Quoting Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
On Dec 9, 2007 9:49 PM, joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
Quoting Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca:
Anthony wrote:
I have a copy of the history and would be willing to extract the list of authors and put it on the appropriate talk pages, if that'd satisfy anyone.
I've got a copy too, though somewhat fragmentary since I got it back when the export function had a 100-revision limit. I don't recall ever making any substantial edits to the page so I've got no direct personal interest in the matter. I'm mainly just upset at the inability of compromise to "stick" even when it's mandated by the license we're using this material under.
Satisfying the GFDL by putting things on the talk page is highly questionable.
It certainly doesn't satisfy the GFDL. But then again, none of the pages on the entire website satisfy the GFDL.
That argument has been made before and a number of lawyers have considered it to be incorrect. I'm not a lawyer so I won't comment too heavily in that regard.
The only thing that'd satisfy the GFDL would be to create a section, ==History==, and put the names there, along with the years, title, and publisher. If that's what we want to do, I'll be all for it.
Er no, as I understand it (again, I'm not a lawyer) having an explicit link to the history is ok because we treat them more or less as one document.
And in any event, there's an obvious good faith difference between questionably satisfying the GFDL and definitely not satisfying it. This is clearly in the second category.
If, on the other hand, the reason you don't want this deleted has nothing to do with the GFDL, I can't help you.
I already listed the many other reasons not to delete this.