I don't know. Why do some people ask questions entirely in CAPS? It's better to copy and paste material from Wikipedia on to Answerbag than it is to copy and paste answers from Answerbag on to Wikipedia. Why complain?

Some people are proud that they found the answer but, to be honest, i think it'd be better jst to paste in the link because no-one wants to read an essay on Answerbag.

It is accurate info. It is MUCH quicker to copy and paste than type all of it out. As long as the information is accurate and very comprehensive, I am sure the person asking the question would prefer that to people who guess, or give 2-3 sentence replies. Points go to people with good, complete answers usually. If they CAN get them from their head and just type them quickly, fine. If not, there is no law against researching for someone who might not know how or where to look. WordNet Search - 3.0 Noun S: (n) whiner, complainer, moaner, sniveller, crybaby, bellyacher, grumbler, squawker (a person given to excessive complaints and crying and whining)

Why not? What is wrong with this? It makes more sense than making something up and writing a load of nonsense.

i asked that question like 3 weeks ago.lol

no not aslong as they put on which site they got it from. i do this a lot but i always put the website on aswell

Sometimes. If it is done intelligently (i.e. if some content or analysis has been added) then it is ok.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes

I think it depends on the individual question, as some require personal responses, but generally only if they don't cite their source, otherwise it can be useful.

no, I like the answers. They are usually correct and they make sense.

It bugs me even more when they think that since it is from wikipedia, it must be "gospel".

No, atleast they're trying to help.

Not at all. I do it myself and include the link. Not all answers are from Wiki though. As it was pointed out to me, always cut and paste the main body of the answer and then include the link. That way, if the link stops working, the information has been archived through the cut and paste.

No, I will use the best source available. I have a pretty good memory, but I do not want to post an answer that I “think is right”. Neither do I appreciate it if another bagger posts an answer that they “think is right”. I like to share knowledge, not guesses. I do think that Wikipedia is overrated and I avoid using them whenever possible. I have reference books on a shelf that I keep nearby, and I use them as much as I can. As far as “viewpoint questions”. I answer these as much as I see fit, but do you realize how many times baggers ask questions like “Why all the viewpoint questions on the bag lately. What’s up with that”?

Sometimes, however: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_dont_mind_if_they_provide_a_reference! [Idea shamelessly copied from MewseJuice: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/132149/386597] ----- (This has been moved from a duplicate question.)

It seems to be the easiest way to answer a question.From a teachers point of view,what mark would you give a student on an essay that just reworded what Wikipedia had written,and at the end of the essay used them as their only reference.Another student researches more and has ten references.Does not his second student deserve the high mark.Also if you have a serious car problem would't you go to many different mechanics to get more information. Knowledge of any topic is not reserved for one book or web page of knowledge.

i dont knowwhy they c&P answers or why the get points and i really dont know why you got down rated. but i gave you +points

Lazy, yes. Ignorant, no. Some people have no idea how to "google" stuff.

It is just an easy way to answer. A little lazy, yes. It is more creative to find answers somewhere else.

It is efficient and authoritative, if accurate information is what you seek. I give high credibility to people who research, more so than those who just spout off their opinions, without any factual support.

No, I don't think they lack creativity or are ignorant. If the question ask for something factual then they may try to copy and just paste it to be accurate. And I disagree with Riff-Raff, if they would've been lazy they won't even have bothered googling it. So no, copying ans pasting information from google isn't lazy, or lacks creativity or is ignorant.

It is good when an answer calls for accurate information instead of an opinion.

Copy and pasting something is acceptable as long as it's relevant and answers the question. I wouldn't want to retype stuff just to avoid cut/paste. What isn't acceptable (to me anyway) is pasting a link to a wikipedia or other article. Posting a link is just lazy, and due to the format most wikipedia articles are in, it often takes a lot of reading to find the relevant section.

it depends...if the information is something they could have looked up, then give it to them...it might give them the idea to do it themselves next time...but sometimes people are not good at research and may not be able to find what they want, even in Wikipedia...I try different combinations of the question until I find a suitable answer...most of the time it is somewhere in wikipedia, but other times it is elsewhere, like the answer for the pink fluid used in the Abyss by the divers instead of oxygen...I found, by googling around, through wikipedia and other sites, that it was Liquivent.

Actually, I think it's nice that sometimes people are willing to do all the extra work. Sometimes, for questions relating to history or science, an encyclopedia reference is quite helpful. And many people don't know about wikipedia.

It depends, using quotes and links are good as long as the answer is easy to decipher. I've seen links that make no sense at all.

I'm with BB - I was surprised to find whole chapters copied and pasted from other references (Wikipedia among them). I thought this was a place to tap users' knowledge and experience. If I can find AB then I can do my own internet search, tyvm...

