2009/1/16 Thomas Larsen larsen.thomas.h@gmail.com:
Hi Thomas,
- What are you plans regarding incorporating content from other
projects? There is a good chance that Wikipedia will soon switch to a license compatible with yours, so you could copy content across. Do you plan to do so, and to what extent?
My knowledge of the licence situation at the moment is that, since Wikipedia contributors agree to licence their contributions under "GFDL 1.2 _or later_", we can use them under GFDL 1.3 and thus import them to Epistemia under the CC-BY-SA. If, actually, we can't do this, then we'll just have to wait until Wikipedia changes to CC-BY-SA. I'm not willing, though, to make Wikipedia's mistake again (well, actually, calling it a "mistake" is not entirely fair, since it was the only real option back in 2001).
You had better read the new GFDL license again - only Wikimedia can relicence content on Wikimedia projects (that was the purpose of the deadline that passed 2 days before the license was published). You'll have to wait. My question was what you plan to do if Wikipedia does switch.
Wikipedia's main issues, in my eyes, are (a) lack of _consistent_ reliability (compare articles in the hard sciences, which tend to be written by specialists, to articles in the soft sciences such as the humanities)
What is that assertion based on? That studies I've seen have examined quite a broad range of articles.
and (b) a participatory culture that is commonly incivil and/or impolite. I'm sure you've experienced discussions where a perfectly good argument has been dissolved (or quelled) by hordes of angry, shouting people who are so passionate about a particular point of view, or too lazy to research it, that they refuse to accept logic.
Sure, but civility wasn't on your list.