This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
OK, I'm all for spreading knowledge but do I get some credit for actually writing what is now posted in this artivle 2 years ago in the Deborah Lipstadt article. Come on, I mean it's almost word for word the same as my original post in the section I called Academic Criticism. Check it out Zumbiz (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? What are you asking Zumbiz? If you've been working on WP for 2 years or more, you have surely figured out that articles (and sections, etc) are unsigned. So in that sense, no, you don't get "credit". However, the Lipstadt article presumably presumably has an intact edit history, so any contribution you made there is reflected in relevant diffs, for anyone looking.
I did not happen to know that similar material appeared in the Lipstadt article when I copied most of this article from the general Ward Churchill biography. But if I had stumbled across the similarity, I would have been thoroughly indifferent about the fact. At most I might have wanted to make sure that the two articles do not contradict each other about any of the same factual matters. I think the amount of discussion of the Churchill/Lipstadt debate is too much for this book article, but as a first pass I just copied what someone else had written... trimming and editing is, of course, very welcomed. LotLE×talk01:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]