Article Licensing edit
Hi, 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)
Thanks for uploading the above image. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, Duk 05:42, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Also Image:Bigfoot3.jpg Thanks, AlbinoMonkey 00:59, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
| Image deletion warning | The image Image:Yeti5.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion because it lacks source and license information, and it is not used in any articles. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion. |
- Please confirm that you are the author of the image Image:Yeti5.jpg and Image:Newbug.jpg and please state the license you wish to release it under. Otherwise those images may get deleted due to lack of licensing info. which I feel would be too unfortunate. These days the image use policy requires that the licensing be clearly mentioned even if it is GFDL, which probably was not the case at the time you uploaded the image. Hope you return & see this message and respond. Thank you very much! -- Paddu 21:15, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Can you tell me the source of the image Image:Afrgry.jpg - specifically anything about its copyright & licence for tagging purposes? thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)
- It's now been liasted on copyvio. If you are the image copyright owner or do have permission to publish, please act fast. Please consider checking the copyright status of other iages you have uploaded. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)
Image Tagging Image:Lizard King2.jpg edit
|
This image may be deleted.
|