Well, I’m glad it’s that simple (sarcasm intended!). Do we really expect new/occasional contributors to figure this out? Having been on Wikipedia for 9 years, it’s all news to me. I always thought that clicking SAVE with
By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL with the understanding that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient for CC BY-SA 3.0 attribution.
that I was releasing *my* contribution, full stop, end of story. If we expect people to do more than this, shouldn’t it say something at this point like “If your contribution has previously been published elsewhere, please click here” and take people to a form where they can supply more details and then hit SAVE. Let’s make it easier for people to do the right thing instead of reverting them and losing them as contributors.
Kerry
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Maggie Dennis
Sent: Thursday, 24 July 2014 12:42 AM
To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities
Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] [Wikimedia-l] Catching copy and pasting early
Just a few points inline. :)
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:50 AM, James Heilman <jmh649@gmail.com> wrote:
To clarify the proposal is:
1) only looking at new edits that add blocks of text over a certain size
2) only tagging those edits on a workspace page for further follow-up by an experienced human editor
3) only running on articles of WikiProjects that want it and are willing to follow-up (thus only WPMED for starters)
What it is NOT is: a tool to add notices to article space, a tool to warn users on their talk pages, or a tool to look at old edits. It is also NOT many other things. This is a very narrow proposal.
With respect to users who are adding content they own which they have previously had published. What you do is you get them in an email to agree to release it under a CC BY SA license and then send that email to OTRS.
Alternatively, they can skip this step if they are reproducing materials from their own website by adding a release to that website. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DCM talks about how. I speak to that based on my volunteer experience, not my work experience. :)
One further point - if they are the sole copyright holder contributing their own text work to Wikipedia, it must be colicensed under GFDL according to our terms of use.
Maggie
With respect to the number of edits, WPMED gets about 1000 a day. If we say about 10% are of a significant size (a rather high estimate) and if we say copy and paste issues occur in 10% with a same number of false positives we are looking at 20 edits to review a day. Those within the project are able to handle this volume in a timely manner.
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
Maggie Dennis
Senior Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.