wiki pedista <wikipedista@...> writes:
In a discussion back in 2002 (starting about here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia/2002-August/021718.html ) It was decided that the acknowledgment for the use of FOLDOC material would be on the same page. I have seen that said mentions still exist, with the use of a template.
Thanks for pointing that out. It wish someone had included me in the discussion at the time.
Is this a legal requirement that comes from some interpretation of our venerable GFDL or just courtesy?
Courtesy. I am happy for FOLDOC content to be used in any way whatsoever in Wikipedia and have modified the FOLDOC copyright in response to requests from wikipedians.
In either case, do the rights to modify our material include the right of moving that notice to a less prominent place, or removing it altogether?
I am very happy to have any kind of acknowledgement or back link on FOLDOC based articles in Wikipedia. I would be almost as happy just to have a single acknowledgement on some suitable global page. I would not be at all happy to have no acknowledgement at all but I'd just cry quietly to myself at night about it. :-)
Can we assure that our re-users would keep [credits for sources]?
Of course not, but Wikipedia should Do The Right Thing anyway.
Denis Howe FOLDOC Editor-in-Chief