Difference between revisions of "Wikibooks:Reading room/General"

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to: navigation, search
(Regex: new section)
m (Bot: Archiving 1 thread (older than 60 days) to Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/2015/February.)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|minthreadsleft = 1
 
|minthreadsleft = 1
 
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
 
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(21d)
+
|algo = old(60d)
|key = abb03c394aadaf87e9a4bc3fb7d2d674
+
|key = 7a0ac23cf8049e4d9ff70cabb5649d1a
 
|archive = Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s
 
|archive = Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s
 
}}
 
}}
Line 10: Line 10:
 
{{clear}}
 
{{clear}}
   
== Producing refereed academic papers on Wikibooks ==
+
== Introducing myself ==
   
For some time I have had the idea of using the internet to produce academic papers in the public domain. Wikibooks might be the place to do this. The idea is that an author submits a new draft paper. People can jump in to make additions and possibly add their names as co-authors. People can jump in to edit and add their names as editors. When the paper has sufficient content it can be frozen for refereeing. Suitably qualified referees can be invited (or maybe just drop in) to determine if the paper is suitable for publication. If it is suitable it can be sent to Wikisource and linked (if appropriate) to articles in Wikipedia. Wikibooks academic papers would need a special format.
+
Hello to everyone, I am posting this as I saw a message on profile page to introduce myself.
  +
I am medical graduate from India ,currently pursuing PG in Radiology and also preparing for some more exams.
  +
I like to untangle the anything that i feel is too complicated to my liking and i good at it (at least that is what my colleagues have told me). Ever I started my med school preps , their were just way too many things to cram in my brain (which shrinks a little every day) , so i started to make jingles out the first alphabets.
  +
I will most likely be contributing a lot of my mnemonics to this site and messing with others , and if i ever manage to write a book , it will happen here at Wikibooks. {{unsigned3|Randjo}}
  +
:Welcome [[User:Randjo|Randjo]]! Thanks for joining! Make sure to also add the pencil and cursive icon above the editing space after a comment, thanks! --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 01:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
   
The advantages of this system is that the papers would be created and remain in the public domain. Publication might also be faster than through the established printed journals. Academics like myself want the widest possible distribution of their work but this gets blocked because the publishers of academic journals normally take the copyright of the papers away from the authors.
+
Hi there I was hoping someone could tell me how to create a new chapter in a discussion page? Thanks. --[[User:Scottxit|Scottxit]] ([[User talk:Scottxit|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/Scottxit|contribs]]) 19:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
: Hi [[User:Scottxit|Scottxit]]. A talk page is made up of sections, subsections, etc. To create a new section on a talk page, there should be a tab up at the top called {{nowrap|"add topic"}} (if you're using vector skin). --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 22:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
   
I am new to Wikibooks and Wiki space in general, so I apologize if I'm way off track with this. It is just an idea, hopefully it can gain substance if other people are interested. [[User:Logicalgregory|Logicalgregory]] ([[User talk:Logicalgregory|talk]]) 07:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
+
Thanks for the help Pi zero! --[[User:Scottxit|Scottxit]] ([[User talk:Scottxit|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Scottxit|contribs]]) 22:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
   
Thanks for all the comments. It seems that wikibooks is not the place for this idea. However, I will continue the thread for a moment longer, if only for the benefit of others who are lost in wikispace. At wikia I found a page that has been set up to do almost exactly what I proposed. It seems to have been in existence for some six years and, although all the infrastructure is there, there is virtually no content. It seems that an "academic publishing" page is just too general to attract participants. It needs to be more focused on a specific area of study. Also, I think it needs a strong group to start it off. I do not think it can be started by just one person with the expectation that others will just drop in (it will end up as dead space). I might pursue the idea further at wikiversity if I can put a group together.[[User:Logicalgregory|Logicalgregory]] ([[User talk:Logicalgregory|talk]]) 09:12, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
+
== Wikidata is coming ==
   
:What you are describing sounds more like [http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page Wikia]. We have a [[WB:OR|policy]] against original research here on Wikibooks. [[User:Recent Runes|Recent Runes]] ([[User talk:Recent Runes|talk]]) 09:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
+
Hi everyone :)
::Please, I beg of you, let's not advertise for Wikia, as that is a conflict of interest with the Wikimedia Foundation board. As for the "[[WB:OR|policy]] against original research" here, I personally think that is something that ought to be reconsidered by the community. Having now carefully read that policy, I am wondering if [[World_War_II/Strategic_Bombing_in_Europe|this recent output]] is actually in violation of Wikibooks policy? -- [[User:Thekohser|Thekohser]] ([[User talk:Thekohser|talk]]) 19:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Oh, don't worry about "advertising" on this level. It is traditional to suggest to people, before nuking their silly contributions, to point out other places that will take them, "this is better for Wikia" is quite a bit nicer than "get that crap out of here!" We could also point out, for example, [http://mywikibiz.com MyWikiBiz]. Just don't ''you'' point it out, okay! More to the point, though, is that Wikiversity is a great place for original research, it is explicitly allowed, just don't try to present it as a scientific consensus, for example, if it isn't. But you can put up a page on your Favorite Crackpot Theory, note that it's not accepted, and then pretty much say what you want as long as it isn't illegal or fattening. At least that's the theory, the execution of the theory gets a bit ragged sometimes, but we are working on that.
 
   
:::As to your brilliant paper, while one might quibble with some words at the end, one might also allow an author some flexibility, especially if the conclusions reached are obvious, and Wikibooks policy on Original Research seems far more flexible than that of Wikipedia. In the end -- in both places! -- the real standard is consensus, there is no way around that unless the Foundation wants to step in, i.e., no way, so my advice: remember to be nice! Now, if I could just take my own advice..... --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 19:29, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
+
I am Wikidata's product manager. I wanted to reach out to you about Wikidata support for Wikibooks. Wikidata stores structured data for Wikimedia projects (and others). For example , things like the date of birth of a famous author or the height of a mountain are stored by Wikidata. We are giving access to this data for all Wikimedia projects step by step. It is now Wikibooks' turn. As a first step you will be able to maintain your interwiki links on Wikidata. This means you will no longer have to store them in the article text of each language. Instead they are stored just once on Wikidata together with all the other projects. (You will still be able to store them in the article text if you really want to but then they overwrite the links coming from Wikidata. Sometimes that is useful.) This first step should happen on February 24th. In the next step you will get access to all the other data on Wikidata. There is no ETA on that yet.
:[[v:|Wikiversity]] is a good place for this, which is still within the Wikimedia projects. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 14:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
::Yes. My opinion is that it is possible that Wikiversity could establish a peer review process, and that it could become, effectively, a publisher of peer-reviewed papers. There are quite a few obstacles to overcome, though. I don't expect to see this soon. However, papers can be written there, just as students and teachers may present, in classes, original research. An exciting idea is the collaborative writing of papers that might be submitted for publication elsewhere, under normal peer review. I've even set up a lab resource at [[Wikiversity:Cold fusion/Lab|Cold fusion/Lab]], something that would be completely inappropriate on Wikipedia or here. I work extensively on Wikiversity because of the great academic freedom that is the ideal there. It's largely realized, and there have only been problems arising from WMF critics using Wikiversity to criticize WMF projects, and then individuals criticized, often politically powerful within the WMF community, and their friends, also came to oppose, sometimes also in disruptive ways. The use (for "Wiki studies") is theoretically possible, but will require the establishment of ethical standards, and I wanted Thekohser to be unblocked there precisely so that he could support the development of those standards, from the critic side, and I assume that there will be others who will participate from the "defense." If, absent such standards, he abuses the relative freedom of Wikiversity to prematurely criticize, I will act to prevent it. But I don't expect it to be a problem. He's been very cooperative. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 18:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
:: Dear Logicalgregory,
+
I am looking forward to having you join the Wikidata family! If you have any questions please don't hesitate to reach out to me. There is a special page for you on Wikidata that will hopefully help you and is a good place to ask questions: [[d:Wikidata:Wikibooks]].
:: That sounds like an excellent idea. However, as Darklama and Recent Runes pointed out, other wiki exist that would be an even better place for it than Wikibooks.
 
:: If you are thinking about publishing some particular paper, perhaps it would be even better to post an outline on a wiki dedicated to whatever particular field you are interested in. A few such narrowly-focused wiki are:
 
::* [http://www.scienceofspectroscopy.info/ Science of Spectroscopy wiki]
 
::* [http://openwetware.org/ OpenWetWare wiki: biology]
 
::* [http://renewableenergy.wikia.com/wiki/Renewable_Energy_Design Renewable Energy Design wikia]
 
::* [http://www.sklogwiki.org/ SklogWiki dedicated to thermodynamics and statistical mechanics]
 
::* [http://wiki.biomine.skelleftea.se/wiki/ BioMineWiki: biology and hydrometallurgy]
 
::* [http://usefulchem.wikispaces.com/ UsefulChem Project wiki]
 
::* [http://prettyscience.wikia.com/ Pretty Science Wikia]
 
