Confused about how much copy and paste info can be in post?

I have had a few posts deleted because of the posting guide lines. If I remember correctly the ratio is 2/3 your own words, 1/3 copy and paste from the source. I had too much copy and paste and not enough of my take on the article. My question is ...why did this new OP that has 1/20th of comment and 19/20th of copy and paste be allowed? "Pilot spots metallic sphere over Washington State"

a reply to: BorisBadInOff

I looked at that post, the Original Poster did a nice job including a significant amount of their own opinion, it's no where near the proportions you're claiming.

a reply to: BorisBadInOff

I don't see any removed posts from your account but do see a single removed thread - which was removed for two reasons:

First it was mostly external copy/paste.

Second, and very relevant, the external content was improperly formatted with the external content not being included within [ ex ] [ /ex ] brackets.

Properly presenting external references ( the work of others ) with those tags is one of the factors moderators weigh in the decision to remove a post / thread or not.

a reply to: Hefficide

What about the source included as a URL inside the EX?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

here is the post: These are probably my favorite type of witness posts, from Pilots. In this case a Pilot was flying from Gig Harbor Washington to Vancouver Wa. when he saw a metallic object off to his left front.
I was flying from KTIW (Tacoma Narrows Airport – Gig Harbor, Washington) to KVUO (Pearson Field – Vancouver, Washington) at 3,500 feet MSL on a southbound heading when I observed a metallic object off the left front of my airplane approximately 500 feet below my altitude and 2 NM southeast of my position.

I looked on my TCAS (traffic alert collision avoidance system) to identify the aircraft type, altitude, speed, and heading to ensure adequate separation. However, there was no signature on my TCAS.

As I approached the object, I noted it was a silver-metallic ball-shaped object and there were no visible wings of obvious propulsion system.





He first though it a drone but realized drones are limited to 400 feet AGL. This object was about 2,500 feet AGL. Well above drone limitations.

I pointed out the object to my passenger (seated in the co-pilot position) to confirm my own observation. She also noted there were no wings and the object appeared stationary at the time.

My first instinct was to conclude it was a drone aircraft, but drones are typically limited to 400 feet AGL whereas this object was approximately 2,500 feet AGL, well above drone limitations.

At this point my closing speed was approximately 100 knots over ground when the object began accelerating northbound (opposite my direction of flight and off the left side of my aircraft).



The object came within about 1500 feet of his aircraft he estimated.

The closest the object came was approximately 1,500 feet as it passed off my left wing at a high rate of speed. It appeared to briefly turn toward my airplane before disappearing out of view behind and to the left of my airplane.

Determining it’s size is difficult given unknown precise distance and reference to other known objects, but my best guess is approximately six feet in diameter and spherical in shape.

I did not attempt a turn toward the object to surveil the craft. Total time from first observation to losing sight of the object was approximately 60 to 90 seconds.

I often record my flights with a wing-mounted 4K GoPro camera, but unfortunately I did not have the camera mounted on this flight.



In a follow up the Pilot said he did not report the sighting to the FAA as he said he didn't think they would receive a return on an object of this size:

Additional Information Provided by Pilot in Response to Questions: Thank you for the prompt reply. I did not report the sighting to the FAA. In any case it is very unlikely they would receive a primary radar return on an object of this size (and less radio-reflective shape).

My airplane is a Piper Cherokee (PA-28). I sent this report because in my 20 years of flying, this was a first. My initial primary concern was a drone flying well above authorized altitude, but it did not have drone-like characteristics. I was also hoping there might have been other sightings in the area. I may call the airport manager to see if there were other similar reports.

Note: The pilot makes a good argument that the object was not a drone. The object was not a regular aircraft because his TCAS did not pick it up. Regular aircraft are required to have transponders which emit a signal that would be picked by a TCAS. The craft was spherical, without wings and looked to be close to his aircraft. These encounters with UFO’s constitute a flight safety risk.

The italics are the only comments, the rest is copied, look at the source.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The source should always be included as a hyperlink / URL.

The use of ex tags is to differentiate the externally quoted material from the original commentary of the OP.

a reply to: BorisBadInOff

That post lacks attribution ( a link to the original source ) as well as lacking ex tags to differentiate between the original material and your commentary upon it.

