Jump to content

Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/JKL

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.53.106.237 (talk) at 14:18, 31 January 2005 (→Japan-101). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Mirrors and Forks : (Numbers) ABC - DEF - GHI - JKL - MNO - PQR - STU - VWXYZ - All - Archive

J

Japan-101

  • No mention of GFDL Mentioned at footer of each article. Links to local copy.
  • No mention of Wikipedia Cited as source with link at footer of each article.
  • Has the tautological "copyrights are property of the owners" Has been removed.


One article in particular Hadaka Apron, but there probably are others. It doesn't use the latest version. Paranoid 13:09, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

K

Kiessecker

Klasikoyun.com

This site is violating GFDL. No attribution, no link to Wikipedia. Links to Wikipedia from main page

  • Some links to Wikipedia
  • No mention of source/GFDL
  • seems to be under construction

Moved from main page Davelane 22:58, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) This was deleted by 212.174.228.10 (Removed Klasikoyun.com site has an attribution in the main page) I've restored this as I beleve they are not in compliance -- if you disagree please move to disputed. --Davelane 16:32, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)


knolix.com

Knowledgerush

  • Links to local copy of GNU/FDL
  • Names Wikipedia and links to source article.
  • Does not have "title page".

Several articles copied, hard to say how many. Tualha 19:00, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Looks like everything with the possible exception of orphans and semi-orphans to me. Andre Engels 17:33, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

KnowLex

  • In en: and ; I only really looked at the former.
  • Bottom of each page links to:
    • Source article on Wikipedia;
    • Wikipedia main page;
    • GNU FDL on FSF site;
    • Author list (history) on Wikipedia; and
    • Edit link on Wikipedia.

OK, so they should have a local copy of the licence. But they also say "The article can be editted here." and I think that's fantastic!!! -- Toby Bartels 04:38, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

KnowLex

  • In en: and ; I only really looked at the former.

Please look up more information about :de: version of this site and post here. JesseW 00:48, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

KnowledgeGeek

Knowledgegeek now looks close to compliance, acknowledging Wikipedia as the original source and linking to the GFDL. Do people agree that they are now largely compliant? --Robert Merkel 04:30, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The site has definitely improved. However, witness all the 'summary' pages one level in from the root page (such as Coffee) still being composed largely of Wikipedia content without any acknowledgement. A sentence or two, lifted directly from Wikipedia is shown in many entries on those 'summary' pages (such as Drip brew, French press, Caffeine, etc. on the Coffee page above) yet you must click through to the full text before a Wikipedia or GFDL reference is made. A reference to Wikipedia and GFDL on all pages with even 'truncated' Wikipedia content (ie, the first few sentences of a bunch of articles) would still seem to be required. Potentially also worth mentioning is that the engine or template system used by KnowledgeGeek is used by StudioReview.com (documented on this page and supported/linked by Mark Coffman of KnowledgeGeek) and as of this writing, StudioReview has a low degree of compliance. I'm not suggesting that the owner/operator of KnowledgeGeek is able to accomplish this, but one wonders if it's possible to add compliance at an engine- or template-level for sites like this which are clearly copying Wikipedia content in huge quantities. Ds13 20:46, 2004 Mar 11 (UTC)
The remaining problems identified above seem to be addressed now. I would agree that they are largely compliant now. --Ds13 06:50, 2004 Mar 21 (UTC)

Knowledge Is Fun

  • site: knowledgeisfun.com
  • A TOTAL ripoff of wikipedia. Claims copyright as own!--Deglr6328 23:11, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • No mention of Wikipedia
  • No link to GFDL
  • Contains text "Copyright © 2004 KnowledgeIsFun.com, all rights reserved."
  • Sent first letter to domainsatvizaginfo.com and @kif (best contacts aval.) --Davelane 00:03, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Response: "Thanks for informing about the missing copyright message. The website is maintained by one of our client who has informed us back that the necessary copyright message has been put."
  • Now contains text "Copyright © 2004 KnowledgeIsFun.com, all rights reserved. This article was derived fully or in part from an article on Wikipedia.org] - the free encyclopedia created and edited by online user community. The text was not checked or edited by anyone on our staff. Although the vast majority of the wikipedia encyclopedia articles provide accurate and timely information please do not assume the accuracy of any particular article. This article is distributed under the terms of GNU Free Documentation License. " --Davelane 16:45, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

