Jump to content

Wikinews talk:2024 Copyright license upgrade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Latest comment: 2 days ago by MGA73 in topic Contact to other wikis

Vote about license upgrade

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Original discussion moved from User talk:Michael.C.Wright/Archive 1#Vote about license upgrade

Hi!

You have now added a conclusion ("Yes, WN upgrade to CC-BY-4.0 if the the other WN also upgrade."). Thank you for that! And I agree that it seems to be a fair description of what concensus is.

But I think we need to clarify what that means. We know that some versions of wikinews want to change too. None that I know of had said no. But many have not made a formal vote and given a clear yes or no. So can we say that the other WN will also upgrade so therefore the final result is a Yes, English Wikinews upgrade to CC-BY-4.0? Or do we have to wait for the final result from all the wikis or from a RFC on meta?

As I understand it some wikis wait for the result from English Wikinews before they do anything. So it is a very slow process to get anywhere.

Also if we agree that it is a yes then we need to know which date the upgrade will take place. I think it would be good if we could send a message to all WN with something like this:

"English Wikinews will change to CC-BY-4.0 with effect for all edits made from December 1, 2024 (or another date). Arabic Wikinews have allready changed, German, Polish, Chinese and Esperanto Wikinews have also decided to change or support to change. You can read about it at en:Wikinews:Water cooler/policy#Update of license.

We hope that you will also change license so we can continue to share articles across the different versions of Wikinews.

To complete the change we need to file a request on Phabricator. To make it easier we plan to make one request for all the versions of Wikinews that will change the license.

To be able to coordinate the change of license we will therefore start a vote here suggesting that you also update the license to CC-BY-4.0. The vote will end on November 15, 2024. That will give some days to prepare the update.

If your wiki have allready decided or have an existing vote please leave a message here with a link to the vote/result.

Please note that if there are no comments or protests it will be taken as a support for the change per m:Requesting wiki configuration changes.

We will appriciate any help to make sure this vote is announced the correct places and the text is translated with a translator so if there are any errors please help correct it. If the local policy have different rules than the one we suggest please correct as soon as possible.

Vote

[edit]

The vote end on November 15, 2024. All users with more than 250 good edits can vote.

Question: Do you support to upgrade to CC-BY-4.0 too on the same date as English Wikinews upgrade their license?"


So perhaps we need a new section where you add the final conclusion (English Wikinews will update per <date> and we will send out a message to all versions of Wikinews to try to get everyone else to update too) and perhaps also a section where we can keep track of the progress (and can discuss the wording of the message to other wikis). Maybe we can use the page I created: User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade. If you think we can move it to a new name so its not in my namespace (Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/License_update_2024 for example). MGA73 (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's a lot to unpack. ツ I'll try to go point-by point:
  • So can we say that the other WN will also upgrade so therefore the final result is a Yes, English Wikinews upgrade to CC-BY-4.0? Or do we have to wait for the final result from all the wikis or from a RFC on meta? Would it be better to say something along the lines of 'English Wikinews will upgrade on date X. Other Wikinews projects are managing their processes internally and independent of English Wikinews.' I think waiting for all other language projects to align and work through things would be time-consuming and detrimental to maintaining momentum for the ones who want to move forward. And I would hope that a change in share-ability (due to license incompatibility) might spur action. I think it's best to post this conclusion after en.WN has all pages prepped (edit-protected pages are all that we think are left). Once that is done we could come up with a date and post the message to all language projects.
  • Related; To complete the change we need to file a request on Phabricator. To make it easier we plan to make one request for all the versions of Wikinews that will change the license. Should we instead provide each language project with instructions on how to do so? That way we all aren't held up and can instead each work at the pace our projects can support.
  • As I understand it some wikis wait for the result from English Wikinews before they do anything. So it is a very slow process to get anywhere. Agreed. I think the only thing holding en.WN up is the edit-protected pages and Gryllida has committed to making those changes over the next few days. 🤞
  • Please note that if there are no comments or protests it will be taken as a support for the change per m:Requesting wiki configuration changes. My reading of the linked document is that it does not state an absence of comments or protests are interpreted as a vote of Support. I understand it to instead be summarized as 'you had your chance.' "[I]t should be enough to show that you have tried to gain consensus, and that you have given an opportunity for objections." It might be a difference without a distinction, but for such a formal and impacting procedure, it may be worth sticking very closely to what the Meta page stipulates. Maybe the verbiage could be along the lines of
"A lack of opposition or absence of comments during the polling period is not automatically considered support. Rather, it reflects that participants had their opportunity to express their views. If no objections are raised, the poll will default to a 'proceed' action, assuming no opposition was voiced."
  • If you think we can move it to a new name so its not in my namespace... I agree and I am unsure of where that should be moved to. Since it's in your user space, it will be cleanest if you or an admin move it.
Thanks for sticking with and managing this! —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Lol yes it was a lot. Sorry about that. But I think we have to figure these things out.

The reason I suggest that we coordinate the change of license is because then it can happen on the same day and as you can see on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/source/mediawiki-config/browse/master/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php$10882 all wikinews have the same license per default. If the wikis change separately then some dev (or whoever make the changes) have to edit several times and add each wiki separately. So my plan and hope is that we can get all or most to change. If lets say 3 wikis do not want us to change then we can say on phabricator that "Please change the default license for wikinews to cc-by-4.0 but make exceptions for these tree wikinews: Foo1, Foo2 and Foo3 (they stay with cc-by-2.5 unless they decide otherwise later).".

