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