Delirium wrote:
Now, the GFDL requires that if you distribute more
than 100 copies of
a document, you must also distribute the source (i.e. wikitext)
version of the document, and the text of the GFDL itself. I don't see
a good way to do this on a smallish pamphlet (say, 5 pages): the text
of the GFDL itself would nearly double the size of the pamphlet. The
wikitext version is permitted to be distributed electronically (i.e.
"see
http://blah/ for a source version of this document"), but even
that is somewhat onerous, as a small organization may not have the
resources or interest in maintaining a mirror of the documents it
distributes for the required year. Notably, pointing to
wikipedia.org
is not sufficient---the GFDL requires that the person doing the
distribution maintain an exact source mirror of the document exactly
as distributed, "free of added material", and including any changes,
so "derived from the Wikipedia article [here]" would not be enough.
It seems to me that it might be possible to comply with this particular
requirement by copying from, and using the link to, a previous version
of the page. For example, you might want to include the article
[[Greece]] on your most recent revision:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Greece&oldid=5864661
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Greece&oldid=5864661>
By including the full URL of a specific revision, rather than that of
the current article, you assure that the linked page will be "free of
added material".
In connection with the general discussion about flagging revisions for
use in a 1.0 print publication, this means that providing a reliable
computer-network location is not that difficult. If you rely on
Wikipedia to keep its history available for at least the required year,
then it may be possible to comply with the GFDL on a print run without
maintaining your own mirror site.
--Michael Snow