Not from me, if that is what you are implying. I have not been in touch with either publication. As for the Signpost piece, it is a fair summary of what they wrote, which is the Signpost's job to deliver.
Andreas On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 9:01 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 February 2013 20:56, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: > > On 9 February 2013 13:08, Thehelpfulone <thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > http://www.civilsociety.co.uk/governance/news/content/14428/wikimedia_uk_trustees_have_been_too_involved_to_govern_the_charity > > > This also refers to an "an intellectual property dispute over > > QRPedia", which is, of course, bunkum. > > > Oh, look who else quotes this claim: > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-02-11/In_the_media > > I wonder where they got it from. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
