Conservapedia talk:Blatant plagiarism/CDC Vaccine Glossary

It must be said, that although attribution is important, that CDC publications, as the work of US federal employees, are in the public domain. So it's not the skankiest of plagiarism. But it is one of the whorey kinds. And well to document it here. human^{be in} 20:27, 2 June 2007 (CDT)

Assuming it's really by the CDC, yep, absolutely on the copyright issue. But given the CP commandments and Andy's attitude towards WP using the public-domain 1911 Britannica (WITH attribution, at least in many instances)... I think we're in violent agreement here. I'll add a note to the article to make the probable copyright non-issue clearer. --jtl^talk 20:30, 2 June 2007 (CDT)

I love it: "violent agreement". Absolutely. human^{be in} 20:47, 2 June 2007 (CDT)

What annoys me is that he doesn't understand the content well enough to edit it. His ideology blinds him. That, and he's just not real smart.--PalMD^{-yada yada} 23:03, 2 June 2007 (CDT)