Sources talk:RDM Twenty-Something Questions For 3/9/07

Good information but the page is a mess. Could this be tidied up somehow? --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 07:48, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Working on it (obviously). Any suggestions appreciated. I'm thinking about pulling all the Ron's at the end of his responses, since we've established (through the bold) who is talking. --Steelviper 07:54, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Should I keep adding the article links (like a podcast) or just yank them? --Steelviper 08:12, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Would the <pre> tag work to highlight sections better than bolding? Or perhaps indent the responses? --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 08:54, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Typos

Should we leave (obvious) typos intact, or correct them? I left them exactly as is, but noticed Serenity touching it up. --Steelviper 08:40, 9 March 2007 (CST)

I think we should correct them, but then have a link at the bottom of the page to the original thread with a note saying that all typos and punctuation has been fixed for easy reading? Either that or they should be preserved exactly as written. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 08:53, 9 March 2007 (CST)

I realize that the article is a direct copy/quote, but as long as the meaning isn't changed, I don't see the harm in correcting them. Or we could place a "(sic)" behind them. --Serenity 08:56, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Let's put a note saying it's been fixed and linkified, since the original version also didn't have the links. Unless the links are distracting/ugly. Then we could just fix the typos. --Steelviper 08:58, 9 March 2007 (CST)

I was tempted to go though the page and put [sic] there at one point. Keep the wiki links though. eg. Roslyn [sic] --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 09:05, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Since this is meant to be a faithful record of another source, I would advocate neither correcting typos nor linkifying. --April Arcus 11:11, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Spoiler

Should we add a spoiler warning? Some vague end of season 3 spoiler stuff... --Steelviper 09:13, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Permission

How was permission to reproduce this obtained? --April Arcus 11:10, 9 March 2007 (CST)

Good call. The person who compiled the interview questions (apparently they were spread across several topics) PM'd me the link to the compilation on the user boards. That's RaymondShaw. Would we need to get permission (persimmons?) from each of the interviewers (plus RDM), or just Scifi (since it's their message board), or just Raymondshaw (since it was his compilation)? The "used with permission" was automatically tagged on as part of the "interview" template, but we should make sure we're in the clear to host this. Otherwise, I guess we could just post a link to it. --Steelviper 11:16, 9 March 2007 (CST)

I don't think that just the act of compilation is copyrightable, and I don't think that SciFi claims copyright to content posted to their forums. We would, however probably need permission from each questioner and RDM.

Beyond that, I must question why archiving the conversation here is even necessary. Can't we just use permlinks to the SciFi forums when we need to cite information revealed by RDM here? --April Arcus 11:20, 9 March 2007 (CST)

I'd have to agree. Other than allowing it to be searched (which, who searches the "Sources" namespace anyway), I don't know that it's absolutely necessary. The biggest gain of hosting here would be that the formatting on the original is pretty ugly, and we've got the potential to greatly clean it up here. That being said, the hassle of contact ~20 people (plus RDM) probably is not a battle worth fighting. If nobody has any objections soon I'll toast it here before too long. --Steelviper 11:25, 9 March 2007 (CST)