2
$\begingroup$

I've seen this phenomenon occur on various SE sites. On the one hand, it might lead to an optimal answer. On the other hand, it might offend people contributing valuable information without earning appreciation.

So, is there a broad consent on this?

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Are you talking about answers from random sources or about answers to the same question? $\endgroup$ – Casebash Aug 10 '10 at 23:16
  • $\begingroup$ @Casebash: I'm talking about answers to the same question. $\endgroup$ – Rasmus Aug 11 '10 at 10:58
10
$\begingroup$

If you are adding something of your own, for example, copying someone else's flawed proof and fixing it to make it correct, I think it is perfectly acceptable. Of course, as always, you should credit your sources. Providing the direct link to the answers you draw from ("link" text below and to the right of each answer) is ideal.
Providing attribution means that people who like your answer can vote it up, and also vote up the less complete answer it was based on.

Answers that add nothing but compile multiple other answers into one comprehensive one are also valuable, and I believe these are good examples of answers that should be community wiki.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ In particular the last line I agree with. CW is a great tool, use it wisely. But one little clarification, if there is more to be said about a particular answer, comment on that answer and let that person have a chance to finish it off. No reason to skoop them due to some typos or just because they forgot to mention some connection. Again, users should be less rep hungry. $\endgroup$ – BBischof Aug 11 '10 at 14:24
4
$\begingroup$

Attribution of material goes without saying. Incorporation of material is fine as long as you have a good reason to do so.

Compilation answers are often valuable - but some questions just don't need them. It depends on factors such as how many answers there are or whether any ideas are fragmented between answers.

In a non-compilation answer, try to avoid duplication. If you think an idea needs to be highlighted, you can mention that someone else's answer explains the idea and mention how it fits in with your answer. Sometimes, though, another answer's exploration of the idea will be insufficient and it is better to just cover everything yourself.

In summary: its fine, but think about what you are doing

| |
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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