Wikibooks:Reading room/Assistance

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to: navigation, search
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 Assistance reading room where Wikibookians help each other solve problems encountered while contributing to books or otherwise taking part in the Wikibooks community.


Hello fellow Wikipedians! I was wondering if any of you would be able to help me figure out a way to include multimedia (i.e photos/diagrams) in my Wikibook? I've tried uploading files that i have saved to my computer but with no luck. I would also like to use images from Wiki Commons but have been experiencing the same problem. Any help would be massively appreciated! Thanks everyone! AlexandraChanner (discusscontribs) 14:52, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Inline citations[edit]

I am a new Wikibooks user, and have referenced an academic, but I am not sure how to do an in-text citation. Would anybody be able to help me out? ButtonsElizabeth (discusscontribs) 10:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

The inline citations are typically made with a combination of the <ref /> pseudo-HTML element, one of the “Cite” templates, and the {{Reflist}} template in one of the trailing sections on the page.
For instance, the Clock and Data Recovery/Structures and types of CDRs/Applications of the 2nd order type 2 architecture page uses the first two (although, as for {{Cite web}}, – not entirely correctly) as follows:
A bang-bang phase detector is inevitable in monolithic applications at very high line frequencies <ref name="Richard C. Walker article">{{cite web |url=|title=Designing Bang-Bang PLLs for Clock and Data Recovery in Serial Data Transmission Systems|author=Richard C. Walker|year=2003|publisher= pp. 34-45, a chapter appearing in "Phase-Locking in High-Performance Sytems - From Devices to Architectures", edited by Behzad Razavi, IEEE Press, 2003, ISBN 0-471-44727-7}}</ref>, …
Check the existing pages (as could be found with the Special:WhatLinksHere tool; as in: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Cite journal) for more examples.
Also, please sign your posts with ~~~~ on talk pages only.
Ivan Shmakov (dc) 11:11, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Potential book on crowdsourcing[edit]

Hi, in a day job I am working on a project funded by Wikimedia UK and the educational charity Jisc to make staff in academia more aware of Wikimedia projects and productive ways to work with them. One of the outputs of this project is a Jisc infoKit titled "Crowdsourcing: the wiki way of working". It is not a guide to wiki editing. Instead it is aimed at management, trying to persuade them that what they might interpret as down-sides of the wiki approach (e.g. being open to edit by anyone) are in fact its key advantages in producing quality work. It tries to get them thinking seriously about free and open content, and empowering volunteer contributors. It starts from very abstract considerations and builds to case studies of working with free-content projects.

I'd like to publish the booklet in a Wikimedia wiki. The content is freely licensed (CC-BY-SA) and, having looked at the existing excellent Wikibooks content, I don't think I'll have any difficulties with the markup. I understand I would have to make clear that the booklet is not dual-licensed. My question is about scope: this is a work of original research but which has already been reviewed and published by a body independent of Wikimedia. Just to be sure, are there any conflicts with the scope of Wikibooks? Thanks in advance, MartinPoulter (discusscontribs) 17:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I, for one, wouldn't think there'd be an original research problem with this, given previous vetting. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 02:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Depending on whether the book is expected to attract new editors or not, it may also make sense to consider placing it on Wikisource.Ivan Shmakov (dc) 05:24, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
But it sounds like something that might want updating, with additional/more-current case studies at least, which isn't Wikisource as I understand the sister. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 11:03, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies. Although it's been already published, it's meant to be an evolving document that draws in more case studies, for example from citizen science projects, exactly as User:Pi zero suggests. Hopefully this is at least a small way to raise awareness of Wikibooks in academia. If I advocate "working the wiki way", I'd better take my own advice. Cheers, MartinPoulter (discusscontribs) 14:46, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Username does not work @ hu.wikibooks[edit]

I registered long time ago in en.wikibooks with the username Harp, I have could not log in with this name at hu.wikibooks, so I needed to register with other name. I was not allowed to register with Harp there. The new registration (User:Horvatha) works in both language version with one registration. Why does not work the Harp for both? It would be nice if I would use the Harp name, because I use it at en.wikipedia, hu.wikipedia and de.wikipedia as well. -- Harp (discusscontribs) 08:04, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