I agree that it is perhaps a bit too much to say that no comments = support. I just wanted the wikis to know that the change will also happen if there are no protests. So that if they ignore this vote the license will change.

So perhaps the conclusion can be as you suggested but with a little addition:

'English Wikinews will upgrade on date X. Other Wikinews projects are formally managing their processes internally and independent of English Wikinews however the magical M@M duo will try to coordinate a joined change of license on all Wikinews projects at the same date.'

And if we want to do it like that then we need to chose a date that is minimum 1 month away. If we do that then Gryllida have plenty of time to fix the pages while we set up the messages/votes on all the other versions of Wikinews.

But of course we can also do as as you suggest and change license on English Wikinews and write to all the other versions of Wikinews that English Wikinews have changed and then still try to make all the other change license too. --MGA73 (talk) 21:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pages to update when license is updated from 2.5 to 4.0

[edit]
Latest comment: 17 days ago50 comments6 people in discussion
Original discussion moved from Wikinews talk:Copyright#Pages to update when license is updated from 2.5 to 4.0

Per Wikinews:Water cooler/policy#Update_of_license it has been decided that Wikinews should update to 4.0 but that it would be good if all Wikinews update so it is still possible to share/translate in the future.

Once Wikinews is ready to do the change the pages below should be updated: (for a list of other language versions see User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade)

Note for admins: To help streamline future license version updates, we are implementing a template {{Current CC Version}} to reduce the number of places we have to change text. We have done this on pages that aren't edit-protected. However, many are protected and need an admin to update.

The change we are implementing now involves replacing any occurrences of the following text:

[http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 license]

..with {{Current CC Version}}, which will transclude our current version.

The template currently renders the following; Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Therefore this change can be implemented now.

Once we are ready to do the license upgrade, we can then change the text in that template to reflect the current version and that will in-turn update all pages that include {{Current CC Version}}.

Below is a list of edit-protected pages that need changed. The list includes pages already changed, so you can reference their edit history as examples of what we are doing.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

– Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published)

  1. MediaWiki:Copyright Not done (elevated privs needed)
  2. MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning Not done (elevated privs needed)
  3. MediaWiki:Gadget-UTCLiveClock.js Not done (elevated privs needed)
  4. Wikinews:Social media Not done (elevated privs needed)
  5. Template:Translated Wikinews Not done (elevated privs needed)
  6. MediaWiki:Mobile-frontend-footer-license Not done (elevated privs needed)
  7. mediawiki-config Not done (make a request in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/)
  8. Template:Main about Not done (elevated privs needed. Should likely point to WN:COPYRIGHT)
  9. Wikinews:Copyright Not done (See comment below re: articles created before XXX)
  10. Template:Printedition Not done (See comment below re: articles created before XXX)
  11. Template:PD-Article Not done (See comment below re: articles created before XXX)
  12. Category:Public_domain_articles Not done (See comment below re: articles created before XXX)
  13. Wikinews:Global Networking/All Done (see notes below re:Poland)
  14. Template:PrinteditionLicense Done (Needs sighted. Uses {{cc-by-2.5}})
  15. Template:Copyvio Done (needs sighted)
  16. Template:Imagevio Done (Needs sighted)
  17. Wikinews:Template messages/Image namespace Done (No addtnl change needed.)
  18. Wikinews:Audio guide Done
  19. Wikinews:Audio Wikinews/About Done
  20. Wikinews:Audio Wikinews/Template/Full Report Done
  21. Wikinews:Audio Wikinews Done
  22. Wikinews:Audio_Wikinews/Cheat_Sheet Done (audio pages often use {{cc-by-2.5}}. Must change to {{Cc-by-4.0}} post-update)
  23. Wikinews:Audio Wikinews/News Briefs/Show/Templates Done
  24. Wikinews:What Wikinews is not Done
  25. Wikinews:Spread_Wikinews Done

Also

  1. MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning says cc-by-sa-4.0 Not done (elevated privs needed)
  2. MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyright says cc-by-sa-3.0. Not done (elevated privs needed)

So it should be clarified if they should be changed or if that apply to all non-article edits.

You are very welcome to add more pages if you find any. --MGA73 (talk) 15:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Some of those pages will require elevated privileges to edit (all of the MediaWiki links). When the time comes, I can modify as many of the others as possible. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think we should create a {{Current CC Version}} or similar template that we use to replace all existing mentions of the current version. That way in future upgrades of the license, we can change one location rather than repeating this exercise. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC); edited 16:27, 26 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Michael.C.Wright: I think that it is a super good idea. If that page is protected you can edit all the other pages now. And using that template it is very easy to see where the current version is listed.
But I think some places need to mention that "Articles created before <date> is licensed 2.5 and articles after that is 4.0.
If the change is done August 1, 2024 for example then that date could be published on all other language versions of Wikinews and then all that want can change at the same date. And chosing a date a bit out in the future gives all wikis a chance to prepare (find out where to change). --MGA73 (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
In the article Wikinews:Global_Networking/All, the section for Poland mentions a specific license and links to a page on the Poland wikinews that is no longer there. Given that we're hoping all other language wikinews sites upgrade, how should we hand the Poland section of that page? Just remove all that verbiage like the other languages? Is the Networking page still useful? The last meaningful edit was seventeen years ago. I just removed spam from it that was eleven years old, so I doubt anyone has paid much attention to it recently. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 19:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello again Michael.C.Wright! I found one more page:

