[WikiEN-l] Article authorship was: Making damn sure image attribution is very clear

[Steve Bennett]

On 8/26/07, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> All the data that I've seen so far suggest that most articles may well
> be the product of single authors.  Not most high profile articles, or
> most featured articles, ... but most articles. Most articles are
> mostly short and on obsecure matters.
>
> Yes, most have had edits by a few others. But these edits are
> overwhelmingly tagging and markup related. It would often be hard to
> argue that they were substantial enough to carry a copyright interest,
> and no one sane would argue that such edits are enough to rightly call
> the editor an author.

In my experience, that's about right. I have a list of about 100
articles that I've started, and I highlight the ones that have been
greatly expanded by others. Probably about 70% are really entirely my
own work - stubs, categories and types aside. Another 20-25% might
have a few sentences here or there added. And the last few have been
more than doubled by other editors.  They're the ones that warm your
heart...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcot_Manor

(I wrote two sentences. Some crazy person expanded it to a full
article complete with pictures...)

Steve