This is really a question for the Stewards, but as you asked here (and I'm a Steward) we can deal with it here. In the past usernames were unique to each project. Later a "single unified login" was introduced that created a central account that automatically registered you at new wikis that you visited for the first time. This doesn't work for you because you have never merged your existing accounts to create the "single unified login." The first step is to visit Special:Mergeaccount. This will create the single unified login and should allow you to access hu.wikibooks. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 08:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Fortunately I can use my old username on as well. -- Harp (discusscontribs) 12:30, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

A category for reference (“man”) pages?[edit]

I’m planning to author some reference pages (also known as man pages, as typically found on Unix-like systems), and given that those often follow certain specific layout, I wonder if it makes a sense to create a dedicated (non-subject) category for them?

My intent is to document the toolkit I currently use for my luxo:ISbot activities. I’m going to start with the reference pages (named as subpages to a new book) for the tools and libraries I use, hopefully to be followed by some “proper” narrative sections. (I’d like to split a proper reference page from my Indexing Web with Head-r at some point just as well.)

Anything else to consider?


Ivan Shmakov (dc) 07:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Blue text[edit]

Hi, I am a new user and am working as part of a group of six people looking at the "Always On" aspect of the Digital Media and Culture Yearbook project at the University of Stirling.

My query is how do I get certain words that are already in Wikipedia, such as 'bandwidth' to appear in blue (so that they link to Wikipedia) when I use these words in my own contribution? Sorry if this is a really silly question. Hope you can help. Thanks.George Berrie (discusscontribs) 21:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi George Berrie.
Because this is Wikibooks, if you write an ordinary wikilink, it only links to a page with that name on Wikibooks. If you write markup [[Reykjavík]], you get a redlink, Reykjavík, because there isn't a book called that.
Books are relatively self-contained; that's part of what makes them books. So we don't link all that often to other wikimedia projects, such as Wikipedia. There's a prefix for each of the sister projects, that can be used to create links to them; but sister links within a book are relatively few, and are typically set aside from the text, such as in a box on the right or in a list at the bottom of a page. Here's a link to a Wikipedia page: Reykjavík. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 01:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for insight re usual practice for Wikibooks - really appreciated. If I were to make a link - such as the one you made for Reykjavik - how would I do this? I thought perhaps highlighting the word, then right-clicking to save the short-cut would work - but it doesn't. I suspect I have to use some markup codes - is that correct? Thanks again.George Berrie (discusscontribs) 17:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

If you edit the markup code of this thread, you'll find that the markup code I wrote to produce that wikilink to Wikipedia was [[w:Reykjavík|Reykjavík]]. The "w:" tels it to link to Wikipedia, and the part after the pipe (the "|") is how the link appears on the page.
(This touches on a sore spot of mine, in Wikimedia Foundation politics. I think it's a mistake for the foundation to be pouring resources into building tools to isolate users from the wiki markup. When working directly with wiki markup, you can learn by seeing what others have written, and slowly learn the few simple techniques that make up nearly all of wiki markup writing, as you need them, each step building on the previous ones you've learned. And tack on advanced techniques when you really need them, as small add-ons to what you already knew. But when working with all those tools, you often don't get to learn by seeing others' work, and the things you learn don't get you any closer to the really advanced things.)
--Pi zero (discusscontribs) 18:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Seconded. Frankly, I’m advocating in favor of using “user-visible” markup pretty much everywhere for I guess over a decade now, and the somewhat recent addition of that certain feature to MediaWikis hosted by the foundation made me feel like there’s an ongoing conspiracy to undermine my work. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 19:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much once again - I've cracked it now. I do agree with the sentiments from both of you - it seems as if a lot of energy (at least in the initial stages of learning) can go into learning/navigating the markup code rather than learning/advancing a topic per se.George Berrie (discusscontribs) 16:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Glossary Help[edit]

Hi all, I'm new to Wikibooks and I am engaging in a collective project looking at Online Identity. Our project is going well, however I have noticed that our glossary is lacking and we are perhaps slightly unsure of how to use it. I was wondering what sort of words we should be considering adding? Is it in general that we should be adding words which are the main focus of our project, or should we be considering any words in our project that have the potential to be contentious? Many thanks, RedGebsKasia (discusscontribs) 14:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

