5

Niall C. discovered (and gave notice)that content was directly copied without attribution from IMDB to provide this answer.

Unfortunately, I edited the answer to improve clarity and add paragraph breaks before the comment was posted. Kevin then edited the answer to indicate that it was a quote from IMDB--but it was no longer a quote (because of my edit).

Should the text be returned to its original state (with Kevin's addition of attribution and link [with some additional text to explain "this film" refers to the 2011 version of The Thing]) so that it is actually a quote?

Since the answer was upvoted and accepted, deletion might be too harsh. (The answer addressed the stated question poorly, so acceptance is surprising. I would be tempted to be harsh because I was taken in by this post.)

| |
  • 4
    Edit the IMDB entry to match? – Kevin Aug 13 '13 at 21:26
  • @Kevin That would be a bit weird if people looked at edit history--the answer quotes a version at IMDB that written later (time travel is not supposed to be possible! :-). OTOH, most of the edit here would (I feel) improve the FAQ post at IMDB. I think I will wait for more community input before taking action. – Paul A. Clayton Aug 13 '13 at 21:41
  • 8
    Well, we are a scifi site. If anyone can edit posts through time, it's us. – Kevin Aug 13 '13 at 21:43
4

The answer has been unaccepted, after a more thorough reading I don't think it even addresses the question, and there is now a proper answer, so I have deleted the answer in question.


For the moment, I've pulled the part you changed significantly out of the quotation block. The only reason I didn't delete it outright was because it was upvoted and accepted, implying several people found it helpful, and the only other answer was a short one-liner. If there is a consensus that it's not an answer or the new answer has enough of the information, I'd be fine deleting it.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .