https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65445
--- Comment #14 from Erik Moeller <[email protected]> --- It wouldn't be, but one step at a time. Separating out the non-attribution content from {{Credit line}} seems like the first step to make licensetpl_attr actually usable in some cases. The aforementioend example https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:(Boletus_edulis).jpg is problematic for other reasons. It uses the {{Attribution}} template, which denotes a non-copyleft license (!) in the "permission" field, in combination with the CC-BY-SA and GFDL licenses , which _are_ copyleft. It looks like the author intended to use {{Credit line}} and would have been better off to use neither and just specify the author correctly. These templates create a lot more confusion than they solve, IMO, but let's sort through this mess and see if they're supportable. I left a comment regarding the {{Credit line}} machine-readable metadata here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Credit_line -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
