By the way I have checked the Wikipedia on DVD (Release Version)
series and again they say:
"For a complete list of contributors for a given article, visit the
corresponding entry on the English Wikipedia and click on "History" ."
But they also say
"For more details about the license of an image, visit the
corresponding entry on the English Wikipedia and click on the
picture."
We decided with images that the second didn't work for later CC licenses.
Andrew
=====================
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2008/10/24 Andrew Cates
<Andrew(a)soschildren.org>rg>:
This is the third time these questions have
turned around just on this
project. We ARE erring on the side of caution which is why we have all
the image pages (unlike others...).
I wouldn't mind doing more but I would question the value of useless
gestures. For example if you say who wrote what is irrelevant I can
get a list of the 60,000 editors including IP addresses who have
edited any of these articles and add it as plain text at the foot of
the license page (similar to the German DVD model) but does that
really help?
It would be far better (and no harder) to include a separate list for
each article. That way you avoid worrying about the "Is Wikipedia a
single GFDL work or a collection of GFDL works?" debate.
The legalities of the GFDL are so confusing and ambiguous that they
are best ignored for the most part. Just try and follow the spirit of
the license, which includes that attribution is required. Telling
somebody how to find the list of authors in a place they can't access
is not attribution by any reasonable definition.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l