Someone asked me a question on the French wikipedia and to be fair, I am not sure what to answer.
The CURRENT text of the licencing proposition gives a link to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Whilst the text of the resolution adopted in december 2007 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update Refers to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/
The second is the US one. Not the first.
What are the implications ? And which one is *currently* proposed for the relicensing scheme ?
thanks
Ant
Florence Devouard wrote:
Someone asked me a question on the French wikipedia and to be fair, I am not sure what to answer.
The CURRENT text of the licencing proposition gives a link to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Whilst the text of the resolution adopted in december 2007 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update Refers to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/
The second is the US one. Not the first.
What are the implications ? And which one is *currently* proposed for the relicensing scheme ?
thanks
Ant
By the way, is that completely normal that the site notice on the english wikipedia is occupied by Wikimania scholarship rather than by the change of licence ?
With all due respect to Wikimania, it seems to me the impact of the licence is higher than Wikimania scholarship.
Ant
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
By the way, is that completely normal that the site notice on the english wikipedia is occupied by Wikimania scholarship rather than by the change of licence ?
With all due respect to Wikimania, it seems to me the impact of the licence is higher than Wikimania scholarship.
All sites should be showing both. Which one occurs on any given page view is random, but the licensing notice is weighted to be 2.5 times more common than the Wikimania notice.
-Robert Rohde
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:11, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
By the way, is that completely normal that the site notice on the english wikipedia is occupied by Wikimania scholarship rather than by the change of licence ?
With all due respect to Wikimania, it seems to me the impact of the licence is higher than Wikimania scholarship.
At the moment enwiki's sitenotices alternate between Wikimania scholarships and the license vote. IIRC it's the same story on other wikis as well.
Jim Redmond wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:11, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
By the way, is that completely normal that the site notice on the english wikipedia is occupied by Wikimania scholarship rather than by the change of licence ?
With all due respect to Wikimania, it seems to me the impact of the licence is higher than Wikimania scholarship.
At the moment enwiki's sitenotices alternate between Wikimania scholarships and the license vote. IIRC it's the same story on other wikis as well.
Okay. I checked several times. I guess it was just bad luck :-( Good then
ant
2009/4/20 Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
Whilst the text of the resolution adopted in december 2007 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update Refers to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/
To my knowledge, the jurisdictional variant URL wasn't intentionally chosen in the hyperlinks in the Board resolution. The language of the proposed migration, which has been vetted by the Board, has consistently referenced the "unported" version.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org