[WikiEN-l] Attributing articles to their authors

[Shmuel Weidberg]

On Jan 24, 2008 4:22 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:

> Are you sure there will be people willing to adjudicate? I certainly
> wouldn't want to be the one to tell someone their contribution isn't
> worthy of credit. There are plenty of people willing to adjudicate
> content disputes, sure, but this isn't about content, it's about
> people, and that changes things.

Oh definitely. I don't think there will be a question of whether a
person is worthy, only whether his contribution meets the criteria for
crediting him. There will be some question about what sort of
contribution is worthy of credit, and what isn't, but that can be
hammered out.

If somebody adds a significant fraction of an article, or a
significant amount to the article, and it survives subsequent editing,
then it deserves attribution. If it doesn't survive then he loses the
attribution.

If somebody started an article and made a significant contribution to
the article, he definitely gets credit. If somebody significantly
improved the accuracy of an article, even if the size of the article
didn't change, he would get credit.

If somebody does significant copy-editing on the article, he should
get credit, and even if there is significant reorganization. We should
credit each person for the specific contribution he made.

You might not like to step on people's toes, but as I am sure many
here can attest, there are plenty of people who are willing to take
the risk.

Regards,
Ezra