User talk:David Newton
Please don't tag every UNSC Resolution. When we decide what to do with the first one, the same decision will of course apply to the rest. Tagging all these now just creates more work. Thank you. Wolfman 00:08, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, go ahead! I am quite overbooked these days, I hadn't the time to follow. JB Soufron however said that he would look into that, but it's often necessary to remain him as he always runs many cats at the same time. ;o) Yann 21:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
New ruling on Crown copyright
Hi David. This news is sad. Is there any mileage in asking the Government copyright people to include GDFL etc in their list of acceptable usage? Otherwise we are going to lose a valuable resource, and it could be potentially damaging for other kinds of Crown documents we might wish to add one day. Kind regards Apwoolrich 08:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- No there is no mileage in asking things like that. GFDL allows essentially any use so long as the document remains GFDL in any derivative use and the creators of the document are credited. OPSI's copyright waiver allows almost all uses but restricts things that are likely to damage the reputation of the British Government. It's things like not being able to use the documents to promote things or use them in a derogatory manner that are the GFDL-compatability killers.
- Unfortunately I don't think there is any mileage in asking the Foundation to be a bit more flexible on this either. Wikisource is fundementally different to the other Wikimedia projects in its practical aims, but that doesn't really seem to matter.
- The number of British Government documents we can use will continue to expand each year as more come out of copyright, and not all of the statutes on the site are affected. Things like the Statute of Westminster are out of copyright for example. I think the only real way that we can deal with this situation is to set up a separate wiki environment to save the content of the site that needs to be dealt with. Mediawiki is actually very good for typesetting British legislation and its database capabilities allow linking to different legislation very easily. One way I could perhaps see for moving forward might be to see whether a deal can be negotiated for hosting on Wikicities with an exception to the GFDL stipulation. It's not unprecedented for that to happen so it is a possibility. David Newton 10:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
As I understand it, we don't host "engravings" on WS anyways, so the only two relevant points of the template are "It is an artistic work other than a photograph or engraving which was created by the United Kingdom Government prior to 1969" and "It is a non-artistic work created by the United Kingdom Government that was commercially published prior to 1969" - essentially, "anything" created by the UK government. I'm not sure on the 1957/current-50, but I'm pretty sure we can still simplify it from its current form. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Haile Selassie 15:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - re UK Acts of Parliament
David, thanks for your work formatting UK Acts of Parliament. They look much better.
John Cross 21:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
My recent contribs...
Any chance of looking over my recent additions, based on retyping from a PD Statutes at large? ShakespeareFan00 11:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)