Informatics Educational Institutions & Programs

Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work – including their language and ideas – as your own, whether intentionally or inadvertently. Because it can happen easily and by mistake, all editors are strongly advised to actively identify any potential issues in their writing. Plagiarism can take several forms.

 N Copying from an unacknowledged source

• Inserting a text—copied word-for-word, or closely paraphrased with very few changes—from a source that is not acknowledged anywhere in the article, either in the body of the article, or in footnotes, the references section, or the external links section.

• The above example is the most egregious form of plagiarism and the least likely to be accidental.

 N Copying from a source acknowledged in a poorly placed citation

• Inserting a text—copied word-for-word, or closely paraphrased with very few changes—then citing the source somewhere in the article, but not directly after the sentence or passage that was copied.

• This can look as though the editor is trying to pass the text off as their own. It can happen by accident when inline citations are moved around during an edit, losing text–source integrity. It can also happen when editors rely on general references listed in a References section, without using inline citations.

 N Summarizing an unacknowledged source in your own words

• Summarizing a source in your own words, without citing the source in any way, may also be a form of plagiarism, as well as a violation of the Verifiability policy.

• Summarizing a source in your own words does not in itself mean you have not plagiarized, if you are still relying heavily on the work of another writer. Credit should be given in the form of an inline citation.

 N Copying from a source acknowledged in a well-placed citation, without in-text attribution

• Inserting a text—copied word-for-word, or closely paraphrased with very few changes from a copyrighted source—then citing the source in an inline citation after the passage that was copied, without naming the source in the text.

• Here the editor is not trying to pass the work off as their own, but it is still regarded as plagiarism, because the source's words were used without in-text attribution. The more of the source's words that were copied, and the more distinctive the phrasing, the more serious the violation. Adding in-text attribution ("John Smith states that ...") always avoids accusations of plagiarism, though it does not invariably avoid copyright violations. See Respecting copyright below for more on using copyrighted sources.

  Be cautious when using in-text attribution, because it can lead to other problems. For example, "According to Professor Susan Jones, human-caused increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide have led to global warming" might be a violation of NPOV, because this is the consensus of many scientists, not only a claim by Jones. In such cases, plagiarism can be avoided by summarizing information in your own words or acknowledging explicitly that while the words are from Jones, the view is widespread.

For avoidance of plagiarism of text copied from compatibly licensed copyleft publications and public domain publications, see also the section below: Copying material from free sources

You can avoid plagiarism by summarizing source material in your own words followed by an inline citation, or by quoting or closely paraphrasing the source, usually with in-text attribution (adding the author's name to the text) and an inline citation. The following examples are adapted from "What Constitutes Plagiarism?", Harvard Guide to Using Sources, Harvard University:

Regardless of plagiarism concerns, works under copyright that are not available under a compatible free license must comply with the copyright policy and the non-free content guideline. This means they cannot be extensively copied into Wikipedia articles. Limited amounts of text can be quoted or closely paraphrased from nonfree sources if such text is clearly indicated in the article as being the words of someone else; this can be accomplished by providing an in-text attribution, and quotation marks or block quotations as appropriate, followed by an inline citation.

If the source is in a language other than English, the contributor may be under the mistaken belief that the act of translation is a sufficient revision to eliminate concerns of plagiarism. On the contrary, regardless of whether the work is free, the obligation remains to give credit to authors of foreign language texts for their creative expression, information and ideas, and, if the work is unfree, direct translation is likely to be a copyright violation as well.^[9][10]

Charles Lipson states that all plagiarism rules "follow from the same idea: acknowledge what you take from others. The only exception is when you rely on commonly known information."^[11] Plagiarism is less a concern where the content both lacks creativity and where the facts and ideas being offered are common knowledge. Here are some examples where in-text attribution is generally not required, though you may still need to add an inline citation:

• use of common expressions and idioms, including those that are common in sub-cultures such as academia;^[12]
• phrases that are the simplest and most obvious way to present information; sentences such as "John Smith was born on 2 February 1900" lack sufficient creativity to require attribution.
• simple, non-creative lists of information that are common knowledge. If the list is drawn from another source (i.e., it is not common knowledge), or if creativity has gone into producing a list by selecting which facts are included, or in which order they are listed, then reproducing the list without citing its source may constitute plagiarism.^[13][14]
• mathematical and scientific formulae that are part of the most basic and general background knowledge of a field, E = mc² and F = ma (where, even in these cases, for deeper reader understanding, a citation may be best practice);
• simple logical deductions.

If you find duplicated text or media, consider first whether the primary problem is plagiarism or copyright infringement. If the source is not in the public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia, or if you suspect that it is not, you should address it under the copyright policies.

There are several methods to detect plagiarism: plagiarized text often demonstrates a sudden change from an editor's usual style and tone and may appear more advanced in grammar and vocabulary. Plagiarized material may contain unexplained acronyms or technical jargon that has been described in an earlier part of the plagiarized document. Because plagiarized material was written for other purposes, it is often un-encyclopedic in tone. An editor who plagiarizes multiple sources will appear to frequently and abruptly change writing styles.

An easy way to test for plagiarism of online sources is to copy and paste passages into a search engine. Exact matches, or near matches, may be plagiarism. When running such tests, be aware that other websites reuse content from Wikipedia. A list of identified websites which do so is maintained at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. It is usually possible to find the exact version in article history from which a mirror copy was made. Conversely, if the text in question was added in one large edit, and the text closely matches the external source, this is an indication of direct copying. When in doubt, double check search engine results with an experienced Wikipedian.

Another option is to utilize a plagiarism detector, such as those found at Category:Plagiarism detectors. Plagiarism detection systems, some of which are freely available online, exist primarily to help detect academic fraud. Wikipedia does not endorse, or recommend, any external services, so your own experience will be the guide.

It can also be useful to perform a direct comparison between cited sources and text within the article to see if text has been plagiarized, including too-close paraphrasing of the original. Here it should be borne in mind that an occasional sentence in an article that bears a recognizable similarity to a sentence in a cited source is not generally a cause for concern. Some facts and opinions can only be expressed in so many ways and still be the same fact or opinion. A plagiarism concern arises when there is evidence of systematic copying of the diction of one or more sources across multiple sentences or paragraphs. In addition, when dealing with non-free sources, be sure that any appropriated creative expressions are marked as quotations.

If you find an example of plagiarism where an editor has copied text, media, or figures into Wikipedia without proper attribution, contact the editor responsible, point them to this guideline, and ask them to add attribution. Attribution errors may be inadvertent, so intentional plagiarism should not be presumed in the absence of strong evidence.^[15] Start with the assumption of good faith; contributors may not be familiar with the concept of plagiarism. It may be helpful to refer them to Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Citing sources, and/or Help:Citations quick reference. Editors who have difficulties or questions about this guidance can be referred to the Help Desk or media copyright questions.

As well as requesting repair of the example you found, you may wish to invite the editor to identify and repair any other instances of plagiarism they may have placed before becoming familiar with this guideline. If an editor persists in plagiarizing, report the editor to the administrators' noticeboard. Be sure to include diffs that show both the plagiarism and the warnings.

It may not always be feasible to contact the contributor. For example, an editor who placed text three years ago and has not edited since is unlikely to be available to respond to the concerns that are raised. Moreover, while discovery of plagiarism can be rapid and inescapable—e.g., one visits a manufacturer's history page, then on turning to Wikipedia, finds manufacturer's verbatim text content appearing in the History section of the company's Wikipedia article—the process of correcting the text may be outside of the skill set of the individual discovering it, and so cannot take place immediately. Even if within the skill set, it may not be rapidly achievable by the discovering editor (e.g., if the process requires identifying alternative content or sources).

As such, whether or not one is able to contact the responsible earlier editor, the process of correcting Wikipedia content will lie to greater or lessor extent with editors currently visiting and actively involved with the article in question. Material that is plagiarized but does not violate copyright need not to be removed from Wikipedia, if its repair is possible. But it must be repaired, and until the repair is achieved, editors have the responsibility of identifying violating text, and alerting readers that the text is not in compliance with core Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

To repair plagiarism, an incoming editor can:

• edit the content to define the limits of the plagiarism (by adding quotation marks, or <blockquote> markup), and then attributing the content to the identified source;
• identify an additional source or sources relevant to the text content in question, then edit the content, paraphrasing per Wikipedia guidelines, so that it is fully consistent with the original and added sources.

Regardless of the specific approach among these used, until the repair is complete, information regarding the source article or file page must appear, and the sentence, section, or article containing substantial plagiarised content must be labeled with a template message (tag). Alternatively, and more radically, the unsourced material can be moved to the article's Talk page until its full repair can be accomplished.

This can begin with a commonsense question: Does it seem likely that the uploader is the original source? The person who scans an image from an 1825 textbook on herbs is unlikely to be the author, even if they have claimed {{PD-self}}. Sometimes doubts may be triggered by the professional quality of media, or by the exclusivity. If you suspect plagiarism, try to locate the original source through an online search engine such as Google Image Search. Other factors to consider include the editing history of the uploader and, with images, image metadata, such as Exif and XMP.^[16][17]

Frequently, a person who uploads and claims credit for another's image will leave the original image metadata, or a visible or invisible digital watermark, in place. If the author information conveyed by the metadata, or watermark, contradicts the author information on the image description page, this is a sign the image requires investigation. A user's original photographs can also be expected to have similar metadata, since most people own a small number of cameras; varied metadata is suspicious. Suspicions based on metadata should be checked with other editors experienced with images and other media.

For images and other media, the correct source and licensing information must be supplied, otherwise the files run the risk of deletion. Never use {{PD-self}}, {{GFDL-self}} or {{self}} if the image is not yours. If the source requests a credit line, e.g. "NASA/JPL/MSSS", place one in the author field of {{information}}.

The guidance in this section must not be read in isolation. Inline citations to a source are still required as described in the Verifiability policy and added to an article as explained in the guideline citing sources. Attribution as described in this section is an addition to those requirements.

For public-domain sources, using {{citation-attribution}}, {{source-attribution}}, or a similar attribution template is acceptable to acknowledge the work of others and still allow subsequent modification. See the next section for more on using attribution templates with compatibly licensed sources; the proper template may vary by the license of the source.

If the external work is under a copyleft license that removes some restrictions on distributing copies and making modified versions of a work, it may be acceptable to include the text directly into a Wikipedia article, provided that the license is compatible with the CC BY-SA and the terms of the license are met. (A partial table of license compatibility can be found at the Copyright FAQ). Most compatible licenses require that author attribution be given, and even if the license does not, the material must be attributed to avoid plagiarism. Attribution for compatibly licensed text can be provided through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation, which is usually placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page (see the section Where to place attribution).

Templates for compatibly licensed sources include:

• {{Dual}}: for content imported from a source that may be reused under both CC-By-SA 3.0 and GFDL
• {{CCBYSASource}}: for content imported from a source compatible for reuse under CC-By-SA 3.0 but not GFDL
• {{CC-notice}}: for content imported from a source compatible for reuse under CC-By-SA 3.0 but not GFDL

Care must be taken to check that what appears to be a compatible licence is indeed compatible. Some websites allow text to be copied for educational or non-commercial use. Such text is not compatible with the Wikipedia licences because the text must be free to be used and distributed commercially.

Text from the interfaces of software, unless the software itself is CC0 or public domain, are not compatible. Text here should be screenshot, and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons instead.

Whether it is copyright-expired or public domain for other reasons, material from public-domain sources is welcome on Wikipedia, but such material must be properly attributed. Public-domain attribution notices should not be removed from an article or simply replaced with inline citations unless it is verified that substantially all of the source's phrasing has been removed from the article (see #What is not plagiarism). Of course, citable information should not be left without cites, although the most appropriate citations should be used.

A public domain source may be summarized and cited in the same manner as for copyrighted material, but the source's text can also be copied verbatim into a Wikipedia article. If text is copied or closely paraphrased from a free source, it must be cited and attributed through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation, which is usually placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page (see the section "Where to place attribution" for more details).