:: --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] ([[User talk:DavidCary|talk]]) 19:02, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
As someone who recently repurposed a small portion of his undergraduate honors thesis [[World_War_II/Strategic_Bombing_in_Europe|here on Wikibooks]] (perhaps unwittingly in violation of policy!), I would like to say something. I can attest that there were at least 100 honors papers coming out of Emory University every year in the late 1980's, and one would estimate with near certainty that easily half of them never reached a "digital age" reformatting. It seems an utter waste of talent and labor to '''''not''''' reach out to people with honors research "collecting dust", and ask them (plead with them!) to consider scanning the work for OCR, then releasing it under a free license to share with the rest of the world. Multiply my experience at Emory by at least 200 (or 400, or 800!), to cover the many outstanding universities worldwide that have featured honors papers, etc. We're talking about a great deal of content and information that really should be gathered up and made digital. If not on Wikibooks, why? And where? -- [[User:Thekohser|Thekohser]] ([[User talk:Thekohser|talk]]) 19:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
+
Cheers [[d:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)|Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)]] 19:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
:Not peer-reviewed, but this material would presumably be fine for Wikiversity, no question, and some of it might be okay here as well. It's likely to be of better quality than the average. Great idea, Thekohser. The problem with great ideas is, frequently, too many Chiefs with great ideas and not enough Indians. I'd suggest this as a project on Wikiversity, to get the papers in a place which is pretty safe from deletion based on arguments of POV, etc., and then review them for transfer to Wikibooks. But I have no problem with placement here first, and then a move to Wikiversity if that seems more appropriate at the time. What I don't like is the raw deal of you do all this work on a page or set of pages and then they are deleted because Randy from Boise and a few drive-bys thought it wasn't notable or was something else Bad. (It's hard to imagine a submitted degree thesis or an honor paper that wouldn't be appropriate, at least, for Wikiversity. But the world is big.) --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 19:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
+
<!-- Message sent by User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lydia_Pintscher_(WMDE)/Distribution_List&oldid=11182355 -->
Concerning Thekosher and Abd remarks on undergraduate honors thesis, I am very confused about where papers can be uploaded on the various Wiki Foundation sites. I have a lot of papers that I would like to make more available to the general public. These are undergraduate thesis, Masters thesis, PhD thesis, a collection of working papers published by University Departments, an even larger collection of papers published in academic journals. The copyright of the published papers have been hi-jacked by various publishers, so there seems to be nothing that can be done about these - they will be locked away in print libraries (where nobody will ever read them) until long after I'm dead (which is why I suggested academic papers could be produced on a Wiki). Going one step back, there are the working papers upon which the published papers are based. They are not as polished as the published papers but are a valuable research resource that could be placed in the public domain. Working papers are peer reviewed within a University Department. When I brought up the question publishing these at Wikisource I was told "We would only look at the papers following peer review" by which I understand them to mean that the working papers would have to be peer reviewed again. This requirement would, I think, be difficult to meet because I know of nobody that would be prepared to spend their time reviewing a paper that has already been reviewed. Now Thekosher suggests collecting undergraduate thesis (I do not think this is a bad idea), when papers that are far more developed, and only one step away from being lost for 100 years, have nowhere to go. [[User:Logicalgregory|Logicalgregory]] ([[User talk:Logicalgregory|talk]]) 07:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
:If you prefer to stay within the Wikimedia Foundation wikis, then [[v:|Wikiversity]] is the only place that original research is acceptable. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 12:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
+
: See also: [[Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals#How Wikidata will handle Wikibooks interwikis]]. --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 14:02, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
::Having been peer reviewed means the work isn't original research per say. The existing peer reviewed journals where the work was previous published and polished up could be cited as sources. However the papers are probably most useful if preserved as papers, so Wikiversity would be the place for that since papers are a type of educational resource acceptable there, while non-book materials are not meant to hosted at Wikibooks. Anyone could use the papers when made available at Wikiversity as a bases for developing books at Wikibooks, if they cite the journals where the work was peer reviewed. Since copyright seems to be a concern I think confirming permission with OTRS should be done before making the papers available at Wikiversity. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 15:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
:If it is in the Public Domain and has been published in a "verifiable, usually peer-reviewed forum", it is welcome at wikisource. The Wikiproject can be found at [[s:Wikisource:WikiProject Academic Papers]]. -[[User:Arlen22|Arlen22]] ([[User talk:Arlen22|talk]]) 18:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
== Raising awarness about Reviewing Pages ==
   
:: <s>I think, thought I could be wrong, that wikisource requires the material to be published elsewhere before they will accept it. I suppose this keeps people from posting their rejected papers there straight away without correcting the flaws.</s> [[User:Thenub314|Thenub]][[Special:Contributions/Thenub314|314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 18:40, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
Hey all!
   
== Goodbook ==
+
I'm just going to post that some people could try helping us with [[Special:PendingChanges]]. "Special:PendingChanges" is a tool which shows list of edits needing reviews/checked. I've already gotten through a lot of pages. Some of these pages date back to 9 months ago. Please make sure you're not blindly accepting changes, since we need people who have the reviewer rights to review these pages, if you find something confusing you, please post it here for the community to answer you.
   
Please see [[Talk:Main Page]]. Thanks. [[User:Kayau|Kayau]] ([[User talk:Kayau|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Emailuser/Kayau|email]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Kayau|contribs]]) 10:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
+
Thanks. --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 23:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
:[[Special:UnreviewedPages]] refers to pages that have ''never'' been reviewed. [[Special:PendingChanges]] is for those previously reviewed but with an edit awaiting approval. It is the latter that needs the focus. [[User:QuiteUnusual|QuiteUnusual]] ([[User talk:QuiteUnusual|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/QuiteUnusual|contribs]]) 09:06, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
::Yes^ I'm pretty bad at explaining things usually tho. Thanks btw. --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 12:52, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
::: If you find a page that needs to be reviewed , do not hesitate to contact any reviewer or admin.(or simply reply here).--[[User:Leaderboard|Leaderboard]] ([[User talk:Leaderboard|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Leaderboard|contribs]]) 06:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
:::: Helping with pending changes, or with unreviewed pages, is similar to the sort of thing suggested by en.wn's rotating sitemessage &mdash; except that it would have to be suggested ''only'' to reviewers, and afaik atm that can't be determined without javascript. (I've wondered if we could put together a nontrivial list of suggestions for things to do, for a rotating sitenotice here spiritually akin to en.wn's &mdash; but, when we had a sitenotice a few months back that suggested contributing to the Featured Book discussions, it apparently didn't generate any activity there ''and'' one user objected strenuously because for some reason they ''couldn't dismiss the sitenotice'' so it was there all the time on every page view.) --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 12:23, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
:I've always found that [[Wikibooks:Maintenance]] is a useful location for seeing what needs doing but it's a pity that we can't have targeted site notices which would be seen only by certain users such as a note about outstanding pages to be reviewed for reviewers and the site notice about the Steward elections only visible to those who qualify to vote. Over the past 6 months it seems thsast more people are reviewing pages which have pending edits needing reviewed which is good. The number of those which have never been reviewed is too big to even contemplate doing anything about.--[[User:Xania|ЗAНИA]] [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]][[User talk:Xania|<sup>talk</sup>]] 16:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
   
== We need another bureaucrat ==
+
== Added Archive page for class projects ==
   
Wikibooks could certainly benefit from another bureaucrat. I think any wiki with only one bureaucrat will suffer from a problem: if a bureaucrat decision is challenged, there is nobody to reverse it. (No really, I know bureaucrats cannot uncheck admin rights, and I don't know if a renaming can be reversed but...) Also, if there are two bureaucrats the bureaucrats can keep an eye on one another to see if they made any 'crat mistakes. However I won't nominate anyone in case the nominee refuses, and other admins who are also, IMO, eligible to become a 'crat take offence. If you think you can become a 'crat, please self-nominate. :) [[User:Kayau|Kayau]] ([[User talk:Kayau|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Emailuser/Kayau|email]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Kayau|contribs]]) 01:55, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
+
Hi ,
:A bureaucrat decision naming a sysop can be questioned and reversed at meta, with a showing of local consensus. I do agree, though, that it's better to have two. It may be more important, though, that a 'crat be highly trusted to remain neutral. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 19:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 
   
== [[User:Thenub314|Thenub314]]'s bureaucrat nomination ==
+
I've cleaned up the main class project and moved them to an archive page. This helps keep it clean(over 44 projects before , dating to 2007).
  +
--[[User:Leaderboard|Leaderboard]] ([[User talk:Leaderboard|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Leaderboard|contribs]]) 14:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
   
The comment above inspired me to nominate myself as a bureaucrat. As per [[WB:CRAT|policy]] I am advertising my nomination here. [[User:Thenub314|Thenub]][[Special:Contributions/Thenub314|314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 02:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 
   
== Placement of HTML tags: Wiktionary or Wikibooks? ==
+
== Wikidata support for interwiki links is here ==
   
Hello. I am a Wiktionarian administrator, interested in seeking feedback and opinions from Wikibookians, to solve an issue directly related to both projects.
+
Hey everyone :)
   
There is [[wiktionary:Wiktionary:Beer parlour#colspan, etc.|an ongoing discussion]] about the existence of individual entries for HTML tags. As notable examples, on Wiktionary, there are ''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Hyper_Text_Markup_Language/img Appendix:Hyper Text Markup Language/img]'', ''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Hyper_Text_Markup_Language/h1 Appendix:Hyper Text Markup Language/h1]'' and ''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Hyper_Text_Markup_Language/title Appendix:Hyper Text Markup Language/title]'', to define, respectively, the tags ''img'', ''h1'' and ''title''.
+
(Sorry for writing in English. It'd be great if someone could translate where appropriate.)
   
However, especially since the creation and maintenance of HTML tags at Wiktionary is a fairly new project, it depends on further consensus. All these pages may conceivably be kept or be deleted from Wiktionary, according to the development of possible discussions and/or votes.
+
As previously announced we have enabled interwiki links via [[d:|Wikidata]] for Wikibooks last night. This means from now on you no longer have to maintain the links in the wikitext but can maintain them together with the links for Wikipedia, Commons, Wikivoyage, Wikisource, Wikinews and Wikiquote on Wikidata. You will still be able to keep them locally though if you want to. Local interwiki links will overwrite the ones from Wikidata. If you don't want any interwiki links from Wikidata on a particular page you can use the magic word <nowiki>{{noexternallanglinks}}</nowiki>.
   
