Talk:Jack Nagel

Untitled
I believe the copyvio bot is in error. The text is indeed based on the indicated page, but it has been edited in various ways; what remains consists of simple declarative sentences of publicly-verifiable facts; and the fact that it is under 2 paragraphs of text bolsters the argument for fair use. Homunq (࿓) 17:36, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * , what you described is what we call Close Paraphrasing, which is still a problem from a copyright perspective. Since all Wikipedia content is free for any to re-use, we have to make sure that we're not giving away content that we're not allowed to, and someone else's words fall into that category. That said, I've re-written the text to remove that. One part that got deleted was his bibliography. If you only use what that article has (which they admit is "selected"), then you're again re-using someone else's creative work. It would be better for this article to create a bibliography section and list all of his publications that you can find and source. That way, it is your own research going into the article, as well as doing better justice to the subject himself by being complete. Feel free to ask me any questions, as I'll keep an eye here for a while. Crow  Caw  16:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)