bases to fall under a GDFL or a compatible license.

I know moderators are busy people and all that, but I think you should get deeper on your role... or at least state that you are busy at the moment not let us hung with the threat of deletion as you did (on top of that, it seems that a simple action (just reference/credit) taken by yourself would solve part of the moderation problem you have), You also missed all the prev. points/questions on this page that lack moderation attention, this regrettable because it prevents or at least makes people think twice about contribution, Paddu as a question waiting on [Wikibooks:Staff_lounge] since October, probably most of the problems I and C++/CPlusPlus users had could have been prevented, a similar topic was already on your own talk page waiting for some time.

As a first time wikibook user/contributor this hasn´t been an overall good experience for me, I thought the idea was to bring content and most people seem to spend the time raising problems and debating small editorial questions, one thing that I observed is that contributors don't tend to spend much time debating such mood points. As a programmer I tend to build on other peoples work not reinvent the wheel, I have based the structure of this book in some books I have and if seen useful and ready to use, with compatible licenses, I will be prone to use them in place of doing all from basic.

I'm not saying that you are doing a bad job but at this time it seems incomplete, can you refer an email (in accord with the wikibooks protocol) so to solve this problem ASAP, I will send all works I have found and in future, any other anyone else intends in using so to expedite the license checks, txs. --Panic 05:58, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I´ll move the references to a proper section as soon as this is resolved... --Panic 06:40, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Images...

Panic had a problem in including pics .png .jpg and .gif to the book, it must be problems with wikibooks upload function, Paddu pointed out that direct references to a WEB resource that ends with any of the supported formats would work... IT DOES

Reference links

I see a bunch of useful-looking C++ reference links at User:Paddu http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:Paddu . Should I copy them to this book in the "Reference Sites" section ? -- DavidCary 20:37, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You can and should add anything useful and on topic to the appropriate section if none exist add one but stay on the topic. --Panic 01:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Q

Ok, there are 3 versions: This book (monolithic), this book (multiple pages), and the Programming:C plus plus book. Which one of these versions is the active version? Where should i link to / contribute? -- Max 10 Sept 2005

Max, you should contribute to the Programming:C plus plus book. This book is going to be deleted in 10 days. MShonle 19:04, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

A

There are 2 books, not with the same content, The Programming:C Plus Plus and the Programming in C -/- -/- (I'm trying a merge into Programming in C -/- -/- as "requested" by moderators (you can also help), it can't be a direct copy because of the dif. structure and content, the Monolithic version is being turned into chapters (using transclusion) to provide a easy way to copy/print the most important parts of the Programming in C -/- -/- book (not finished yet as can be asserted by the index, but the content is the same only displayed in a dif. format (I'm marking stuff as I do that, I probably should make it more evident to readers/writers), any help also apriciated on that... txs for your interest in contribution to the book.

PS: If you wish we can distribute some tasks so not to step in each others actions--Panic 07:13, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

So let me know if i got this right:

I should link to the multi-page version of this book, since this is the future. New stuff / Corrections should also go into the multi-page versions. If a new chapter is added, :_OnePage and :_Index need to be updated, but nothing else.

The things currently in the :_OnePage need to go into different chapters, and :_OnePage and :_Index need to be updated.

Now the only question i have left is: Some pages have a colon (e.g. Programming_in_C -/- -/-:_Introduction) and some don't (Programming:C_-/-_-/-_Programming_Language). Which version is the way to go?

-- Max 11 Sept 2005

Hi Max. You should link to the Programming:C plus plus version. That book currently uses space separators for chapter name, although it should really be colons. What you use right now shouldn't be a big deal: so long as it's consistent with whatever style the links near it use, then when it's all changed and standardized it will become correct. MShonle 19:04, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi MShonle. Thank you for the feedback. However, my indented audience are students taking a beginners C++ programming course. From comparing the two books I found the C -/- -/- way easier to read and understand for beginners. So as longs as there are two book I prefer this one. -- Max 11 Sept 2005

Well, I suppose that's the catch here. That is, the "so long as their are two books" part: this book will be deleted by the 21st. (It's a rather long and sorted story, but see the Wikibooks:Staff lounge for more details.) The most useful of this book's contents, consistent with the other version, should be merged with the existing book. You can merge the contents of the two into Programming:C plus plus if you'd like. But as a resource this book won't be up on Wikibooks so anything you work on here won't be posted, unless you (or someone else) adds it to Programming:C plus plus. MShonle 23:04, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Q

Been looking on how TOCs work, can we use the local javascript to hide/show it, how ? --Panic 07:12, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A

__NOTOC__ and __TOC__ are explained at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Section#Table_of_contents_.28TOC.29 -- does that answer your question ?