One particular argument for deleting these pages from Wiktionary is that there are already pages on Wikibooks, including ''[[HyperText Markup Language/Tag List/img]]'', ''[[HyperText Markup Language/Tag List/option]]'' and ''[[HyperText Markup Language/Tag List/table]]'' for similar purposes, therefore Wiktionarian versions would be redundant.
+
You do not yet have access to the other data on Wikidata like the date of birth of an author. That will come in a future deployment. I will let you know when I have a date for it.
   
Since the particular message "Given this book is a user guide, it is organized around topics from the user's perspective, not around the names of the tags." is displayed at the top of [[HyperText Markup Language/Tag List]], am I right in assuming that individual pages for each HTML tag would be better placed in Wiktionary? Or, perhaps, there are reasons for keeping them at Wikibooks, that I am unaware of?
+
If you have any questions [[d:Wikidata:Wikibooks]] is a good first step. That is also a good place for any issues or bugs you encounter.
   
Thanks in advance. --[[User:Daniel.|Daniel.]] ([[User talk:Daniel.|talk]]) 17:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
I'm very happy to welcome you all to Wikidata! I hope it will become a great help for Wikibooks.
   
:I would consider that page more of an alphabetical index of tags and the note is indicating that the chapters shown at the root of the book will use those tags as needed based on the functional organization of the book. The book as a whole is based around what kinds of things you want to do with HTML rather than going through each tag in turn. HTML tags are not anything close to what I'd imagine being hosted at Wiktionary and it seems like that's a reach for Wiktionary's scope. I compare [[HyperText Markup Language/Tag List/img]] with [[wikt:Appendix:Hyper Text Markup Language/img]] and the former is far superior. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 17:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
Cheers Lydia
  +
-- [[d:User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)|Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)]] 07:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
<!-- Message sent by User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lydia_Pintscher_(WMDE)/Distribution_List&oldid=11205771 -->
   
:: Since Wiktionary is already more reference-like, it makes sense in that view to put them there. But Wikibooks would be a more logical choice given the content and purpose of Wikibooks itself. I can't, however, imagine that a separate book would be created for the reference of each computer language. Which, in turn, means that if they were to be placed on Wikibooks, they'd necessarily have to form part of some sort of appendix within each wikibook on their respective subjects. In either case, a reference list for HTML as well as for other computer languages is certainly extremely useful. I really think we should at least have references for computer languages ''somewhere'' on Wikimedia. But where, I don't know. [[User:CodeCat|CodeCat]] ([[User talk:CodeCat|talk]]) 18:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
== Did we even allow these guys to remove our interwiki links? ==
   
:(edit conflict, above comments by Adrignola and CodeCat not yet read.)That is an interesting question, and one I don't know I have a quick answer to. My feeling is that the tag list you point out is certainly appropriate for the book it is in, that is as an appendix to the textbook on HTML. As to the individual structure of the book, one entry per page seems a bit cumbersome but I usually defer to individual book contributors for how they like to structure their books. So I imagine that the pages are reasonably covered by our scope. I am less familiar with wikitonary's scope, but roughly speaking traditional dictionaries have appendices on all sorts of things (how to convert cups to tablespoons, etc.), and I am not surpirsed that wikitionary has such an appendix. But then again, it really becomes a line as to where the scope begins and ends, this wouldn't be covered in a more traditional dictionary... so, to summarize, I don't know how to feel about these pages at wikitionary, but the pages pointed to in wikibooks are well suited to our scope. I am not sure how to handle the duplication of effort problem. [[User:Thenub314|Thenub]][[Special:Contributions/Thenub314|314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 18:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
I know they told us that they'll be doing it, but did we actually tell them ok? Aren't we suppose to be reverting edits that remove our interwiki then? --[[Special:Contributions/72.84.233.224|72.84.233.224]] ([[User talk:72.84.233.224|discuss]]) 20:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
:To add on to what I said here^ Pi zero has even notified some of these users who remove our interwiki links about the discussion that is currently going on in the Proposal. Users like Ruzwig just seem to ignore this notification. What are we suppose to do? --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 20:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
   
: I think "HyperText Markup Language/Tag List" with all its subpages should be separated again into a standalone book, named along the lines of "HTML Reference". I do not think a reference book should be presented as an appendix of a guidebook; these should be two standalone books instead. On the other subject, this seems to be a Wikibooks material rather than a dictionary one. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|talk]]) 18:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
: I am sysop in russian Wikibooks. Why my last edits is wrong? [[User:Oleg3280|Oleg3280]] ([[User talk:Oleg3280|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Oleg3280|contribs]]) 20:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  +
::Because there has been no agreement by the Wikibooks Community on allowing people to remove interwiki links. --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 20:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
   
I think "which project" is the wrong thing to focus on. A dictionary explains how to pronounce words, there definitions, and correct grammar uses. Books may have a glossary, which usually only include unfamiliar words that people in the field should know without details usually found in a dictionary. Books should have glossaries. I think what Wiktionarians should focus on is if explaining how to pronounce words, there definitions, and correct grammar uses for programming terms is relevant to Wiktionary's scope. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 18:55, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
== [Global proposal] m.{{SITENAME}}.org: {{int:group-all}} {{int:right-edit}} ==
   
:: Re Dan: Maybe, but the implication is that there will be more than just one reference book. If there is a HTML reference, then we'll also want a reference book for C, Python and so on for every other computer language with a sizable collection of names. [[User:CodeCat|CodeCat]] ([[User talk:CodeCat|talk]]) 20:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
+
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr">
  +
[[File:Mediawiki-mobile-smartphone.png|thumb|MediaWiki mobile]]
  +
Hi, this message is to let you know that, on domains like {{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}.'''m'''.wikipedia.org, '''unregistered users cannot edit'''. At the Wikimedia Forum, where global configuration changes are normally discussed, a few dozens users [[m:Wikimedia Forum#Proposal: restore normal editing permissions on all mobile sites|propose to restore normal editing permissions on all mobile sites]]. Please read and comment!
   
:::Wiktionary has developed a consistent format to organize morphemes of multiple languages. I believe it may as well be consistently expanded to include commands, tags and other characteristics of computer codes, that may in turn be further organized by categorization and indexes. For example, once this project reaches a certain level of maturity, a page called [[wikt:Appendix:Control flow statements]] could explain "go to", "for" and "while" of various languages together.
+
Thanks and sorry for writing in English, [[m:User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 22:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
:::If one particular goal of Wiktionary is to explain the grammar of many natural languages, it may as well conceivably explain the syntax of programming languages similarly. Since Wikibooks has [[Subject:English language]], in addition to the coverage of English from Wiktionary, I assume each project may treat the same subjects from different approaches, without them becoming redundant to each other. --[[User:Daniel.|Daniel.]] ([[User talk:Daniel.|talk]]) 20:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
+
</div>
  +
<!-- Message sent by User:Nemo bis@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Distribution_list/Global_message_delivery&oldid=11428885 -->
   
== Five-year WMF targets ==
+
== IRL classmate awaiting my offer to come join Wikibooks! ==
   
There was a thread on the foundation-l mailing list on [[wmf:Resolution:Five-year_targets|five-year Wikimedia Foundation targets]] excluding non-Wikipedia projects. Below are some highlights that would be most relevant for those concerned with Wikibooks. The full postings are linked. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 15:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
+
Hey all! :) Today I’m planning on bringing a new user to Wikibooks, a sixth grade classmate of mines! As of you know, most 11/12 year olds are usually clumsy, and usually don’t mean well. But hopefully she will be more than happy to come. I’m planning on helping her set an account, and letting her read our policies. She doesn’t have that good grammar as normal people here at Wikibooks, so that’s going to be quite a problem. But hopefully that’ll be fixed up soon. All I’m asking is for the admins to use their tools wisely and be patient with her, and the rest of the users.
   
{{cquote|The vast majority of our users are using Wikipedia and not the other projects, which means even a small improvement to Wikipedia is likely to have more impact than even a large improvement to one of the other projects. Sue was very clear that prioritising Wikipedia only applies to the WMF. The community can, and should, continue to improve the other projects, the WMF just feels that its limited resources are better used where they will have more impact.|||Thomas Dalton|[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061533.html foundation-l mailing list]}}
+
Back in 2010, when I joined. I was a clueless, very young, editor who was blocked for wrong behavior I didn’t know that was wrong. I was a clueless nooby, but now today I’m currently helping out Wikibooks and Wikiversity and patrolling more than 100 WMF wikis for vandalism. I remember one person, who was in support of me, said that young children were the “future” of WMF. Maybe this user could be as well? I don’t know, but I’m hoping so.
   
