By the way I have checked the Wikipedia on DVD (Release Version) series and again they say:
"For a complete list of contributors for a given article, visit the corresponding entry on the English Wikipedia and click on "History" ."
But they also say
"For more details about the license of an image, visit the corresponding entry on the English Wikipedia and click on the picture."
We decided with images that the second didn't work for later CC licenses.
Andrew =====================
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
2008/10/24 Andrew Cates Andrew@soschildren.org:
This is the third time these questions have turned around just on this project. We ARE erring on the side of caution which is why we have all the image pages (unlike others...).
I wouldn't mind doing more but I would question the value of useless gestures. For example if you say who wrote what is irrelevant I can get a list of the 60,000 editors including IP addresses who have edited any of these articles and add it as plain text at the foot of the license page (similar to the German DVD model) but does that really help?
It would be far better (and no harder) to include a separate list for each article. That way you avoid worrying about the "Is Wikipedia a single GFDL work or a collection of GFDL works?" debate.
The legalities of the GFDL are so confusing and ambiguous that they are best ignored for the most part. Just try and follow the spirit of the license, which includes that attribution is required. Telling somebody how to find the list of authors in a place they can't access is not attribution by any reasonable definition.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l