[WikiEN-l] BJAODN restored again

[David Mestel]

>Instead, it specifies a 'section Entitled "History"', which is defined
>as "a named subunit of the Document whose title either is precisely
>[History] or contains [History] in parentheses following text that
>translates [History] in another language." The original content of this
>section is irrelevant to the license; only the title matters.

Eh?  From section 4.I of the GFDL: "If there is no section Entitled
"History" in the Document, create one stating the title, year, authors, and
publisher of the Document"

David

On 12/06/07, Eugene van der Pijll <eugene at vanderpijll.nl> wrote:
>
> David Mestel schreef:
> > No history section is required, technically, if a Document is written
> and
> > then distributed only as a verbatim copy, but that's not the case with a
> > Wikipedia article.
>
> With "history section", you mean a section describing the history of the
> page? The GFDL does not discuss such a section.
>
> Instead, it specifies a 'section Entitled "History"', which is defined
> as "a named subunit of the Document whose title either is precisely
> [History] or contains [History] in parentheses following text that
> translates [History] in another language." The original content of this
> section is irrelevant to the license; only the title matters.
>
> An example of such a section Entitled "History" is for example
> [[London#History]]. If you create a derived work of [[London]], you have
> to include that section, and add your name to it (presumably under
> ===Rise of modern London===). And if you consider Wikipedia to be one
> document, you have to add your own name to [[History]], when
> republishing it.
>
> That's what the GFDL says.
>
> Eugene
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



-- 
David