Andrew Gray wrote: > 2009/1/22 Erik Moeller <e...@wikimedia.org>: > >> A vast number of pseudonyms below have no meaning except for >> their context in Wikipedia. > > Apropos of which, a thought. We have spilled a good bit of ink over > whether or not it is appropriate for the reuser to attribute > "Wikipedia users" either alone or in addition to the usernames - > should the project have a right to attribution, etc etc etc. In > practice, wouldn't it be almost essential to name the site where the > work was done *as well* as the usernames? Many of the pseudonyms, in > effect, depend on that context... > > (Apologies if this was raised before - I don't remember seeing it) > > An article which has had many developments and been passed on might > then wind up with an amalgamated attribution line like: > > "by the United States Atomic Energy Commission (1962), Wikipedia > contributors "NukeUser", John Smith, Jane Doe and Mike Placeholder > (2004-2007), Citizendium contributors Alan White, John Smith and Betty > Green (2007-2009), and anonymous contributors." > > It's not exactly smooth, but it is comprehensible, and it does seem > helpful to name the project to give some context to the names.
Just saying "Wikipedia users" wouldn't be a good idea, but I like this way of mentioning it. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
