User talk:Yunzhong Hou
From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection
Contents |
[edit] Sorry for the move, but...
Hello, we have a naming convention here in Wikibooks. Basically, we do "Future/Prologue" and not "Future:Prologue". I have taken the liberty to correct your page, but please follow naming conventions in the future. Good luck with your project. --Dragontamer 04:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links on Future/Totalitarian State
Could I ask you to review these. There really are a large number on this page - many only go to a graphic or photo. The idea of Wikibooks is that the reader will find all they need on the page concerned and links, certainly in this quantity, are rarely necessary. Thank you --Herby talk thyme 16:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Attribution of other wikis
Here's the way I do it for most wikis:
Go to the page you're copying, copy it, and add it to the new page you're creating.
Then go back to the page you copied, click on "history", then click on the date stamp of the most current revision. Copy the URL address, then go back to the new page here on wikibooks.
Edit the talk page, and put in the following (for example):
- Copied from the page "Category:Yunzhong Hou (Futurologist)" on future.wikia, using this revision.
If you're using a page from wikipedia, you can do even better by requesting an import on WB:RFI, which brings over all versions of the page history. --SB_Johnny | talk 17:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rewriting?
You asked about this on the vfd discussion, and I've answered there. I think there's certainly promise in your approach for a good wikibook, but not the way you're doing it.
I think the best way foreward would be to just take one scenario (whichever one you prefer: "Matriarchy" would actually be my vote), and go into detail about the reasons for making such a prediction. You could certainly use some empirical trends (i.e., the historical collapse of patriarchy), and any number of psychohistorical factors (will to power, will to belong, philanthropic drive, instinctive drives (sex, need for food, attraction to the path of least resistance), and gender differences (how different drives are expressed and/or interpreted differently by man and women).
BUT: just laying out a bunch of hypotheticals without discussions of the method just won't fly. --SB_Johnny | talk 20:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] speedy deleteion
If you want something deleted, just add {{delete|reason}} to the page. This categorizes it so admins can find tagged pages and delete them. For more substantial content, where deletion would not be uncontroversial, list content at WB:VFD. Please review our deletion policy or ask on my talk page if you have further questions. – Mike.lifeguard | talk 00:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- About the recent speedies you requested:
- One was changed to a merge tag. Please make sure that all useful content is merged before requesting deletion. If you still want it deleted, I suggest nominating it at WB:VFD since there is not "no meaningful content" at the moment.
- The other was done
- I noticed that you had started Principles of Economics/Labor Supply from a Wikipedia article. Simple copying of content from Wikipedia doesn't meet the requirements of the GFDL. Instead, please request an import at WB:RFI. As well, if there are other pages you created with text from Wikipedia, please let me know so I can import and history-merge them to comply with GFDL requirements. Thanks. – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Latest delete requests
Those pages you wanted deleted seem like good content, so I can't speedily delete them. If you think they should be deleted, please read our deletion policy, and add them to WB:VFD with a rationale citing policy. Thanks. – Mike.lifeguard | talk 00:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Ah, that bureaucracy. On Novelas wikia where I am an admin this would never have been a problem. But whatever, I'll make the point by redirecting those redundant pages to the pages with the same material. --Yunzhong Hou 02:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, no, that's not the point I was trying to make. There's nothing wrong with having duplicated content when the scope & target of two texts are significantly different. I was trying to say nicely that there's absolutely no reason whatsoever to delete those pages, nor redirect them, and that you need to read our policy. – Mike.lifeguard | talk 03:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... Okay. --Yunzhong Hou 03:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
