Hoi,
Googledegook, whatshallweexect they know ... UB40..
Thanks,
GerardM
On 22 September 2014 23:42, Jonatan Svensson Glad <gladjona...@outlook.com>
wrote:
>
>
> From: gladjona...@outlook.com
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: To revdel (RD1) or not to revdel. That is a question....
> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:38:16 +0200
>
>
>
>
> I have had some discussions w/ users on IRC about the need to revdel/legal
> obligation to revdel copyvios.
> If it had copyvios in it but has since been edited and rewritten, and no
> longer can be deleted per G12, nor revdeled per RD1 (since then it would
> ruin attribution, if the user had actually written something themself).
> How should the example below be revdeled handled?
> Example:Revision 1. mixed copyvio and own words by user X.Revision 2.
> Fixed typos by User Y.Revision 3. User Z rewrote the coied tex, left user X
> own words.
>
> How should this be revdeled, and how should this be atributed? (sorry for
> my bad English....)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