  1. MediaWiki:Mobile-frontend-footer-license

As for the page you mentioned above related to Poland it does seem to me the page is out of date. I wonder if Marek Mazurkiewicz knows the correct link. --MGA73 (talk) 12:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I added it to the list as not done. We'll need someone with elevated privileges for that one. Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Great Michael.C.Wright! Template:Main about should be fixed too. --MGA73 (talk) 16:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Added and help requested for protected pages. Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 17:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
What are You looking for on pl.wikinews? How I can help You? :) Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 23:17, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the help @Kajtus von Rzywiec!
We have a page here, Wikinews:Global_Networking/All#Poland, with a broken (?) link to the following pl.wn page: [1]. Is there a better page at pl.wn we should link to on our side (maybe a generic copyright page) that clarifies your copyright license? Alternately, we could remove the link entirely on our side so that neither of us needs to worry about maintaining it in future upgrades. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 19:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
[1] this page is here. As You said, it's just lists web resources for reporters.
This is about our licences: Warunki użycia (Terms of use). Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Actually, I just thought to translate the link to English and I see now it isn't meant to point to a clarification of the license. It's meant to point to a page on pl.wn that lists web resources for reporters. If that is correct, and if you have a new page for that, we can update the text on our side. 👍 —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 19:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Kajtus von Rzywiec thank you for the clarification. It turns out we had the right page title, but wrong linking syntax. I've corrected it. Thanks again for the assist. I also meant to post this last week but forgot, sorry. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
No problem. :) If I can help in any way, just tag me. Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 16:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I created User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade to make it easier for other languages to upgrade too. Everyone are welcome to update/expand it. --MGA73 (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

it will require a configuration change in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/source/mediawiki-config/browse/master/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php$10828 too. --MGA73 (talk) 07:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I made a new heading below for the to do list. --MGA73 (talk) 15:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

To do per November 2024

[edit]

Below is an update about what still needs to be done (or is fixed allready):

Table moved to: Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade#pages-table

Note: Articles created before XXX: The current footer say that "All text created after September 25, 2005 available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License, unless otherwise specified." We need to update the date. The question is if how we should tell about older licenses.

Feel free to update the table with specific text about what to update and the status for the change (or move to sub page).

In addition to that we should probably inform the other versions of Wikinews and maybe even try to help implement the change there. A separate page for that can be seen at User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade. Feel free to move to a different name outside my user space or copy relevant info. --MGA73 (talk) 15:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Michael.C.Wright Thank you for setting this up!
Just to make sure it is noted I would like to point out that there are a few open issues for discussion in Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade#pages-table. For example Template:PrinteditionLicense. We have to decide if we want to create a new template or fix the existing so it can be used for both old and new files. It is used on about 1,931 items but it can be done with a bot (mine for example) for most of the files (I think a few are protected).
But about 820 files are sxw and nominated for deletion per Wikinews:Deletion_requests#825_sxw-files. If deleted it will reduce the number of files to fix (if we decide to fix). Perhaps User:Gryllida can decide to either keep or delete? If they are to be deleted it can be done with a script (see m:User_talk:EPIC#How_to_mass_delete).
While I remember: Once license is changed we may have to fix stuff on Commons too (and other places where there might be screenshots of Wikinews). --MGA73 (talk) 20:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
what happens with a page created in 2006 that was revised in 2025. i am sure many policy pages are going to be like that Gryllida (talk) 04:05, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
The old text will still have the old copyright and the changes will be 4.0. If originally copied from Wikipedia then it should actually be license SA. But it is probably not an issue unless someone want to use the policy outside Wikinews. --MGA73 (talk) 13:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello Michael.C.Wright! It was these comments:

Pages to change Old text New text Status
Template:Translated Wikinews [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License] ??? Not done (elevated privs needed). Are we sure it should be updated? Old articles should not be translated. Now articles should only be 4.0 if the other version of Wikinews is also 4.0?
Template:PrinteditionLicense Done (Needs sighted. Uses {{cc-by-2.5}}) I think changes should be reverted. Old articles should not be changed to 4.0. So either we need 2 different templates for old and new articles or the template have to say that the article is either 2.5 or 4.0
Wikinews:Audio guide cc-by-2.5 cc-by-4.0 Done / Not done The upload text needs to be updated too
Wikinews:Audio Wikinews/News Briefs/Show/Templates cc-by-2.5 + {{Current CC Version}} cc-by-4.0 + Creative Commons 4.0 License Done / Not done The change does not work because it is in a nowiki-section

But it would be good if you could check the entire table and update if something needs to be fixed. I'm not a native English speaker so it would be good to have someone check the text I added.

I also gave a suggestion about articles created before XXX and to me it looks similar to what you suggested below. You are welcome to update the table with your text (just make sure to update the real table and not the summary I added above).

