In a message dated 1/7/2009 11:35:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, wikipedia.kawaii.neko@gmail.com writes:
Just like "deleting" a merge requires admin tools. You are welcome to file a bugzilla on this.>>
------------------------ It's not at all like it. In this case, anyone can do a merge. You simply cut and paste the text and then redirect the page. This is open to any editor. However, some commentators are stating that doing this violates the license, and the *sole* way to do it without doing so, would be to use tools that some editors do not have.
So we set up a situation, where we allow and encourage merging, and then when editors actually do it, we threaten them with a copyright infringement lawsuit.
That is not acceptable. I'm not going to file a "bug report", because this is an conflicting interpretation of what we can, should, may, or might do. I don't personally think we need the history in order to fulfill the license requirements. But I'll strenously object to anyone trying to use that to clobber mergers when we are allowing and encouraging them to do exactly that.
Will Johnson
**************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
I am sorry? Who encouraged merging? There is no consensus behind that. Merge was proposed as a compromise to the mass deletion/inclusion war but it was never commonly accepted. If it was I want to see the evidence of that consensus. - White Cat
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:41 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/7/2009 11:35:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, wikipedia.kawaii.neko@gmail.com writes:
Just like "deleting" a merge requires admin tools. You are welcome to file a bugzilla on this.>>
It's not at all like it. In this case, anyone can do a merge. You simply cut and paste the text and then redirect the page. This is open to any editor. However, some commentators are stating that doing this violates the license, and the *sole* way to do it without doing so, would be to use tools that some editors do not have.
So we set up a situation, where we allow and encourage merging, and then when editors actually do it, we threaten them with a copyright infringement lawsuit.
That is not acceptable. I'm not going to file a "bug report", because this is an conflicting interpretation of what we can, should, may, or might do. I don't personally think we need the history in order to fulfill the license requirements. But I'll strenously object to anyone trying to use that to clobber mergers when we are allowing and encouraging them to do exactly that.
Will Johnson
**************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l