Talk:Family of Improved Load Bearing Equipment

Military history: National / Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

CSD WP:G12 contested

The current content of the article seems to be based on the document that it already cites as its source, the 2011 Army FILBE document at http://ammocanman.com/pub/documents/FILBE_2011-07-14.pdf. As a work of the US Government, specifically the Department of Defense, that document may be ineligible for copyright protection. (WP:Copyright#Works by the United States Federal Government) Unician ∇ 17:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that could right, and I should have looked at the reference before tagging the page rather than just checking the address was not a US military one. Sorry about that. I note that the source does not state who published it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

True, the reference URL that is cited in the article isn't under a .mil domain, and probably isn't the original URL under which that document was published. I've added another URL, under navy.mil, pointing to the draft FILBE specs. There's a little irony in that this Marine equipment, described on a Department of the Navy website, was developed by the Army's Natick lab. Unician ∇ 19:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that WilyD, whose judgement I respect, has removed the speedy deletion tag. However, the content still remains a copy-paste from a document that is not demonstrably a US Government publication. Even if that is not a copyright violation, it remains WP:PLAGIARISM. Perhaps someone would like to rewrite it in their own words, as should of course have been done from the start? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:21, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "plagarism" is irrelevant - Wikipedia is full of plagarism of public domain materials, including the wholescale imports of the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica and the Catholic Encyclopaedia. Materials from the American government can also be freely pasted in with or without attribution - it's public domain stuff, so you can do what you want. In this case, it looks at least plausible that both Wikipedia and ciehub.info are reproducing American Government texts, rather than us copying material that ciehub has any rights to. It's possible this is mistaken, but this is clearly not an unambiguous case; G12 only applies in unabiguous cases. Ambiguous cases can be brought up at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Wily D 09:40, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]