If we decide that we need two different print edition templates we could perhaps start adding the "old" template to the existing files. We do not have to wait. Or we could decide that all new articles should have a "new". Also I suggested to close the discussion about the sxw-files. There is no reason to change the license template for those if they are to be deleted. And if they are to be kept we might as well change the license template now. --MGA73 (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

We found out somewhere we do not need print edition template anymore so thats no longer an issue.
I added a column to the table with "when" so it is more clear if the change should be done "no" or "on date". --MGA73 (talk) 16:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Do I understand correctly that it was determined that the license change will take place in mid-December? Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 23:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Kajtus von Rzywiec Yes! There were a last minute question about legal stuff but we got a reply yesterday here Special:Diff/4806909 that there are no legal issues. My plan was to send a message out to all Wikinews but you are welcome to tell your Wikinews now. --MGA73 (talk) 05:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Note: Articles created before XXX

[edit]

To solve this problem I propose the following:

1. The new footer could state the following:

All text created after December 16, 2024 is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License unless otherwise specified.

For historical copyright information, see Copyright.

2. WN:Copyright should begin with the following and leave the existing text largely in place:

All text created after December 16, 2024 is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License unless otherwise specified. Text created between September 25, 2005 and December 15, 2024...[this is where we merge in existing text].

Thoughts or concerns? —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

[edit]

If you haven't already, please also check with the WMF Legal department by email at legal@wikimedia.org that they're okay with the change. You will also need to have done it before you request the actual configuration change to wgRightsText etc., otherwise your change probably won't be deployed. Let me know if you run into any technical issues with that, and I'll do my best to help. Bartosz Dziewoński (WMF) (talk) 00:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just a notice that per Wikinews:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade#Contact_legal_to_get_approval this will be taken care of. --MGA73 (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Michael.C.Wright When you ask legal perhaps you could also ask about the other Wikinewses too? I mean if we can make a coordinated change for all unless the wiki choses otherwise. --MGA73 (talk) 12:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Will do. I'll post the email exchange, likely as a subpage to this project page. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Tomorrow will be seven days since I've made the request. If I haven't heard back from legal by tomorrow, I will send one more request. If we don't hear back from legal, we can at least show Phabricator we tried and legal provided no feedback. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
If User:Bartosz Dziewoński (WMF) have a contact in legal that could be an option too. --MGA73 (talk) 16:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
I contacted the Legal team through a different channel and I learned that they just have a large queue of requests at the moment. Most likely someone has seen your message and will reply eventually. That's all I know, I hope it helps. Bartosz Dziewoński (WMF) (talk) 20:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for reaching out and getting an update. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Michael.C.Wright @Bartosz Dziewoński (WMF) Shaun from WMF Legal here. Changing the license itself is a community decision, so I have no specific feedback there. Structurally, as long as the license is implemented in the same way that the 2.5 license is implemented (i.e. 2.5 and 4.0 footers and other meta-information in the same place), then there's also nothing to say about that. I do appreciate the heads up though! SSpalding (WMF) (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

To do per December 2024

[edit]

Pages to update

[edit]

@Gryllida: I will make all necessary changes to edit-protected pages if you will temporarily reduce the edit-protection level on any pages marked "not done" in the pages table (you will need to click "expand" to see the table). I assume you can reduce the protection to auto-confirmed or if you can change it to reviewers only that would work too (I don't know what options you have for that). Let me know if you have any questions.

The sooner this is done the better. I can make many changes immediately, but some will have to be done once we know the definitive date from Phabricator.

Thank you in advance. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

As far as I can tell half of the pages not yet changed are not protected so you can go ahead and change those if they need to be changed now. I tried to mark when the pages should be changed and if you want to change more pages now I suggest that you change "On date" in the table to indicate which pages should be changed now and which should be changed later. --MGA73 (talk) 15:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Any page that mentions a date of our upgrade to 4.0 can be changed after the date of the upgrade. We may make the request from Phabricator on December 16, but the actual date of change may not be December 16. As long as all those pages don't require elevated privileges to change, I will change them myself after we have have actually updated.
We still need an admin to either reduce the level of edit-protection, or make the changes for us now, i.e., for pages that still need {{Current CC Version}}, and pages that need verbiage updated such as "articles created before XXX."
Failing that, we will just need to request global sysops to do that work for us. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 15:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Michael.C.Wright Gryllida changed all the pages I marked with "now". The rest of the pages are marked "on date" indicating that they should not be changed now. If you want any pages changed now can you indicate in the table which pages that should be changed now? --MGA73 (talk) 16:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I now see the {{Current CC Version}} has been deployed to the remaining pages. I think it would make things much easier and quicker if the protection level of the remaining, protected pages in the list be reduced enough to allow me to edit them once we're ready. In that way, we don't have to keep hounding admins for it when they already have a lot to do. I'm happy to make the required text changes myself and then request edit protection be re-applied.
But it's not the end of the world if it requires us to request the edits be made by an admin, of course. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 18:09, 4 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Comments from other wikis

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 months ago17 comments4 people in discussion
Original discussion moved from Wikinews:Water cooler/policy#Comments from other wikis

Note: I think it makes sense to collect all the comments from the other wikis here. --Ankermast (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

German: Hi everyone, I can tell you that there is interest in an update for German Wikinews, which has already been discussed. There are still some doubts about the documentation obligation, though. Best regards, --Ankermast (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you Ankermast. Can you link to the discussion? I thought of listing discussions/results on User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade but here is also fine. About documentation I do not know if m:Terms_of_use/Creative_Commons_4.0/Legal_note#Mechanism_for_the_upgrade can help? --MGA73 (talk) 19:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
The proposal is discussed below your message from May: n:de:Wikinews:Pressestammtisch#Update of license to cc-by-4.0. Ankermast (talk) 19:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Arabic: Per the vote on ar:ويكي_الأخبار:الميدان#مقترح_تحديث_رخصة_ويكي_الأخبار They will change to Cc-by-sa-4.0. --MGA73 (talk) 19:57, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

