Creative Commons - User contributions [en]

Talk:Frequently Asked Questions

2010-04-20T23:59:09Z

Coz: /* Suggestions */

== Intact, but not in tact ==

In the section "How do I properly attribute a Creative Commons licensed work?" the phrase "in tact" is used twice when what is meant is "intact". While amusing, it's not appropriate.

Great work!
-TGrip

== Headline text ==
Energía Eólica de Potencia: "Central Eólica con Acumulación de Energía por Pesos y Generación de Electricidad por Gravedad de 20 MW"

Although the article is only editable by admins.

At the end of the first question a sentence containing questionable grammar appears. <--The html code will also be include the metadata that enables your work to found via Creative Commons-enabled search engines. --> I understand the intent of the answer but the poor grammar may be confusing to non-native English speakers - and irritating to native English speakers. (Hint: cut the 'be' from before 'include' and paste it before 'found via'.

Thanks - DRC
----------------

In the response to the question: "I used part of a Creative Commons-licensed work, which Creative Commons license can I relicense my work under?"

The second paragraph contains the sentence: "Thus, for example, if you are using work issued under an Attribution-NoDerivatives license, you may be able to relicense it under either another Attribution-NoDerivatives license or an Attribution-NonCommercial license."

It would make more sense to me if that sentence were replaced with: "Thus, for example, if you are using work issued under an Attribution-NoDerivatives license, you may be able to relicense it under either another Attribution-NoDerivatives license or an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license."

In the first two questions ("how to apply a license"), could you add a link to [[License_HTML_Code]], as that information seems to be missing from this site and from creativecommons.org? (If it's not missing, then providing a link to it would be helpful.) The [[License_HTML_Code]] information is targeted more at web developers than software developers, but it should still be available somewhere, and this seems like a good spot.

:Q: I am a webdesigner and the only solution I have found is under CC License. How can I do to use this solution in my websites (commercial)?

== wording ==

"and asks permission to do (or not do) something the license says she must do (or not do)"

should be

"and asks permission to do (or not do) something the license says she must not do (or do)"

== Mistake in: "[[Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F|How do I properly attribute a Creative Commons licensed work?]]" ==

[[Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F|The chapter sais]]: "''Cite the work's title or name, if such a thing exists. If you are publishing on the Internet, it is nice to link the name or title directly to the original work.''" Thats not 100% right. it's not "nice to". You have to do it. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode "''to the extent reasonably practicable, the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work, [...]''"

[[Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F|The chapter also sais]]: "''Cite the specific CC license the work is under. If you are publishing on the Internet, it is nice if the license citation links to the license on the CC website.''". That's not right too. You have to link to the license: See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode "''You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for, this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute or Publicly Perform.''"

--[[User:PMay|PMay]] 12:52, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

== Suggestions ==

- In the question "May I apply a Creative Common license to a work that is in the public domain?" has a typo that reads Copyfruad instead of Copyfraud.

- I think a new question should be added, something like "Under which terms can I distribute derivative work?' that contains the following info:

'You must still follow the terms of the CC license that governs the use of the original work, but you are allowed to add any terms that do not conflict with the license.'

There's a similar question 'If I use a Creative Commons-licensed work to create a new work (ie a derivative work or adaptation), which Creative Commons license can I use for my new work?' but it only covers using CC licenses for derivatives.

Talk:Frequently Asked Questions

2010-04-20T23:57:35Z

Coz: /* Suggestions */ new section

== Intact, but not in tact ==

In the section "How do I properly attribute a Creative Commons licensed work?" the phrase "in tact" is used twice when what is meant is "intact". While amusing, it's not appropriate.

Great work!
-TGrip

== Headline text ==
Energía Eólica de Potencia: "Central Eólica con Acumulación de Energía por Pesos y Generación de Electricidad por Gravedad de 20 MW"

Although the article is only editable by admins.

At the end of the first question a sentence containing questionable grammar appears. <--The html code will also be include the metadata that enables your work to found via Creative Commons-enabled search engines. --> I understand the intent of the answer but the poor grammar may be confusing to non-native English speakers - and irritating to native English speakers. (Hint: cut the 'be' from before 'include' and paste it before 'found via'.

Thanks - DRC
----------------

In the response to the question: "I used part of a Creative Commons-licensed work, which Creative Commons license can I relicense my work under?"

The second paragraph contains the sentence: "Thus, for example, if you are using work issued under an Attribution-NoDerivatives license, you may be able to relicense it under either another Attribution-NoDerivatives license or an Attribution-NonCommercial license."

It would make more sense to me if that sentence were replaced with: "Thus, for example, if you are using work issued under an Attribution-NoDerivatives license, you may be able to relicense it under either another Attribution-NoDerivatives license or an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license."

