On 10/2/06, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
For example, the PR around Citizendium has had various Wikimedians saying this is fine since Wikipedia can benefit from any improvements to the content which that project makes, but that may involve linking to it with these sorts of templates.
I think that would be fine if Citizendium gains critical mass. I have more of a problem when the appearance is that it is used to _build_ critical mass.
Some way of adding attribution on the history page (which isn't indexed by Google and therefore useless to spammers) may be a better solution than adding these to the article. It probably also makes more sense in terms of the GFDL if the history is all on the history page and not partly there, partly on the talk page, and partly on the article itself.
Perhaps, if it is only and very specifically used for contributions from external sources. A sort of "External History:" namespace whose contents are shown and linked to on top of the history might be workable. Right now I'm not sure the problem is prevalent enough to justify prioritizing such a change.