Talk:Former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney to release "Memoirs: 1939-1993"
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Blood Red Sandman in topic Wikipedia
Wikipedia
editHello, I am the author of the entry at Wikipedia Memoirs: 1939-1993. In the interest of saving time I copied and pasted my work from Wikipedia and edited to become a Wikinews article, thank you. User:Chessy999
- As it states on the article tag, this is a duplicate article. Not to mention Wikipedia and Wikinews do not use the same license and information cannot be copy and pasted from Wikipedia to WIkinews. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- In this case, we can use it, since the original author of the text is the one submiting it here. It's still his/her copyright, s/he is free to release it under dual liscences. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 19:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not while its published on Wikipedia. The licenses, regardless of authors are not compatible. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see why not, but OK then, all the user has to do is state here "I hereby release said material into the public domain". That would overule other liscences and makes the material fit for any purpose. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- There isn't a problem. The GFDL is not an exclusive licence so the author can release the material elsewhere under different licences. Adambro 20:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well I am not gonig to sift through the history of the WP article because that could take hours depending on how many people edited. If its in a cllaberative space, then this is not an acceptable WN article because those edits will be changed on WP. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 20:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- There isn't a problem. The GFDL is not an exclusive licence so the author can release the material elsewhere under different licences. Adambro 20:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see why not, but OK then, all the user has to do is state here "I hereby release said material into the public domain". That would overule other liscences and makes the material fit for any purpose. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not while its published on Wikipedia. The licenses, regardless of authors are not compatible. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- In this case, we can use it, since the original author of the text is the one submiting it here. It's still his/her copyright, s/he is free to release it under dual liscences. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 19:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing to sift through at WP I am the only editor, I release the copyright into the public domain, let's rock !!
- Thats not going to be the case. I still highly object. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Object to what ? I wrote the article 74.14.120.137 01:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I stated my concerns here and on your talk page. You do not own the edits that are made on a Wikipedia article, if others can make edits to it. THe article on Wikipedia is not yours once others edit it. And in order to comply with the licenses we would have to monitor that article 24/7, something I am not willing to do. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Uh, u r missing the point, I wrote the Wikinews article, not Wikipedia ! 74.14.120.137 02:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- You have been claiming to have written the Wikipedia article too. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dragon, the way copyright works is that it is technicaly still the author's in this case, just released freely and attributed to Wikipedia. I highly doubt that there is any way the two liscences could conflict, thus preventing dual liscencing, but in any case, user has released the work into the public domain, so anyone can do anything with it. It's still his to release even less restrictively, and he has done that. If you really want, I'll go over the original article and double-check. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please see the page's history. No-one else has touched the article, it has a total of just six edits. No problems here at all. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dragon, the way copyright works is that it is technicaly still the author's in this case, just released freely and attributed to Wikipedia. I highly doubt that there is any way the two liscences could conflict, thus preventing dual liscencing, but in any case, user has released the work into the public domain, so anyone can do anything with it. It's still his to release even less restrictively, and he has done that. If you really want, I'll go over the original article and double-check. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- You have been claiming to have written the Wikipedia article too. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)