On 7/15/07, Charlotte Webb <charlottethewebb(a)gmail.com> wrote:
If there were a more reliable way to do this, it would be much easier
to avoid mistaking sources for mirrors (copyright infringement on our
part), or mistaking mirrors for sources (circular spread of
information that was never properly verified).
Somehow I doubt it's as fool-proof as you say.
It's as accurate as the list on Meta, which is pretty accurate, since
there are always people looking out for mirrors and forks and keeping
track of them at pages like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks
...as part of efforts to ensure GFDL compliance among reusers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GFDL_Compliance
The plugin doesn't completely remove those sites from the result, it
just replaces the usual listing which is several lines long with a
greyed out link to the mirror. So it's possible to spot false
positives, should they ever occur.
--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain(a)gmail.com