{{cquote|It's absolutely not clear to me (and I don't think anyone) that a focused investment in, say, textbook development is actually going to result in predictable payoff in a transformatively larger number of sustainable content contributors. That doesn't mean that there isn't a potential for such an investment to be successful, and it doesn't mean that it's not a risk worth taking.|||Erik Moeller|[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061608.html foundation-l mailing list]}}
+
I hope for her to accept this, this could help her academically. I’m still awaiting her acceptance, since I’m going to talk to her about this stuff atm. Thanks all for reading. --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 00:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  +
: No problem , let her come! Thanks for informing.--[[User:Leaderboard|Leaderboard]] ([[User talk:Leaderboard|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Leaderboard|contribs]]) 10:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
   
{{cquote|But let's not kid ourselves -- transformatively increasing the productivity and success of efforts like Wiktionary, Wikibooks, and Wikisource is not just a matter of tiny injections of bugfixes and extensions here and there. It's a matter of serious assessment of all underlying processes and developing social and technical architectures to support them. I hope that we'll eventually be able to make such investments, but I also think it's entirely reasonable to prioritize lower risk investments.|||Erik Moeller|[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061608.html foundation-l mailing list]}}
+
== hi ==
   
:Wow, how extraordinarily depressing. [[User:Thenub314|Thenub]][[Special:Contributions/Thenub314|314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 17:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
+
−<s>text</s>Aauib hi {{unsigned|Laurz177}}
  +
:Welcome Laurz! --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 14:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
   
::Yes. It's not surprising to me, however. It just gives me all the more motivation to prove them wrong. Also, a relevant slide from Wikimania 2010, where Erik Moeller above took a look at the other Wikimedia projects besides Wikipedia: [http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Beyondencyclopediawikimania2010-100714133959-phpapp02.pdf&page=23 Slide 23]. Slides before and after cover the others, for comparison. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 19:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
+
== Introducing myself: DKroot ==
   
:Maybe I should get to work again! -[[User:Arlen22|Arlen22]] ([[User talk:Arlen22|talk]]) 01:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
+
Hi, everybody. I'm a software developer in Washington DC area. Here is some [http://about.me/d.k brief info about me].
   
:I thought Moeller founded Wikinews... Anyway, but how can the WB community prove them wrong? It's not like WB will get much more traffic even if we make it 100% perfect... [[User:Kayau|Kayau]] ([[User talk:Kayau|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Emailuser/Kayau|email]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Kayau|contribs]]) 10:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
+
I've been working with Oracle and MS SQL Server DBMSes for quite some time, but haven't dealt much with compatibility issues until working on one of my recent projects. I found the [https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/SQL_Dialects_Reference SQL Dialects Reference] Wikibook quite valuable for this work and started to contribute to Oracle and MS SQL Server content the best I can.
::Quantity matters as much as quality. -[[User:Arlen22|Arlen22]] ([[User talk:Arlen22|talk]]) 13:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 
   
:::Indeed, I would think that high quality textbooks would attract more readers due to gaining higher rankings in search results. The moral of the above is that if we want to succeed, we have to do it ourselves and the WMF cannot be relied upon for support. We prove them wrong about our prospects by not giving up even if the head honchos have forgotten where Wikipedia once was compared to where it is today. It's apparent that they have not heard the idea that the greater the risk, the greater the reward. As Wikipedia has matured, the potential for greater percentage of growth lies in the other projects. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 13:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
+
I love using our own MediaWiki server for organizing and sharing knowledge in my teams. {{unsigned|DKroot}}
  +
:Welcome DKroot to Wikibooks, hope you have a great time :) --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 21:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
   
::::I think the biggest reason why WP is popular is because it's comprehensive. Whenever I want the basic info about something, I use WP. It's what makes WB less likely to succeed than WP... [[User:Kayau|Kayau]] ([[User talk:Kayau|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Emailuser/Kayau|email]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Kayau|contribs]]) 13:16, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
+
== Introducing myself ==
   
:::::But that is offset by the fact that textbooks are way different than encyclopedias. Something like [[Excel]], [[PHP]], or [[HTML]] wouldn't exist on Wikipedia. -[[User:Arlen22|Arlen22]] ([[User talk:Arlen22|talk]]) 13:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
+
Hi there, my name is Anna and I am a student and the University of Stirling. I am currently working on a Wikibook with other students for our Digital Media and Culture module. The book is [https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Perspectives_in_Digital_Culture Perspectives in Digital Culture] and the chapter that out group is working on is [https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Perspectives_in_Digital_Culture/The_Prosumer_Society The Prosumer Society] [[User:Anna hoodie|Anna hoodie]] ([[User talk:Anna hoodie|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Anna hoodie|contribs]]) 21:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
  +
:Welcome to Wikibooks! --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 22:21, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
   
:::::: Well one thing we have going for us is price, the text book for the course I am teaching at the moment is $209 from the book store. Multiply that by the 140 students I am requiring to by the text, times the number of years the course has been running, it is really quite a lot of money. And the book is ''required'', I would love to convince the department to require something free (modulo printing costs) but we have to get the books there first. On the other hand I have seen many departments print and sell notes developed by the faculty, so if we had something that was a suitable replacement it would be possible to convince them. Last I checked university departments are not so in love with publishing companies either. (I mean really! They make minor tweaks every two years so there can be a new edition, which means students cannot by the old books used as easily. It is an amazing racket.)
+
Hi, Anna! I am also in Digital Media and Culture this semester! I am working on the chapter [[Perspectives in Digital Culture/Web as Public and Private Space]]. I hope your chapter and your research is going well! Ours is starting to look like information overload, but I love it:P --[[User:Bailie Richards|Bailie Richards]] ([[User talk:Bailie Richards|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/Bailie Richards|contribs]]) 22:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
:::::: Of course, secondary education and below is a whole different ball game, it would be much more difficult to get a wikibook adopted at that level in the US. [[User:Thenub314|Thenub]][[Special:Contributions/Thenub314|314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 15:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 
   
:::::::http://www.ck12.org is our main competitor on the secondary education front as it is aiming for approval by California's schools. Their licensing was changed to noncommercial a few months back, but I was able to pull content from their site under the cc-by-sa license before that and upload the PDFs to Commons. There are Creative Commons licensed books and material at http://cnx.org, another competitor. The advantage Wikibooks has over these two is that anyone can improve upon the content easily because this is a wiki. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 16:12, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
+
== Inspire Campaign: Improving diversity, improving content ==
   
::::::::It's out of the question that secondary schools use learning materials from free sources such as WB, in a truely commercialised world, except for 'non-traditional' subjects such as [[Hong Kong Senior Secondary Liberal Studies|Liberal Studies]]. However, if the education bureau actually allows such materials to be used (which is highly unlikely), I believe it will be extremely popular. There are repeated complaints about book publishers realeasing a new edition every now and then. Sometimes it's necessary. For example, when we were learning planets in primary school, they had to make a new edition of the science book. However, most of the time the changes can be rather trivial, and like Thenub said it can be rather irritating that old books cannot be used. Also, books can be hard to find, especially 'non-traditional' subjects such as Liberal Studies. That's something they are also complaining about. I think using materials from sources such as WB has neither of these advantages and therefore has potential.
+
This March, we’re organizing an [[:m:Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire|Inspire Campaign]] to encourage and support new ideas for improving gender diversity on Wikimedia projects. Less than 20% of Wikimedia contributors are women, and many important topics are still missing in our content. We invite all Wikimedians to participate. If you have an idea that could help address this problem, please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 31.
:::::::::One major problem we may face is CC-BY-SA. <s>I read in some paper a few years ago that it has been proposed to let CC-BY-SA become an alternative to public domain in Hong Kong law. I'm not sure if they have implemented it though...</s>[http://www.ipd.gov.hk/eng/whats_new/news/creative_commons_1710.pdf it was implemented]. [[User:Kayau|Kayau]] ([[User talk:Kayau|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Emailuser/Kayau|email]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Kayau|contribs]]) 09:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 
   
== Proposing new deletion process ==
+
All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive, positive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign and help this project better represent the world’s knowledge! [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MediaWiki message delivery|contribs]]) 19:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
This has been moved to [[Wikibooks:Reading_room/Proposals#Proposing_new_deletion_process|the proposals reading room]]. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Adrignola|talk]]</small> 12:50, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
+
<!-- Message sent by User:PEarley (WMF)@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:PEarley_(WMF)/Inspire_Mass_Message_Manual/en&oldid=11468682 -->
   
