User talk:Damian

Copyright

In regards to the 100th Circle Moon Mage Quest article you posted... At the bottom there is the notice about right to copy, and to note the author.

I propose removing that (and/or an explicit reference) to the copyright of this entire wiki (that you agree to when you edit a page; normally) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ . Please read that and state (on this page) if the contents of that licence suit your desire, and which of my suggestions is ok. (I am ok with keeping you listed as original author, of course). --Callek 23:54, 20 February 2008 (CST)

I am not sure how this messaging thing works, I hope this reaches you. The sentence at the bottom is merely a suggestion and I have no care in the world if they copy it and give me credit but I don't think it is against the rules to suggest they do so.

Having looked at it again I have changed the sentence to:

Copy for your own use and as you see fit.

I am guessing that is acceptable.

I did not mean to imply it was against the rules at all, I was more suggesting either completely removing the line "copy..." or specifically mentioning a real copyright/fair-use document (That Creative Commons one) that can easily hold up in a court, should the need arise. "Copy for your own use and as you see fit" could easily (theoretically) allow me to take it, write a book using that, never give you credit and sell it. I do not claim to be a lawyer, but I try to have an understanding about that stuff. --Callek 23:04, 21 February 2008 (CST)

Going back on this... I would ask that you not sign articles. People can view the history to see that you submitted the information. It is common wiki practice NOT to sign articles or mention copyrights unless you specifically have a different license for that material than the one Callek mentioned we use here at Elanthipedia. In summation, please only sign discussion pages, not articles.

--Naeya ^(talk) 11:30, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

While I understand your preference and the fact that it is not common wiki practice, I do not understand the reasoning behind it. I take pride in my work and do not see the reason why I would do the reader the disfavor of not telling them who wrote the article as a final blurb on the bottom of the page. Furthermore, how am I to give credit for the works of others when I use their information to create the page? Do I need to copyright everything under myself and then turn around and give myself the permission to post it? That seems somehow silly. I look forward to your reply.

You can give credit, that's preferred (ie links to other sites that you gleaned info from, etc). However, signing/dating your article is not preferred. Why you ask? Because if someone comes along to add to/correct your work, they are not/will not be included in your signature/date. They will, however, be in the article's history, as are you as the original author.

Additional note, please DO sign talk page comments.--Naeya ^(talk) 13:12, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

The credit I mentioned of giving is not one I could point to a website. It is one of more or less personal interaction with those whom I credit. Additionally, those who come along to edit/correct my work should be included in the history but not be cited as the original author. If I cannot even take credit for my own work *here* how would I ever expect anyone to bother later? (It is not that I care if they do or don't but the point remains.) Other than your preference and common practice of the wiki is it against the rules to post my name in a scribe like fashion at the end of my articles? If that is the case I will leave it in the body of my article. So far I have removed mention of my name directly from my posts with the exclusion of the signature. (i.e. I have edited certain messages which said things like "Well done Damian" and replaced them with "Well done young one" or something along those lines.) Forgive my lack of signature on these pages, I continue to forget to post it as it seems inconsequential here since it was designated my talk page. Nonethless here it is.
Damian 13:33, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

I suppose one thing to do is to go look at Wikipedia. I have never seen a "by my hand" or "written by" at any of the articles over there. Likewise, they avoid the first person in the articles. It, and the Elanthipedia, are meant to collections of facts, not personal articles so to speak. Not to say we need to be as strict as them, and indeed we using a different license, but the spirit is the same I believe. You are "cited" as the original author in the history, as you are the person who created the page and generated the bulk of the content, but that content can change drastically and look very little like your original work as new information is added, or game details change. At what point does it cease to be by "Damian's" hand and not "New Guy's" hand? The edit history serves this purpose. (and adding a signature gives a timestamp and very clear notice of which comments are yours :) -Grindinghalt 14:43, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

In addition, the article title "100th Circle Moon Mage Quest" is pretty generic. Perhaps one solution would be for you to create a separate article called "Damian's 100th Circle Guide" and then copy/modify that content over and reference your article? Like Diarik has his Triage Explained and other personal articles? Just a thought. -Grindinghalt 14:43, 10 March 2008 (CDT)