Anthony wrote:
CC-by-NC isn't a copyleft license, so the compatibility would be really strange. A derivative of a GFDL article (which wasn't an aggregate) would have to be GFDL. But a derivative of a CC-by-NC article doesn't have to be CC-by-NC. However, the original work would still be under CC-by-NC, so unless the original authors gave [you] other permissions, you'd still have to follow CC-by-NC for any derivatives. As for a work entirely released under *both* GFDL *and* CC-by-NC, that'd be kind of cool. You could use the work under the GFDL, complete with all its obnoxious requirements, *or* you could use the work under CC-by-NC, without all the GFDL's obnoxious requirements, but only if you do so for noncommercial purposes.
...or you could just go with CC-By-SA, which _is_ a copyleft license, but not nearly as obnoxious as the GFDL.