The have changed per phab:T372730. --MGA73 (talk) 15:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Does this mean that all articles are also licensed retroactively? Best regards, Ankermast (talk) 20:23, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
As I understand m:Terms_of_use/Creative_Commons_4.0/Legal_note#Mechanism_for_the_upgrade then only new edits are licensed 4.0. Existing text is still 2.5 (or PD if it is very old). --MGA73 (talk) 21:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
I asked because it is not shown that the earlier texts were contributed under 2.5. Ankermast (talk) 21:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Polish: The poll on whether the license should be changed is going to end today. --Ankermast (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

We have it Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 01:08, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chinese: Seems to be positive about a change to cc-by-4.0. But perhaps User:Kitabc12345 can give an update? --MGA73 (talk) 20:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Esperanto: ni estas por VladimirPF (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you VladimirPF! Do you have a link to the discussion? --MGA73 (talk) 05:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
La diskuto estis ekster vikinovaĵoj ĉar ĉe ni aktivas malmultaj personoj. Tamen, se estas bezonata mi povas organizi la diskuton kaj peti voĉdoni. VladimirPF (talk) 08:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. I do not need a discussion but I do not know if it is needed for a change in phabricator. --MGA73 (talk) 11:42, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
VladimirPF Please check m:Requesting wiki configuration changes. I think the best is to start an on wiki discussion to meet the requirements. --MGA73 (talk) 15:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can we request a license change for other wikis?

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 months ago13 comments6 people in discussion
Original discussion moved from Wikinews:Water cooler/policy#Can we request a license change for other wikis?

I have noticed that on m:Requesting_wiki_configuration_changes#How_to_request_a_change #3 it says “In the case of a very small and low-activity community, it should be enough to show that you have tried to gain consensus, and that you have given an opportunity for objections.”

I have send messages to all wikis suggesting an update (see User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade) and on many wikis there were no response and therefore no objections. However I think before we can request a license update for other Wikinews there should at least be a more clear message in local language.

What do you think? Could that be an option to make sure that WN will have the same license after an upgrade?

In case any WN do not wish to upgrade they can very easily avoid that by simply saying "No". --MGA73 (talk) 17:51, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

We should point out that the hurdle to change is quite low for small communities (as this is the case for many Wikinews wikis). Ankermast (talk) 18:06, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
By the way: Would it be okay if I updated the list in your namespace? Ankermast (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes please do! --MGA73 (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm considering requesting modifications to the copyright agreements for different language versions of Wikinews that we have already given an opportunity to oppose. The challenge is how to indicate on their own Wikis that "previous articles were published under the old agreement" in their own language. Additionally, we have provided ample time for them to express any objections, but I believe we could use machine translation or AI translation to communicate this in their original language. After all, some of the non-responsive Wikinews versions likely have inactive communities. The worst-case scenario is that these projects could be closed by Meta-Wiki. Kitabc12345 (talk) 06:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
It is recommended that open a global RFC on metawiki and send a notification again. If there is no objection, then the global community can force an update of the license on these wikis. Thanks. SCP-2000 (talk) 08:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Kitabc12345 and SCP-2000 Yes it may be the best way to do it on meta. I have not thought much of a wording of such an RFC but it could be something like "All Wikinews change to cc-by-4.0 on October 15, 2024 unless a wiki specifically choses otherwise. Vote will end at October 1." Any Wikinews that does not want to change to cc-by-4.0 can then just say "XX-Wikinews have decided to stay at cc-by-2.5 / change to cc-by-sa-4.0 per <link>." I do not know if 1 month to vote is enough and if 15 days after that is enough to change all Wikinews but whoever make the RFC can decide :-) --MGA73 (talk) 11:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
I support this proposal. Kitabc12345 (talk) 12:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Comment from Gryllida

[edit]
Original discussion moved from Wikinews:Water_cooler/policy#Comment from Gryllida

Comment Side note, I saw this and postponed it in my mind given the more urgent task of publishing. May take more than a day to resolve. Your help copyediting new submissions, helping others copyedit, and adding (and discussing) Reviewer nominations is welcome. I hope the licensing discussion can wait till then. Gryllida (talk) 12:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Gryllida I agree that there are lots of urgent tasks. I do not think that the problem is that things go too fast. The discussion about reviewing is almost three months old and the discussion about licensing is about ten months old. The discussion at Wikinews:Deletion_requests#August_11,_2023 is almost thirteen months old.
I think that in all of those discussions then whoever have strong opinions about the matter have allready said what they would like to say. My suggestion will be to make a conclusion like "Based on the discussion I will close this as <whatever> unless someone provide a good argument against before <date>". And then give like one or two weeks to make new arguments. Worst case someone thinks it is a bad idea and they request more time to discuss.
If you do not feel like closing the deletion request and/or the licensing discussion because you would rather spend your time on other matters you could also ask Michael.C.Wright to go ahead. --MGA73 (talk) 19:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
@MGA73 at what stage are we? The Polish language version is waiting for the decision of the English version. Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 20:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi Kajtus von Rzywiec. I think we are close but per Wikinews:Water_cooler/policy#Non-admin_or_non-bureaucrat_closure? we just need for the final closure to be made. After that I think next step will be an efford to make the changes on all versions of wikinews. But for that to happen we need a date for the change of license. --MGA73 (talk) 06:06, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ok, thanks for your answer. I keep my fingers crossed that the process will go smoothly Kajtus von Rzywiec (talk) 12:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Set date of actual upgrade (a poll)

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago13 comments4 people in discussion


The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



The poll has closed without opposition. Should en.WN declare December 16, 2024 as the date to execute the copyright license update? has passed. We will proceed with December 16, 2024 as the upgrade date. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 15:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

We need to first set the date of en.WN's upgrade before we start another poll for all other languages to agree, per MGA73's comment above. We need a date for en.WN before we can set the date for the others, because by default, we all have the same license in Phabricator, where the change is initiated. Therefore, we need to move quickly.

