Hoi,
People have one reputation. This reputation is for the WMF with the nick
they are known by. Being on this committee is a poisoned chalice anyway
because they will never be able to satisfy everyone.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/3/14 geni geni...@gmail.com
2009/3/13 Erik Moeller
Erik Moeller wrote:
a) a link
(URL) to the article or articles you are re-using,
As I have said on a few occasions now in a few
threads, this is of course no attribution at all.
This needs sorely to be worded something like
a) a link (URL) to the history page of the article
or other page
If you can link to the article you can link to the history. We already
have that mechanism. The problem I see is that people will link to a
specific version, and though that satisfies the licensing
requirements, and is necessary academically for tracing the actual
sources and authors, in most
Дана Wednesday 04 March 2009 19:00:25 Thomas Dalton написа:
maintaining what they consider adequate attribution). The options
given, in order of simplest to most difficult are:
No credit
Credit to Wikipedia (or similar)
Link to article
Link to history
link online, full list of authors
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
If the people producing the mugs want that they are free to produce a
version of the history on their servers or more legally more solid
include a sheet of paper with a complete list of authors with the mug.
It's hard
2009/3/15 Charlotte Webb charlottethew...@gmail.com:
This would still give the wrong data if the page has been moved to
[[Xenu (Scientology)]] and the [[Xenu (disambiguation)]] is moved to
[[Xenu]], which isn't a totally unreasonable outcome.
You'd have to use something like:
2009/3/15 Charlotte Webb charlottethew...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
If the people producing the mugs want that they are free to produce a
version of the history on their servers or more legally more solid
include a sheet of paper with
2009/3/15 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
Would this mean the vicious lunatic arsehole contributor (note I don't
say hypothetical there, there are quite enough real-world examples
of unbalanced nutters out to nail us on anything) who takes the
mug-maker to court would win, or lose? To what
2009/3/15 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Wikimedia is not a party to the license therefor it's FAQ is of no
relevance. The answer again goes to the license text. You must...keep
intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide ,reasonable to
the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name
geni wrote:
2009/3/15 Charlotte Webb :
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
If the people producing the mugs want that they are free to produce a
version of the history on their servers or more legally more solid
include a sheet of paper with a complete list of
Anthony wrote:
a) a link (URL) to the history page of the article
or other page that contains the authorship
information of the articles you are re-using.
For offline copies, that would likewise be no attribution at all.
Can we please drop the nonsense that a URL is no attribution at
2009/3/16 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
Anthony wrote:
For offline copies, that would likewise be no attribution at all.
Can we please drop the nonsense that a URL is no attribution at all in
an offline context? I've made this point before, but URLs do not
suddenly become devoid of
2009/3/16 Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 1:59 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. The claim is meaningless and querulous noise. Printed objects
commonly have a URL on them these days. Listing a source or history
short URL would do the job it's
2009/3/16 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
You have failed to establish how that makes any difference - it
doesn't. The reason for it being there makes no difference as to
whether people know what a URL is when they see it in print.
Interesting claim I'm not aware of any testing.
If we limit
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
a) a link (URL) to the history page of the article
or other page that contains the authorship
information of the articles you are re-using.
For offline copies, that would likewise be no
Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
a) a link (URL) to the history page of the article
or other page that contains the authorship
information of the articles you are re-using.
For offline copies, that
16 matches
Mail list logo
