Template talk:GFDL: Difference between revisions
Boobpedia - Encyclopedia of big boobs
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
::: Even Wikipedia's own admins would tell you it's not a referal point. But that aside, sometimes just a whole section is taken verbatim. Do you mind if I create a new template just for that scenerio, then? -[[User:Biguns|Biguns]] 12:12, 14 October 2007 (PDT) | ::: Even Wikipedia's own admins would tell you it's not a referal point. But that aside, sometimes just a whole section is taken verbatim. Do you mind if I create a new template just for that scenerio, then? -[[User:Biguns|Biguns]] 12:12, 14 October 2007 (PDT) | ||
:::: Before I create a new one, what about allowing using <nowiki>{{GFDL|section}}</nowiki>? -[[User:Biguns|Biguns]] 19:15, 16 October 2007 (PDT) | :::: Before I create a new one, what about allowing using <nowiki>{{GFDL|section}}</nowiki>? -[[User:Biguns|Biguns]] 19:15, 16 October 2007 (PDT) | ||
::i have a couple of thoughts. one, boobpedia does not disallow using wikipedia as a reference. wikipedia has some very anal rules about referencing and attribution which are fine for academic research, but are not suited to non-academic subjects. two, having a section by section "this section is based on..." disclaimer is just ugly. imagine having one clear section, another section with the disclaimer, then a clear section, then another section with the disclaimer, it's just unsightly. if we do a verbatim copy of a WP article or a significant portion of it, we use the GFDL notice. if it's just one section, i'd much prefer that the editor does some rewriting and reference the WP article instead. --[[User:Hexvoodoo|Hexvoodoo]] 21:09, 16 October 2007 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 04:09, 17 October 2007
Sometimes it is just a specific section
Can an admin please change the phrase "this article" into "this section or article"? Thanks! -Biguns 09:01, 12 October 2007 (PDT)
- currently this template is only used if an article is started as a verbatim copy from wikipedia. if information from wikipedia is added later, it should be like referencing from other websites. --Hexvoodoo 12:53, 12 October 2007 (PDT)
- Even Wikipedia's own admins would tell you it's not a referal point. But that aside, sometimes just a whole section is taken verbatim. Do you mind if I create a new template just for that scenerio, then? -Biguns 12:12, 14 October 2007 (PDT)
- Before I create a new one, what about allowing using {{GFDL|section}}? -Biguns 19:15, 16 October 2007 (PDT)
- Even Wikipedia's own admins would tell you it's not a referal point. But that aside, sometimes just a whole section is taken verbatim. Do you mind if I create a new template just for that scenerio, then? -Biguns 12:12, 14 October 2007 (PDT)
- i have a couple of thoughts. one, boobpedia does not disallow using wikipedia as a reference. wikipedia has some very anal rules about referencing and attribution which are fine for academic research, but are not suited to non-academic subjects. two, having a section by section "this section is based on..." disclaimer is just ugly. imagine having one clear section, another section with the disclaimer, then a clear section, then another section with the disclaimer, it's just unsightly. if we do a verbatim copy of a WP article or a significant portion of it, we use the GFDL notice. if it's just one section, i'd much prefer that the editor does some rewriting and reference the WP article instead. --Hexvoodoo 21:09, 16 October 2007 (PDT)
