Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-1417834-20140208191645/@comment-1417834-20140301000920

Well I stated my point of view on the requirement to keep references to the license intact and asked for citation for their point of view and got: "I have explained our position on this matter. Our stance is that attribution is satisfied by a stable url link to the original source material. I don't agree with your interpretation of the specific stated terms you mentioned, but I don't think it would be helpful to engage in a tautological argument over the meaning of the license terms, because we will keep circling due to the difference of interpretation."

Clearly that doesn't follow what I read in the license or what is written on wikipedia's article on cc-by-sa

If you search the license for the terms "keep intact" or "part of these credits", clearly it doesn't intend for what wikia is stating.

@Speysider, I didn't think it was appropriate to bother every single reader with something that not everyone understands.