Difference between revisions of "OrthodoxWiki talk:Copyrights"
(→CC footer misleading) |
m (→CC footer misleading) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
Until I noticed your multimedia announcement today, I hadn't realized that OrthodoxWiki ran under dual licensing. Maybe it would be best to remove the CC image from the footer and replace it with plain text, like "[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html GFDL]-[http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ CC] licensed"—or just remove the image and leave the "Copyright Information" link as-is in the footer. --[[User:RockOfVictory|J. J.]] 15:32, August 17, 2006 (CDT) | Until I noticed your multimedia announcement today, I hadn't realized that OrthodoxWiki ran under dual licensing. Maybe it would be best to remove the CC image from the footer and replace it with plain text, like "[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html GFDL]-[http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ CC] licensed"—or just remove the image and leave the "Copyright Information" link as-is in the footer. --[[User:RockOfVictory|J. J.]] 15:32, August 17, 2006 (CDT) | ||
| − | : I think this would be a good idea, actually, especially considering that the consensus over at Wikipedia finds our dual license incompatible with their single one (which would allow material to be brought from there to here, but not here to there).[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy#Unattributed_imports_from_OrthodoxWiki:__Please_help.21]. I've updated the text on this article to make this incompatibility more explicit. —[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</small> 14:30, April 24, 2007 (PDT) | + | : I think this would be a good idea, actually, especially considering that the consensus over at Wikipedia finds our dual license incompatible with their single one (which would allow material to be brought from there to here, but not here to there).[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy#Unattributed_imports_from_OrthodoxWiki:__Please_help.21]. I've updated the text on this article to make this incompatibility more explicit. —[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</small> 14:30, April 24, 2007 (PDT) |
Revision as of 21:30, April 24, 2007
Contents
Lack of Authorship/Editorship Information in Encyclopedic Wiki Entries
All what one finds in wikis are IP addresses and nicknames. The lack of clear and complete authorship/editorship information attached to each entry, including authors/editors' affiliations and credentials, is a very serious quality issue encountered in most wiki-based encyclopedias these days (not just OrthodoxWiki). There are no built-in wiki mechanisms or policies to enforce the presence of such metainformation in every article.
Problem with Citations
Citing a wiki page in your work can also be very tricky (unless one uses the new 'permanent link' feature in MediaWiki to point to a specific revision of that page). A page might significantly change and become a totally different article than the one you were originally referring to (while still maintaining the same URI).
Some Related Links
From User:Arbible
Re:
As far as Wikipedia is concerned, they explicitly state "a direct link back to the article satisfies our author credit requirement" (wikipedia:Wikipedia:Copyright). I think we should adopt the same explicit policy (and to this end, the "click through" language has recently been revised. I agree about the permalinks -- that's why I'm now recommending that the link to the original article go to the version permalink rather than the article itself (although I'm not requiring it since Wikipedia does not require it for compliance).
As far as OrthodoxWiki is concerned, we don't have the issue with IP addresses. Besides this, an author is free to give as much or as little information about themselves as they wish (on their user page). There is more discussion of this at Help:Citing OrthodoxWiki - please feel free to comment there too. Thanks, — FrJohn (talk)
- Just to confirm - does OrthodoxWiki have the same stipulation as Wikipedia, ie that OrthodoxWiki must be referenced in quotes and borrowed articles? — Pιsτévο, at 22:48, May 31, 2006 (CDT)
- Yes, I believe this is the case, Pistevo. --J. J. 15:32, August 17, 2006 (CDT)
Until I noticed your multimedia announcement today, I hadn't realized that OrthodoxWiki ran under dual licensing. Maybe it would be best to remove the CC image from the footer and replace it with plain text, like "GFDL-CC licensed"—or just remove the image and leave the "Copyright Information" link as-is in the footer. --J. J. 15:32, August 17, 2006 (CDT)
- I think this would be a good idea, actually, especially considering that the consensus over at Wikipedia finds our dual license incompatible with their single one (which would allow material to be brought from there to here, but not here to there).[1]. I've updated the text on this article to make this incompatibility more explicit. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs 14:30, April 24, 2007 (PDT)
