Could you at least try to do more than just copy-pasting? I'm not asking for more content (I used short dictionary entries to kickstart articles myself), but at least make try to make it look like an encyclopedia entry. I edited this entry in that manner; you can see it's really not much work, but it goes a long way. --DirkB 18:29, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
DirkB, I would never coy and paste for an article. But it's the definition for a word. Not much to add but that. Your edit is also copy and paste, you pretty much just took away the bullet points. Chippeterson 6 September 2008
- Wow, you claim you never copy-pasted and then accuse ME of copy-pasting when I restructured your copy-paste job and introduced some more original language? Hilarious!
- I fully admit that my edit is heavily based on the dictionary definition because yes, that's the way it's defined. But you simply took the entire definition and even kept the non-encyclopedic bullet-point list formatting which is used in dictionaries such as the one you referenced.
- I'm not here for a semantic debate about how much you have to change before a copy-paste job becomes acceptable. I'm also not here to suddenly defend myself against your accusations after I damage-control'd your blatant copy-paste job. Whatever, dude. But if you insist that I copy-pasted by restructuring a dictionary definition into a more readable form, I will gladly take this to some sysop so we can both be banhammered. Trust me, at this point, I'd do it just for the Lulz. --DirkB 18:53, 6 September 2008 (EDT)