I wrote:
As far as I understand it, users of our material have to provide history of contributors, and we suggest that they link back to our article to fulfil this obligation. Alternatively, there is nothing to stop them just copying our history and use that instead, without linking to us (strictly, they may not even have to credit 'Wikipedia' at all).
Looks like I was wrong here: section 4J of the FDL *requires* giving the network location of previous versions of the document, so they would have to link back to the original text. I think the Wikipedia:Copyrights page could do with changing to make that clearer.
Also note section 4K of the GFDL which requires preserving pre existing acknowledgements and dedications.
Tim (Enchanter)
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
From: "Tim Marklew" tmarklew@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:56 PM
I wrote:
As far as I understand it, users of our material have to provide history
of
contributors, and we suggest that they link back to our article to fulfil this obligation. Alternatively, there is nothing to stop them just
copying
our history and use that instead, without linking to us (strictly, they
may
not even have to credit 'Wikipedia' at all).
Looks like I was wrong here: section 4J of the FDL *requires* giving the network location of previous versions of the document, so they would have
to
link back to the original text. I think the Wikipedia:Copyrights page
could
do with changing to make that clearer.
Also note section 4K of the GFDL which requires preserving pre existing acknowledgements and dedications.
Tim (Enchanter)
Simple Science Wiki Is still using subpages, so I've just put a /Credits subpage for each article where appropriate. It has text appropriate to the usage, such as, "The first version of this article was based on text originally from http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/blah of [[Wikipedia]]" where the wiki-link leads to a short blurb explaining and thanking Wikipedia.
Would it be possible to add a Credits: namespace that, like the Talk: namespace would track a given article? That way we could put credits, links-back, links to any invariant texts, et cetera ad nauseum. We could even put in hardcopy references, which would be useful and keep 'em from cluttering a document. Best of all, it's unobtrusive but easily accessible.
Just a suggestion, your mileage may vary, code requirements may not permit, and a half-dozen other disclaimers. :)
-- April
(Another shameless plug for http://www.renaissoft.com/april/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Simple_Science_Wiki .)
On 21-08-2002, Rosa Williams wrote thusly :
From: "Tim Marklew" tmarklew@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:56 PM
I wrote:
As far as I understand it, users of our material have to provide history
of
contributors, and we suggest that they link back to our article to fulfil this obligation. Alternatively, there is nothing to stop them just
copying
our history and use that instead, without linking to us (strictly, they
may
not even have to credit 'Wikipedia' at all).
Looks like I was wrong here: section 4J of the FDL *requires* giving the network location of previous versions of the document, so they would have
to
link back to the original text. I think the Wikipedia:Copyrights page
could
do with changing to make that clearer.
Also note section 4K of the GFDL which requires preserving pre existing acknowledgements and dedications.
Tim (Enchanter)
Simple Science Wiki Is still using subpages, so I've just put a /Credits subpage for each article where appropriate. It has text appropriate to the usage, such as, "The first version of this article was based on text originally from http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/blah of [[Wikipedia]]" where the wiki-link leads to a short blurb explaining and thanking Wikipedia.
Would it be possible to add a Credits: namespace that, like the Talk: namespace would track a given article? That way we could put credits, links-back, links to any invariant texts, et cetera ad nauseum. We could even put in hardcopy references, which would be useful and keep 'em from
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
cluttering a document. Best of all, it's unobtrusive but easily accessible.
This is a very good point here. I think it will become a neccessity, some time in future, to give references, at least for medical articles. Today's medicine paradigm is EBM (Evidence Based Medicine) and one _must_ give credible reference for any statement in articles.
BTW I should flesh out "Wikipedia medicine standards" at last. What do you think about putting in a compulsory disclaimer in articles on health related subjects ?
Regards, kpjas.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 09:30:27AM +0200, Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz wrote:
On 21-08-2002, Rosa Williams wrote thusly :
Would it be possible to add a Credits: namespace that, like the Talk: namespace would track a given article? That way we could put credits, links-back, links to any invariant texts, et cetera ad nauseum. We could even put in hardcopy references, which would be useful and keep 'em from
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^cluttering a document. Best of all, it's unobtrusive but easily accessible.
This is a very good point here. I think it will become a neccessity, some time in future, to give references, at least for medical articles.
If those references are important for the article then they should be in the article itself, not in the credits section. An important purpose of the credits sections is to tell us that it is Ok that certain parts of the article were copied from elsewhere. So it shouldn't be cluttered with other references.
-- Jan Hidders
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org