[WikiEN-l] Re: votes for deletion

[Daniel Mayer]

kq wrote:
> Yes, that's all well and good, but sometimes apparent
> copyright violations are actually not violations at
> all.  That happened today with a Czech Republic
> article--someone at another site had claimed copyright
> on writeups from the U.S. State Department, which are
> in the public domain.  The text was removed, listed
> for deletion, and restored.  I thought you noticed
> when that happened.  :-)

And that is exactly why we should always give credit where credit is due by 
placing a ==References== section in articles that have a good amount of 
public domain text in it. 

Just because we legally aren't required to credit public domain text doesn't 
mean we shouldn't do the academically correct thing and not take credit for 
text we did not write. A great side benefit is that others will not suspect a 
copyright violation after reading the ==References== section. 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)