"

 Debate 
""Fair use"" is not enshrined in British law  that's an American thing. 
That's a laugh. Britian DOES have copyright laws (And the site has broken none of them) and had them long before America existed. Do you even bother to cheak things before you waffle on about them?   
Your colleague has already given an example of lack of attribution.  
He lied. The real author is clearly stated on the page if you'd bothered to look. And the source stated on the main news page (although you'd have to go into the history to look for it.) 
And you can prove that copyright holds after publication by simply going down to your local newsagents and looking in a few magazines.
Strawman argument. I never said it did, liar. I asked if these where under copyright to begin with, which is questionable in some instances and I suppose a moot point anyway, and so far no one has answered. Maybe because the answer was not what you would like to hear? Still I grow tired of these games. Please give an example of where the site has broken British copyright laws as that's the only thing preventing inclusion or concede the issue. I gave the rules on the article talk page. You must realise how dishonest it is to claim things that are not true, or if it is true why not prove it to me?   "