A lack of opposition or absence of comments during the polling period is not automatically considered support. Rather, it reflects that participants had their opportunity to express their views. If no objections are raised, the poll will default to a 'proceed' action, assuming no opposition was voiced.

The vote will end on November 20, 2024. All users with more than 250 good edits can vote.

Poll question: Should en.WN declare December 16, 2024 as the date to execute the copyright license update?

Questions and comments

[edit]
The sooner the better. We need to establish momentum or we'll be stuck talking about this project for months...
The upside to a volunteer project is the potential to have total coverage, even during holidays such as Christmas. There will likely be plenty of people still working at Phabricator, who don't celebrate Christmas, or want to take some time away from family, etc. Besides, the 16th is when the change is requested. When it is actually executed by the folks at Phabricator is anybody's guess. What we do know is that it won't happen until we make the request.
I also don't believe there is a need to have everything cut over exactly on the 16th. We already have copyright protection in place and it is already stratified, meaning older, static content is already covered with older copyright licenses. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 15:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Provided the date is agreed on. 1. What happens if Wikimedia Legal have not yet replied by this date? 2. What happens to licence of pages, such as WN:SG, which continuoisly change? 3. What actionable items are required to be carried out on the specified date? 4.What happens if one of the needed actionable items is not completed on this date i.e. someone is away from computer or needs to get permission from someone else. Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 11:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
    Why do we need a specified date? If there is concensus that CC BY 4.0 is the best desired licence can we do upgrade today? Gryllida (talk) 11:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Gryllida, I'll answer the questions in order below:
1. I believe it is required, based on this conversation: Wikinews talk:2024 Copyright license upgrade#contact-legal
2. I'm not sure I understand the concern. What happens now with those pages? They are already covered by CC-BY-2.5 in their current form, regardless of any change based our current statement in the footer of every page: "All text created after September 25, 2005 available[sic] under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License, unless otherwise specified." (pasting that here I see it has a typo in it that needs to be fixed)
3. We do the following: Wikinews:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade#Request_configuration_change_in_Phabricator
4. If the action requires admin privileges, we proceed as planned and work with global sysops.
5. MGA73 pointed out the following: The reason I suggest that we coordinate the change of license is because then it can happen on the same day and as you can see on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/source/mediawiki-config/browse/master/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php$10882 all wikinews have the same license per default.
I don't see the upgrade happening as in a light-switch; where we request the change in phabricator and it's done. There will be a "tail" to this project where we likely find pages we missed, that still mention the old license. We just need to update those as we find them. I've added that as an action item.
I think part of our larger problem with en.WN is we tend to get ourselves bogged down in paralysis by analysis, trying to anticipate every possible outcome before proceeding. For this license upgrade project, we already have copyright protection and the upgrade has been undertaken by other projects. Therefore the likelihood of something catastrophic happening if we miss something at this point, is probably pretty low. I would therefore prefer to move forward a bit more aggressively and deal with issues if-and-as they arise. Prolonging this project diverts attention from more urgent priorities, like increasing active editors, reviewers, and admins. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 15:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Can we do this phab request today? I think not, as Wikimedia Legal did not reply yet.
How can I support December 16 if Wikimedia Legal may or may not have responded by then?
How about option "submit phab request as soon as Wikimedia Legal said this is ok to do"?
Thank you. Gryllida (talk) 19:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
For point 4, I recommend asking AAA before global sysops, unless it is vandalism. Gryllida (talk) 19:04, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment I do not think its a problem if many are on hollyday. It could actually be a good thing because it is likely to reduce the number of cases where someone start an article before the upgrade (licensed 2.5) but publish it after the upgrade (licensed 4.0). I do not think its a problem if that happens but some might prefer that it is a clear case with either 2.5 or 4.0.
If local admins can't be active the day of the upgrade then we can either ask on meta or perhaps Michael.C.Wright could be given admin rights for one week to be able to change the relevant pages. --MGA73 (talk) 18:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Votes

[edit]

Support I support this date. We've been trying to set a date since at least August and I think most everyone is ready to move on to other pressing matters. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Support I'd say as soon as possiblw but I suppose this gives us time to make the required practical changes that go with it. --RockerballAustralia contribs 07:51, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


wording

[edit]
Latest comment: 19 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

So footer, MediaWiki:Copyright-footer, would say 'all stuff after December 2024 is under a new licence'. Is it not supposed to say also 'all stuff before December 2024 is under old licence' also? Gryllida (talk) 18:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Gryllida I suggested to change the text to "after <date>, 2024 is available" but you are right that it will not tell anything about the text before that date. We could change to for example:
"All text created after December 16, 2024 is available under the terms of the $1 License, unless otherwise specified. For older text see Wikinews:Copyright."
Thoughts? --MGA73 (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Contact to other wikis

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago11 comments3 people in discussion

@Michael.C.Wright and Gryllida. Right now I have User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade where I have links to contact with other WN. I wonder if we should move it to Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade/other-Wikinews so we can keep info in a non-userspace. But I do not think I can move pages myself?

