On 17/08/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On 8/17/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
How is it better than nothing? Wikipedia didn't write the text, a
person did.
It's better than nothing because Wikipedia records who wrote the text.
Well, as I showed you, in this instance, Wikipedia *didn't* record who wrote the text.
They could give a url directly to the history page, but that's just likely to confuse people.
And linking to the article won't confuse people? Linking to the article is less of an attribution than linking to the history page, but neither is particularly good attribution if you consider that the majority of people are going to have no clue how to search for an author through either such link.
I think there is a problem between copyright licencing. Yes Creative Commons would presume that you link to the main contributor - GFDL Wikipedia does fine - on mirror sites like answers there is no need to show history or even link back to the article (? could be wrong about the back link?)
mike