CZ Talk:Notice Board
nicely expressed notice about "calling a constable." Nancy Sculerati MD 12:38, 27 January 2007 (CST)
Wikipedia credit
User Anthony wrote under the dateline of January 24:
- Mentioning Wikipedia is neither necessary nor sufficient for GFDL compliance. Anthony 14:07, 28 January 2007 (CST)
I disagree. In any case, I want to credit WP where credit is due just as I would want to be credited for my own work. In connection with my work on the Highland Games Wikia (formerly Wikicities) I use the following template (with obvious changes) for WP material (see edit page for code):
| http://www.citizendium.org/images/Smallwikipedialogo.png | This page uses content from Wikipedia. The original article was at {{{1}}}. The list of authors can be seen in the page history. As with Citizendium, the text of Wikipedia is available under the GNU Free Documentation License. |
This was written by Angela Beesley when she was with Wikipedia, so that should answer any questions about what is sufficient. See the template page of Wikia: http://www.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Wikipedia
James F. Perry 15:38, 28 January 2007 (CST)
- Good suggestion, James. I think it is also highly adviseable to link to Wikipedia (or whatever other wiki) in the edit summary when importing text. The format I have been using is like this: "importing Wikipedia article; see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mon_language&action=history up to January 12, 2007 for authorship history".—Nat Krause 15:56, 28 January 2007 (CST)
Wikipedia does not own the copyright on the articles in question, the copyright is held by the authors of the articles. What Angela Beesley said on Wikia is really quite irrelevant.
Don't get me wrong. I think linking to Wikipedia for articles based on Wikipedia is a good idea. But it is not necessary for GFDL compliance, and it most certainly is not sufficient for GFDL compliance. Anthony 16:10, 28 January 2007 (CST)
- Well, the important thing is that we make the list of authors available somehow, right?—Nat Krause 16:21, 28 January 2007 (CST)
We have been linking to WP in articles that were automatically copied over in the first fork. There is a database flag that says whether an article is sourced from WP, and unfortunately, the code is simplemindedly written right now so that if someone starts a new page, the flag is "off." Hence the very temporary need for a template. We will remove these templates, as rendundant, as soon as the code is fixed. When fixed, we will be able to check a box and the corresponding WP article will be linked.
I don't want to use a WP logo in that pointer, by the way. --Larry Sanger 16:46, 28 January 2007 (CST)