--- Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
I am sure you would agree that it would be damned stupid that the english wikipedia is under one license while all other wikipedias be under another license, because in becoming compatible with wikitravel, you would cause our projects to become non compatible with one another. So, in effect, this is a global issue and you are trying to force all projects to follow what you started, without even involving them. I think this is just incorrect toward other projects.
I'm not sure I follow you about compatibility. We all agree, surely, that dual licensing gives people more options on how to use the work. Apologies if I've missed something, but I don't think anyone is arguing that en.Wikipedia should refuse GFDL-only material, but rather that we should encourage people to opt to dual license because that makes certain bits more compatible with other projects, and never less compatible. Have I missed a trick?
Personally, I think Wikipedia is (to a small extent) falling short of its goal of "creating a free encyclopedia" if articles cannot be incorporated into other copyleft projects. I accept this is a complex problem, but the way I see it, voluntary dual licensing by contributors may help a little -- it certainly can't hurt.
Matt
[[User:Matt Crypto]]
___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com