Yes. That is the nature of 'cut-and paste', demonstrating no attempt by the 'cut-and-paster' to describe any analysis of the event and no even half-hearted attempt to somehow tie it to the fact of the issue, i.e., Picket's deliberate decision to murder POWs whom he knew had never worn the uniform of the CSA.
Makes me wonder what your credentials are.
In order to describe both Picket's crime and the inane character of Post 110, no credentials are required other than the ability to read, write, and comment with a sober mind.
It is not possible to imagine Lee committing an atrocity such as this.
The author presented his paper to a Civil War symposium and is writing books on the two NC Union regiments. Those are his credentials.
So far your sole ‘refutation’ is to accuse him of cutting and pasting his information. Logic says that you know the source he cut from, unless your accusation against him is baseless.
So what is the source you are accusing him of copying?