Talk:GNU Free Documentation License
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the GNU Free Documentation License article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2 |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about GNU Free Documentation License. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about GNU Free Documentation License at the Reference desk. |
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on GNU Free Documentation License. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130530230813/http://www.informationweek.com/verizon-settles-open-source-software-law/206904096 to http://www.informationweek.com/verizon-settles-open-source-software-law/206904096
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:07, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
References for Conditions
editThe licence conditions are listed in the text. Can we add references to the GFDL text where the conditions can be found?
Example: All previous authors of the work must be attributed<ref>GFDL, section 4. "MODIFICATIONS", lit B.</ref>
--D-Kuru (talk) 11:35, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2024 - minor grammatical edit
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section: == List of projects that use the GFDL ==
For the Last.fm bullet item: * Last.fm – artists descriptions are under GFDL
Instead of "artists descriptions", it should be one of the below:
- artist descriptions - artists' descriptions - descriptions of artists
I would lean towards the first: artist descriptions. Thanks. BackspaceSomethingElse (talk) 23:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Done I replaced it with your first suggestion, thanks. Jamedeus (talk) 23:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)