[Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

Erik Moeller erik at wikimedia.org
Mon Jan 12 19:05:46 UTC 2009

2009/1/11 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> That may have been the intention of the author of the GFDL (though you
> haven't proven this).  But the simple fact of the matter is that the history
> section *does* provide credit to *all* the authors.

It does so, in the context of Wikipedia.org, because change tracking
and attribution are served by the same software function. That a
listing of all authors would always be included directly (as opposed
to by reference) with any copy of a Wikipedia article is not a
reasonable inference from this fact, especially given that the
language in GFDL which clearly exists for purpose of giving credit
includes reasonable limitations (principal authors). After all, even
you yourself agree that including the full change history with each
copy is overkill.

Hence, we are having a practical debate about what is and isn't
reasonable. I base my argument on the language of the GFDL when it
comes to author credit, which includes limitations, as well as
established guidelines and practices on Wikipedia. Your argument, on
the other hand, appears to be pulled out of thin air. It is neither a
direct requirement of the GFDL, nor an established practice, nor a
reasonable expectation of a volunteer contributor. I can only conclude
that it is your personal preference.
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

More information about the foundation-l mailing list