I must protest this most vigorously. The source of the article on the Antiochian website was OrthodoxWiki, not the other way around. The text supplied here first by chrisg was edited thoroughly by myself (both on 28 May), and best evidence of this is in the addition of a quotes section; additionally, the website version states that it was last modified on 7 June (ie today).
Obviously all edits are released for public consumption and change. This is the nature of a Wiki in general, particularly with our license. However, even if GFDL allows people to lift an article directly from OW, sources should be properly acknowledged on OW itself.
- Absolutely. Chrisg, since you are the webmaster of the Antiochian Australasian site, please be sure that your site, if it uses material from OrthodoxWiki, properly attributes it, and please do not falsify source information in OrthodoxWiki articles. (Even if all the material in the article were your own original work, if it is placed on OrthodoxWiki before being published elsewhere, it becomes subject to the OrthodoxWiki license.) —Dcn. Andrew talk random contribs 06:51, June 8, 2006 (CDT)
The material in the website article was first placed on the Australian Antiochian website under Orthodox Christianity. It was then placed on OrthodoxWiki. It was later moved from Orthodox Christianity to a new folder Australian Biographies on the website and updated.
The source attribution in OrthodoxWiki should either be reinstated, or this article and all other articles first published on the Australian Antiochian website which are no longer acknowledged on OrthodoxWiki should be removed. The imputations made against me are quite wrong.
In the meantime, until the matter is satisfactorily resolved, the privileges previously granted to OrthodoxWiki, to copy articles from the Australian Antiochian website, are suspended. chrisg 2006-06-08-2238 EAST