Talk:Main Page
From Enwikikids
Does this site still have the issue that the IP address of any user is discoverable by ANY admin? If so, it should be shut down just like the previous (failed) incarnation.
- A.Yes we do
- B.I'm going to contact the owner of editthis.info to see if he can get it changed.
- C.If it can't be changed then we will move all content to another place.
- Have a nice week and God bless:)--Sir James Paul 06:54, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
Didn't we go through all this before??? To no avail??? HsyUTA Thank you for your blog.Really thank you! Keep writing.
YgCHol This is one awesome post.Much thanks again. Really Cool.
LICENSE
If you're going to cut& paste articles from simple.wikipedia (see red, then you need to make sure THIS site's content is licensed under the GDFL. Is that so?
Listen
I've tried to keep my interfering to a minimum and let you learn from your mistakes, as I know I'm often the bringer of bad news. However, this is now SERIOUS. You have stolen the logo of WikiKids from Kennisnet, which is covered under full copyright. You have stolen content from the Simple English Wikipedia, which is covered under copyright under the terms of the GFDL. This project will never be a Wikia for a number of reasons:
- The name WikiKids is already taken by two other projects.
- You steal content. Right now, I can contact the people that made the article red on Wikipedia and get them to send you a warning as the copyright holder of the information. If you continue to breach this, sooner or later someone will issue a DMCA and have this site taken down. You also stole the logo from Kennisnet. As if stealing wasn't bad enough, you stole it from someone that's donated a load of servers in their datacenter to the Wikimedia Foundation. Even if Wikia decided that all this plagiarism was OK, as Wikia is run by much the same people, they'll stay well away from you.
- You guys have proved again and again that you are fundamentally incapable of running a community site. That's going to sound really mean and horrible, and it'll probably earn me a ban from all of your sites, but I'm afraid it's true. Running community sites is incredibly difficult. In 6 months from now you'll probably have a much better idea of what to do, but right now all you're going to do is make rules and more rules and more rules until everyone's broken at least one, got shouted at and left. Take a break from running wikis and edit them instead so that you can get a better feel of how things really work. Adminiship on all your wikis has been a disaster, and there are so many rules it is completely insane. You might respond now "OK, you're right, we'll change", but I'm not sure you can. You are far too wrapped up in this to be able to run a community site effectively. Wait a few months and pick it up again.
Please, even if you disregard everything I've said and ban me, get rid of the stolen content and sort out your licensing. You obviously do not have a clue about licensing, so get someone in who does. There's stuff like attribution and other very important parts of the license that you're not doing. Archer7 16:06, 5 June 2007 (EDT)
I have made my attempts to remove the logo, I'll fix red. Otherwise, I need adminship to do everything else. ForestH2 20:19, 5 June 2007 (EDT)
- Logo changing requires adminship. Again you will not be blocked for saying this. I am aware James in praticular has no clue about copyright and licensing. ForestH2 20:22, 5 June 2007 (EDT)
- However, I do, and told him that I was concerned. I was planning to remove the logo soon. RyGuy 15:08, 6 June 2007 (EDT)
- You'll also need to sort out GFDL compliance if you're planning to reuse GFDL content. You don't even need to license it under any free license if you don't want: you can retain the copyrights and just not use anything from Wikipedia, although I think that would make things incredibly difficult, and some editors might not like it either. Archer7 20:29, 6 June 2007 (EDT)
- I agree with you Archer. You have made some very good suggestions. I will make sure James doesn't block you. RyGuy 08:42, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
- You'll also need to sort out GFDL compliance if you're planning to reuse GFDL content. You don't even need to license it under any free license if you don't want: you can retain the copyrights and just not use anything from Wikipedia, although I think that would make things incredibly difficult, and some editors might not like it either. Archer7 20:29, 6 June 2007 (EDT)
- However, I do, and told him that I was concerned. I was planning to remove the logo soon. RyGuy 15:08, 6 June 2007 (EDT)
- What are you talking about when you say stolen content? I thought it was okay to take from wikipedia/wikipedia simple english because both of us are under GDFL?--Sir James Paul 13:17, 9 June 2007 (EDT)
- You're not under GFDL because you haven't complied with the license conditions. You do not state anywhere that you are under GFDL, and according to the license this must be stated on every page, with a link to the license. You'll also need to link back to the original revision that you took it from on Wikipedia, not just the article. Normally a link in the footer to a local page with the GFDL and a statement (eg "All text on WikiKids is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License") will be viewed as complying with the license. See here for more information, and make sure you meet all the Green requirements. Archer7 06:49, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
The activity level here is enthralling.
