On 24 January 2011 18:02, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 24 January 2011 16:09, Magnus Manske
<magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
Probably but I can't see it falling within our remit. Apart from
anything else it's not under a free license.
If the BBC owns the copyright, or has permission to re-license the
work, then that isn't an issue. I can't remember the copyright system
for h2g2 (I was very active there before I became active on Wikipedia,
but that was years ago).
I don't think their content would be appropriate for us without a
major re-write, though. It tends to be (or at least, tended to be
while I was there) written in a very light-hearted, sometimes even
comedic, tone. It's not encyclopaedic. It isn't well-referenced either
(and certainly isn't a reliable source).
h2g2 was a fun community, but it wasn't really a useful project.