I edited the appropriate parts to remove the close paraphrasing, much of which came from a long quote, which I also pared down. If revision-delete is needed of the copyrighted text, that will be all versions prior to the current one.
CrowTalk 20:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Thanks for cleaning, I rev-deled the earlier versions.--
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement.
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Edited out & paraphrased the copyrighted text from the government source. Question: is their license
[1] compatible with ours? Also, if revision-delete is needed of the copyrighted material, I believe all prior versions have had some amount of it, both from the given source as well as others (which other editors have already removed).
CrowTalk 20:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Based upon the text description of the license it sounds like it is compatible with our free licenses.
I am somewhat surprised they don't simply refer to a CC license however they specifically mention it is compatible with the cc 4.0 license.--
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:32, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
If there were long identical phrases we would also need to provide attribution. It is not enough to simply use material that's properly licensed, it must be attributed. However I did a quick check and do not see any remaining overlap of significant text.--
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
I edited the appropriate parts to remove the close paraphrasing, much of which came from a long quote, which I also pared down. If revision-delete is needed of the copyrighted text, that will be all versions prior to the current one.
CrowTalk 20:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Thanks for cleaning, I rev-deled the earlier versions.--
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement.
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Edited out & paraphrased the copyrighted text from the government source. Question: is their license
[1] compatible with ours? Also, if revision-delete is needed of the copyrighted material, I believe all prior versions have had some amount of it, both from the given source as well as others (which other editors have already removed).
CrowTalk 20:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Based upon the text description of the license it sounds like it is compatible with our free licenses.
I am somewhat surprised they don't simply refer to a CC license however they specifically mention it is compatible with the cc 4.0 license.--
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:32, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply
If there were long identical phrases we would also need to provide attribution. It is not enough to simply use material that's properly licensed, it must be attributed. However I did a quick check and do not see any remaining overlap of significant text.--
S Philbrick(Talk) 21:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)reply