On 3/1/06, Ben Yates <bluephonic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Poking my head in:
I don't have an particular argument, but this whole discussion feels
very wrong. Wikipedia should not be acting like a corporation -- it
is not trying to make a profit; its mission is to spread knowledge.
I, for one, am very glad to see Wikipedia take a strong stand on trademark
issues involving the wikimedia foundation. My efforts, freely given, are
done so with the understanding that the effort & goal is to create a "free HIGH
The only way the high quality can be assured, and wikipedia can stay
reputable (with the press penchant for negative stories) is to clearly
identify what is the original source "wikimedia foundation"
data/information/articles and what is not. Otherwise, forks that start with
wikipedia articles and then change them (in ways that gain notoriety), or
include gobs of advertising, etc., if allowed to use wikpedia trademarks,
dilute the value of wikipedia in users minds, create bad press, and harm the
reputation of the encyclopdia and the open edit model.