As a book creator I rarely see a need for a glossary in today's connected world, unless the terms are very obscure and would consider only doing it at a lower priority for a book that would be intended for print. As a reader (and in normal editorial practice) I prefer linking the terms to Wikibooks, Wikipedia or Wikitionary (in that order) or even cross linking to the section of the book that provides the information.
Keeping a glossary complete and accurate is a work into itself, if we considered how wikibooks are edited it would require extreme dedication as not to be a futile effort. --Panic (discusscontribs) 20:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

This was very helpful, thank you for your response! RedGebsKasia (discusscontribs) 13:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Adding images[edit]

Hi there, I'm fairly new to Wikibooks and was wondering whether anyone could help me regarding adding images to pages. Can someone please explain to me how to do this easily and within Wiki copyright laws? Thank you! GemmaMiller (discusscontribs) 16:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The most easy way to upload images to be used anywhere in the WikiMediaSphere (including Wikibooks) is, I believe, to do so via WikiMedia Commons.
The rules are pretty simple, – you can upload an image if either:
  • you’ve made it all by yourself – it may be a drawing, a photography of nature, etc. – and agree to release it under the terms of one of the free licenses;
  • you’ve got it off the Web, and its respective copyright holder (which may be its author, publisher, or some other party) have allowed its unlimited redistribution and use under (again!) a free license;
  • the copyright on the work has expired and it entered the public domain.
Be sure to check the Commons’ Upload Wizard – it’s supposed to guide you through some of the intricacies of the rules.
Ivan Shmakov (dc) 17:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for getting back to me so quickly. I'll be sure to have a go at that. GemmaMiller (discusscontribs) 17:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I am new to Wikibooks and currently working on a group assignment looking at "Always on" Culture. I am currently referencing and I am uncertain what the protocol is for referencing a direct quote. I am just not sure how to do it using the ref tags. Sorry for asking a silly question, I am just slightly confused. If anyone could help then that would be great. Many thanks. Amandajayner (discusscontribs) 10:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

The #Inline citations section above has an example of using both the <ref /> pseudo-HTML element and the “Cite” templates. Could you please provide an example of what exactly you’re trying to do, so that I can suggest a specific markup for that?
Anyway, if you’re trying to add a quote to the text itself, you may consider using the {{Quote}} template.
Ivan Shmakov (dc) 11:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I think I understand it now, the quote template really helped. Thanks again! Amandajayner (discusscontribs) 20:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, another maybe silly question, looking to put in a footnote but can't seem to find an option for that on my text box when writing? I am sure it's a simple answer but just to save time I thought I would ask. Thanks for your time. JustHollie (discusscontribs) 17:18, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I have just started using Wikibooks and am a little confused on when to reference. The majority of the ideas I am referring to are from the same author, so do I only reference him once, or do I reference each idea with the correlating page number to his book? Probably a really obvious answer, just not too sure how to go about it! Thank you. Kristddd (discusscontribs) 21:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Contacting Wikibooks participants[edit]

Moved from Wikibooks talk:Reading room.

Hi, I just wanted to know why some user names on WikiBook come up as red and say that the user does not exists and others are in blue? What does this mean?

Also I wanted to know how I get in contact with a person if I have their wiki name, how would I go about finding their personal wiki page? SmithBiancaAnn (discusscontribs) 13:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

A red link in user’s signature may mean that the user in question has not created a personal page at this project. In this case, the wiki will tell that it’s the user page that does not exists, not the user, however.
Alternatively, may mean that the user has configured his or her signature to use red color for the link.
The simplest way to contact the user is probably to write a message on his or her own talk page, such as User talk:Ivan Shmakov or User talk:SmithBiancaAnn. Typically, a link to that page will be included in the user’s signature.
Ivan Shmakov (dc) 13:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah, ok thank you very much SmithBiancaAnn (discusscontribs) 18:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Content Publication[edit]

Hey guys, I'm also working with an educational group on the Technological Determinism page - I am wondering about the etiquette of publishing information to the page before it is entirely complete. Of course, we are looking to get as much accurate and complete information as possible, but at what stage would it be advisable to publish to the public page so that we have something presentable, although inevitably imperfect? e.g. in terms of referencing complete, etc. AlexaSoccer (discusscontribs) 18:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

There is no requirement of completeness before contributing content to workbooks, it just needs to be ineligible and in the scope of the work it is added into and conform with the general rules of the project. --Panic (discusscontribs) 19:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Block text?[edit]

Hi guys - one more quick question, how would I do block text when using a longer quote? I understand the indent, but not sure how to make it even on either side. Thanks!

