Wiki Discussion/Quoting External Content

I notice that the page [Jerusalem_Tavern, EC1M 5NA]? quotes material from its website. Do we want to do this? There are arguments against, relating to issues of maintenance and copyright. --IvorW

I think this comes under fair use. It's good publicity for them so even if it didn't I think they'd be unlikely to object. --Kake

But I think that the box looks good --IvorW. What do others think? The way it's been done is non-standard Wiki, but perhaps there is a way of achieving this with a style sheet, or possibly another patch development.

Idea: how about laying out a box like so:

| This text is in a box |
| |
| Author: IvorW |

Do you mean a sort of special markup that puts the text in a table, or...? Because as is stands, CSS is generally fairly good for making things look different, and if you combine it with logical markup (e.g. the blockquote tag with its "cite" attribute specifying where you got the text from), then it becomes clearly understandable even if you can't see styling. Basically, I fear us becoming reliant on physical markup.

Also, for what it's worth, I don't like the idea that much of people just copying text from $official_website - too much of that and I think you're a brochure, not a guide. However, the Jerusalem Tavern page is alright as it's purely historical factual content (mmm, dry!). Still, be cautious in copying... --Earle

Yup, I agree; fact-quoting fine, opinion-quoting generally pointless. (Although see Porterhouse Covent Garden, WC2E 7NA for some opinion-quoting that I think is useful (quoted from menu rather than website though).) Oh, and if someone who knows more about London history than me wants to write something to replace the quoted text on the Jerusalem page, then that would be lovely, although possibly more useful to spend the time writing up the history of a pub that we don't already have existing text for. --Kake

Last edited 2003-12-10 09:32:17 (version 5; diff). List all versions.