On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/4 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
- Have the numbers been released? All I saw was a selective summary.
- What do you think they're conclusive of?
The numbers given by Erik at the start of this thread are sufficient to draw the conclusion that a significant majority of the community will be happy with attribution by URL.
Less than half of people answering the survey ranked attribution by URL first.
You're assuming that those who ranked "no credit is needed" first will be happy with attribution by URL, and you're assuming that those who ranked "credit can be given to the community" will by happy with attribution by URL. But these people will also probably be happy with attribution by listing of authors. So you can easily draw the conclusion that a significant majority of the community will by happy with attribution by listing of authors. In fact, making your assumption you could say that the survey showed that 100% of them are happy with it.
My one concern with the survey is that the options were not particularly clearly defined - I'm not sure everyone taking it would have understood what the online/offline split was all about.
It was horribly designed, but this much seems true - 1 in 5 Wikipedians surveyed expect that an offline copy of a Wikipedia article to which they have contributed, will contain their name. But according to Creative Commons, CC-BY-SA does not require such attribution.