Oldak Quill wrote:
You mention trying to get permanently featured as "not everyone knows that" sections on the fun pages of newspapers. Could this not fuel a perception of Wikipedia as somewhat frivelous?
So what? Let them have whatever perception they want. People are fascinated by these snippets of information that are short enough that they can just repeat to their friends over the next glass of wine. If you are worried about it being seen as frivolous then you are taking this all too seriously
Couldn't it encourage more people to see our contents as a random collation of facts rather than a great source of information?
Yes, that would be an excellent outcome.
I don't see the point of getting into such complicated legalese contortions over what amounts to very short extracts from Wikipedia. Saying simply "Source pms.wikipedia.org" (or whatever language version) should be enough for anything that does not exceed two paragraphs in length. A simple policy statement that any such usage will be viewed as fair use should be adequate to the circumstances. Trying to dissect the minutiae of GFDL to deal with this can only benefit stupid lawyers.
Ec