On Jan 24, 2008 4:22 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure there will be people willing to adjudicate? I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to tell someone their contribution isn't worthy of credit. There are plenty of people willing to adjudicate content disputes, sure, but this isn't about content, it's about people, and that changes things.
Oh definitely. I don't think there will be a question of whether a person is worthy, only whether his contribution meets the criteria for crediting him. There will be some question about what sort of contribution is worthy of credit, and what isn't, but that can be hammered out.
If somebody adds a significant fraction of an article, or a significant amount to the article, and it survives subsequent editing, then it deserves attribution. If it doesn't survive then he loses the attribution.
If somebody started an article and made a significant contribution to the article, he definitely gets credit. If somebody significantly improved the accuracy of an article, even if the size of the article didn't change, he would get credit.
If somebody does significant copy-editing on the article, he should get credit, and even if there is significant reorganization. We should credit each person for the specific contribution he made.
You might not like to step on people's toes, but as I am sure many here can attest, there are plenty of people who are willing to take the risk.
Regards, Ezra