I would like to create a message to send to all WN with a link to a table where we can note if the WN will change license or not.

We may need an extra column where we can add "Final result" where we or the wiki can note "Will upgrade to 4.0" or "Do not wish to upgrade" etc. I think that will be more clear then if they will update or not or if discussion is pending.

So on the page I would have the draft to the message and the table where info about status/results for all WN can be noted. MGA73 (talk) 18:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

You can move it, or I can move it without leaving a redirect if you prefer that (the latter is admin-only)
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:MovePage/User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade
Let me know if you would like me to help.
Thank you, Gryllida (talk) 22:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I found it! I left a redirect because there are inbound links. Everyone are welcome to check and fix. --MGA73 (talk) 05:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Kitabc12345 and SCP-2000 and Ankermast. At #Can_we_request_a_license_change_for_other_wikis? there was a discussion about how to implement it on other Wikinews. We talked about starting an RfC on Meta. But it was in August 2024 and all Wikinews had the chance to discuss and decide and as I understand it many of the active communities may allready have made up their mind. Since there are only a few days left untill December 16 I think that we should start by asking them directly. If that does not work we can always try an RfC later. If any of you are active atm. you are very welcome to Comment and help fix the notice at Wikinews:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade/other-Wikinews#Message_to_all_Wikinews_projects and help monitor the Wikinews projects in case they have questions or a reply. But given the time limit I will send out the messages tomorrow. I know that is not much time but I hope at least one other user have the time to help read and make sure my notice makes sense. --MGA73 (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have now updated the draft to a vote. If anyone have suggestions please share them soon. I plan to start votes on all remaining wikinewses after the license change is completed on en.wikinews, pl.wikinews and he.wikinews. --MGA73 (talk) 19:55, 12 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

When I updated Phab:T381421 to add another wikinews someone suggested I should "Preferably do a general task and notify all wikinews communities."
So I think the best is to do a b:Requests for comment and suggest a change of default license for ALL Wikinewses that does not actively choses another license than default. I guess it would be something similar to m:Wikinews/Licensure Poll. Comments, ideas and assistance is most welcome. I plan to start a page on meta in a few days. --MGA73 (talk) 16:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have now created m:Requests for comment/Update standard license for Wikinews. It is not meant to do any changes for en.wikinews as the license have been changed here. It is meant to change the license on all Wikinewses that have not made a change yet.

I plan to leave a note on all Wikinewses but not on Wikipedia, Wikiversity, Wikisource etc.

Special ping for User:Bartosz Dziewoński (WMF) and User:SSpalding (WMF) just as info. --MGA73 (talk) 15:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

"Preferably do a general task and notify all wikinews communities." Yeah, we (read: you) suspected that would happen. I think at this point treating the various different languages of Wikinews as one unified project is challenging, given their vastly different cultures and activeness. Thank you for sticking with this and helping everyone work through it! —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just as info I have also left a note on Wikinews:Water cooler/policy because someone said on Meta that the discussion should have started on Meta before English Wikinews changed the license. I think that many does not follow this page so I left the notice on Water cooler too. --MGA73 (talk) 12:10, 19 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Mark all articles with cc-by-2.5?

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago19 comments4 people in discussion

@Michael.C.Wright, Gryllida, Leaderboard and everyone else.

It was discussed on Template talk:PD-Article if it was a good idea to mark all existing articles with a cc-by-2.5 notice so that it will be easier for users of Wikinews to see which copyright apply to each article.

Perhaps we can have a quick discussion about this? It should be uncontroversial to add a template to the articles. So if everyone agree perhaps we can make a template with a suggested text? And at the same time start a formal discussion if User:Leaderbot and Leaderboard can be trusted to do the task?

We do not need to have the perfect template text before the discussion about a bot flag is started. Because even if the bot end adding a template with a text that needs to be modified it will be easy to modify the text later.

