The article was created with the copyrighted text, all work since then is a
derivitive, and we've distributed it to hundreds of mirrors who are using it
without a liscense. It's delete and rewrite, or delete till we can ascertain
a free license release.
On 8/7/07, K P <kpbotany(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/7/07, Brock Weller <brock.weller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
From the acknowledgements section (yes, there is
one) on Kuru:
This article was adapted with permission from a report "Kuru: The
Dynamics
of a Prion Disease", authored by Stacy
McGrath.
notes on medical virology- Timbury
Both out of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease) and annoying as
hell
to track down specific revisions, except in this
case, because the
copyrighted text is the base for the whole damn article. Literally the
first
edit, and its stuck around since 2004. The
timbury one can just be
wiped,
he's a user who contributed it under the
GFDL, the report one is more
troublesome, did she give permission for GFDL, or just wikipedia? its
non-free if its just permission for us. This needs some fixing, probably
some oversight as well.
Any thoughts on someone coming up with a method to identify and flag or
template articles to be reviewed that have an acknowledgement section,
something used 'with permission' or copyright notices?
--
-Brock
So does the entire article have to be rewritten? Or what? I see the
acknowledgements but don't understand the implications.
KP
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l