How much of this is from Wikipedia?
Dr. Wormer, over at Rational W. has just stated flatly that this article is simply the WP article -- without any attribution that I can find. I've done a little checking against the WP article and it looks to me as if it is a *rewrite* of the WP article, with almost all the text either edited, reworded, rewritten, or simply eliminated. Daniel, you're the person who apparently created the CZ article out of whole cloth a couple of years ago -- what do you say in reply to Dr. Wormer? And, even given that a lot of it has been rewritten, is there still enough direct WP material there that we would have the disclaimer at the bottom of the page? Thanks! Hayford Peirce 22:02, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know why the WP box was not ticked - it definitely should have been, and so I just did a jog edit to that effect. I wouldn't call the changes a rewrite - even with the edits Gareth recently made, the difference to the imported version (discounting the export of parts to the subpages) is small, and the categorization as External probably justified. So Paul is right, as in most cases. But I think External Articles should be phased out anyway, and I would welcome suggestions in this regard. --Daniel Mietchen 01:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)