If the external work is in the public domain, but it contains an original idea or is a primary source, then it may be necessary to alter the wording of the text (for example, not including all the text from the original work, or quoting some sections, or specifically attributing to a specific source an opinion included in the text) to meet the Wikipedia content policies of neutral point of view and Wikipedia:No original research (in particular the restrictions on the use of primary sources).

Avoiding plagiarism requires attribution, and this is best accomplished when a reader can easily compare the Wikipedia article to the source. Many public domain sources are online, and attribution can (and should) include hyperlink. When there is no online source, the editor should consider creating an exact copy of the source at Wikisource. The editor should also consider this if the online source is not available on a stable site or is in a form (e.g., a photocopied book) that is not readily convertible into simple text. This may be appropriate even when the source appears to be at a stable site and in an acceptable form, because the Wikisource site is under control of the Wikimedia foundation and other sites are not.

Wikipedia's content is dual-licensed under both the GFDL and CC BY-SA license models. Contributors continue to own copyright to their contributions, but they liberally license their contributions for reuse and modification. GFDL and CC BY-SA do require attribution. However, since Wikipedia's articles do not contain bylines, it is not necessary or appropriate to provide attribution on the article's face. As long as the licensing requirements for attribution are met (see the guideline for specifics), copying content (including text, images, and citations) from one Wikipedia article to another or from one language Wikipedia to another is not plagiarism as long as attribution is provided via the edit summaries.

If a Wikipedia article is constructed through summarizing reliable sources, but there is a paragraph or a few sentences copied from compatibly licensed or public-domain text which is not placed within quotations, then putting an attribution template in a footnote at the end of the sentences or paragraph is sufficient. To aid with attribution at the end of a few sentences, consider using a general attribution template such as the {{citation-attribution}} template for public-domain sources or {{CC-notice}} for compatibly licensed sources, {{Free-content attribution}} which is designed around material with an externally posted license, or use a source-specific attribution template such as {{DNB}}.^[18] Directions for usage are provided on the template pages.

If a significant proportion of the text is copied or closely paraphrased from a compatibly-licensed or public domain souce, attribution is generally provided either through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or a general attribution template such as {{source-attribution}}, or similar annotation, placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page. In such cases consider adding the attribution statements at the end of the Reference section directly under a line consisting of "Attribution:" ('''Attribution:''') in bold:^[19]

Attribution:

• Place appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation here

See, for example, Western Allied invasion of Germany and the Battle of Camp Hill.

A practice preferred by some Wikipedia editors when copying material from public domain or compatibly-licensed sources is to paste the content in one edit and indicate in the edit summary of the source of the material. If following this practice, immediately follow up with proper attribution in the article so that the new material cannot be mistaken for your own wording.

To provide proper attribution when copying verbatim from a public domain or compatibly-licensed source, you can either:

• Put the whole text of the source (if small enough) in quotation marks or blockquotes, followed by an inline citation; or
• For sections or whole articles, add a section-wide or article-wide attribution template; if the text taken does not form the entire article, specifically mention the section requiring attribution; or
• In a way unambiguously indicating exactly what has been copied verbatim, provide an inline citation and/or add your own note in the reference section of the article.

For an example of the last, see the references section in planetary nomenclature [1], which uses a large amount of text from the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature.

This practice has some advantages—for example, further changes such as modernizing language and correcting errors can be done in separate edits after the original insertion of text, allowing later editors the ability to make a clear comparison between the original source text and the current version in the article.

