Knowledge (XXG)

:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 May 8 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

246:. This template says explicitly that it's a part of a dual license rather than a sole license, though it needs to do so more prominently. So long as it's used as a grant of supplemental rights, along with an acceptable free license, there's no policy violation here. However, this specific licensing isn't really something that ought to be encouraged by Knowledge (XXG), so this is a weak keep at best. 231:
applications, the GFDL makes reuse impossible - is anyone really going to reprint the whole license just so they can use one bit of text? On the other hand, many people probably want to reprint an article in a book without changing it, and this license would allow them to do that. If this license is
131: 336:
as valid use. The GFDL is substantially less free than most other free licenses due to the requirement to reprint the license verbatim. Therefore, multilicensing with a CC licence of any time is fine.
113: 42: 37: 143:, it's kind of pointless to have a template that lets you release contributions under an invalid license. (The no-derivs condition is not allowed on Knowledge (XXG).) 103: 60: 21: 140: 281: 216: 157: 17: 107: 174: 360: 76: 294:
I fixed it up to be like our other dual-license templates, and specifically mentioned that its alongside the GFDL.
359:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
75:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
276: 211: 152: 345: 341: 328: 309: 302: 287: 258: 222: 193: 186: 163: 96: 324: 253: 271: 268: 206: 203: 147: 144: 264: 297: 181: 69:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
320: 249: 92: 198:
But the no-derivs licensing is worthless; it's no better than releasing only under
337: 88: 267:; just because it doesn't violate policy doesn't mean it should be kept. -- 353:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
199: 141:
User talk:Unionhawk/Archives/2009/May#No-derivs licensing
125: 119: 232:
being used as it says, then it is making our articles
79:). No further edits should be made to this section. 363:). No further edits should be made to this section. 8: 104:Template:DualLicenceWithCC-ByND-3.0-IntEng 61:Template:DualLicenceWithCC-ByND-3.0-IntEng 18:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion 7: 227:It's not worthless at all. In maybe 172:, but this is a dual-license with a 84:The result of the discussion was 28: 1: 236:, even if only marginally so. 30: 380: 356:Please do not modify it. 346:14:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 329:12:21, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 310:00:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC) 97:16:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC) 72:Please do not modify it. 319:per my comments above. 288:22:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC) 259:17:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC) 223:15:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC) 194:14:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC) 164:23:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC) 308: 192: 139:As evidenced by 51: 50: 371: 358: 307: 305: 295: 284: 279: 274: 257: 219: 214: 209: 191: 189: 179: 160: 155: 150: 135: 74: 47: 36: 31: 379: 378: 374: 373: 372: 370: 369: 368: 367: 361:deletion review 354: 303: 296: 282: 277: 272: 247: 217: 212: 207: 187: 180: 158: 153: 148: 102: 77:deletion review 70: 64: 57: 52: 45: 34: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 377: 375: 366: 365: 349: 348: 331: 313: 312: 292: 291: 290: 241: 240: 239: 238: 237: 137: 136: 82: 81: 65: 63: 58: 56: 53: 49: 48: 40: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 376: 364: 362: 357: 351: 350: 347: 343: 339: 335: 332: 330: 326: 322: 318: 315: 314: 311: 306: 301: 300: 299:ViperSnake151 293: 289: 285: 280: 275: 270: 266: 262: 261: 260: 255: 251: 245: 242: 235: 230: 226: 225: 224: 220: 215: 210: 205: 201: 197: 196: 195: 190: 185: 184: 183:ViperSnake151 177: 176: 175:valid license 171: 168: 167: 166: 165: 161: 156: 151: 146: 142: 133: 130: 127: 124: 121: 120:transclusions 118: 115: 112: 109: 105: 101: 100: 99: 98: 94: 90: 87: 80: 78: 73: 67: 66: 62: 59: 54: 44: 41: 39: 33: 32: 23: 19: 355: 352: 333: 321:Calliopejen1 316: 298: 243: 233: 228: 182: 173: 169: 138: 128: 122: 116: 110: 85: 83: 71: 68: 250:Gavia immer 265:WP:NOHARM 244:Weak keep 132:subpages 20:‎ | 269:King of 204:King of 145:King of 114:history 338:Stifle 304:Talk 234:freer 202:. -- 188:Talk 89:Erik9 55:May 8 46:: --> 43:May 9 38:May 7 16:< 342:talk 334:Keep 325:talk 317:Keep 263:See 254:talk 229:most 200:GFDL 170:Keep 126:logs 108:talk 93:talk 86:keep 35:< 22:Log 344:) 327:) 286:♠ 248:— 221:♠ 178:. 162:♠ 95:) 340:( 323:( 283:♣ 278:♦ 273:♥ 256:) 252:( 218:♣ 213:♦ 208:♥ 159:♣ 154:♦ 149:♥ 134:) 129:· 123:· 117:· 111:· 106:( 91:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion
Log
May 7
May 9
Template:DualLicenceWithCC-ByND-3.0-IntEng
deletion review
Erik9
talk
16:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Template:DualLicenceWithCC-ByND-3.0-IntEng
talk
history
transclusions
logs
subpages
User talk:Unionhawk/Archives/2009/May#No-derivs licensing
King of



23:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
valid license
ViperSnake151
 Talk 
14:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
GFDL
King of


Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.