== Regex ==
+
== SUL finalization update ==
   
What regex would I use to remove every ref on a page? -[[User:Arlen22|Arlen22]] ([[User talk:Arlen22|talk]]) 17:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
+
<div class="mw-content-ltr">
  +
Hi all, please read [[m:Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Schema_announcement|this page]] for important information and an update involving [[m:Help:Unified login|SUL finalization]], scheduled to take place in one month. Thanks. [[m:User:Keegan (WMF)|Keegan (WMF)]] ([[m:User talk:Keegan (WMF)|talk]]) 19:45, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  +
</div>
  +
<!-- Message sent by User:Keegan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Keegan_(WMF)/Everyone_but_meta_and_de&oldid=11538208 -->
  +
  +
== Why are we allowing automatic reviewer rights? ==
  +
  +
What's the whole purpose of automatically achieving the reviewer flag? Which holds reviewing/rollback rights in them? --[[User:Atcovi|atcovi]] ([[User talk:Atcovi|talk]]) 19:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  +
: Interesting question. I think the main purpose is for editors who've been active in the project for some time. Since by now they are trusted by the community , an additional privilege is granted in the form of reviewer.--[[User:Leaderboard|Leaderboard]] ([[User talk:Leaderboard|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Leaderboard|contribs]]) 06:39, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  +
:: When a user first arrives at Wikibooks, they have (by definition of "first arrives") no prior experience of how things are done here. They may have experience of another wiki, most likely Wikipedia, and should edit here for a while, to learn how practices here are different from practices there, before they're given the power to make [[wikt:normative|normative]] judgements here. If they ''don't'' have prior experience of another wiki, then again they should edit here for a while before they're given such. The criteria for autopromotion are meant to hold off on giving them the bit until they've had a chance to get some sense of the place. --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 12:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Possibility of a "Sister projects" report in the Wikipedia Signpost ==
  +
  +
Hello, all I'm a volunteer at the [[en:w:WP:POST|Wikipedia Signpost]], the Wikimedia movement's biggest internal newspaper. Almost all of our coverage focuses on Wikipedia, with occasional coverage of Commons, the Meta-Wiki, MediaWiki, Wikidata, the the Wikimedia Labs; we have little to nothing to say about Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Wikinews, Wikiversity, or Wikivoyage. I'm interested in writing a special long-form "sister projects" report to try and address this shortfall. Is there anyone experienced in the Wikibooks project with whom I can speak with, perhaps over Skype, about the mission, organization, history, successes, troubles, and foibles of being a contributor to this project? If so, please drop me a line at my [[en:w:User talk:Resident Mario|English Wikipedia talk page]]. Thanks! <span style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><b><font color="#333" size="2">[[User:Resident Mario|Res]]</font></b><font color="#444" size="2">[[User_talk:Resident_Mario#top|Mar]]</font></span> 21:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
: Did you mean to customize this message for each project, or did you really mean to ask at multiple sisters "Is there anyone experienced in the Wikiversity project..."? --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 23:58, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
::I wish I had the excuse that I was tired, but no, I left the computer, went to eat lunch, came back, forgot I had to change that bit, and cross-posted. Well, I've fixed it now. Time to navigate around, again. Tut. [[User:Resident Mario|Resident Mario]] ([[User talk:Resident Mario|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Resident Mario|contribs]]) 00:27, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
::: {{ping|Resident Mario}} Do you figure on getting ''one'' person to talk to about a project, or getting a broader perspective on a given project by talking to more than one person per? Obviously, talking to multiple people per project there's the challenge of rendering the material into a coherent report, while talking to just one person there's the likelihood of idiosyncracies in the interviwee's view of the project. --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 12:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
::::{{ping|Pi zero}} Because there's a lot of individual interviews that need to happen, I hope that if I get comments from one prominent contributor per wiki I can get a sufficiently clear picture of that wiki's activities from that alone, as long as the interview is of sufficient length. I do, however, want to speak with multiple people when possible, and I will post the draft here for community input before publication. [[User:Resident Mario|Resident Mario]] ([[User talk:Resident Mario|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Resident Mario|contribs]]) 02:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
::::: {{ping|Resident Mario}} Taking myself as an example, I know I have some ideas about Wikibooks that come from my peculiar personal history: I started on Wikipedia, then branched out to Wikibooks, then branched out to Wikinews, and have spent years medidating on the comarisons and contrasts between those three. If you interviewed me, it's a good bet you'd get a different impression of the elephant than speaking to some else. I can think of at least one other active long-term Wikibookian who'd be likely to give you an atypical view. Based on my own experiences with these projects, I expect I'd have to be active in a project for at least a year before I'd start to get a feel for it, several years for deeper insight (I got major insights into Wikipedia about once a years for several years, and even though I've slowed down at lot there, I feel I've got some further deep insights into it since).
  +
  +
::::: I don't mean to discourage you, honestly; I'm just encouraging you to be aware of the pitfalls.
  +
  +
::::: For mainstream insights into Wikibooks, the first name that pops into my head is [[User:QuiteUnusual|QuiteUnusual]], which may of course just mean I'm unaware of the peculiarities of QU's view of the project :-).&nbsp; I've no clue whether QU would even entertain the possibility of an interview (I imagine some folks would be happy to give an interview, some would flat-out refuse; I'm ambivalent, myself). --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 11:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
::::::I have one perspective, sure, but there are others like Chazz, Jomegat, Panic, etc., who are very ''content'' focused whereas these days I'm quite administration focused. Depends what you want really. [[User:QuiteUnusual|QuiteUnusual]] ([[User talk:QuiteUnusual|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/QuiteUnusual|contribs]]) 12:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
:::::::Perhaps one of each, then? [[User:Resident Mario|Resident Mario]] ([[User talk:Resident Mario|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Resident Mario|contribs]]) 15:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
:::::::: I had no idea that such a activity even existed here. Probably a good idea I think. I could probably help here.--[[User:Leaderboard|Leaderboard]] ([[User talk:Leaderboard|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Leaderboard|contribs]]) 16:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
:::::::::Ok, I will contact the people that have responded in this thread at a later date, a little buried at the moment. Thanks all! [[User:Resident Mario|Resident Mario]] ([[User talk:Resident Mario|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Resident Mario|contribs]]) 03:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Wikidata ==
  +
  +
How can we make use of Wikidata here at Wikibooks? It occurred to me that all the data stored there could be used to keep books up to date. For example, property [[d:P1098]] is "number of speakers" (of a language), which could be used in language learning books to keep number of speakers claims up to date. However, as far as I can tell, there is no way to access any of this data on a Wikibooks. Supposedly, <code><nowiki>{{#property:p1098}}</nowiki></code> should access the data for this property stored at the Wikidata page for that item, but I tried it on [[Breton]], which is linked to the Wikidata page for the Breton language, which has P1098, but it didn't work. Not implemented for Wikibooks yet, maybe. Even if it worked here, the #property tag only allows accessing data from the Wikidata page for the current page. So there's no way, as I understand, to access any data for the Breton language on a subpage of that book, nor is it possible to access population data for Germany on [[Wikijunior:Europe/Germany]]. This essentially negates the usefulness of any Wikidata data on Wikibooks.
  +
This really bothers me. All this useful data collected in a systematic way, but for all intents and purposes not useful for any project but Wikipedia! I don't even see it being used at Wikipedia much, except for the interlanguage links. What makes this worse, is this appears to be a software thing, not something the people at Wikidata can fix. Then there's the whole problem of the interwiki links being forced on us, and not being organised in a way that is useful to our project.
  +
The Wikimedia Foundation is notoriously unresponsive to requests from the community, so I feel we, the Wikibooks community, possibly with the other sister projects, need to get the Foundation's attention, and let them know we are annoyed that Wikidata and the Wikidata software is being implemented in such a top-down, undemocratic way, and that is sidelining other projects and is not designed in a way that benefits any of the sister projects. I'm not sure how we'd go about this, but I think it's an issue the community should discuss. [[User:Liam987|<span style="color:white;background:#0055A4;font-variant:small-caps;text-shadow:0 5px 8px #850000">Liam987</span>]] [[User talk:Liam987|talk]] 00:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
: Have you listened to Lila's address at last year's Wikimania? One of the earlier points &mdash; translated from politician-speak &mdash; was, the Foundation doesn't give a &lt;several choices here, of varying rudeness&gt; about the non-Wikipedian sisters.
  +
  +
: Anyway, about Wikidata. I don't think I'd trust Wikidata's material to be ''automatically'' imported to Wikibooks (or any other sister, really, not even a Wikipedia), but I'm interested in the possibility of some sort of semi-automated checks against Wikidata that would make it easy to compare the current state of things here to the current state of things there, and update here for automatic use when things look right.
  +
  +
: I thought Wikidata stuff was supposed to be made available through Lua? At the very least, it should be possible to get at it through javascript &mdash; but we'd want to work out a super-general tool, so we'd only have to write it once and then wouldn't have to be constantly changing it every time we want some slight variation. The trick is to create a tool that's enormously general but also carefully limited in power so that it can't be used for large-scale vandalism (indeed, that's one of the key design blunders with Wikidata, that it doesn't minimize the consequences of vandalism). --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 02:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
::I understood that Lua could be used for that too, but it seems not. [[w:Template:Wikidata]] has a thread on the talk page from 2013 about wether it was possible to access Wikidata data for a page other than the current one, and it was found to be impossible. Nothing seems to have changed since. I really seems such a waste to have these people collecting endless data in a way that isn't useful to anyone. [[User:Liam987|<span style="color:white;background:#0055A4;font-variant:small-caps;text-shadow:0 5px 8px #850000">Liam987</span>]] [[User talk:Liam987|talk]] 02:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
