Also, has it been discussed that the minimum number of authors rule effectually only applies to stubs and some starts? Even these have often been edited by many more than a handful of bots.
It would be useful to have an SQL query that output the number of articles on en.wp with more than a handful of articles. It's probably fairly small.
So the effectual rule is that attribution is done by a hyperlink.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Brian Brian.Mingus@colorado.edu wrote:
Following this line of reasoning in both directions, many users who contribute to an encyclopedia that "anyone can edit" may not want their name reprinted on every conceivable medium that their contributions could be replicated on. In other words, many users probably don't care even a little bit about the attribution requirements of the CC-BY-SA. They contribute under the implicit assumption that their work is in the public domain. An argument can be made that printing their username all over the place is an invasion of their privacy, since with a bit of Googling its often possible to relate that to their real identity. I've got a collection of references to algorithms that show its possible to link users across social networking sites. Some of these methods would apply to a user's edits as well.
My honest intrepretation of the 5 authors or less rule else a hyperlink is that it's silly.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
So, whatever way we decide to go with licenses or attribution requirements when this debate has settled, at some point our prospective reader will find themselves confronted with a long list of names, whether printed on the page or at the end of a URL or steganographically encoded into the site logo. :-)
On this list, a minority will be real names ("John Smith"); the rest, if we discount the thousand variants on "anonymous" via our IP editors, are pseudonyms ("WikiUser") or modified names ("JohnSmith78").
In some cases, users adopt pseudonyms out of a desire for privacy, but in many cases, it doesn't signify much more than a simple decision that a username is a lot easier to work with internally, or a general habit of using some kind of nickname online... or the fact that "John Smith" was taken. And many of *those* people would, no doubt, prefer to be credited by a real name (or at least a real-sounding nom de plume...). Similarly, some of those using pseudonyms who don't want to use real names, may prefer a different pseudonym... etc, etc, etc.
It would be helpful to figure out some way of (automatically) being able to have a given username "translate" into a different name when a list of credits is generated - we would have a list which better reflects the attribution wishes of our users, and one which looks a little "neater" for the reuser to put in their Respectable Scholarly Publication. Win-win situation.
So how could we do it? At a rough sketch, I'm envisaging:
- each user has a "credit" field which they can (optionally!) set
through preferences
- when we generate the list of contributors to an article, in whatever
way we end up deciding to do that, the system can be set to read off this "credit name" rather than simply using the normal internal username, if one is available.
I note that MediaWiki already has a user_real_name field - could we use it for this sort of purpose? Would this be technically practical?
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l