User:Anton - Revision history

Tobin at 06:55, 6 November 2003

2003-11-06T06:55:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:55, 6 November 2003
Line 103:		Line 103:
	[[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]		[[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]

			----

	Fine by me. I'll adopt a sig block that says		Fine by me. I'll adopt a sig block that says
Line 111:		Line 112:

	Anton		Anton

			----

			As long as you limit this to articles where you have contributed something significant that should be fine (though I'd be much happier if you used something in the style I suggested, it separates the attribution out of the evolving article text, lets people get back to your original work and is far more general than a "sig block"). I think the "Feel free to use, copy, correct, modify or redistribute" is entirely redundant though and should be cut (the GNU FDL gives people the right to do this anyway.)

			[[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]

Anton at 02:16, 6 November 2003

2003-11-06T02:16:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:16, 6 November 2003
Line 102:		Line 102:

	[[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]		[[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]


			Fine by me. I'll adopt a sig block that says

			"Written/Modified by Anton on [date]. Feel free to use, copy, correct, modify or redistribute".

			This should encourage people to correct me when I make mistakes of fact, attribution, interpretation, spelling, or when my biases show too obviously.

			Anton

Tobin: Del's compromise

2003-11-06T01:53:32Z

Del's compromise

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:53, 6 November 2003
Line 85:		Line 85:
	[[User:Del\|Del]]		[[User:Del\|Del]]

			----
	Cleaner is:		Cleaner is:
	# if you want to retain authoship: write what you want. Post it somewhere. Then link to it here		# if you want to retain authoship: write what you want. Post it somewhere. Then link to it here
	# if you are willing to work collaboratively: contribut to the wiki and be content with the user contribution and page history features to record you unique contributions.		# if you are willing to work collaboratively: contribut to the wiki and be content with the user contribution and page history features to record you unique contributions.
	I find editing articles with a byline in them to be awkward. ~ [[User:JakeVortex\|JakeVortex]] 12:48, 6 Nov 2003 (EST)		I find editing articles with a byline in them to be awkward. ~ [[User:JakeVortex\|JakeVortex]] 12:48, 6 Nov 2003 (EST)
			----

			Del's compromise sounds fair to me. As long as Anton has no problem with the idea that people will, probably, modify what he has written at some point and that the attributions should be placed at the end of an article (Attribution sub heading?) so that it doesn't look like individual sections of an article are owned by a single person.

			For articles that have been started using material that has been published elsewhere I'd like to see more of an effort to include bylines. Would the following be acceptable to everyone?

			== Attribution ==
			Much of this article is based on an original article by ''Person XYZ'', you can find a copy of the original article at ''some location (Possibly the article history?)''

			I think that makes it clear where the starting point came from and where people can find a copy.

			[[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]

JakeVortex at 01:48, 6 November 2003

2003-11-06T01:48:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:48, 6 November 2003
Line 83:		Line 83:
	Also note that many of Anton's articles here are previously published with his name on the byline and to reproduce an original article, even with permission and the oversight of the GNU FDL, it's best to reproduce it in full including all bylines.		Also note that many of Anton's articles here are previously published with his name on the byline and to reproduce an original article, even with permission and the oversight of the GNU FDL, it's best to reproduce it in full including all bylines.

	[[Del]]		[[User:Del\|Del]]

			Cleaner is:
			# if you want to retain authoship: write what you want. Post it somewhere. Then link to it here
			# if you are willing to work collaboratively: contribut to the wiki and be content with the user contribution and page history features to record you unique contributions.
			I find editing articles with a byline in them to be awkward. ~ [[User:JakeVortex\|JakeVortex]] 12:48, 6 Nov 2003 (EST)

Del at 01:14, 6 November 2003

2003-11-06T01:14:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:14, 6 November 2003
Line 83:		Line 83:
	Also note that many of Anton's articles here are previously published with his name on the byline and to reproduce an original article, even with permission and the oversight of the GNU FDL, it's best to reproduce it in full including all bylines.		Also note that many of Anton's articles here are previously published with his name on the byline and to reproduce an original article, even with permission and the oversight of the GNU FDL, it's best to reproduce it in full including all bylines.

	[Del]		[[Del]]

Del at 01:14, 6 November 2003

2003-11-06T01:14:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:14, 6 November 2003
Line 70:		Line 70:

	I hope this doesn't stop you from wanting to contribute but this wiki risks going the way of other collaborative works if people start thinking of articles as being "their" work. - [[User:Tobin\|Tobin]] 23:52, 5 Nov 2003 (EST)		I hope this doesn't stop you from wanting to contribute but this wiki risks going the way of other collaborative works if people start thinking of articles as being "their" work. - [[User:Tobin\|Tobin]] 23:52, 5 Nov 2003 (EST)

			----

			OK, how about this compromise?