It lacks originality and if the question asked is a factual one, then anything copied from Wikipedia could well be incorrect - in that case, I would say, ill-informed.

No, I also get irritated with the "Wiki answers". (Something that the questioner could have done on their own anyway).

If it answers the question..why not? After all someone obviously didn't mind going to the extra trouble to get the answer.

If it answers my question it's fine with me just don't give me pages of the stuff....get me the meat of it and be done with it. I wouldn't give it 6 points but would give it maybe a 4 for looking it up.

Copy-and-paste refers to the popular, simple method of reproducing text or other data from a source to a destination. It differs from cut and paste in that the original source text or data does not get deleted or removed. The popularity of this method stems from its simplicity and the ease with which users can move data between various applications visually — without resorting to permanent storage. Copying often takes place in graphical user interface systems through use of the key-combinations Ctrl+C (used for killing the running process in UNIX terminals); or by using some other method, such as a context menu or a toolbar button. Once one has copied data into the area of memory referred to as the clipboard, one may paste the contents of the clipboard into a destination using the key combinations Ctrl+V, or other methods dependent on the system. Macintosh computers use the key combinations ⌘C and ⌘V. The X Window System maintains an additional clipboard containing the most recently selected text; middle-clicking pastes the content of this "selection" clipboard into whatever the mouse pointer is on at that time. Most terminal emulators and some other applications support the key combinations Ctrl-Insert to copy and Shift-Insert to paste. This is in accordance with the IBM Common User Access (CUA) standard.

I know of who you are speaking here. No points from me. Quoting an entire article is just daft and a waste of the question asker's time.

i prefer personalized regurgitated answers, personally

Sorry, But I had to push this even further. It's the Wikipedia entry for Answerbag! Answerbag From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Answerbag site logoAnswerbag is a collaborative online database of FAQs, where questions are asked and answered by users. As of December 2006, Answerbag was the second largest social Q&A site next to Yahoo! Answers [1] In a comparison with Yahoo! Answers and MSN Live QnA, Cnet declared that Answerbag was neck and neck with Yahoo! Answers.[2] A user who has created an account can ask and answer questions, and suggest new categories. Answers are rated by users as "helpful" or "not helpful". The "helpful" rating will give the answer or question points. The "not helpful" rating will take away points. Users will "level up", achieving levels with a certain amount of points. Users can flag questions as "Wrong Category", "Nonsense", "Spam/Offensive", and "Duplicate". Flagged questions/answers are reviewed by moderators, and if they agree with the flag, they will give the user who flagged the question/answer 5 points and may then be deleted or changed by the moderators. Answers may be commented on. Conversely, when a member consistently submits accurate and well-written replies, others can award "useful" ratings to those answers and increase that user's visibility in a positive manner. Total number of rated answers appear on profiles pages; and on the statistics pages, where members' statistics are shown and compared. Examples include, "Most questions asked" or "Most positive ratings received". Many questions receive multiple answers. The answers with more ratings appear above those lower in ratings, giving the reader a better way to distinguish good from bad. In late 2006, Answerbag received press attention by announcing that it would release a read/write API for their Q&A database.[3] Answerbag was founded in July 2003, by Joel Downs and acquired in early 2006 by Infosearch. However, on October 3, 2006, Answerbag announced it would join with Demand Media.

You would be surprised at the number of people who still don't know how to conduct a proper search on the internet. Sometimes a few relevant words from the article, and a link to it are all that is needed, and yes, the effort is worth points. Would it be better for the question to join the ranks of zero answers? When I first came on the computer, a mere two years ago, I didn't know wiki from winnie the pooh. I was very intimidated by a list of hundreds of sites, some of which were traps for spiders, viruses, trojans, cookies, and all manner of scary things.

If it is a good answer and the person has bothered to search and research for me I am grateful. I like that better than just a link posted Yes I will continue to give points to people that bother to research an answer.

I say yes. If the answerer has done more to find the answer than the asker, why not. I also find sometimes that someone has written an editorial comment that expresses my thoughts perfectly and I do not mind cutting and pasting it, being sure to give the writer credit.

There is nothing that says points need to be given for any answer. A few ways of looking at this: 1. You could be rude and tell the questioner to look it up themselves. 2. The question could remain unanswered. 3. Post the Wikipedia link in the question

OMG, that is so annoying. I'm like, "dude I already read that and I'm looking for other people's views!"

Did you know Wikipedia was created by a neo-nazi?

Everybody, please give Lukezor a thumbs up, and Nevets a thumbs down. I know Lukezor wrote in all capatals, so what?, at least he has an intelligent point, which is what is important.