::: {{ping|Liam987}} I'll put "accessing Wikidata" on my list of things to add to my [[n:Help:Dialog|dialog tools]]. The tools &mdash; which I do mean to import to Wikibooks once I've gotten one more round of upgrades implemented (in progress) &mdash; are designed to be extensible without modifying the existing code, by creating new ''actions'', which are wiki pages with associated javascript. So we can write javascript for querying Wikidata, and then a dialog can send a request to the Wikidata-query action which fetches the requested data and sends the results to another dialog page for further processing. That will be, frankly, ''slow''; probably at least four seconds, all told, and that's when neither the server nor the internet is being sluggish; but if we arrange for Wikidata queries to be an infrequent, manually initiated maintenance action, it should be tolerable. Eventually, once we've got the query facility working smoothly and are sure it's what we want it to be, we can integrate the Wikidata query facility into the general ''do'' action, where most dialog facilities are all kept together to avoid the time overhead of switching between actions; that should cut out two or three out of those four seconds. --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 14:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
::::There is some stuff implemented at Wikipedia that compares, for example, the date of death recorded on Wikipedia to the Wikidata equivalent and then adds the article to a hidden category if they differ. No idea how this is done (because I haven't bothered to look). [[User:QuiteUnusual|QuiteUnusual]] ([[User talk:QuiteUnusual|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/QuiteUnusual|contribs]]) 16:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
::::: Sounds like a good place to start for an example of how to query Wikidata. --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 16:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
:::::: {{ping|QuiteUnusual}} You're referring to, I think, [[w:Template:WikidataCheck]]. The problem with this is the same as I mentioned for the <nowiki>{{#property}}</nowiki> tag: it can only access data for the current page. If we were to create a Wikidata page for every page on Wikibooks, we could use this but the data would still have to be updated there. [[User:Liam987|<span style="color:white;background:#0055A4;font-variant:small-caps;text-shadow:0 5px 8px #850000">Liam987</span>]] [[User talk:Liam987|talk]] 22:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Stewards confirmation rules ==
  +
  +
Hello, I made [[:m:Requests_for_comment/Confirmation_of_stewards|a proposal on Meta]] to change the rules for the steward confirmations. Currently consensus to remove is required for a steward to lose his status, however I think it's fairer to the community if every steward needed the consensus to keep. As this is an issue that affects all WMF wikis, I'm sending this notification to let people know & be able to participate. Best regards, --<small>[[User:MF-Warburg|MF-W]]</small> 16:12, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
<!-- Message sent by User:MF-Warburg@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Distribution_list/Global_message_delivery&oldid=11737694 -->
  +
  +
== VisualEditor News #2—2015 ==
  +
  +
<div class="plainlinks mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">
  +
  +
<div style="margin:0.5em;width:230px;{{#switch:ltr|rtl=float:left;margin-left:0;|#default=float:right;margin-right:0;}}border:1px solid #AAA;padding:0.5em;">
  +
[[File:VisualEditor-logo.svg|200x70px|center|alt=VisualEditor]]
  +
  +
  +
'''Did you know?'''
  +
<div class="thumbcaption" style="font-size: 90%;">
  +
With [[:mw:Citoid|Citoid]] in VisualEditor, you click the 'book with bookmark' icon and paste in the URL for a reliable source:
  +
  +
  +
[[File:Citoid in VisualEditor Screen Shot 2015-04-02.png|alt=Screenshot of Citoid's first dialog|centre|frameless|230x230px]]
  +
  +
  +
Citoid looks up the source for you and returns the citation results. Click the green "Insert" button to accept its results and add them to the article:
  +
  +
  +
[[File:Citoid results in VisualEditor Screen Shot 2015-04-02.png|alt=Screenshot of Citoid's initial results|centre|frameless|230x230px]]
  +
  +
  +
After inserting the citation, you can change it. Select the reference, and click the "Edit" button in the context menu to make changes.
  +
  +
[[:mw:Special:MyLanguage/VisualEditor/User guide|The user guide]] has more information about how to use VisualEditor.
  +
</div></div>
  +
Since the last newsletter, the [[:mw:VisualEditor|Editing Team]] has fixed many bugs and worked on VisualEditor's performance, the [[:mw:Citoid|Citoid]] reference service, and support for languages with complex input requirements. Status reports are posted [[:mw:VisualEditor/changelog|on Mediawiki.org]]. The worklist for April through June is available [[phab:project/sprint/board/1113/|in Phabricator]].
  +
  +
The weekly '''task triage meetings''' continue to be open to volunteers, each Wednesday at [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20150401T11&p1=224&am=30 11:00 (noon) PDT] (18:00 UTC). You do not need to attend the meeting to nominate a bug for consideration as a Q4 blocker. Instead, go to Phabricator and "associate" the [[phab:tag/editing_department_2014_15_q4_blockers/|Editing team's Q4 blocker project]] with the bug. Learn how to join the meetings and how to nominate bugs at [[:mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal|mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal]].
  +
=== Recent improvements ===
  +
VisualEditor is now substantially faster. In many cases, opening the page in VisualEditor is now faster than opening it in the wikitext editor. The new system has improved the code speed by 37% and [[:mw:RESTBase|network speed]] by almost 40%.
  +
  +
The Editing team is slowly adding '''auto-fill features''' '''for citations'''. This is currently available only at the French, Italian, and English Wikipedias. The '''[[:mw:Citoid|Citoid service]]''' takes a [[:en:URL|URL]] or [[:en:Digital object identifier|DOI]] for a reliable source, and returns a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. After creating it, you will be able to change or add information to the citation, in the same way that you edit any other pre-existing citation in VisualEditor. Support for [[:en:ISBN|ISBNs]], [[:en:PubMed#PubMed_identifier|PMIDs]], and other identifiers is planned. Later, editors will be able to improve precision and reduce the need for manual corrections by contributing to the Citoid service's definitions for each website.
  +
  +
Citoid requires good [[:mw:Special:MyLanguage/Help:TemplateData|TemplateData]] for your citation templates. If you would like to request this feature for your wiki, please post a request in the [[phab:tag/citoid/|Citoid project on Phabricator]]. Include links to the TemplateData for the most important citation templates on your wiki.
  +
  +
The '''special character inserter''' has been improved, based upon feedback from active users. After this, VisualEditor was made available to all users of Wikipedias on the [[:mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts|Phase 5]] list on 30 March. This affected 53 mid-size and smaller Wikipedias, including '''Afrikaans''', '''Azerbaijani''', '''Breton''', '''Kyrgyz''', '''Macedonian''', '''Mongolian''', '''Tatar''', and''' Welsh'''.
  +
  +
Work continues to support languages with complex requirements, such as Korean and Japanese. These languages use [[w:input method editor|input method editors]] ("IMEs”). Recent improvements to cursoring, backspace, and delete behavior will simplify typing in VisualEditor for these users.
  +
  +
The design for the image selection process is now using a "masonry fit" model. Images in the search results are displayed at the same height but at variable widths, similar to bricks of different sizes in a masonry wall, or the [[:mw:Special:MyLanguage/Help:Images#Mode parameter|"packed" mode in image galleries]]. This style helps you find the right image by making it easier to see more details in images.
  +
  +
You can now '''drag and drop categories''' to re-arrange their order of appearance ​on the page.
  +
  +
The pop-up window that appears when you click on a reference, image, link, or other element, is called the "context menu". It now displays additional useful information, such as the destination of the link or the image's filename. The team has also added an explicit "Edit" button in the context menu, which helps new editors open the tool to change the item.
  +
  +
'''Invisible templates are marked by a puzzle piece icon''' so they can be interacted with. Users also will be able to see and edit HTML anchors now in section headings.
  +
  +
Users of the TemplateData GUI editor can now set a string as an optional text for the 'deprecated' property in addition to boolean value, which lets you tell users of the template what they should do instead. ([https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90734 T90734])
  +
  +
=== Looking ahead ===
  +
The special character inserter in VisualEditor will soon use the same special character list as the wikitext editor. Admins at each wiki will also have the option of creating a custom section for frequently used characters at the top of the list. Instructions for customizing the list will be posted [[:mw:VisualEditor/Special_characters|at mediawiki.org]].
  +
  +
The team is discussing a test of VisualEditor with new users at the English Wikipedia, to see whether they have met their goals of making VisualEditor suitable for those editors. The timing is unknown, but might be relatively soon. ([https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90666 T90666])
  +
  +
=== Let's work together ===
  +
  +
* Share your ideas and ask questions at [https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=VisualEditor/Feedback&lqt_method=talkpage_new_thread mw:VisualEditor/Feedback].
  +
* Can you translate from English into any other language? Please check [https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special%3AMessageGroupStats&x=D&group=ext-visualeditor-ve&suppressempty=1 this list] to see whether more interface translations are needed for your language. [[m:User talk:Elitre (WMF)|Contact us]] to get an account if you want to help!
  +
* The design research team wants to see how real editors work. Please [https://jfe.qualtrics.com/form/SV_6R04ammTX8uoJFP sign up for their research program].
  +
* File requests for language-appropriate "{{Int:visualeditor-annotationbutton-bold-tooltip}}" and "{{Int:visualeditor-annotationbutton-italic-tooltip}}" icons for the character formatting menu [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/task/create/?projects=PHID-PROJ-dafezmpv6huxg3taml24 in Phabricator].
  +
  +
Subscribe, unsubscribe or change the page where this newsletter is delivered at [[:m:VisualEditor/Newsletter|Meta]]. If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the [[mail:translators-l|Translators mailing list]] or [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elitre_(WMF)&action=edit&section=new contact us] directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!
  +
  +
— <span class="mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">[[:mw:User:Elitre (WMF)|Elitre (WMF)]]</span>
  +
  +
</div> 19:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
<!-- Message sent by User:Keegan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=VisualEditor/Newsletter/Wikis_with_VE&oldid=11742174 -->
  +
  +
== https://wikibooks.org ==
  +
  +
Just a quick note to inform that wikibooks.org and wikibooks.com now leads to https://www.wikibooks.org. wikibooks.org/wiki/Page links would continue to redirect to English Wikibooks for backward compatibility. See [[phab:T87039]]. [[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]] ([[User talk:Glaisher|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Glaisher|contribs]]) 08:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
== TOC in sidebar? ==
  +
  +
Wikibooks usually have a TOC and people love to navigate thru the book via this TOC. But in most cases the TOC is a page of its own. So you always have to toggle between TOC-page and your actual page (or the author adds one of the navigation-templates, which is ugly, uncomplete and error-prone). Shall we have a sidebar like in the [https://doc.wikimedia.org/mediawiki-core/master/php/index.html documentation of mediawiki] to visualise the TOC? Additionally to the actual sidebar or as a replacement? --[[User:Kelti|Kelti]] ([[User talk:Kelti|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kelti|contribs]]) 11:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  +
: That sort of stylistic preference varies by book. Some books have a side navigation box, for example [[WJ:Big Cats]]. (Easily adjusting the style of such things is one of the targets I had in mind in [[Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals#Navlist]].) --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 12:22, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:13, 18 April 2015

Replacement filing cabinet.svgArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions Assistance Requests
General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books General | Technical | Administrative Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions

Welcome to the General reading room. On this page, Wikibookians are free to talk about the Wikibooks project in general. For proposals for improving Wikibooks, see the Proposals reading room.

Introducing myself[edit]

Hello to everyone, I am posting this as I saw a message on profile page to introduce myself. I am medical graduate from India ,currently pursuing PG in Radiology and also preparing for some more exams. I like to untangle the anything that i feel is too complicated to my liking and i good at it (at least that is what my colleagues have told me). Ever I started my med school preps , their were just way too many things to cram in my brain (which shrinks a little every day) , so i started to make jingles out the first alphabets. I will most likely be contributing a lot of my mnemonics to this site and messing with others , and if i ever manage to write a book , it will happen here at Wikibooks. —Preceding unsigned comment by Randjo (discusscontribs) added before 8:22, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome Randjo! Thanks for joining! Make sure to also add the pencil and cursive icon above the editing space after a comment, thanks! --atcovi (talk) 01:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi there I was hoping someone could tell me how to create a new chapter in a discussion page? Thanks. --Scottxit (discusscontribs) 19:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Scottxit. A talk page is made up of sections, subsections, etc. To create a new section on a talk page, there should be a tab up at the top called "add topic" (if you're using vector skin). --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 22:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help Pi zero! --Scottxit (discusscontribs) 22:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata is coming[edit]

Hi everyone :)

I am Wikidata's product manager. I wanted to reach out to you about Wikidata support for Wikibooks. Wikidata stores structured data for Wikimedia projects (and others). For example , things like the date of birth of a famous author or the height of a mountain are stored by Wikidata. We are giving access to this data for all Wikimedia projects step by step. It is now Wikibooks' turn. As a first step you will be able to maintain your interwiki links on Wikidata. This means you will no longer have to store them in the article text of each language. Instead they are stored just once on Wikidata together with all the other projects. (You will still be able to store them in the article text if you really want to but then they overwrite the links coming from Wikidata. Sometimes that is useful.) This first step should happen on February 24th. In the next step you will get access to all the other data on Wikidata. There is no ETA on that yet.

I am looking forward to having you join the Wikidata family! If you have any questions please don't hesitate to reach out to me. There is a special page for you on Wikidata that will hopefully help you and is a good place to ask questions: d:Wikidata:Wikibooks.

Cheers Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 19:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

See also: Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals#How Wikidata will handle Wikibooks interwikis. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 14:02, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Raising awarness about Reviewing Pages[edit]

Hey all!

I'm just going to post that some people could try helping us with Special:PendingChanges. "Special:PendingChanges" is a tool which shows list of edits needing reviews/checked. I've already gotten through a lot of pages. Some of these pages date back to 9 months ago. Please make sure you're not blindly accepting changes, since we need people who have the reviewer rights to review these pages, if you find something confusing you, please post it here for the community to answer you.

Thanks. --atcovi (talk) 23:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Special:UnreviewedPages refers to pages that have never been reviewed. Special:PendingChanges is for those previously reviewed but with an edit awaiting approval. It is the latter that needs the focus. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 09:06, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes^ I'm pretty bad at explaining things usually tho. Thanks btw. --atcovi (talk) 12:52, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
If you find a page that needs to be reviewed , do not hesitate to contact any reviewer or admin.(or simply reply here).--Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 06:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Helping with pending changes, or with unreviewed pages, is similar to the sort of thing suggested by en.wn's rotating sitemessage — except that it would have to be suggested only to reviewers, and afaik atm that can't be determined without javascript. (I've wondered if we could put together a nontrivial list of suggestions for things to do, for a rotating sitenotice here spiritually akin to en.wn's — but, when we had a sitenotice a few months back that suggested contributing to the Featured Book discussions, it apparently didn't generate any activity there and one user objected strenuously because for some reason they couldn't dismiss the sitenotice so it was there all the time on every page view.) --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:23, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
I've always found that Wikibooks:Maintenance is a useful location for seeing what needs doing but it's a pity that we can't have targeted site notices which would be seen only by certain users such as a note about outstanding pages to be reviewed for reviewers and the site notice about the Steward elections only visible to those who qualify to vote. Over the past 6 months it seems thsast more people are reviewing pages which have pending edits needing reviewed which is good. The number of those which have never been reviewed is too big to even contemplate doing anything about.--ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 16:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Added Archive page for class projects[edit]

Hi ,

I've cleaned up the main class project and moved them to an archive page. This helps keep it clean(over 44 projects before , dating to 2007). --Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 14:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


Wikidata support for interwiki links is here[edit]

Hey everyone :)

(Sorry for writing in English. It'd be great if someone could translate where appropriate.)

As previously announced we have enabled interwiki links via Wikidata for Wikibooks last night. This means from now on you no longer have to maintain the links in the wikitext but can maintain them together with the links for Wikipedia, Commons, Wikivoyage, Wikisource, Wikinews and Wikiquote on Wikidata. You will still be able to keep them locally though if you want to. Local interwiki links will overwrite the ones from Wikidata. If you don't want any interwiki links from Wikidata on a particular page you can use the magic word {{noexternallanglinks}}.

You do not yet have access to the other data on Wikidata like the date of birth of an author. That will come in a future deployment. I will let you know when I have a date for it.

If you have any questions d:Wikidata:Wikibooks is a good first step. That is also a good place for any issues or bugs you encounter.

I'm very happy to welcome you all to Wikidata! I hope it will become a great help for Wikibooks.

Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 07:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Did we even allow these guys to remove our interwiki links?[edit]

I know they told us that they'll be doing it, but did we actually tell them ok? Aren't we suppose to be reverting edits that remove our interwiki then? --72.84.233.224 (discuss) 20:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

To add on to what I said here^ Pi zero has even notified some of these users who remove our interwiki links about the discussion that is currently going on in the Proposal. Users like Ruzwig just seem to ignore this notification. What are we suppose to do? --atcovi (talk) 20:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I am sysop in russian Wikibooks. Why my last edits is wrong? Oleg3280 (discusscontribs) 20:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Because there has been no agreement by the Wikibooks Community on allowing people to remove interwiki links. --atcovi (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

[Global proposal] m.Wikibooks.org: (all) Edit pages[edit]

MediaWiki mobile

Hi, this message is to let you know that, on domains like en.m.wikipedia.org, unregistered users cannot edit. At the Wikimedia Forum, where global configuration changes are normally discussed, a few dozens users propose to restore normal editing permissions on all mobile sites. Please read and comment!

Thanks and sorry for writing in English, Nemo 22:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

IRL classmate awaiting my offer to come join Wikibooks![edit]

Hey all! :) Today I’m planning on bringing a new user to Wikibooks, a sixth grade classmate of mines! As of you know, most 11/12 year olds are usually clumsy, and usually don’t mean well. But hopefully she will be more than happy to come. I’m planning on helping her set an account, and letting her read our policies. She doesn’t have that good grammar as normal people here at Wikibooks, so that’s going to be quite a problem. But hopefully that’ll be fixed up soon. All I’m asking is for the admins to use their tools wisely and be patient with her, and the rest of the users.

Back in 2010, when I joined. I was a clueless, very young, editor who was blocked for wrong behavior I didn’t know that was wrong. I was a clueless nooby, but now today I’m currently helping out Wikibooks and Wikiversity and patrolling more than 100 WMF wikis for vandalism. I remember one person, who was in support of me, said that young children were the “future” of WMF. Maybe this user could be as well? I don’t know, but I’m hoping so.

I hope for her to accept this, this could help her academically. I’m still awaiting her acceptance, since I’m going to talk to her about this stuff atm. Thanks all for reading. --atcovi (talk) 00:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem , let her come! Thanks for informing.--Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 10:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

hi[edit]

textAauib hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurz177 (discusscontribs)

Welcome Laurz! --atcovi (talk) 14:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Introducing myself: DKroot[edit]

Hi, everybody. I'm a software developer in Washington DC area. Here is some brief info about me.

I've been working with Oracle and MS SQL Server DBMSes for quite some time, but haven't dealt much with compatibility issues until working on one of my recent projects. I found the SQL Dialects Reference Wikibook quite valuable for this work and started to contribute to Oracle and MS SQL Server content the best I can.

I love using our own MediaWiki server for organizing and sharing knowledge in my teams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DKroot (discusscontribs)

Welcome DKroot to Wikibooks, hope you have a great time :) --atcovi (talk) 21:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Introducing myself[edit]

Hi there, my name is Anna and I am a student and the University of Stirling. I am currently working on a Wikibook with other students for our Digital Media and Culture module. The book is Perspectives in Digital Culture and the chapter that out group is working on is The Prosumer Society Anna hoodie (discusscontribs) 21:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikibooks! --atcovi (talk) 22:21, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Anna! I am also in Digital Media and Culture this semester! I am working on the chapter Perspectives in Digital Culture/Web as Public and Private Space. I hope your chapter and your research is going well! Ours is starting to look like information overload, but I love it:P --Bailie Richards (discusscontribs) 22:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Inspire Campaign: Improving diversity, improving content[edit]

This March, we’re organizing an Inspire Campaign to encourage and support new ideas for improving gender diversity on Wikimedia projects. Less than 20% of Wikimedia contributors are women, and many important topics are still missing in our content. We invite all Wikimedians to participate. If you have an idea that could help address this problem, please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 31.

