archives2004 [ July-October ] — 2005 [ March-June | July-August | September-October | November-December ]
archives2006 [ January-February | March-April | May-August | September-October | November-December ]
archives2007 [ January-February | March-April ]
Article Licensing
editHi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)
Nice work on Paine Field. The article was already mostly there. Burgundavia 09:54, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
Grumman American AA-1
editI see that you put the stub back. Where do I find info on "the standard wikiproject layout" for aircraft? I have not been able to find one so far. Regards - Oldfarm 02:24, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ok I just found it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content Oldfarm 02:36, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind comments on the Yankee article - I learned on N6212L (now owned by a JONATHAN L HUGHES [1]) Oldfarm 05:19, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
COTW Project
editYou voted for Culture of Ancient Rome, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.
COTW Project
editYou voted for Lee Smith (baseball), this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.
Image deletion warning | The image Image:XP-55 Ascender.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information. |