In the first two questions ("how to apply a license"), could you add a link to [[License_HTML_Code]], as that information seems to be missing from this site and from creativecommons.org? (If it's not missing, then providing a link to it would be helpful.) The [[License_HTML_Code]] information is targeted more at web developers than software developers, but it should still be available somewhere, and this seems like a good spot.

:Q: I am a webdesigner and the only solution I have found is under CC License. How can I do to use this solution in my websites (commercial)?

== wording ==

"and asks permission to do (or not do) something the license says she must do (or not do)"

should be

"and asks permission to do (or not do) something the license says she must not do (or do)"

== Mistake in: "[[Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F|How do I properly attribute a Creative Commons licensed work?]]" ==

[[Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F|The chapter sais]]: "''Cite the work's title or name, if such a thing exists. If you are publishing on the Internet, it is nice to link the name or title directly to the original work.''" Thats not 100% right. it's not "nice to". You have to do it. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode "''to the extent reasonably practicable, the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work, [...]''"

[[Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F|The chapter also sais]]: "''Cite the specific CC license the work is under. If you are publishing on the Internet, it is nice if the license citation links to the license on the CC website.''". That's not right too. You have to link to the license: See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode "''You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for, this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute or Publicly Perform.''"

--[[User:PMay|PMay]] 12:52, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

== Suggestions ==

* In the question "May I apply a Creative Common license to a work that is in the public domain?" has a typo that reads Copyfruad instead of Copyfraud.

* I think a new question should be added, something like "Under which terms can I distribute derivative work?' that contains the following info:

'You must still follow the terms of the CC license that governs the use of the original work, but you are allowed to add any terms that do not conflict with the license.'

There's a similar question 'If I use a Creative Commons-licensed work to create a new work (ie a derivative work or adaptation), which Creative Commons license can I use for my new work?' but it only covers using CC licenses for derivatives.

User talk:Nkinkade

2010-04-10T14:58:00Z

Coz: /* Excess empty lines */

==Pages to delete==
I noticed you've done some deletions recently, according to [[Special:Log/delete|the log]], so I thought I'd notify you of some more pages that need that treatment. You can find them in [[:Category:Pages to be deleted]] (which I just created). Thanks! [[User:JesseWeinstein|JesseWeinstein]] 00:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

* Thanks, Jesse! I shared this with a couple other folks and the pages you identified should now be gone. The "Pages to be deleted" Category is a good thing. [[Special:Contributions/190.2.228.207|190.2.228.207]] 02:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
** Yeah, I noticed that Nathan had gotten on it; I've got more for you all now... ;-) Thanks for the reply, though! [[User:JesseWeinstein|JesseWeinstein]] 02:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

BTW, the ConfirmEmail bit seems to be broken -- at least, I haven't gotten my confirmation email, and it's been a few hours... Any ideas? [[User:JesseWeinstein|JesseWeinstein]] 02:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

== Cleaning up the mess ==

The page [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/index.php?title=Special:NewPages&limit=500&namespace=2 Special:NewPages] provides a good list of the ~150 pages that need to be deleted. Any spare time you have to chop a few would be certainly appreciated. [[User:JesseWeinstein|JesseWeinstein]] 17:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

== Excess empty lines ==

I believe the wiki pages use too many empty lines. For example, look at the http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FFAQ page. On top and on the bottom of the page title, there's a lot of empty space.

Then again on the top and bottom of the translating link, which could be a smaller block of text, but I suppose this was made to accomodate the text in case a page is translated into a multitude of languages.

Then finally under the first paragraph, there seems to be at least an extra unneeded empty line.

I understand that empty lines help to keeps things tidy, but excessive empty space makes the site looks bland, plus, in that particular page, it could greatly benefit navigation if all the questions fit one page, so users don't have to scroll.

I also understand that this would be a wiki-wide change, but I believe that the entire wiki would benefit.

As a side note, I'm writting here because I saw you made some changes to that page, however I would also want to know how I can suggest new questions for the full FAQ.

* The extra spacing above/below each entry is created by the <h2> elements that Mediawiki generates from the wiki markup. It could be altered via styling, but personally I don't see a problem with the spacing. It doesn't seem excessive to me, and we haven't had yet had any other complaints about it. [[User:Nkinkade|nkinkade]] 16:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

* I can clean it up a bit. I agree somewhat that it's more space than it needs to be. A lot of the time this is just due to MediaWiki inserting p elements that have padding or margins in the stylesheet.[[User:Akozak|Akozak]] 18:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

* Also, you can suggest edits to the FAQ or FFAQ using the talk page.[[User:Akozak|Akozak]] 18:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

* Thanks for your replies, I'll make suggestions to the FAQ later.[[User:Coz|Coz]] 14:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Nkinkade

2010-04-08T16:13:16Z

Coz: /* Excess empty lines */ new section