On 3/2/06, Jim <trodel(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The only way the high quality can be assured, and
wikipedia can stay
reputable (with the press penchant for negative stories) is to clearly
identify what is the original source "wikimedia foundation"
data/information/articles and what is not.
But the information in question *is* original source wikimedia
foundation data/information/articles. However, the Wikimedia
trademarks, at least in theory (IANAL), disallow someone from making
that clear.
Otherwise, forks that start with
wikipedia articles and then change them (in ways that gain notoriety), or
include gobs of advertising, etc., if allowed to use wikpedia trademarks,
dilute the value of wikipedia in users minds, create bad press, and harm the
reputation of the encyclopdia and the open edit model.
Jim
And as far as I can tell, none of that is happening here. As I
understand it, these articles weren't changed at all, and there isn't
any advertising.
Anthony