I think the template text can be discussed here. The bot flag should probably be discussed at Wikinews:Bots where bot flags are usually discussed. MGA73 (talk) 15:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think the currently proposed footer text should be fine. I think it over-complicates the project to try to add a template to existing articles of a given date while ensuring older articles that are in the public domain do not get the template. We'll need admin access to update archived articles and that is not a fast or easy process right now.
I also think that given the slow and arduous process of gaining consensus for actions around here, we should make this project as easy as possible, with as few moving parts as possible. We have more projects to start working on after this one and I think if we have to keep going to polls and discussions with numerous questions, we'll get nowhere fast. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
If it is determined that a template is a good idea, a compromise could be to use the footer text for now so we can complete the upgrade as planned. Then later we circle-back and organize the template, which if used, should be substituted (i.e., subst:) to minimize future risk. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 16:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
It should be easy to tell the bot to skip articles in Category:Public domain articles / with the template {{PD-Article}}. I think the process of agreeing on admin rights for a bot is a bigger problem. But unless there are anyone that actively says "I disagree" then I do not see any reason why a temporary admin right can be given to a bot even if only 2 or 3 users support. As alternative 1 we can remove the protection. Use a bot to edit and then add the protection again. Since global sysops are allowed perhaps as alternative 2 global sysops could add the template some how. --MGA73 (talk) 19:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Someone can code the bot and an admin can run it from a separate account. Gryllida (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Gryllida See Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Leaderbot. Leaderboard (talk) 02:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Leaderboard @Michael.C.Wright @MGA73
Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 23:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Who emailed wikimedia legal and did they reply? I did and yes, they did.
  • There are 12 pages to be updated on the date. Is this correct? That is correct. There may be pages we've missed that we'll find out about later, which we can address as we find them.
  • What is the consensus about licence tagging on articles published with CC 2.5 prior to Dec-16? I don't know that a consensus has been reached. See above discussion.
    if just use the footer, someone needs to word what it should say, e.g. "pd before date1, cc 2.5 from date1 to date2, and cc 4 currently". then all the effort to run a script or a bot is not as urgent. would you agree? Gryllida (talk) 18:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
    We reached consensus on your proposed idea of using various {{Archived}} templates, rather than just using the footer (see discussion below). However, should we, for any reason, not be able to use the templates as proposed, we can fall back on the footer option and I will compose the verbiage at that time (to reduce confusion as to what we are doing now). —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 19:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
    yup thanks i pinged leaderboard at AAA asking about code of his bot Gryllida (talk) 19:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Either works for me. Leaderboard (talk) 01:45, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Either works for me too. If there is an Archived on the articles that are PD then perhaps replace them with a Archived-PD. It should give fewer edits compared to mark all articles licensed 2.5. --MGA73 (talk) 07:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Where is the person who needs to edit the sysadmin/shell access thing? Has he/she already done that? Gryllida (talk) 01:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

┌──────────────────────────┘
Utilizing templates such as {{archived}} and {{archived2}} seem to have the greatest support so let's go that route.

I propose we utilize the name {{Archived-cc-2.5}} for all existing, non-PD articles licensed with CC 2.5 so that the template for CC 4.0 articles created after the upgrade can utilize the template conventionally named {{Archived}}. I will prepare the templates.

If we can utilize a bot, either with admin privileges or run by an account with admin privileges, we could make this change at any time before or on the date of the actual update. Gryllida, as the admin, it's your call on which route we take on getting those edit-protected changes made, if you're okay with that. Otherwise I will post a request at WN:AAA. If we get no reply from WN:AAA by the time of the upgrade, we can fall back to utilizing the footer verbiage.

There appear to be 1,713 articles that are in the public domain. Those will need the current {{Archived}} replaced with {{Archived-PD}}, which I will prepare. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have prepared the following templates:
Note: {{Archived-PD}} is identical to {{Archived}} but I think it's a good idea to have a dedicated archive template for each different CC license. PD articles already have a template that states the unique CC license so we don't need to mention it again in {{Archived-PD}}. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 15:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC); edited 15:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think it looks good. There seems to be 1,205 articles in Category:Public domain articles so a few additional checks may be needed.
I tried to get users to be more active at Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous#Calling_out_all_active_users! as it seems that getting users to vote in requests for rights is hard.
If we ask nicely at meta it might be possible to have a global admin or steward help out either by AWB or bot. If that does not work we can ask if it is possible to grant a temporary admin right for Leaderboard/Leaderbot even if we only have the support of 4 users (where 5 are needed). --MGA73 (talk) 15:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
There seems to be 1,205 articles... My bad. I wasn't properly caffeinated and was counting manually. 🤦‍♂️
I have made a request at WN:AAA. I don't anticipate the bot getting approved in time (but would be happy to be proven wrong!). —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 18:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Great. That makes things easier when we agree on the numbers :-) Yes an admin bot may need an exception where User:Gryllida grant admin rights temporary to a bot (even if there are not 5 votes). --MGA73 (talk) 18:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

update

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 days ago7 comments3 people in discussion

hi

please check what is done and what isn't. i left a note here

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Admin_action_alerts#licence_upgrade_today

please let me know if any additional action is required

thanks Gryllida (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

At some point perhaps revert Special:Diff/4802688 by User:Michael.C.Wright when the original discussion can be archived.
Other than that I can only think of finishing the discussions about archived articles. --MGA73 (talk) 18:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
For some reason no changes appear on MediaWiki:Gadget-UTCLiveClock.js. Does anyone know how or if that script is still in use? Nothing of relevance links to it[4] that I can tell.
Also, see the discussion at Template_talk:Translated_Wikinews#Edit_request_2. There was some confusion around what changes are needed there.
I just went through the Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade#pages-table and everything but those two pages are good-to-go. I've updated our 'master table' and the rest of that page to reflect my understanding of what is done and what is left.
We still need to work through {{Archived-cc-2.5}} and {{Archived-PD}} (This action item). That discussion is above [5] and will likely need a bot with admin access to complete.
Thank you very much for your help! —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 14:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I noticed that the articles are removed from Category:Public domain articles when the changes are made. We might want to make {{Archived-PD}} put the pages back in the category. --MGA73 (talk) 16:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Done Good catch! —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 17:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Great! Should we also have similar categories for 2.5 and 4.0 articles? --MGA73 (talk) 10:43, 18 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm, that's a good question. Any idea how these categories would be useful? I don't have any objection to it per se, just wandering if it is necessary. —Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 15:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews_talk:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade&oldid=4830658"