On 18 September 2012 00:04, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas@googlemail.com> wrote:

On 18 September 2012 00:03, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:

On 17 September 2012 23:50, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas@googlemail.com> wrote:
> OK, having done some digging; this project seems to be often referred to or
> introduced as a WMUK project.
>
> (e.g. this Wikimania video:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GibraltarpediA_introduction_video.ogg )
>
> Obviously that is a concerning facet that needs to be cleared up also.

That video just says WMUK is looking forward to supporting the project
(which it is - that's why an MoU is being discussed). It doesn't say
it is a WMUK project (at least, I didn't notice anything saying that).

There has been some confusion about WMUK's involvement, though,
certainly. In particular, the project has been repeatedly linked to
Monmouthpedia in a way that suggests it is being organised by the same
organisation. The "GibraltarpediA" mark doesn't help - in fact, it
probably infringes on the "MonmouthpediA" mark. I know there were some
issues with the use of the Wikipedia mark, which I believe were
resolved with the WMF. I'm not aware of WMUK granting a license to use
the "[Placename]pediA" mark, though.

It goes back to your point about demarcation though. At no point did Roger really identify this as *his project*. And the outro discussing WMUK leaves one assuming (quite fairly, I think) it is a WMUK project.

Tom