This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
That may have been when I created the article. It is extremely sparse and summarized. I doubt if this violates any copyright. rossnixon01:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
If my understanding of copyright is correct, fair use assesses the right to copy a small percentage of a text (small not being defined, and varying on the importance of the copied parts). The original "interesting part" of the source is roughly 3k chars, the disputed part of the article is roughly 1000 chars (although some of it has been rewritten). It is not a blatant copyvio, but I believe it still qualifies as one. -- lucasbfrtalk10:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
I tried to follow this link [1] but it was dead. I found another link to a magazine article profiling Bryson, and substituted that. It may not be the same as the lost linked content - I'll never know. Anyway at least this link resolves. Birdbrainscan22:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply