Talk:Main Page

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Jump to: navigation, search
Book important.svg This page is for discussing the Main Page only, not for general questions about Wikibooks.
Please do not make general inquiries here. Instead, go to WB:HELP, and ask there, where your question will be seen.


  1. January 2004 – January 2005
  2. January 2005 – August 2005
  3. August 2005 – January 2006
  4. February 2006 – September 2007
  5. September 2007 – present

Contents
Please
Add your comment at the bottom unless it clearly goes under an existing heading
Sign and date your submission (four tildes ~ will do that if you are a registered member) so that other readers know who said what and whom to ask about it (and whether it's so old that it may have been answered elsewhere)

[edit]

The wikibooks logo with the books and the text under it looked stupid to me for a while and I was trying to figure out why, because I do like the idea. Then I realized that it should be "Think freely. Learn freely." Otherwise it's grammatically incorrect.

Sorry for nit picking but I thought I'd share.

Samsara1064 (talk) 05:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; please see m:Wikibooks/Logo - we are choosing a new one currently.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Hooray for the new logo! Look at it up there on the actual website! It's beyuutiful! --Mcld (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Travel

Is there a section here for travel guides? I could certainly be a helpful resource

See Wikibooks:Miscellaneous bookshelf Firefoxman (talk) 22:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, travel guides aren't particularly well suited here. We do have a few, the bookshelf (which is deprecated) and Subject:Miscellaneous are good places to start. If we had a lot, we could probably make a Subject:Travel page too. You might want to take a look at http://www.wikitravel.org, a wiki that specializes in this stuff. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 22:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sister Projects

Just to inform the admins here, the sister project template is wrong. The link to Meta-Wiki is not "Meta-Wiki", but "Wikimedia". Wikimedia is the foundation, the coordination project is Meta-Wiki. Correct that, I can't. 220.255.4.136 (talk) 08:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 12:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Run-on

Wikibooks began on July 10, 2003, since then Wikibooks has grown to include over 30,580 pages in a multitude of textbooks created by volunteers like you! ->change comma after 2--3 to a period (or semicolon) and s to S.

Yes check.svg Done thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture?

Did the main page for this site have a painting of an a library full of books with an old man (i think he was monk) standing on a ladder searching for a book. I'm trying to locate the image.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.34.212.93 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Problem with the audio and listen templates

Just wanted to let the Admins know that there is a problem with the Audio and Listen templates on this site. The code is different than what is currently on Wikipedia. I did not want to just do a cut and paste, because I did not know if the problem is with just these two templates or whole bunch of templates need to get synchronized with the main Wikipedia site. Also, does anybody know if there is a version of the gallery code that allows for adding a sound file as well as an image and text? Basically I want to add a gallery of a bunch of images, and if the image has a sound file that goes with it (eg. image of a bear and a sound file of a bear growl) I want to place them nicely into the gallery setup. Thanks. Zzmonty (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] logo

I don't know where to put this, so I'll put it here. The logo has changed yet the favicon hasn't. Could some one please change the favicon to the new version. ChrisDHDR (talk) 15:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

As the top of the page suggests, you can raise this in WB:HELP (this page is to discuss the Main Page). See Wikibooks:Reading room for where a lot of discussion goes on. Join us!
As for your question, see bugzilla:17049. --Swift (talk) 16:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. You may need to go to http://en.wikibooks.org/favicon.ico and refresh your browser's cache. --DavidCary (talk) 06:33, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow that logo looks like a good use of 2 years spent debating, voting, more debating, more voting, more debating and yet more voting. Was that honestly the best that anyone could come up with? I know it's been updated for half a year now but even after all that time it remains pretty pathetic. Oh well. At least we all had the opportunity to vote like 6 times to make this grand decision.--ЗAНИA Flag of Italy.svgtalk 15:07, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit]

Just a suggestion, but I think the logo would look better if it used light variations of blue instead of the current brownish ones. --81.165.230.130 (talk) 22:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. See meta:Wikibooks/Logo for more. Please note that this page is for the discussion of the Main Page. --Swift (talk) 01:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] for the complaination

for example, You have to choose logo for something you belive. Also the logo have the connection with us. If you want something that to be eternal so you have to choose wisely!

[edit] Featured books

the featured books seem to be the same every day, can this be expanded? Yes, you just have to check it at library or surf using an internet!

[edit] Bookshelves -> Subjects

Apparently the move to subjects has been long in the making. With recent actions having been made to classify the books in the wiki so that they are in the proper subject categories and the long-stated intention to move to subjects, I am curious as to what other criteria must be satisfied before they replace bookshelves on the main page. (In my sandbox I have a potential replacement for the respective portion of the page.) If there's more to be done before they are ready, it would be helpful to know. If people only see the bookshelves featured prominently on the main page, they will have little incentive to ensure their books have {{Subjects}} on them if they've added their book to a shelf. -- Adrignola talk contribs 18:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I have noticed some people seem to prefer the bookshelves still for organizational and cosmetic reasons. The first might need to be addressed before moving forward unless there is community consensus that the differences are good. The later can probably be addressed later on, but people may prefer to improve or address the appearance of subject pages before making the switch. --darklama 18:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I am personally not impressed by the bookshelves' organization or appearance. They suffer from the same issues that subjects did before being cleaned up; namely shelves such as Wikibooks:Languages bookshelf and Wikibooks:Language and literature bookshelf overlapping. You've got the Wikibooks:Natural sciences department and the Wikibooks:Natural sciences bookshelf causing confusion. The Wikibooks:How-tos bookshelf and Wikibooks:Technology bookshelf have the same downfalls that led to them being eliminated for the subjects (too many books due to a general scope). Many bookshelves such as Wikibooks:Humanities and arts department strike me as downright messy and unintuitive (some links go to another shelf, others go to books—and what are games and athletics doing there?).
I frankly am not surprised the subjects were so poorly maintained since their creation in the fall of 2007, seeing as they have a single point of entry from the main page, and I believe the main page's current layout will not encourage the maintenance of the subjects into the future. I'd like to know how community involvement was gained for the initial move to subjects and have that same method applied to this issue. -- Adrignola talk contribs 19:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not impressed with the bookshelves either. The move to subjects was discussed in the reading room. There was no set timetable for doing so though. I think Languages, Mathematics, and Computer Programming are the only areas where there has been concerns about how things have changed. Languages and Computer Programming may have been antiquity addressed enough to move forward with, but Mathematics still doesn't seem to be resolved. I'd hate to give the wrong impression that people who initiate discussion to discuss concerns are wasting there time.
I am thinking as part of the move when its time to change the bookshelves to subjects on the main page, it might be time to redesign the main page once again too. --darklama 20:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I've moved the discussion to the reading room to get thoughts from the community. -- Adrignola talk contribs 22:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] front page still says GFDL on the bottom and not CC-BY-SA - edit works now