Just drudged up an article to use an example of how things should look.

***

As the owner of an AMD graphics card, one of the features I have envied is DLSS. It's a feature that helps graphics look better with less demand upon hardware by utilizing upscaling.

Now, AMD is entering the fray with its own supersampling option, FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). Launching today as a part of AMD's growing FidelityFX suite of graphics-tweaking tools, FSR will be made available for dozens of current graphics cards already on shelves—no Tensor cores required.

PC Mag Original Article

This tech, when it arrives, will help many people with older GPU's who cannot upgrade currently due to shortages squeeze more life out of their older cards.

***

a reply to: BorisBadInOff

That thread looks like its about 50/50 because part of it was not put in quote when it should have been. Probably just a mistake on the OP's part.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: BorisBadInOff

That post lacks attribution ( a link to the original source ) as well as lacking ex tags to differentiate between the original material and your commentary upon it.

Maybe you misunderstood, but boris is quoting another thread that he did not compose.
He wants to know why his thread got spanked and you guys left the horrible thread he is quoting stand as it was.

a reply to: butcherguy

I caught that but can't help the OP of that thread here ( unless they randomly open this thread ). My purpose was to explain to the OP why his thread had been removed.

In regard to that and generally speaking - staff usually only addresses such things if a member complaint is generated ( Creating a thread like this to table the topic isn't the same thing ).

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: butcherguy

I caught that but can't help the OP of that thread here ( unless they randomly open this thread ). My purpose was to explain to the OP why his thread had been removed.

In regard to that and generally speaking - staff usually only addresses such things if a member complaint is generated ( Creating a thread like this to table the topic isn't the same thing ).

This makes no sense. I really can't understand how this stuff works...that's ok, I will continue to try to get it right. I LIKE the topic of the OP and don't want it tabled, and I am not going to dwell on my confusion....let the games continue.

I can't wait till Friday when we find out our makers have been here a very long time.

a reply to: BorisBadInOff

Just try and make sure you don't copy every single bit of text from a website, put the url in, use the external content tags for any external content and and say something about you posted

originally posted by: BorisBadInOff
I LIKE the topic of the OP and don't want it tabled, and I am not going to dwell on my confusion....let the games continue.

Oftentimes the Mods will excise some of the excess quote and add the tags.

a reply to: BorisBadInOff

Find one that looks properly formated and click on the quote to see how it was done. It's actually really easy. In fact just click on quote instead of reply to this one and review it.

quoted text from source goes here

Link goes here.

As a rule, the quoted text should include no more than 10% or 3 paragraphs of the original source, whichever is less.

I worked as a journalist for a few years....
A good rule of thumb was to not copy/paste more than 10% of an article. I know that may not be the rules here, but that was our rule when writing. Just an FYI

originally posted by: shaemac
I worked as a journalist for a few years....
A good rule of thumb was to not copy/paste more than 10% of an article. I know that may not be the rules here, but that was our rule when writing. Just an FYI

That's a pretty good rule of thumb.
For short articles, as little as possible to make your point.

originally posted by: shaemac
I worked as a journalist for a few years....
A good rule of thumb was to not copy/paste more than 10% of an article. I know that may not be the rules here, but that was our rule when writing. Just an FYI

That was the limit stated by former ATS owner Springer here, no more than 10% (or three paragraphs, whichever is least):

Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**

if you post something that is not 100% your own writing or work you must use the EX TAG, post NO MORE THAN 10% of the original (or three paragraphs, whichever is least), and GIVE A LINK TO THE SOURCE MATERIAL.

originally posted by: butcherguy
Maybe you misunderstood, but boris is quoting another thread that he did not compose.
He wants to know why his thread got spanked and you guys left the horrible thread he is quoting stand as it was.

Isn't that kind of like telling the cop that pulled you over to give you a speeding ticket "But all the other cars around me were speeding too, why aren't you giving them tickets? Why just me?"

Maybe the other cars deserved tickets too, which they didn't get, but that doesn't exactly let you off the hook if you were speeding. I think it boils down to limited availability of resources to enforce rules. Not everybody who breaks every rule is going to get caught every time and punished.