Wikipedia talk:Mirrors and forks/Archive 1

message: Moved from Wikipedia:Village pump on Saturday, September 13th, 02003.
Hi, there seems to be a parsing error on Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content
the ===='s are not being parsed as wiki code on the last heading.  It's not rendering the wiki-code.  Anyone have a work around for this?  { MB | マイカル } 19:31, Sep 5, 2003 (UTC)
The problem is that the text inside the heading has an additional = - however it seems like exchanging the = with %3d as its URL encoded version doesn't help, then the URL does not work anymore. andy 19:37, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried = instead of %3D and that seems to work. Least it works in my browser, it might not be a universal fix, I don't really know. --Camembert
----
Could someone please check out http://www.nationmaster.com/index.php ? I stumbled across Wikipedia's Amongst Barbarians article there but don't quite know where and how to add Nationmaster here. (Or has it already been added and I just failed to notice?)  --KF 23:01, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: Site says "The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL." Was that there when you looked? CGS 10:22, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: D'oh! I didn't scroll down far enough. Still it's an interesting question generally. Any comments? Mahaabaala 10:30, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: This is great! That's why Wikipedia is licensed under an open license. It's not plagerism, it's the whole point. CGS 10:39, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: I hope you didn't scare them into deleteing the page unnesessarily, Mahaabaala. CGS 12:19, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: nationmaster.com is already listed on Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content. andy 12:24, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Parser error

message: www.4reference.net is using wikipedia contents.
They also use wikipedia images, but they don't provide any link to the Image: page. IMO a serious issue as they don't provide any license information for picture.
Some pics are GFDL like on : http://www.4reference.net/encyclopedias/wikipedia/Nice_Observatory.html
but other aren't like on :
http://www.4reference.net/encyclopedias/wikipedia/Tank_history.html
what's your advice ?
Ericd 20:58, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: The second example is bad since it actually lists a source and the photo is probably public domain since it was taken before 1923. Their site is also some kind of encyclopedia and therefore would have as much Fair use on the images as we do.BL 21:04, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair use isn't GFDL there's no warning about image, this is misleading the reader. Ericd 21:10, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, by not linking to the image page they are failing to provide author details - isn't that a requirement of the GFDL?  Actually, as far as I can see they are not doing this for the text either - the link only goes to the main page.  As I understand it they should give a link back to the original article. -- sannse 21:48, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

text: Here are some: http://kosmoi.com/Health/Medicine/Anatomy/Digestive/, http://kosmoi.com/Health/Medicine/Anatomy/Heart/.  In fact all of the anatomy section seems to be in violation.  dave 18:17, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

text: I'll revert back to my version, which had more information. Wikipedia doesn't own the GFDL, nor does it own the content, so Wikipedia's copyright page isn't he be all and end all. Martin 18:25, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Image license on site using wikipedia content

message: Compare Piracy in the Caribbean to http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Pirates.  The metaweb article says at the bottom, "This page was last modified 09:32, 19 Jan 2004. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License." but there is no mention of Wikipedia, nor a link.  RickK 04:56, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Metaweb