I've never seen edit histories deleted for copyright violation, but I
suppose it's not a crazy misuse of the admis tools. I've seen histories
deleted for BLP violations, and spam links that go to stuff like porn, and,
if I recall correctly, personal attacks (esp. those that "out" our
contributors). So I guess there are circumstances where removing
destructive edits doesn't qualify as a violation of the GFDL.
Ford MF
On 9/12/08, Ting Chen <wing.philopp(a)gmx.de> wrote:
Hello folks,
in the Chinese Wikipedia an administrator had deleted part of article
histories. He deleted the article complete and then reversed the
deletion of part of the historical versions. He did this in good faith,
because he deleted vandalism edits and copy right violation content. I
was the opinion that this is not a good idea because at first the GFDL
requires the edit histories (also of the vandalism edits) and second
because thus we lost part of the records about the vandals edits.
What is the right way here?
Thanks for any advise.
Ting
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l