Archive:Should we permit or disallow commercial use of CZ-originated articles?: Revision history

5 April 2007

• curprev 20:2820:28, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Thomas E Kelly‎ 21,484 bytes +862‎ →‎Reply:
• curprev 20:2720:27, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Thomas E Kelly‎ 21,433 bytes +811‎ →‎Reply:
• curprev 20:2520:25, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Thomas E Kelly‎ 21,427 bytes +805‎ →‎Reply:
• curprev 20:2520:25, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Jitse Niesen‎ 20,622 bytes 0‎ →‎Argument: A noncommercial license is incompatible with Wikipedia.: change heading to "A noncommercial license hinders sharing with Wikipedia"
• curprev 20:2420:24, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Thomas E Kelly‎ 20,622 bytes 0‎ →‎Reply:
• curprev 20:2420:24, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Thomas E Kelly‎ 21,219 bytes +597‎ →‎Reply:
• curprev 20:1720:17, 5 April 2007‎ imported>Jitse Niesen‎ 20,622 bytes +28‎ →‎Reply: language improvements, hopefully without changing the meaning

3 April 2007

• curprev 11:0911:09, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 20,594 bytes +462‎ →‎Argument: Having incompatible licences is a nuisance: only stub, incomplete and English mistakes, sorry
• curprev 10:3110:31, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ m 20,378 bytes +42‎ →‎Argument: Commercial use would permit people to profit on the backs of volunteers.
• curprev 08:4708:47, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Jitse Niesen‎ 20,336 bytes +204‎ →‎Reply: grammar; "many less people" --> "far fewer people"
• curprev 08:3208:32, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 20,336 bytes +204‎ →‎Argument: Having incompatible licences is a nuisance
• curprev 08:0108:01, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 20,132 bytes +1,796‎ →‎Reply: People will always profit on the backs of volunteers
• curprev 07:5007:50, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 19,950 bytes +1,614‎ →‎Reply: There is nothing wrong with commercial use.
• curprev 07:4107:41, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 19,642 bytes +263‎ →‎Reply: Non-commercial sites could offer similar features to commercial sites.
• curprev 07:2207:22, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 19,511 bytes +132‎ →‎Argument: "Noncommercial" is not well defined
• curprev 07:0207:02, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ m 19,379 bytes +1,043‎ →‎Reply: The ''Citizendium'' website ''is'' maximum distribution.
• curprev 06:4106:41, 3 April 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 19,304 bytes +968‎ →‎Argument: Commercial use would permit people to profit on the backs of volunteers.: stub

31 March 2007

• curprev 09:1909:19, 31 March 2007‎ imported>Jitse Niesen‎ 19,187 bytes +851‎ add "Argument: Having incompatible licenses is a nuisance"; expounded by Tom Kelly on talk page and Oleg Alexandrov on forum

28 March 2007

• curprev 14:5514:55, 28 March 2007‎ imported>Jitse Niesen‎ 18,336 bytes −167‎ →‎Argument: A noncommercial license is incompatible with Wikipedia.: the second reply seems to be the elaboration of the original argument, so move things around

27 March 2007

• curprev 22:2422:24, 27 March 2007‎ imported>Larry Sanger‎ 18,503 bytes +11‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:2321:23, 27 March 2007‎ imported>Larry Sanger‎ 18,492 bytes +1,184‎ →‎Point of order: CC-by-nc or CC-by-nc-sa?: CC-by-nc-sa

26 March 2007

• curprev 12:3112:31, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Joseph Rushton Wakeling‎ m 19,231 bytes +395‎ →‎Point of order: CC-by-nc or CC-by-nc-sa?: Correction/clarification
• curprev 12:2912:29, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Joseph Rushton Wakeling‎ 19,223 bytes +387‎ →‎Point of order: CC-by-nc or CC-by-nc-sa?: Explanation of key differences.
• curprev 12:0912:09, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Howard Arvi Hughes‎ 18,836 bytes +1,366‎ →‎Reply: The ''Citizendium'' website ''is'' maximum distribution.: stub
• curprev 12:0612:06, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 18,788 bytes +1,318‎ →‎Argument: "Noncommercial" is not well defined
• curprev 11:5911:59, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 17,470 bytes +162‎ →‎Argument: Commercial use facilitates competition
• curprev 11:5711:57, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 17,308 bytes +1,149‎ →‎Argument: "Noncommercial" is not well defined
• curprev 11:3411:34, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 16,159 bytes +2‎ →‎Reply: People will always profit on the backs of volunteers
• curprev 11:3411:34, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 16,157 bytes −1‎ →‎=Reply: People will always profit on the backs of volunteers
• curprev 11:3311:33, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 16,158 bytes +5,915‎ →‎Argument: Commercial use would permit people to profit on the backs of volunteers.
• curprev 11:2711:27, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 15,526 bytes +55‎ →‎Argument: A noncommercial license is incompatible with Wikipedia.
• curprev 11:2411:24, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 15,471 bytes +207‎ →‎Argument: Commercial use is part of the definition of free/open content.
• curprev 11:1411:14, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 15,264 bytes +146‎ →‎The issue explained neutrally
• curprev 11:1311:13, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 15,118 bytes +4,875‎ →‎The issue explained neutrally
• curprev 11:0411:04, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 14,918 bytes +4,675‎ →‎Argument: A non-commercial license permits overall greater encyclopedia quality through freer use of allowable images
• curprev 10:5110:51, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Anthony DiPierro‎ 14,090 bytes +88‎ →‎Argument: If contributors share copyright, the Citizendium Foundation could relicense articles commercially.
• curprev 10:1410:14, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 14,002 bytes +645‎ →‎Rebuttal: There are excellent reasons to disallow Wikipedia from using Citizendium original articles
• curprev 10:0910:09, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,988 bytes +122‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are fundamentally compatible
• curprev 10:0610:06, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,866 bytes −50‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are fundamentally compatible
• curprev 10:0510:05, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,871 bytes −45‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are fundamentally compatible
• curprev 10:0110:01, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,916 bytes −2‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are fundamentally compatible
• curprev 10:0010:00, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,910 bytes −11‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are much more compatible than you think
• curprev 09:5709:57, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,921 bytes +3‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are much more compatible than you think
• curprev 09:5609:56, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,917 bytes −1‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are much more compatible than you think
• curprev 09:5509:55, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,915 bytes −3‎ →‎Reply: There's no good reason to prefer to let Wikipedia use our articles
• curprev 09:5509:55, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,918 bytes +796‎ →‎Reply: We should disallow Wikipedia from using our articles (with rebuttal to above)
• curprev 09:5409:54, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ 13,901 bytes +779‎ →‎Argument: A noncommercial license is incompatible with Wikipedia.: reorganizing some
• curprev 09:5309:53, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ 13,122 bytes −782‎ →‎Rebuttal: Article incompatibility is better achieved through stylistic means than the blunt instrument of a license
• curprev 09:5109:51, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,904 bytes +547‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are much more compatible than you think
• curprev 09:5009:50, 26 March 2007‎ imported>Stephen Ewen‎ m 13,894 bytes +18‎ →‎Rebuttal: The GFDL and CC-by-sa are much more compatible than you think