We had a criticism last year at one of our events that by making text
freely available we are undermining the employability of the
journalists and authors who would otherwise have written those
paragraphs about composers, musicians or species. We should (and
generally do) confront this head-on and
On 14 April 2012 14:31, Martin Poulter infob...@gmail.com wrote:
We had a criticism last year at one of our events that by making text
freely available we are undermining the employability of the
journalists and authors who would otherwise have written those
paragraphs about composers,
On 14 April 2012 20:45, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
I would suggest that the critique rests on a highly questionable
assumption, namely that if Wikipedia were not there people would pay
journalists to write the stuff that Wikipedia provides. Given that
when I'm creating new articles
Was chasing up something I had heard on the radio this morning and
came to this BBC link - nice link to us
http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/284382df-ae6d-4631-999a-ce6204f29c45
--
Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK. 07976 935 986
tweet @jonatreesdavies
Wikimedia UK is the operating
Someone should tell them about that GFDL note, though...
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Was chasing up something I had heard on the radio this morning and came to
this BBC link - nice link to us
The BBC have been using content from Wikipedia for quite a few years (hence why
it still says GFDL on it rather than CC-BY-SA - that does need updating). My
favourite example is BBC Wildlife, e.g. see the bottom of:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/life/Arctic_Fox
Thanks,
Mike
On 13 Apr 2012, at
For background, see:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/faq#why_is_bbc_using_wikipedia
Thanks,
Mike
On 13 Apr 2012, at 09:29, Michael Peel wrote:
The BBC have been using content from Wikipedia for quite a few years (hence
why it still says GFDL on it rather than CC-BY-SA - that does need updating).