[edit] When did that happen?

I'm very surprised to find somehow someone deleted the link to the math bookshelf. Vandalism? Currently, the main page doesn't link to Wikibooks:Mathematics_bookshelf. Please fix! -- Taku (talk) 01:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Bookshelves have been deprecated. You'll find that under the Natural Sciences heading there is a link to Subject:Mathematics. See the section above on this page. This transition has been in the works for years. Please ensure all new books are properly categorized so that they show up on the subject pages. Subject pages may be changed in terms of appearance, but the dynamic listing of books is here to stay. -- Adrignola talk contribs 02:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
In what AUTHORITY can you deprecate bookshelves? Just because you're an admin? You can't just deprecate pages just because you feel like it. As far as I can see, Subject:Mathematics is not being maintained, since it lacks links to many books. I don't know why I have to say, but it is important "not" to hide books from the readers. I can't edit the Main Page myself, so please restore the links to bookshelves. Please realize what you have done is effectively vandalism. -- Taku (talk) 11:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I commented on your talk page, but for others' benefit, I want to point out the archived discussion at Wikibooks:Reading_room/Archives/2007/November#Phase_out_Bookshelves. Subject:Mathematics has all the books listed at the mathematics bookshelf; they are simply listed in sub-subjects listed at the right-hand side. They're not all supposed to show up on one page. I disagree that it is not being maintained. People spent months organizing the books so that the subject pages could finally be useful.
I'd like to point out this diff and this diff and this diff to show that it wasn't even myself who took the initial action to deprecate bookshelves through redirects. This really is a sticky situation, as that archived discussion seems to indicate consensus to move to subjects and another admin has been deprecating bookshelves in line with that, but yet there are a few who do not want to move to bookshelves. How can everyone be satisfied? -- Adrignola talk contribs 13:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I didn't realize that people were going around killing bookshelves. When was that discussed? Even though I supported the switch, we are by no means ready to get rid of bookshelf pages. There are also a lot of problems still with the word subject to categories at the bottom of module pages? Even if we want to switch, there should be a period where both exists and subjects are the main thing that is linked and some deprecation notice is put at the top of bookshelf pages. I think we have a real problem with getting the word out to the community and getting support/feedback. Thenub314 (talk) 15:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Quality/Draft selector interferes with layout

For whatever reason, the quality/draft selector is messing up the main page. The {{Main Page featured books}} template is squished... This isn't occurring on other pages, so it's apparently not an issue with the FlaggedRev system itself. I can't quite suss out the cause, and I don't have the access level required to fix it anyway, so if anyone out there can figure out how to fix this I'm sure many people would be appreciative. Ohms law (talk) 18:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Some images that were deleted because they were at commons made the current version a draft one. I attempted to review it, but the review would not take effect. I then tried turning off stability and turning it back on, and the most recent version finally appeared as the most recently reviewed version. -- Adrignola talk contribs 20:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Well it looked like the above immediately afterward. Looks like it's bugged. -- Adrignola talk contribs 20:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It's doing it again (still?)... :( Ohms law (talk) 08:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Outer Space

The sentence "Outer space is perhaps the final frontier for man" is meaningless and offensive. Is deep sea exploration, or archeology not a frontier? One man's frontier is another one's back fence. Was the New World a frontier for man? Also using 'man' for 'mankind' is not entirely unproblematic. Tibetologist (talk) 01:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Calling it "meaningless and offensive" is perhaps a bit of a hyperbole. The deep seas, deserts, poles and space are all frontiers which man has striven to conquer (for better or for worse). One can't be sure, but I'd wager that mankind will visit the deep seas before it conquers outer space. Archeology is a frontier of a different sort so there you enter a semantic debate which I'm not sure is the best use of our time.
Speaking of semantics; using "man" for "mankind" is not entirely unheard of. I'd argue for trying not to be offended. If you think prose can be improved, just do it. --Swift (talk) 02:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Problematic Eye

What is that eye doing over there on the right side of the main page? Is there any way to take it away? Arlen22 (talk) 17:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] "Foreign" Languages

Is "foreign" necessary in the Bookshelves section, under Humanities and Arts Department? --Adam7davies (talk) 16:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It distinguishes itself from the "languages and literature" link, I suppose. However, I do not maintain the bookshelves because my focus is on the subjects, so I can't say that the bookshelves and their organization make sense from my perspective. -- Adrignola talk contribs 18:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page"