# World Magazine picks up Wilson and Wilkins cotnroversies



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 5, 2007)

World Magazine has picked up on recent charges from an anonymous blog* of more plagiarism by Steve Wilkins, but more interestingly covers the FV controversy and the SJC contention with La. Presbytery as well. 
World On the Web » World New Media Archive » New/old plagiarism scandal

*I agree with one of the comments at the article link that the plagiarism charge while it looks to be accurate, is overstated and could have been strengthened by less is more.


----------



## ReformationArt (Dec 5, 2007)

It is noteworthy that the World Mag blog links directly to a post on the Puritan Board as part of the discussion:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f77/latest-reply-doug-wilson-27027/


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 5, 2007)

I missed that; PB made the news.


----------



## Gryphonette (Dec 5, 2007)

To be fair, Mark T. said in the comments that Pr. Wilkins wrote three books in three consecutive years (1996,1997, 1998). The original plagiarism charge came up in 2005, long after the last book was written.

We should keep in mind that the timeline doesn't show that Pr. Wilkins wrote a book, was accused of plagiarism, then repeated the offense in subsequent books; instead, he wrote three books in rapid succession, unfortunately using the same sloppy method of attribution in each one.

I'm scarcely an office-holder in the Steve Wilkins Fan Club, but still, I can't think why it should come as a stunning surprise to find that he used the same method to write all three books. Actually, the fact he _did_ seems to me to show he really didn't understand the rules of what constitutes plagiarism.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 5, 2007)

Well, if that is the case, what is new here? Showing that it was more than one work?


----------



## ReformationArt (Dec 5, 2007)

I guess it's simply new in that the plagiarism in the other volumes was not previously known.


----------



## Gryphonette (Dec 5, 2007)

Well, that's just it. There really_ isn't_ anything new. The book referred to in the World article, "Call of Duty", was - according to Mark T.'s comment - published in 1997, the year after "Southern Slavery As It Was". When the plagiarism charge came up in 2005 regarding the latter book, it ought to have covered all three books.

As I said, it's not that I'm sticking a halo on Pr. Wilkins, but it seems a bit hard for World to rake up old issues like this.

Any mallet to whap him with, apparently.

Not meaning THIS thread, of course! Goodness, no. But I wish the WORLD guy (Poole?) had paid more attention to the timeline.

There's been no _new_ wrongdoing.


----------



## SEAGOON (Dec 5, 2007)

Hi Anne,

As I mentioned in the thread, of all the things to go after Wilkins for, the plagiarism thing is probably the least noteworthy. I know that MarkT is trying to show that the FV's poster-boy martyr certainly doesn't live up to the Machenesque image they'd like to cut for him, but the phrase "stay on target" occurs to me here. 

The analogy is certainly imperfect, but one of the problems with addressing the misdeeds of the Clintons was that there were so many scandals the prosecution was overwhelmed following them, the people couldn't remember the issues or keep them straight, and eventually public sympathy began to go in favor of the big, lovable, bad boy and against the people who kept finding a new problem every week. 

ONE problem at a time would seem to be wise at this point and certainly the FV is a far more serious problem to tackle than plagiarism, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 5, 2007)

Agreed. It also appears to take on the appearance of a vendetta if one is not careful with these matters.



SEAGOON said:


> Hi Anne,
> 
> As I mentioned in the thread, of all the things to go after Wilkins for, the plagiarism thing is probably the least noteworthy. I know that MarkT is trying to show that the FV's poster-boy martyr certainly doesn't live up to the Machenesque image they'd like to cut for him, but the phrase "stay on target" occurs to me here.
> 
> ...


----------



## Gryphonette (Dec 5, 2007)

Oh, you're absolutely right, Andy.






AAMOF, I fear this business is likely to backfire; if I realized fairly quickly that there's nothing new in the current charge, that it's merely a continuation of the 2005 stuff, it's a cinch other people will too.

Never had a unique thought in my life, sad to say. Finally gave up even trying.





If anything, it's quite likely to make Pr. Wilkins look like a martyr to those who might have been neutral about him 'ere now. "Poor man! It's a shame how those nasty anti-FV people stoop to dredging up old news in an effort to humiliate Pr. Wilkins."

_Real_ helpful.


----------



## Gryphonette (Dec 5, 2007)

Jinx!


----------

