9

I found a great tag excerpt and tag wiki in one Stack Exchange community (say, Stack Overflow). In another community (say, Computational Science), we have the same tag with totally missing usage info. Now, I want to reuse most of the text from Stack Overflow tag wiki by a copy-paste with edits to drive the usage guidance to the rules and needs of Computational Science.

Since the tag excerpt does not allow any links and would be edited for the needs of the community, there is nothing that should be done.

For the tag wiki, it is possible and probably necessary to give the proper attribution according to the CC BY-SA 3.0 license requirements. I found one question on Meta regarding this topic which also mentions the required attribution. However, no example is given.

I am intended to do the following:

  • copy/edit tag excerpt and tailor it

  • copy tag wiki + edits and add the following in the end:

    The contents of this tag-wiki originates from "julia" tag-wiki description at Stack Overflow and was edited to reflect usage guidance and advice specific for the Computational Science community.


  1. Does it seem like an appropriate attribution? I am a bit lost in whether I fulfill the 3.0 license attribution requirements in this particular situation.
  2. Are there examples of such tag wikis with attributions anywhere within SE?
  3. Am I worrying too much? :)

To be a bit more specific, no blind copy-pasting is intended. However, the fact that the tag wiki originated (was based on, used as a fundamental building block) from a tag wiki in another SE community, should be properly attributed.

7
  • 1
    See what RobertC wrote: no copying from one site to another, each site's Tag Wiki must be unique to the site - so look at the difference between site A and B and ensure that the Tag Wiki is different to the extent that the sites are different - two sites aren't exactly the same, and neither is the Tag Wiki for each. - That doesn't actually answer your question, as much as it asks why it's a question. Alternatively, you should be more worried about copying (thus not need to attribute). Make certain that they are different.
    – Rob
    Jul 4 '19 at 0:24
  • 1
    @Rob maybe I underestimated the edits I intend to do. The fact that the wiki will be edited, does not mean that the attribution should not be given. However, I also find it unhelpful to start from a blank screen for no reason, when a good source can be used as a foundation/building block. Thus, attribution is needed. Jul 4 '19 at 0:58
  • Example: For our Astronomy.SE tag Sun we have some information, and on our Space.SE tag Sun we have different information (not copied); though surely we are referring to exactly the same thing. I do not suggest that those are great works of prose, much could be improved. The difference between the sites is Astronomy is 'looking at the Sun' and Space is 'visiting or orbiting the Sun' (gross oversimplification) and the write-up for each tag ought to reflect that.
    – Rob
    Jul 4 '19 at 1:26
  • @Rob I intend to take from here Resources, Books, and Publications sections as is. While I am going to write an intro paragraph myself. + add hints when questions related to this tag might be more suitable for other SE communities. The fact that I am taking a big chunk of tag wiki from other community, requires me to use attribution. I also do not see the need to immediately edit this list of resources OR write it myself. The editing might (or might) not happen naturally over time. Jul 4 '19 at 1:30
  • The reason to 'start from a Blank's is what RobC wrote, no copying from anywhere. The "good source" is you, and you'll get a badge if it's used enough and credit for the edit. So make it completely original, thus there's nothing to attribute - do you want to credit your parents or teachers for getting you interested in the subject? Search this Meta for plagiarism, back in a few hours.
    – Rob
    Jul 4 '19 at 1:32
  • @Rob No copying for the sake of no copying is not a good reason. What I intend to do is no plagiarism, the license allows me to do it with attribution. Blind copy-paste is obviously bad, I do not argue with that. Jul 4 '19 at 1:34
  • @Rob Believe me, I am particularly and personally interested in appropriate and tailored tag excerpts and tag wikis. Particularly, on Computational Science. Jul 4 '19 at 1:53
3
+50
  1. Does it seem like an appropriate attribution? I am a bit lost in whether I fulfill the 3.0 license attribution requirements in this particular situation.

Yes, that's fine. I am not a lawyer, but if I interpret the rules correctly, you don't need to credit the author(s) (which is required in some cases) since they're not visible on the tag wiki page, and for some elaborate tag wikis you'd need to minutely investigate the edit history to see who actually wrote what. Otherwise, attribution rules on Stack Exchange are often not followed to the letter of the law but, as I personally see it, to the spirit of the law.

  1. Are there examples of such tag wikis with attributions anywhere within SE?

Meta Stack Overflow is full of tag wikis copied (almost) verbatim from here (which isn't really surprising, since for a long time this site was Meta Stack Overflow). Here is an example.

Most of the times the content is just copied, without attribution and (equally bad) without tailoring the content to the new community. Examples are abound, e.g. most programming language tags on the technical Stack Exchange sites have been copied from Stack Overflow at a certain point in time and aren't updated. For example, one tag wiki lists Java 8 as the latest Java version :)

  1. Am I worrying too much? :)

That's a matter of opinion, I guess. You've got the attribution covered, but I agree with @rene's comment; please check if the original tag wiki is properly attributed. If it's not, well, it's never too late to correct that mistake. Generally, I would say you can put your energy now into providing good content "to reflect usage guidance and advice specific for the Computational Science community."

1
  • 1
    It is maybe worth mentioning that some tag wiki's are simply plagiarized. Before making a copy and attributing to the source you might need to verify if the source isn't lacking attribution. If anything, that is where I would worry about.
    – rene
    Jul 6 '19 at 18:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .