Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2008-10 > 1224704519

From: Janis L Gilmore <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] APGQ article & plagiarism
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:41:59 -0700
In-Reply-To: <>

Well, as an English major I shouldn't admit it, but this clarification was
quite helpful to me, Tom.

Particularly the indication that three sentences justifies an offset quote.
I have had trouble judging that in the past, and while I realize there is
some room for flexibility, it's nice to have a rule of thumb.

(I sometimes feel that I spend more time finding out what I don't know than
I spend exhibiting what I do know.)

Janis Walker Gilmore

On 10/23/08 3:11 AM, "Tom Jones" <> wrote:

> It's gratifying to know that this article is being and discussed, but
> the focus on word count seems to be missing an important point: we
> should cite a source for all concepts that are not our own. It doesn't
> matter if they are expressed entirely in our own words or we use a small
> or large number of the creator's words. (This is the intent of the
> American Historical Association standard that the article quotes.) The
> three-word count applies to quotation marks, not attribution. It's part
> of a "rule of 3" sometimes taught in high school and college composition
> classes: use quotation marks for 3 or more of another author's words;
> use block quotations for 3 or more sentences (or lines) written by
> another author; ask permission to quote 3 or more paragraphs of another
> author's work. So far as I know, these guidelines are "soft," not hard
> and fast rules, but I find them useful. Sometimes in genealogical
> writing we put just one word in quotation marks (for example --- Smith's
> deed says he was "of" Fairfax County). It's good to know this wasn't
> clear in the article. I hope the explanation adds clarity. ---- Tom
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: