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 2 threads (older than 60 days) to Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/2014/August.)
 
(841 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
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}}
   
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.
+
== Featured books advertisement ==
   
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)
+
Please remove that featured books advertisement appearing at the top of pages. It has been here for quite a lot of time, it is unproductive (just like the featured books process itself), and it gets increasingly annoying. I must have hidden it multiple times, and it still keeps appearing. From some computers, it is even impossible to hide, for whatever technical reasons. -- Your Wikibooks contributor, [[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 17:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  +
:Yes. --[[User:Good afternoon|Good afternoon]] ([[User talk:Good afternoon|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Good afternoon|contribs]]) 02:38, 25 August 2014 (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)
+
:: As I recall, the original plan was to set up a sitenotice like en.wn has most of the time, where there's a set of several community reminders/invitations, and the sitenotice selects one of them randomly. We hoped to have several here, too, but hadn't gotten to more than just that one.
   
: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)
+
:: Would a rotating message like that be equally obnoxious to you? (I don't recall every hearing a complaint about it over there, so I wonder if the difference could have to do with the pshychology of the rotating message, which doesn't hit one thing nearly as hard as featured books is being hit here.) --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 04:25, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
::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)
+
:::{{ping|Dan Polansky|Good afternoon}} I'm very interested in understanding this, because I'd been hoping (one of these days, in my [[wikt:copious free time|copious free time]]) to put together a rotating set of messages such as en.wn has. --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 04:29, 25 August 2014 (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)
+
== Vietnamese postage stamp ==
:[[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,
+
Good day!
:: 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.
+
There is article about a bug [[w:Anoplophora horsfieldi|Anoplophora horsfieldi]]. Whether it is possible at the end of this article in gallery to place the image a Vietnamese stamp of 1977 with this bug? --[[User:Matsievsky|Matsievsky]] ([[User talk:Matsievsky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Matsievsky|contribs]]) 09:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
:: 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:
+
<br> Second question. There is category for bug Anoplophora horsfieldi [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Anoplophora_horsfieldi Category:Anoplophora_horsfieldi]. Whether it is possible in this category the image a Vietnamese stamp of 1977 with this bug? --[[User:Matsievsky|Matsievsky]] ([[User talk:Matsievsky|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/Matsievsky|contribs]]) 09:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
::* [http://www.scienceofspectroscopy.info/ Science of Spectroscopy wiki]
+
: Depends on whether the image itself is qualified. Artwork on a stamp is certainly intellectual work and would normally be a no-no, but a quick search on the commons shows a lot of [[Commons:Stamps/Public_domain|stamps in the inventory]]--but none for Vietnam. You'd be better off posting your question there, and if you have such a photo, asking what the stamp criteria are. A quick browse did find a discussion in a 2007 Village Pump archive about a PD-license template for tagging such, and a few other search links, if read may find more. No mention in the FAQ, so don't bother with that! Try making the post above again [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents on one of these pages]. Good luck. // [[User:Fabartus|Fra]]<font color="green">[[User talk:Fabartus|nkB]]</font> 21:12, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
::* [http://openwetware.org/ OpenWetWare wiki: biology]
+
'''On your second question:''' a category here wouldn't be useful unless you were writing a book on the subject. But yes, one can be created, speaking technically. However, The images [[commons:|there on the Commons]]&mdash;it's whole purpose is to store media for all Wikimedia projects&mdash;can directly be used here simply by adding the page title in a standard wikimarkup image link like this:
::* [http://renewableenergy.wikia.com/wiki/Renewable_Energy_Design Renewable Energy Design wikia]
+
<nowiki>[[File:Some image name|thumb|400px|Some Caption|alt=Caption for the vision impaired]]</nowiki></code>,
::* [http://www.sklogwiki.org/ SklogWiki dedicated to thermodynamics and statistical mechanics]
+
* where, the width (400px) and thumb go together.
::* [http://wiki.biomine.skelleftea.se/wiki/ BioMineWiki: biology and hydrometallurgy]
+
* Otherwise the image, if large, will fill the page width.
::* [http://usefulchem.wikispaces.com/ UsefulChem Project wiki]
+
* The width is defaulted as well in user preferences, so may be left out.
::* [http://prettyscience.wikia.com/ Pretty Science Wikia]
+
That's the basics. Good luck again! // Frank [[User:Fabartus|Fra]]<font color="green">[[User talk:Fabartus|nkB]]</font> 21:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
:: --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] ([[User talk:DavidCary|talk]]) 19:02, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
+
**** Thank you very much. Sorry my explanation. The problem is that Vietnamese stamp images haven't free licenze. [[User:Matsievsky|Matsievsky]] ([[User talk:Matsievsky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Matsievsky|contribs]]) 22:16, 2 September 2014 (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)
+
== Grants to improve your project ==
: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)
 
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)
+
Greetings! The [[:m:Grants:IEG|Individual Engagement Grants program]] is accepting proposals for funding new experiments from September 1st to 30th. Your idea could improve Wikimedia projects with a new tool or gadget, a better process to support community-building on your wiki, research on an important issue, or something else we haven't thought of yet.
::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)
+
Whether you need $200 or $30,000 USD, Individual Engagement Grants can cover your own project development time in addition to hiring others to help you.
  +
*'''[[:m:Grants:IEG#ieg-apply|Submit your proposal]]'''
  +
*'''Get help''': In [[:m:Grants:IdeaLab|IdeaLab]] or an upcoming [[:m:Grants:IdeaLab/Events#Upcoming_events|Hangout session]] [[User:PEarley (WMF)|PEarley (WMF)]] ([[User talk:PEarley (WMF)|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/PEarley (WMF)|contribs]]) 15:19, 3 September 2014 (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)
+
== How do you make a test book? ==
   
:: <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)
+
Hi everyone! I'm Jonathan. :) I usually make pretty minor edits. I wanted to do something pretty big now (making a new book/reorganizing an old one [Vegan Cuisine]), but I wanted to make sure that I won't be messing up anything, so I thought making a test first, and showing the results if they aren't obviously awful, would be a good idea. Right now it's basically a bunch of links (it's a cookbook, and they seem to normally be like this, although I'm not sure). I want to turn it into a proper book, with each heading a chapter and each recipe a page, and possibly adding reason as to why people eat vegan food, and a history of veganism, plus any other stuff I (and other people who might be interested :)) can think of. Thanks for reading! [[User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|JonathanHopeThisIsUnique]] ([[User talk:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|contribs]]) 19:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  +
Edit: I feel so silly. I noticed the sandbox button right after submitting this! :)
  +
:This is a little bit tricky because of the way the Cookbook works. However, if you are extending it beyond cooking then it might be reasonable to put the content in the main space instead. The book [[Using Wikibooks]] is a good introduction to everything you need to know to structure a new book so I'd start by reading that then ask for any further clarification here. [[User:QuiteUnusual|QuiteUnusual]] ([[User talk:QuiteUnusual|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/QuiteUnusual|contribs]]) 17:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
  +
::Hello [[User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|Jonathan]], I believe, you would be able to complete this book. In case you require any assistance, you can contact [[User:Xania|Xania]], or other editors out here. Please feel free to ask anytime. '''Jai Jinendra'''. [[User:Harrybrowne1986|Vishal]][[User Talk:Harrybrowne1986| Bakhai]] - [[Special:Contributions/Harrybrowne1986|Works]][[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|15px]] 10:40, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  +
:::Thanks for replying to me, everyone! I'll go look at Using Wikibooks and ask for help when I need it. I've kind of decided to get more comfortable here before doing this, and am editing some other books right now to become more comfortable, but this is really appreciated! :) [[User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|JonathanHopeThisIsUnique]] ([[User talk:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/JonathanHopeThisIsUnique|contribs]]) 18:22, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  +
::::The Sandbox is always a great place to experiment and you can always create your own sandbox and other pages like this: [[User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique/Page 1]], [[User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique/Page 2]]. Create any pages you like within your own user space. Later you can move or copy them to a more appropriate location or ask someone to move them for you. You could also create a fresh book all about Veganism ([[Veganism]]) with fresh pages as well as links to Cookbook articles. Lastly remember that even if you decide to edit existing Cookbook pages and make some kind of mistake we can easily undo mistakes and change it back to how it appeared before.--[[User:Xania|ЗAНИA]] [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]][[User talk:Xania|<sup>talk</sup>]] 19:14, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
   
== Goodbook ==
+
== Questions before starting the project of the Law of the Republic of China to review from article to article ==
   
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)
+
As English Wikisource cannot easily maintain [[s:Portal:Law of the Republic of China]] whenever any article of any law is amended while Taiwan does not officially speak English, I would like to start a project of the Law of the Republic of China to review from article to article of any law, including current and historical versions. [[Wikibooks:Naming policy]] would ask all relevant pages to prefix something like "Republic of China Law/", such as "Republic of China Law/Criminal Code of the Republic of China/Article 1", "Republic of China Law/Administrative Procedure Act/Article 1", and so on, right? Please historically note that some laws of the Republic of China were enacted in [[w:Republic of China (1912–49)|Mainland Era]] through 1949, but others were enacted in Taiwan after 1949, so if prefixing is needed, I prefer "Republic of China Law/" for uniformity as "ROC Law/" is not readily clear. Thanks.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] ([[User talk:Jusjih|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/Jusjih|contribs]]) 02:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
   
== We need another bureaucrat ==
+
:For what I understood, first you are considering the title. At Wikibooks we try very hard to avoid, for a few years now, direct descriptive references in titles, so in place of "Republic of China Law" could be something like "Evolution of Sino-Jurisprudence" (for what you state it would be a more exact description of what you intend). It even avoids a direct reference to Republic of China since you seem to intend to cover the historical evolution and some special administrative regions (besides all the other political nuances that it may help avoid). You can use subsections to be more clear of the subject matter.<br>
  +
:You can also request for the importation of content from Wikisource, while not initial in volume, until you commit to differentiate from the source as not to duplicate it can probably help. --[[User:Panic2k4|Panic]] ([[User talk:Panic2k4|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Panic2k4|contribs]]) 03:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  +
::China is divided since 1949 into the People's Republic of China based in Mainland China and the Republic of China based in Taiwan, so "Evolution of Sino-Jurisprudence" would cover both of them and even ancient China, which is much more than what I intend. What I intend to review the "Republic of China Law" from article to article is limited to national laws passed by the Legislature and promulgated by the President. For example, the ''[[s:Civil Code (Republic of China)|Civil Code]]'' with 1225 articles was promulgated in 1929 and 1930 with five parts when the Republic of China was in Mainland China while Taiwan was a Japanese external territory, then after Taiwan Retrocession in 1945, the Republic of China lost Mainland to the Communists in the Chinese Civil War in 1949 and retreated with its laws to Taiwan.<br>
  +
::I am creating a page titled [[Republic of China Law/Civil Code/Article 8]] for initial demonstration, inspired by Japanese Wikibooks with some law reviews from article to article like [[:ja:消防法第13条]] (Firefighting Act Article 13) at Japanese Wikibooks. Then I plan to import more amended Republic of China Laws here, break them up by articles, and delete the unmaintained pages at English Wikisource that cannot maintain [[s:Wikisource:What_Wikisource_includes#Evolving_works|evolving works]]. Please advise before I go any further. Thanks again.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] ([[User talk:Jusjih|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jusjih|contribs]]) 01:27, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  +
:::It was just a suggestion as to comply with the new way of naming projects, the issue is that by naming it Republic of China Law you block that subject/category namespace for any other related works ([https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:Books_by_subject Books by subject]). As for the imports I see no problem.
  +
:::What about adding "Annotated Republic of China Laws" at least that would reduce the issue and reflect what you intend... --[[User:Panic2k4|Panic]] ([[User talk:Panic2k4|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Panic2k4|contribs]]) 04:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  +
::::Thanks so much for your suggested prefix, so I just moved my demonstrating page "Republic of China Law/Civil Code/Article 8" to [[Annotated Republic of China Laws/Civil Code/Article 8]]. Meanwhile, I am waiting for any response at [[s:Wikisource:Proposed deletions]] regarding amended Laws of the Republic of China before requesting importing flag.--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] ([[User talk:Jusjih|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jusjih|contribs]]) 05:36, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  +
::::: Take the time to look into the structure of other works for ideas on how to build it. I personally dislike navigational aids and think the content (ease of use and portability) is king. See [[Annotations to James Joyce's Ulysses]] (the navigational aid is superfluous if you structure the book around the slash convention, this of course increases the depth of the tree created by content, on the other hand it forces a move away from a monolithic structure that readers in low speed connections dislike but is often preferred for continue care and oversight of the work's progress). [[Annotations of The Complete Peanuts]] is a more simplistic approach it works since the subject matter is not very complex but makes its use a bit dry. One of my favorites is the [[The Devonshire Manuscript]] but it goes well beyond a simple annotation work... --[[User:Panic2k4|Panic]] ([[User talk:Panic2k4|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Panic2k4|contribs]]) 09:12, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  +
::::::Thanks again for the examples. Now I would like to be sure whether to keep the title [[Annotated Republic of China Laws]] or drop the last "s".--[[User:Jusjih|Jusjih]] ([[User talk:Jusjih|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jusjih|contribs]]) 06:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  +
::::::: It depends. Since you are covering also special regions and then there is also the notion on how the legal system is structured in some nations there is a separation of the legal rules, for example family law, civil law, military law, criminal law etc... there is also the concept that there isn't a single law (that in its singular form is simply an abstraction for simplification of discourse) but a set of laws when we address the particulars of the diverse but specific legal legislation. --[[User:Panic2k4|Panic]] ([[User talk:Panic2k4|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Panic2k4|contribs]]) 21:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
   
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)
+
== Suggestions for advertising it.Wikibooks ==
: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 ==
+
Hello! I'm a user from the Italian Wikibooks. <br />
  +
As a [https://it.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Bar#Banner_per_pubblicizzare_Wikibooks request] of the community [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Requests_for_adminship#Ilario I asked to Wikimedia-CH] to advertise it.Wb with a banner. Soon the community will prepare it and a page which should prompt readers to contribute to our project. <br />
  +
We wanted know if You could kindly point us activities of peer learning and e-learning in which Wikibooks could be a helpfool tool, and anything needed to advertise the project. Ours has 100 times less [https://it.wikibooks.org/wiki/Speciale:Statistiche active users per month] compared to this site, is not known by most people and e-learning is an innovation in Italian schools. <br />
  +
Thank you very much for your advice! --[[User:Riccardo Rovinetti|Riccardo Rovinetti]] ([[User talk:Riccardo Rovinetti|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Riccardo Rovinetti|contribs]]) 16:12, 8 October 2014 (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)
+
== Featured books advertisement 2 ==
   
== Placement of HTML tags: Wiktionary or Wikibooks? ==
+
Please remove the featured books advertisememt as per my post from [[#Featured books advertisement]]. On some computers I cannot hide it; the "dismiss" button is not visible. I consider the presence of this advertisemsen to be an inappropriate use of prime advertising space. Please remove it. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 06:33, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
   
Hello. I am a Wiktionarian administrator, interested in seeking feedback and opinions from Wikibookians, to solve an issue directly related to both projects.
+
== Template:W ==
   
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''.
+
Why are we not supposed to use [[Template:W]] (see [[meta:Template:W]])? I thought we weren't supposed to worry about performance. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|discuss]] [[Special:Contributions/Leucosticte|contribs]]) 19:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
+
: Interesting question. I've wondered the reverse: why ''would'' one use {{tl|w}} as it exists here? I honestly don't understand what benefit is perceived to come from it. (In contrast, en.wn has a different template with the same name, [[n:Template:W]], that plays a subtle and important role in the en.wn infrastructure. It looks for a local page with the target name and links to that if found, otherwise (barring specialized options) links to the target page on en.wp, and uses various hidden machinery to aid categorization maintenance by tracking local and non-local links.) --[[User:Pi zero|Pi zero]] ([[User talk:Pi zero|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pi zero|contribs]]) 15:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
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.
 
 
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.
 
 
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?
 
 
Thanks in advance. --[[User:Daniel.|Daniel.]] ([[User talk:Daniel.|talk]]) 17:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 
 
: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)
 
 
:: 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)
 
 
:(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 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 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)
 
 
:: 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)
 
 
:::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.
 
:::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)
 
 
== Five-year WMF targets ==
 
 
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)
 
 
{{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]}}
 
 
{{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]}}
 
 
{{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]}}
 
 
:Wow, how extraordinarily depressing. [[User:Thenub314|Thenub]][[Special:Contributions/Thenub314|314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 17:50, 18 October 2010 (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)
 
 
:Maybe I should get to work again! -[[User:Arlen22|Arlen22]] ([[User talk:Arlen22|talk]]) 01:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 
 
: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)
 
::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 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)
 
 
:::::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)
 
 
:::::: 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.)
 
:::::: 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)
 
 
::::::::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.
 
:::::::::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 ==
 
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)
 
 
== Regex ==
 
 
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)
 

Latest revision as of 08:13, 21 October 2014

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

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 8:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Featured books advertisement[edit]

Please remove that featured books advertisement appearing at the top of pages. It has been here for quite a lot of time, it is unproductive (just like the featured books process itself), and it gets increasingly annoying. I must have hidden it multiple times, and it still keeps appearing. From some computers, it is even impossible to hide, for whatever technical reasons. -- Your Wikibooks contributor, Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 17:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes. --Good afternoon (discusscontribs) 02:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
As I recall, the original plan was to set up a sitenotice like en.wn has most of the time, where there's a set of several community reminders/invitations, and the sitenotice selects one of them randomly. We hoped to have several here, too, but hadn't gotten to more than just that one.
Would a rotating message like that be equally obnoxious to you? (I don't recall every hearing a complaint about it over there, so I wonder if the difference could have to do with the pshychology of the rotating message, which doesn't hit one thing nearly as hard as featured books is being hit here.) --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 04:25, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
@Dan Polansky, Good afternoon: I'm very interested in understanding this, because I'd been hoping (one of these days, in my copious free time) to put together a rotating set of messages such as en.wn has. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 04:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Vietnamese postage stamp[edit]

Good day! There is article about a bug Anoplophora horsfieldi. Whether it is possible at the end of this article in gallery to place the image a Vietnamese stamp of 1977 with this bug? --Matsievsky (discusscontribs) 09:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Second question. There is category for bug Anoplophora horsfieldi Category:Anoplophora_horsfieldi. Whether it is possible in this category the image a Vietnamese stamp of 1977 with this bug? --Matsievsky (discusscontribs) 09:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Depends on whether the image itself is qualified. Artwork on a stamp is certainly intellectual work and would normally be a no-no, but a quick search on the commons shows a lot of stamps in the inventory--but none for Vietnam. You'd be better off posting your question there, and if you have such a photo, asking what the stamp criteria are. A quick browse did find a discussion in a 2007 Village Pump archive about a PD-license template for tagging such, and a few other search links, if read may find more. No mention in the FAQ, so don't bother with that! Try making the post above again on one of these pages. Good luck. // FrankB 21:12, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

On your second question: a category here wouldn't be useful unless you were writing a book on the subject. But yes, one can be created, speaking technically. However, The images there on the Commons—it's whole purpose is to store media for all Wikimedia projects—can directly be used here simply by adding the page title in a standard wikimarkup image link like this:

[[File:Some image name|thumb|400px|Some Caption|alt=Caption for the vision impaired]],
  • where, the width (400px) and thumb go together.
  • Otherwise the image, if large, will fill the page width.
  • The width is defaulted as well in user preferences, so may be left out.

That's the basics. Good luck again! // Frank FrankB 21:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

        • Thank you very much. Sorry my explanation. The problem is that Vietnamese stamp images haven't free licenze. Matsievsky (discusscontribs) 22:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Grants to improve your project[edit]

Greetings! The Individual Engagement Grants program is accepting proposals for funding new experiments from September 1st to 30th. Your idea could improve Wikimedia projects with a new tool or gadget, a better process to support community-building on your wiki, research on an important issue, or something else we haven't thought of yet. Whether you need $200 or $30,000 USD, Individual Engagement Grants can cover your own project development time in addition to hiring others to help you.

How do you make a test book?[edit]

Hi everyone! I'm Jonathan. :) I usually make pretty minor edits. I wanted to do something pretty big now (making a new book/reorganizing an old one [Vegan Cuisine]), but I wanted to make sure that I won't be messing up anything, so I thought making a test first, and showing the results if they aren't obviously awful, would be a good idea. Right now it's basically a bunch of links (it's a cookbook, and they seem to normally be like this, although I'm not sure). I want to turn it into a proper book, with each heading a chapter and each recipe a page, and possibly adding reason as to why people eat vegan food, and a history of veganism, plus any other stuff I (and other people who might be interested :)) can think of. Thanks for reading! JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (discusscontribs) 19:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC) Edit: I feel so silly. I noticed the sandbox button right after submitting this! :)

This is a little bit tricky because of the way the Cookbook works. However, if you are extending it beyond cooking then it might be reasonable to put the content in the main space instead. The book Using Wikibooks is a good introduction to everything you need to know to structure a new book so I'd start by reading that then ask for any further clarification here. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 17:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello Jonathan, I believe, you would be able to complete this book. In case you require any assistance, you can contact Xania, or other editors out here. Please feel free to ask anytime. Jai Jinendra. Vishal Bakhai - WorksFlag of India.svg 10:40, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for replying to me, everyone! I'll go look at Using Wikibooks and ask for help when I need it. I've kind of decided to get more comfortable here before doing this, and am editing some other books right now to become more comfortable, but this is really appreciated! :) JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (discusscontribs) 18:22, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
The Sandbox is always a great place to experiment and you can always create your own sandbox and other pages like this: User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique/Page 1, User:JonathanHopeThisIsUnique/Page 2. Create any pages you like within your own user space. Later you can move or copy them to a more appropriate location or ask someone to move them for you. You could also create a fresh book all about Veganism (Veganism) with fresh pages as well as links to Cookbook articles. Lastly remember that even if you decide to edit existing Cookbook pages and make some kind of mistake we can easily undo mistakes and change it back to how it appeared before.--ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 19:14, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Questions before starting the project of the Law of the Republic of China to review from article to article[edit]

As English Wikisource cannot easily maintain s:Portal:Law of the Republic of China whenever any article of any law is amended while Taiwan does not officially speak English, I would like to start a project of the Law of the Republic of China to review from article to article of any law, including current and historical versions. Wikibooks:Naming policy would ask all relevant pages to prefix something like "Republic of China Law/", such as "Republic of China Law/Criminal Code of the Republic of China/Article 1", "Republic of China Law/Administrative Procedure Act/Article 1", and so on, right? Please historically note that some laws of the Republic of China were enacted in Mainland Era through 1949, but others were enacted in Taiwan after 1949, so if prefixing is needed, I prefer "Republic of China Law/" for uniformity as "ROC Law/" is not readily clear. Thanks.--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 02:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

For what I understood, first you are considering the title. At Wikibooks we try very hard to avoid, for a few years now, direct descriptive references in titles, so in place of "Republic of China Law" could be something like "Evolution of Sino-Jurisprudence" (for what you state it would be a more exact description of what you intend). It even avoids a direct reference to Republic of China since you seem to intend to cover the historical evolution and some special administrative regions (besides all the other political nuances that it may help avoid). You can use subsections to be more clear of the subject matter.
You can also request for the importation of content from Wikisource, while not initial in volume, until you commit to differentiate from the source as not to duplicate it can probably help. --Panic (discusscontribs) 03:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
China is divided since 1949 into the People's Republic of China based in Mainland China and the Republic of China based in Taiwan, so "Evolution of Sino-Jurisprudence" would cover both of them and even ancient China, which is much more than what I intend. What I intend to review the "Republic of China Law" from article to article is limited to national laws passed by the Legislature and promulgated by the President. For example, the Civil Code with 1225 articles was promulgated in 1929 and 1930 with five parts when the Republic of China was in Mainland China while Taiwan was a Japanese external territory, then after Taiwan Retrocession in 1945, the Republic of China lost Mainland to the Communists in the Chinese Civil War in 1949 and retreated with its laws to Taiwan.
I am creating a page titled Republic of China Law/Civil Code/Article 8 for initial demonstration, inspired by Japanese Wikibooks with some law reviews from article to article like ja:消防法第13条 (Firefighting Act Article 13) at Japanese Wikibooks. Then I plan to import more amended Republic of China Laws here, break them up by articles, and delete the unmaintained pages at English Wikisource that cannot maintain evolving works. Please advise before I go any further. Thanks again.--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 01:27, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
It was just a suggestion as to comply with the new way of naming projects, the issue is that by naming it Republic of China Law you block that subject/category namespace for any other related works (Books by subject). As for the imports I see no problem.
What about adding "Annotated Republic of China Laws" at least that would reduce the issue and reflect what you intend... --Panic (discusscontribs) 04:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your suggested prefix, so I just moved my demonstrating page "Republic of China Law/Civil Code/Article 8" to Annotated Republic of China Laws/Civil Code/Article 8. Meanwhile, I am waiting for any response at s:Wikisource:Proposed deletions regarding amended Laws of the Republic of China before requesting importing flag.--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 05:36, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Take the time to look into the structure of other works for ideas on how to build it. I personally dislike navigational aids and think the content (ease of use and portability) is king. See Annotations to James Joyce's Ulysses (the navigational aid is superfluous if you structure the book around the slash convention, this of course increases the depth of the tree created by content, on the other hand it forces a move away from a monolithic structure that readers in low speed connections dislike but is often preferred for continue care and oversight of the work's progress). Annotations of The Complete Peanuts is a more simplistic approach it works since the subject matter is not very complex but makes its use a bit dry. One of my favorites is the The Devonshire Manuscript but it goes well beyond a simple annotation work... --Panic (discusscontribs) 09:12, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again for the examples. Now I would like to be sure whether to keep the title Annotated Republic of China Laws or drop the last "s".--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 06:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
It depends. Since you are covering also special regions and then there is also the notion on how the legal system is structured in some nations there is a separation of the legal rules, for example family law, civil law, military law, criminal law etc... there is also the concept that there isn't a single law (that in its singular form is simply an abstraction for simplification of discourse) but a set of laws when we address the particulars of the diverse but specific legal legislation. --Panic (discusscontribs) 21:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions for advertising it.Wikibooks[edit]

Hello! I'm a user from the Italian Wikibooks.
As a request of the community I asked to Wikimedia-CH to advertise it.Wb with a banner. Soon the community will prepare it and a page which should prompt readers to contribute to our project.
We wanted know if You could kindly point us activities of peer learning and e-learning in which Wikibooks could be a helpfool tool, and anything needed to advertise the project. Ours has 100 times less active users per month compared to this site, is not known by most people and e-learning is an innovation in Italian schools.
Thank you very much for your advice! --Riccardo Rovinetti (discusscontribs) 16:12, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Featured books advertisement 2[edit]

Please remove the featured books advertisememt as per my post from #Featured books advertisement. On some computers I cannot hide it; the "dismiss" button is not visible. I consider the presence of this advertisemsen to be an inappropriate use of prime advertising space. Please remove it. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 06:33, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:W[edit]

Why are we not supposed to use Template:W (see meta:Template:W)? I thought we weren't supposed to worry about performance. Leucosticte (discusscontribs) 19:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Interesting question. I've wondered the reverse: why would one use {{w}} as it exists here? I honestly don't understand what benefit is perceived to come from it. (In contrast, en.wn has a different template with the same name, n:Template:W, that plays a subtle and important role in the en.wn infrastructure. It looks for a local page with the target name and links to that if found, otherwise (barring specialized options) links to the target page on en.wp, and uses various hidden machinery to aid categorization maintenance by tracking local and non-local links.) --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 15:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)