[Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> Why do you want attribution of work you have done on Wikipedia
> articles to be acknowledged more prominently in dead tree media than
> it is online?
[snip]

I'm not stating my opinion on Anthony's position at this time,  but I
do not think he is asking for additional attribution.

On Wikipedia attribution is "on the next page", it's just over on the
history tab.  This is analogous to including attribution at the tail
of a dead-tree article, or perhaps in a separate authors index.  It is
exactly analogous to providing attribution is a location which is
certainly not immediately accessible to the reader, and which is
potentially completely inaccessible.  (For practical reasons it may
not be possible to provide an equivalent, as dead-tree is not an
equivalent medium,  but this fact doesn't make a URL the equivalent or
even the nearest fit)

I expect this discrepancy to become more obvious as tools like
automatic text attribution make it easier to ignore vandalism,
copy-editing, and removed changes in the article history.   Addressing
this concern well is important even if your position isn't the same as
Anthony's.