All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive, positive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign and help this project better represent the world’s knowledge! MediaWiki message delivery (discusscontribs) 19:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

SUL finalization update[edit]

Hi all, please read this page for important information and an update involving SUL finalization, scheduled to take place in one month. Thanks. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:45, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Why are we allowing automatic reviewer rights?[edit]

What's the whole purpose of automatically achieving the reviewer flag? Which holds reviewing/rollback rights in them? --atcovi (talk) 19:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Interesting question. I think the main purpose is for editors who've been active in the project for some time. Since by now they are trusted by the community , an additional privilege is granted in the form of reviewer.--Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 06:39, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
When a user first arrives at Wikibooks, they have (by definition of "first arrives") no prior experience of how things are done here. They may have experience of another wiki, most likely Wikipedia, and should edit here for a while, to learn how practices here are different from practices there, before they're given the power to make normative judgements here. If they don't have prior experience of another wiki, then again they should edit here for a while before they're given such. The criteria for autopromotion are meant to hold off on giving them the bit until they've had a chance to get some sense of the place. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Possibility of a "Sister projects" report in the Wikipedia Signpost[edit]

Hello, all I'm a volunteer at the Wikipedia Signpost, the Wikimedia movement's biggest internal newspaper. Almost all of our coverage focuses on Wikipedia, with occasional coverage of Commons, the Meta-Wiki, MediaWiki, Wikidata, the the Wikimedia Labs; we have little to nothing to say about Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Wikinews, Wikiversity, or Wikivoyage. I'm interested in writing a special long-form "sister projects" report to try and address this shortfall. Is there anyone experienced in the Wikibooks project with whom I can speak with, perhaps over Skype, about the mission, organization, history, successes, troubles, and foibles of being a contributor to this project? If so, please drop me a line at my English Wikipedia talk page. Thanks! ResMar 21:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Did you mean to customize this message for each project, or did you really mean to ask at multiple sisters "Is there anyone experienced in the Wikiversity project..."? --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 23:58, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
I wish I had the excuse that I was tired, but no, I left the computer, went to eat lunch, came back, forgot I had to change that bit, and cross-posted. Well, I've fixed it now. Time to navigate around, again. Tut. Resident Mario (discusscontribs) 00:27, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
@Resident Mario: Do you figure on getting one person to talk to about a project, or getting a broader perspective on a given project by talking to more than one person per? Obviously, talking to multiple people per project there's the challenge of rendering the material into a coherent report, while talking to just one person there's the likelihood of idiosyncracies in the interviwee's view of the project. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
@Pi zero: Because there's a lot of individual interviews that need to happen, I hope that if I get comments from one prominent contributor per wiki I can get a sufficiently clear picture of that wiki's activities from that alone, as long as the interview is of sufficient length. I do, however, want to speak with multiple people when possible, and I will post the draft here for community input before publication. Resident Mario (discusscontribs) 02:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@Resident Mario: Taking myself as an example, I know I have some ideas about Wikibooks that come from my peculiar personal history: I started on Wikipedia, then branched out to Wikibooks, then branched out to Wikinews, and have spent years medidating on the comarisons and contrasts between those three. If you interviewed me, it's a good bet you'd get a different impression of the elephant than speaking to some else. I can think of at least one other active long-term Wikibookian who'd be likely to give you an atypical view. Based on my own experiences with these projects, I expect I'd have to be active in a project for at least a year before I'd start to get a feel for it, several years for deeper insight (I got major insights into Wikipedia about once a years for several years, and even though I've slowed down at lot there, I feel I've got some further deep insights into it since).
I don't mean to discourage you, honestly; I'm just encouraging you to be aware of the pitfalls.
For mainstream insights into Wikibooks, the first name that pops into my head is QuiteUnusual, which may of course just mean I'm unaware of the peculiarities of QU's view of the project :-).  I've no clue whether QU would even entertain the possibility of an interview (I imagine some folks would be happy to give an interview, some would flat-out refuse; I'm ambivalent, myself). --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 11:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I have one perspective, sure, but there are others like Chazz, Jomegat, Panic, etc., who are very content focused whereas these days I'm quite administration focused. Depends what you want really. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 12:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps one of each, then? Resident Mario (discusscontribs) 15:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I had no idea that such a activity even existed here. Probably a good idea I think. I could probably help here.--Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 16:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I will contact the people that have responded in this thread at a later date, a little buried at the moment. Thanks all! Resident Mario (discusscontribs) 03:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata[edit]

How can we make use of Wikidata here at Wikibooks? It occurred to me that all the data stored there could be used to keep books up to date. For example, property d:P1098 is "number of speakers" (of a language), which could be used in language learning books to keep number of speakers claims up to date. However, as far as I can tell, there is no way to access any of this data on a Wikibooks. Supposedly, {{#property:p1098}} should access the data for this property stored at the Wikidata page for that item, but I tried it on Breton, which is linked to the Wikidata page for the Breton language, which has P1098, but it didn't work. Not implemented for Wikibooks yet, maybe. Even if it worked here, the #property tag only allows accessing data from the Wikidata page for the current page. So there's no way, as I understand, to access any data for the Breton language on a subpage of that book, nor is it possible to access population data for Germany on Wikijunior:Europe/Germany. This essentially negates the usefulness of any Wikidata data on Wikibooks. This really bothers me. All this useful data collected in a systematic way, but for all intents and purposes not useful for any project but Wikipedia! I don't even see it being used at Wikipedia much, except for the interlanguage links. What makes this worse, is this appears to be a software thing, not something the people at Wikidata can fix. Then there's the whole problem of the interwiki links being forced on us, and not being organised in a way that is useful to our project. The Wikimedia Foundation is notoriously unresponsive to requests from the community, so I feel we, the Wikibooks community, possibly with the other sister projects, need to get the Foundation's attention, and let them know we are annoyed that Wikidata and the Wikidata software is being implemented in such a top-down, undemocratic way, and that is sidelining other projects and is not designed in a way that benefits any of the sister projects. I'm not sure how we'd go about this, but I think it's an issue the community should discuss. Liam987 talk 00:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Have you listened to Lila's address at last year's Wikimania? One of the earlier points — translated from politician-speak — was, the Foundation doesn't give a <several choices here, of varying rudeness> about the non-Wikipedian sisters.
Anyway, about Wikidata. I don't think I'd trust Wikidata's material to be automatically imported to Wikibooks (or any other sister, really, not even a Wikipedia), but I'm interested in the possibility of some sort of semi-automated checks against Wikidata that would make it easy to compare the current state of things here to the current state of things there, and update here for automatic use when things look right.
I thought Wikidata stuff was supposed to be made available through Lua? At the very least, it should be possible to get at it through javascript — but we'd want to work out a super-general tool, so we'd only have to write it once and then wouldn't have to be constantly changing it every time we want some slight variation. The trick is to create a tool that's enormously general but also carefully limited in power so that it can't be used for large-scale vandalism (indeed, that's one of the key design blunders with Wikidata, that it doesn't minimize the consequences of vandalism). --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 02:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I understood that Lua could be used for that too, but it seems not. w:Template:Wikidata has a thread on the talk page from 2013 about wether it was possible to access Wikidata data for a page other than the current one, and it was found to be impossible. Nothing seems to have changed since. I really seems such a waste to have these people collecting endless data in a way that isn't useful to anyone. Liam987 talk 02:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Liam987: I'll put "accessing Wikidata" on my list of things to add to my dialog tools. The tools — which I do mean to import to Wikibooks once I've gotten one more round of upgrades implemented (in progress) — are designed to be extensible without modifying the existing code, by creating new actions, which are wiki pages with associated javascript. So we can write javascript for querying Wikidata, and then a dialog can send a request to the Wikidata-query action which fetches the requested data and sends the results to another dialog page for further processing. That will be, frankly, slow; probably at least four seconds, all told, and that's when neither the server nor the internet is being sluggish; but if we arrange for Wikidata queries to be an infrequent, manually initiated maintenance action, it should be tolerable. Eventually, once we've got the query facility working smoothly and are sure it's what we want it to be, we can integrate the Wikidata query facility into the general do action, where most dialog facilities are all kept together to avoid the time overhead of switching between actions; that should cut out two or three out of those four seconds. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 14:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
There is some stuff implemented at Wikipedia that compares, for example, the date of death recorded on Wikipedia to the Wikidata equivalent and then adds the article to a hidden category if they differ. No idea how this is done (because I haven't bothered to look). QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 16:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like a good place to start for an example of how to query Wikidata. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 16:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@QuiteUnusual: You're referring to, I think, w:Template:WikidataCheck. The problem with this is the same as I mentioned for the {{#property}} tag: it can only access data for the current page. If we were to create a Wikidata page for every page on Wikibooks, we could use this but the data would still have to be updated there. Liam987 talk 22:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Stewards confirmation rules[edit]

Hello, I made a proposal on Meta to change the rules for the steward confirmations. Currently consensus to remove is required for a steward to lose his status, however I think it's fairer to the community if every steward needed the consensus to keep. As this is an issue that affects all WMF wikis, I'm sending this notification to let people know & be able to participate. Best regards, --MF-W 16:12, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #2—2015[edit]

19:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

https://wikibooks.org[edit]

Just a quick note to inform that wikibooks.org and wikibooks.com now leads to https://www.wikibooks.org. wikibooks.org/wiki/Page links would continue to redirect to English Wikibooks for backward compatibility. See phab:T87039. Glaisher (discusscontribs) 08:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

TOC in sidebar?[edit]

Wikibooks usually have a TOC and people love to navigate thru the book via this TOC. But in most cases the TOC is a page of its own. So you always have to toggle between TOC-page and your actual page (or the author adds one of the navigation-templates, which is ugly, uncomplete and error-prone). Shall we have a sidebar like in the documentation of mediawiki to visualise the TOC? Additionally to the actual sidebar or as a replacement? --Kelti (discusscontribs) 11:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

That sort of stylistic preference varies by book. Some books have a side navigation box, for example WJ:Big Cats. (Easily adjusting the style of such things is one of the targets I had in mind in Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals#Navlist.) --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:22, 17 April 2015 (UTC)