>requires that any derivative of works from Wikipedia must be released under that same license, must state that it is released under that license, and must acknowledge the contributors (which can be accomplished with a link back to that article on Wikipedia).
I like how cc requires making the materials available but it is served as a giant multi TB turd mostly made up of cruft. (think: custom templates) It is also funny how people seem to think anonymous users who cant be identified own copyright to anything. WP has refused to set up a proper identification process.
2 angry alcoholics > nobel laureate
A [shame] link back to wp? why? They don't own the rights and they are not a reliable host for crediting sources. If WP vanishes you are still obligated to name the authors. (who have no name or address)
The idea is of course nice. It would be more fun if one could easily export a category in various popular formats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks
Looks like you're right. Forking Wikipedia is pretty easy from a licensing perspective.