			Anton writes what he wants, and finishes his articles with the byline: "Written by Anton de Stoc ... bla bla bla ...".

			Should anyone else come and substantially change the article, they should then remove the byline?

			At least the original copy of the article will remain in the archives with Anton's byline on it.

			Also note that many of Anton's articles here are previously published with his name on the byline and to reproduce an original article, even with permission and the oversight of the GNU FDL, it's best to reproduce it in full including all bylines.

			[Del]

Tobin at 12:52, 5 November 2003

2003-11-05T12:52:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:52, 5 November 2003
Line 58:		Line 58:

	Anton		Anton

			----

			In the case of this wiki (and wikis in general) articles are, ultimately, authored by the community. Individuals can be expected to take responsibility for what they change in an article but there is no concept of ownership (that is to say no individual can say an article is "theirs"). If you want articles attributed to yourself (alone) then Cunnan isn't an appropriate place to write them.

			This is a large part of what helps wikis grow at great speed and to great depth (though Cunnan is far from the kind of critical mass that larger wikis have). They are not plagued by the "don't copy, distribute or change anything" attitude of, most, private work. As soon as someone starts claiming that an article is their work alone then it becomes much harder for others to contribute (how much does one need to add to an article before it becomes one's own? If the original author stops working on the articles are they still unalterable?).

			The wiki software keeps track of all changes made and who made them. It is a fairly easy matter to determine who did what to an article. This record is a much better method of tracking such changes, as an attribution inserted directly into an article can be changed while this record can't be forged (by anyone who doesn't have direct access to the database).

			When Cunnan was first set-up some thought was given to the possibility of using software similar to that which [http://everything2.com/ Everything2] uses but it was obvious that, while still working well it caused some stagnation with people "owning" nodes. Wikis on the other hand don't suffer this problem (look at the exponential growth of the [http://en.wikipedia.org Wikipedia] for an example.)

			I hope this doesn't stop you from wanting to contribute but this wiki risks going the way of other collaborative works if people start thinking of articles as being "their" work. - [[User:Tobin\|Tobin]] 23:52, 5 Nov 2003 (EST)

Anton at 12:22, 5 November 2003

2003-11-05T12:22:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:22, 5 November 2003
Line 47:		Line 47:
	If I may extend your analogy, I'd describe Cunnan as more of a timber plantation. The trees are there to be improved upon.		If I may extend your analogy, I'd describe Cunnan as more of a timber plantation. The trees are there to be improved upon.
	Someone may fell your tree, mill it and turn it into something else. If the original unmodified tree is important to you, it may be better to plant it in an arboretum or botanical park. [[User:Morgant\|Morgant]]		Someone may fell your tree, mill it and turn it into something else. If the original unmodified tree is important to you, it may be better to plant it in an arboretum or botanical park. [[User:Morgant\|Morgant]]

			-----

			Morgant,

			I really, really dont care about 'unmodified'. We are all dwarves, looking higher because we are upon the shoulders of giants.

			What I care about is that an author's work is clearly identified as theirs, so they can take responsibility for it, good or bad.


			Anton

Morgant: continuing discussion

2003-11-05T10:18:41Z

continuing discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:18, 5 November 2003
Line 42:		Line 42:

	Anton		Anton
			-----
			Anton,

			If I may extend your analogy, I'd describe Cunnan as more of a timber plantation. The trees are there to be improved upon.
			Someone may fell your tree, mill it and turn it into something else. If the original unmodified tree is important to you, it may be better to plant it in an arboretum or botanical park. [[User:Morgant\|Morgant]]

Anton at 09:02, 5 November 2003

2003-11-05T09:02:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:02, 5 November 2003
Line 30:		Line 30:
	You are writing some very interesting stuff and I don't want to drive you away by arguing but if people start "owning" articles then the wiki stops being a community effort (or becomes less of one). [[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]<br>		You are writing some very interesting stuff and I don't want to drive you away by arguing but if people start "owning" articles then the wiki stops being a community effort (or becomes less of one). [[User:Tobin\|Tobin]]<br>
	PS - I agree totally on the bibliographies and footnotes point.		PS - I agree totally on the bibliographies and footnotes point.

			-----

			Tobin,

			If the system records edits, then my insistance on having my name on what I write is therefore unimportant - except to me, for whom it is very important.

			The analogy I would use for the Wiki as a community effort is forest and trees - we planted the forest, but that tree is mine, and that tree I helped with.

			Authors deserve to have their work publicly and easily identified.

			Anton