The problem is, if you’re quoting someone or something, it is considered very unprofessional to make even the slightest changes, even correcting typos in written materials. That’s what the [sic] is for, to denote that this is literally how it’s written in the source.
The fact it comes from urban dictionary is immaterial. It could come from a Facebook post, a presidential press conference or a YouTube comment and the rules are the same. Journalistic codes of conduct don’t discriminate between sources when it comes to the handling of quotes.
The fact is, when you’re quoting something, anything, taking such liberties with the quote, even for seemingly innocuous/well-intentioned reasons, is a professional minefield no journalistic publication is going to want to touch.
The problem is, if you’re quoting someone or something, it is considered very unprofessional to make even the slightest changes, even correcting typos in written materials. That’s what the [sic] is for, to denote that this is literally how it’s written in the source.
See my explanation in the comment chain below.
The fact it comes from urban dictionary is immaterial. It could come from a Facebook post, a presidential press conference or a YouTube comment and the rules are the same. Journalistic codes of conduct don’t discriminate between sources when it comes to the handling of quotes.
The fact is, when you’re quoting something, anything, taking such liberties with the quote, even for seemingly innocuous/well-intentioned reasons, is a professional minefield no journalistic publication is going to want to touch.