Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spiders/Resources
Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Peter coxhead in topic Need to verify Psyche license
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Spiders , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spiders on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpidersWikipedia:WikiProject SpidersTemplate:WikiProject SpidersSpiders WikiProject icon
Where does it say that Psyche is under a Creative Commons license? I don't see anything on their site indicating that to be the case. Kaldari (talk) 18:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC) Reply
- @Kaldari: belated reply, but see under "Copyright" at http://www.hindawi.com/journals/psyche/guidelines/. It's not clear, though, whether this applies to past articles, i.e. before Hindawi took over publication. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC) Reply
- For future reference, the Copyright section says "Open Access authors retain the copyrights of their papers, and all open access articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited." Kaldari (talk) 04:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC) Reply
- Which creates the issue, because it's not clear that old papers were "Open Access". Peter coxhead (talk) 10:33, 16 January 2016 (UTC) Reply
- For future reference, the Copyright section says "Open Access authors retain the copyrights of their papers, and all open access articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited." Kaldari (talk) 04:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC) Reply