There are several tools available to help identify plagiarism on Wikipedia:

• CopyPatrol – lists pages with suspected plagiarism for manual review
• Earwig's Copyvio Detector – check any article for plagiarism, but keep in mind WP:NOTEARWIG.
• User:CorenSearchBot (deactivated) – automatically patrolled newly created pages for plagiarism and tagged them

• Plagiarism from Wikipedia
• {{Uw-plagiarism}} — user talk page warning/request on plagiarism: "... Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed.
• Wikipedia:Quotations (essay)
• Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing (essay)
• Wikipedia:Copy-paste (summary of policies and practices)
• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches – Article on plagiarism in The Signpost

1. ^ "What Constitutes Plagiarism?", Harvard Guide to Using Sources, Harvard University: "In academic writing, it is considered plagiarism to draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper. It doesn't matter whether the source is a published author, another student, a Web site without clear authorship, a Web site that sells academic papers, or any other person: Taking credit for anyone else's work is stealing, and it is unacceptable in all academic situations, whether you do it intentionally or by accident." The university offers examples of different kinds of plagiarism, including verbatim plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, inadequate paraphrase, uncited paraphrase, uncited quotation.
2. ^ "University-wide statement on plagiarism", University of Cambridge.

   For subject-specific guidelines, see "Guidance provided by Faculties and Departments", University of Cambridge.

3. ^ For example, Smith 2012, p. 1, or Smith, John. Name of Book. Name of Publisher, 2012, p. 1.
4. ^ "What Constitutes Plagiarism?", Harvard Guide to Using Sources, Harvard University (see "Uncited paraphrase" and "Uncited quotation").

   There may be exceptions when using extensive content from free or copy-left sources, so long as proper attribution is provided in footnote or in the references section at the bottom of the page.

5. ^ See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Attribution: "The author of a quote of a full sentence or more should be named; this is done in the main text and not in a footnote. However, attribution is unnecessary with quotations that are clearly from the person discussed in the article or section. When preceding a quotation with its attribution, avoid characterizing it in a biased manner."
6. ^ Levy, Neill A. "Tweedledum and Tweedledee: Plagiarism and Copyright", Cinahl Information Systems, 17(3.4), Fall/Winter 1998.
7. ^ Copyright: Fair Use: "Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission."
8. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Michael E. Brown, "The Causes of Internal Conflict: An Overview," in Michael E. Brown, et al, Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict, MIT, 2001, p. 14.
9. ^ United States Copyright Office. "Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code, Circular 92". Retrieved 2009-04-09. A "derivative work" is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted.... Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:...(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work....
10. ^ Buranen, Lise; Roy, Alice Myers (1999). Perspectives on Plagiarism and Intellectual Property in a Postmodern World. SUNY Press. p. 76. ISBN 0791440796. ...large-scale cribbing of foreign-language texts might occur during the process of translation.... The practice persists even though the most flagrant violators are eventually accused and dismissed from their posts.
11. ^ Lipson, Charles (2013). Doing Honest Work in College: How to Prepare Citations, Avoid Plagiarism, and Achieve Real Academic Success. 2nd Ed., p. 43. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 022609880X.
12. ^ To qualify as a "common expression or idiom", the phrase must have been used without attribution at least 2 years ago by someone other than the originator and in a reliable source, in other words one that is likely to have watchful editors and lawyers; there must be no evidence that the author(s), or publisher(s), of the unattributed use later lost, or settled out of court, a lawsuit based on the unattributed use, or that the publisher issued an apology, or retraction, for plagiarism relating to the unattributed use. Since it is impossible to prove that something does not exist, Wikipedia editors who suspect plagiarism is involved must provide reliable evidence of such a legal judgment, out-of-court settlement, apology, or retraction.
13. ^ Per Lipson, 2013, p. 43: "If you use someone else's work, cite it... Cite it even if the work is freely available in the public domain... All these rules follow from the same idea: acknowledge what you take from others. The only exception is when you rely on commonly known information." See full Lipson reference above.
14. ^ This may also constitute a copyright problem; U.S. law on such lists is illustrated by the case Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service.
15. ^ Avoiding plagiarism requires familiarity with citation and paraphrasing. Contributors need to know when and how to cite sources. When paraphrasing, they need to know how much they can and should retain without following too closely on source text. They also need to remember when and where they saw something first, both in active research, while note taking, and during composition, to avoid unconscious plagiarism. See Perfect, Timothy J.; Stark, Louisa J. (2008). "Tales from the Crypt...omnesia". In John Dunlosky, Robert A. Bjork (ed.). Handbook of Metamemory and Memory. CRC Press. pp. 285–314. ISBN 978-0805862140. Retrieved 2009-01-13..
16. ^ Exif data is automatically saved by most modern digital cameras, and includes important information about the camera being used and the date/time of the picture (see File:Cannon.jpg for Exif in action).
17. ^ XMP is utilized by Adobe in its image manipulation programs; it tracks the history of modification and, when possible, original ownership information (see File:Redding Album Cover.jpg for XMP in action).
18. ^ To be used as an inline citation {{DNB}} needs the "inline=1" parameter set.
19. ^ To meet the requirements of WP:PSEUDOHEAD, use 6 quotation marks to surround "Attribution:" rather than a leading ";"

Articles, books, and journals

• Lipson, Charles. Doing Honest Work in College: How to Prepare Citations, Avoid Plagiarism, and Achieve Real Academic Success. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. ISBN 022609880X.
• Eisner, Caroline, and Vicinus, Martha (eds). Originality, Imitation, and Plagiarism: Teaching Writing in the Digital Age. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2008.
• Jaschick, Scott. "Winning Hearts and Minds in War on Plagiarism". Inside Higher Ed, 7 April 2008.
• Lesko, John P. (ed.). Plagiary: Cross-Disciplinary Journal in Plagiarism, Fabrication, and Falsification. Scholarly Publishing Office, 2009.

Digital academic resources

• Cornell University. "Recognizing and Avoiding Plagiarism". College of Arts and Sciences, Cornell University, ©2005. Web. 12 Mar. 2009.
• Duke University Libraries. "Citing Sources: Documentation Guidelines for Citing Sources and Avoiding Plagiarism". Duke University Libraries, (last modified) 2 June 2008. Web. 12 Mar. 2009. (Provides hyperlinked "Citation Guides" pertaining to the most commonly used citation guidelines, including parenthetical referencing; includes: APA, Chicago, CSE, MLA, and Turabian style guidelines; such style guides define plagiarism and how to avoid it.)
• Harvard College Library. "Research Guides". Harvard University Library, (last reviewed) 9 March 2009. Web. 12 Mar. 2009. (Compiled by the Staff of Harvard College Library.)
• Indiana University at Bloomington. "Plagiarism: What It is and How to Recognize and Avoid It". Writing Tutorial Services, Campus Writing Program, Indiana University, (last updated) 27 Apr. 2004. Web. 12 Mar. 2009.
• University of New South Wales. "Avoiding Plagiarism". The Learning Centre, Academic Skills Resources, University of New South Wales, (last updated) 24 Oct. 2008. 12 Mar. 2009. (Includes: "What Is Plagiarism?"; "Common Forms of Plagiarism"; and "Plagiarism & the Internet".)

External links

• FamousPlagiarists.com^{[dead link‍]} – Website published by John P. Lesko, associate professor of English at Saginaw Valley State University; editor of Plagiary (see "Further reading"). (Hyperlinked resources, including: a "glossary of terms" relating to plagiarism; a bibliography of "Books and Other Resources"; and profiles of "Famous Plagiarists". "Copyright 2004–2006 Famous Plagiarists.com / War On Plagiarism.org. Some Rights Reserved").
• The Plagiarism Checker – Facility for detecting student plagiarism at dustball.com. ("EDUC478: This educational software was designed as a project for the University of Maryland at College Park Department of Education." © Copyright 2002 by Brian Klug.) However, please note, this tool routinely fails to identify material taken from recent published sources whose texts do not appear online. For instance, the Charles Lipson quote appearing in footnote, above, is not detected as being derived verbatim from that source.
• Plagiarism.org – By Turnitin (cited by Eisner and Vicinus [below]).
• "Read a Q&A with the editors on Inside Higher Education" – Interview with Caroline Eisner and Martha Vicinus, editors of Originality, Imitation, and Plagiarism, conducted on April 3, 2008.
• Seife, Charles (August 31, 2012). "Jonah Lehrer's Journalistic Misdeeds at Wired.com". Slate.