L

Latkey

  • Site: Latkey
  • Uses portions of Wikipedia articles on alphabets for description of their products related to alphabets
  • Example: [5] (see Historical Background for Cyrillic Alphabet) from Cyrillic alphabet
  • Does not link to GFDL or Wikipedia. Does not mention them at all.
  • Claims "© 2005 Latkey Ltd. All rights reserved." at the bottom of every page.

Lexikonia.org

A local copy of italian wikipedia.

  • Site: [7]
  • Example [8]
  • No link to the current version of article
  • No GFDL documentation
  • Yes link to en.wikipedia.org, no link to it.wikipedia.org
  • Attribution with an image not much readable and in English, instead the visitors are probably Italians.

logicjungle.com

  • Site: logicjungle.com
  • Mirror of the english wikipedia
  • Link to GNU FDL.
  • Link to www.wikipedia.org (from the icon)
  • Crediting links to original articles
We can class this is as 'well behaved' mirror. Phil from logicjungle proactively read the listing here and emailed me. I suggested some improvements to the wording of the article links, to give proper credit to wikipedia, which were quickly implemented.
If any further contact is necessary, it might as well go through me, or a I can provide a copy of the email conversation we had -- Nojer2 10:09, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

latitudezero.org

The Logo (A Book)

  • Site: The Logo (A Book)
  • Uses the article about the book: "No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies"
  • Mentions Wikipedia, and provides a link to the front page
  • No GFDL Link
  • Looks like fair use.

lotsofinformation.com

This may (or may not) be a very nasty clone. It does include the GFDL, it does name Wikipedia, but all such links are local and don't link back to wikipedia.org. It appears to be an almost exact mirror of the pages with no pictures. The only thing is, the login CGI works for some reason but doesn't appear to permit logins. In this case, they may be attempting to capture logins and passwords from wikipedia which can then be later used for making bad edits. I haven't found a clear way to check this, but I can't think of any reason to make an active CGI for the login when all other links are broken and the edit links aren't working. I have tried logging in through the form using an invalid user / invalid password set, and valid user / invalid password. In both cases it rejects this.

The domain is registered by Godaddy.com, with Paul Hardwick as the admin/tech/ etc. contact. Interestingly, someone with that name asked questions on the media-wiki list about making local copies of this site. Other info; he seems to be doing online shopping etc. http://www.paulhardwick.com/.

My possible explanations (most likely to least likely)

  • someone is playing with the site, they didn't expect Google to find it
  • someone is phishiing wikipedia to capture usernames.
  • someone plans an editable version of wikipedia but hasn't turned on new user sign up yet.
  • someone copied wikipedia and just set up the cgi with no intention for it to

be used.

I tried calling the phone number in the Whois entry to see what was there, but I couldn't even hear the company name clearly on their voicemail.

Needs further investigation. 129.215.13.84 16:54, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

www.LocalColorArt.com

-- Solipsist 18:55, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Lex-24.de

  • GFDL mentioned, and a very hard-to-read full text of the license is linked from each page.
  • Wikipedia is mentioned as the source, and main page of one wikipedia is linked from each article, though some of those links go to wrong language. (Say, Japanese articles having a link to dk.wikipedia.org, French articles having a link to pl.wikipedia.org).
  • No link to the live article.
  • Example http://www.lex-24.de/es/Top/Ser_vivo , http://www.lex-24.de/fr/Top/Art
  • It is in more than dozen languages, but English is somehow not accessible.

-- Tomos 03:28, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/JKL&oldid=9970242"