[WikiEN-l] DRV and WT:BLP

[Anthony]

On Dec 9, 2007 10:10 PM,  <joshua.zelinsky at yale.edu> wrote:
> Quoting Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> > It certainly doesn't satisfy the GFDL.  But then again, none of the
> > pages on the entire website satisfy the GFDL.
>
> That argument has been made before and a number of lawyers have
> considered it to
> be incorrect. I'm not a lawyer so I won't comment too heavily in that regard.
>
> > The only thing that'd
> > satisfy the GFDL would be to create a section, ==History==, and put
> > the names there, along with the years, title, and publisher.  If
> > that's what we want to do, I'll be all for it.
>
> Er no, as I understand it (again, I'm not a lawyer) having an explicit link to
> the history is ok because we treat them more or less as one document.
>
> And in any event, there's an obvious good faith difference between
> questionably
> satisfying the GFDL and definitely not satisfying it. This is clearly in the
> second category.
>
I agree, but do you believe that having the information in the history
of an article which redirects to the one in question does satisfy the
GFDL?  And what about the part of the merge that went into a different
page from the one the redirect went to?  How does that questionably
satisfy the GFDL?  I don't see it.  Not at all.  Whether you get to
the information by following "What links here" and then clicking on
"history" or you get it by clicking on "Talk" and then "merged page
history", it seems equally (non)compliant to me.

And what about the article on Angela?  Are we sure that nothing has
been merged from that article anywhere?  I have a copy of that one too
if someone wants the list of editors.