[Wikipedia-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: The New French Editor and edit war

[Anthere]

--- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> Yes, one of my grave defects is love of stirring up
> trouble.
> 
> Vincint,
> 
> I hope you can see, apart from the fun we are
> having, that anyone who logs
> on to the French Wikipedia, not just Anthere, can
> edit your article. I
> sympathise with your view that you should be able to
> maintain the integrity
> of your article and in most publishing situations
> you could, (like fun) but
> where you are you can't due to the GNU copyright
> (which by publishing on
> Wikipedia you have implicitly agreed to). I hope
> this clarifies the
> situation.
> 
> Fred Bauder

Since it could be going into legal matters, I switch
to the main list. Ultimately, this could concerns
Jimbo.

I should add that we are slowly proceeding toward an
agreement on the [[religion grecque]] page.

That is, I am boldly going toward each step upon which
we can find an agreement, and let issues such as his
use (and my breaking) of non-breakable caracters, use
of fancy div, use of multiple external anchors between
his articles for later discussion. As I told him,
discussion over anchors are likely to take some time,
it would be sad not to settle an agreement on the
articles themselves. Any relevant links against
technical or practical use of external anchors will be
welcome, advice from french speaking as well, as
Vincent is claiming this opinion of mine is only mine.
Partially true, as there is no rules against using
anchors. Except for Vincent as external anchors, I
believe most anchors have been used in "list of xxx"
as internal anchors, which I can live with. My issue
is mostly a question of easiness of editing, and
mostly linking. I think we have to take time for
issue, and  proceed slowly.

just to make you laugh, I must also say he is
currently considering I was acting against the rules
of Wikipedia, when I refused to protect the page, as
he requested it. He claims edit wars rules that
protection is mandatory, and that his wishes for
protection are not respected, and that I am forcing my
personal belief in what Wikipedia should be (but is
not) by refusing to protect it myself !

My, this is fun ! I would never have believed someone
in a war "against" me would so deeply reproach "me" to
refuse to "protect" the page against "his" edits!

172 ! come over here :-) (just kidding, right ?)

------------
 
However, I would like to insist on the *legal matter*,
as I think, should Vincent proceeds along the lines he
has been suggesting, this will be a problem for Jimbo.

Here
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_Utilisateur%3AVincent_Ramos

Vincent explains that

* he can prove he is the main author of some articles
(he gives this link as an example
http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Sanskrit&action=history

* he can show further proofs of him being the author,
such as school notes (I suppose he teaches that
topic), or articles notes

* he knows where to seek legal advice. He adds that he
does not want to do that, but should he has further
problem with his intellectual ownership to these
articles I insist on editing, he will know where to go

* He further add that there is no legal notion of
copyright in France anyway

* that he is a scholar, who accepted nicely to spent
his time here, and to give us his work free of right
because he liked Wikipedia concept. However, he says
he can't tolerate my attitude that consist in
incoherently editing his perfectly good articles, to
modify along my own views, when not everyone share
them (note : absolutely no one gave any comment on the
article content itself and my proposition of division,
that he incidentely accepted)

* that if I further proceed in editing his articles,
he would remove everything he wrote and would have his
(oops I dunno how to say that) legal rights respected,
in a way to quit wikipedia and let it in the same
state that it was before he gots there. He add he
would be very sad if that should happen.

(note : his articles are very interesting, though they
are not always very accessible to everyone imho. Some
have been a little bit rework by others (mostly
wikification, I tried a couple of time to do more, and
was ill-received, which is why I suspected a strong
owernership problem)

* he also says he will not tolerate that one (note :
me) decide I have any rights in a system with no
hierarchy : and that if I refuse to respect structures
in place to facilitate edit war, it is my choice, but
that I do let him any possibility than to (what he
wrote in the edit war article, which is basically that
I am a vandale). (note : what he is hinting at here,
is my refusal to protect the page I am on war on, and
my proposition to discuss the matter instead, rather
than letting other more knowledgeable people decide
what is best).

Well...

I must add that a couple of people expressed I was
right on the copyright point (I tried to explain to
him what the license implied, and that he implicitely
agreed to proceed under this license each time he
pushed on "save"), but it does not appear clear he
understands the point.

All in all, he is a very good contributor, but a
disaster as a collaborator. As long as no one touches
his articles, all is fine (and little do so, as these
are expert and very well research topics), if someone
remove a single sentence from anything he wrote, he
says it is abusive.

Anyway, I am used to being the bugging one :-)

I don't think this will proceed any further in the
next weeks. But, I wanted to make clear what the
problem is, for any further edit wars (which will
undoubtely occur again). I learn the hard way from my
peers I can't own articles, I can teach others as well
perhaps.

Yours

Anthere

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com