Reversion of the work and related pages

I saw a reversion done by Dysprosia, no great problem there, but with it other changes were lost, so I propose reversions in accord to the use/warnings wikibooks places on them should only be done by people doing hard contribution (I call them major contributors) or by any other user in cases of vandalization if no loss of content occurs if so it should be edited out not reverted, if anyone has some problems please use this discussion area or read what is written in this discussion area (the why and how should always be found here so others can see it...) --Panic 19:15, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You are mistaken. Dysprosia 05:36, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

(cur) (last) 20:01, 17 Nov 2004 Panic2k4 M (reverted - yes and no this is a relevant reference not an add value to the context if portability of the context is to be maintained this info needs to be visible (se 2nd convention)) (cur) (last) 06:32, 17 Nov 2004 Dysprosia M (revert. internal wikilinks should be internal, that should be obvious) (cur) (last) 02:25, 17 Nov 2004 Panic2k4 M (The Programming Language - fix)

You are correct, I swear that I saw it, the edits times aren't that close, but could it have been a cross edit ?!? I do have been having huge problems with my ISP using "forced" cache proxy (or wiki not dealing with them properly)... sorry Ill correct my statement... What you did was not a reversion but due to your wording on the comment and the quick (and now confirmed as erroneous) check I did, I was lead on error, but even so the use of reversions does already have a warning from wikibooks, the proposal is valid in the sense it ports it to the conventions section...

So...

I propose reversions in accord to the use/warnings wikibooks places on them should only be done by people doing hard contribution (I call them major contributors) or by any other user in cases of vandalization if no loss of content occurs if so it should be edited out not reverted, if anyone has some problems with the content please use this discussion area or read what is written in this discussion area (the why and how should always be found here so others can see it...) --Panic 17:55, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Transclusion editing

I seems to have a problem with editing content that are included by transclusion. For example the external section have be edited and showing up if one look at the external section on its own. The old one still show up tho on the main page. Any idea / particular reason why ? -- KTC 08:11, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Forceful worked around it today by deleting and then reinserting the transclusion. Somehow, doesn't feel like that being a long term solution tho... -- KTC 21:58, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Sorry KTC, I did not get a notice for this post, txs for the help, I don't particularly master Wiki (or like it) but it is a good tool for this purpose, I've noticed that with transclusions the updates takes a little more time to become active, it's probably some kind of caching that the server/software does to speed stuff up, I've not taken the time to look into it but the updates do become active after a while...

As you did (or not) noticed this "work" is a fork after having had some problems with the last "active" contributor, one of the points under discussion was that the work should be split into chapter/sections, so and thinking on future contributors that have slow connections or software limitations on the edits, I've started splitting some more stable/static parts of the "work" using transclusions that in a future stage could be used to give a more modular look to the project, as my intention is to have at least one global look on the structure (so to facilitate the modification of the logical structure/display of content), a monolithic format is ideal for this as for grabbing a copy of the work, doing a print out or conversion to PDF etc...

Don't panic... use the same steps I do, as you are editing stuff turn on (Watch this page) and take a look on Recent Changes (wikibooks main) and that will keep you up to date with any edits... --Panic 05:09, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

TODOs

I saw that James Dennett started to use TODOs notes on the book, I was using commented out notes but the idea is probably more pleasant to readers that can see that a section is in evolution and to contributors than can add to it (no one likes to see TODOs :) ) I've made them a bit more visible and removed ''' messes up the text justification on long phrases, I have added

done with (You can copy-paste):

<div style="margin: 10px; padding: 5px; border: 1px solid red;">
;(TODO: <desc.>)
</div>

I have some ideas to the NOTEs and WARNINGs, I'll wait first for anyone to comment on the TODOs... if no one oppose I'll move it to the conventions and add the code to edit section, a wikibooks:template would be nice but I had not the time to see about them properly yet, the TOC should also be fixed, a smaller one (it seems that it can't be "hidden" by default but that will only be useful if we can use the hide/show javascript on it... --Panic 05:18, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)