AlexaSoccer (discusscontribs) 18:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps you could use the {{Quote}} template? — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 19:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello there people, I'm new to the Wiki community and I'm having a little difficulty with my user page. It keeps stating that my username doesn't exist and I've been told that I might need my page to be verified. Could I possibly get some help and advice about what I need to do as I'm a bit stuck... Thanks it would be much appreciated! LittleBlondeLottie (discusscontribs)

Hey User:LittleBlondeLottie, check out your page now! I think I made your user page live! If not, let me know if I can do anything else! RedheadRachel (discusscontribs) 23:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I also had problems with setting off a quote and found this page helpful! RedheadRachel (discusscontribs) 00:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Using a single reference for an entire sub-section?[edit]

Hi there, I'm a new user and I'm slightly confused as to what the rules are for using a single in-text citation for an entire sub-section. Within the sub-section I have written I have split the text up into three separate paragraphs, all of which use the same in-text citation. Should I just put one in-text citation at the end of the sub-section or should I have the same citation at the end of each paragraph within the sub-section? Any help would be much appreciated! SilentJamie (discusscontribs) 09:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Generally speaking you would repeat the citation. This is for both the purposes of clarity and to ensure the citation remains linked to the text in the event someone later restructures the book. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 12:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! I'll be sure to follow your advice. SilentJamie (discusscontribs) 12:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Links to glossary?[edit]

I was wondering if there was a way to link users from a term you used to the definition in your glossary, much like the references system works? If not, what is the standard protocol for telling readers that a term is defined in the glossary? Many thanks! --IsmayH (discusscontribs) 11:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

It's unusual to see it done. I have used this model in my book. You'll see an example in this chapter. Go to the Mining section and click on the last word in the section (countermine) and it will link you to the definition in the Glossary. The way this is implemented is to label each word in the Glossary. To continue with Countermine, the code looks like this in the Glossary: ";Counter mine (or countermine) : <div id="Countermine"></div>. Then within the Mining section the code is the same as that used to go to any section on a page: [[Castles of England/English Castle Glossary#Countermine|counter mine]]. If you use section headers in the Glossary (e.g., put each definition under its own head of the format =====Glossary Word===== then you can link to it in the same way. I just used the "div" method because it made the Glossary look prettier.QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 11:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Somehow, I think this should’ve been <span id="countermine" />, instead of <div />. Or perhaps (largerly equivalent) {{anchor|countermine}}. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 11:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
No it isn't. There are other ways you can do it, but the example I've given above is specifically how it is done in that book. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 12:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Linking to other pages[edit]

Hi there, I'm part of a University group working on a chapter called 'Technological Determinism' and was wondering how we would go about linking to other chapters within our digital media and culture yearbook? Sophie Michele Addison (discusscontribs) 11:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

You need to read Using Wikibooks really. But, as an overview the structure of all books here is:
Main Page
Main Page/Chapter 1
Main Page/Chapter 2
Main Page/Chapter 2/Section A
You will note the use of "/" to create levels in the book. To link from the Main Page to a Chapter you enter [[/Chapter 2/]], to link from one chapter to another you enter [[../Chapter 2/]]. There are various other ways of linking up and down the chapters, but these are the basics. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 12:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and fast reply. Will try your suggested format for linking from one chapter to another and read the using wikibooks page. Sophie Michele Addison (discusscontribs) 13:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok so I've used your suggested format for linking to other chapters of the main book but it isn't taking me to their pages. Anything you could suggest? Sophie Michele Addison (discusscontribs) 14:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your version had an extra Digital Media and Culture Yearbook 2014/ between the ../ parent page reference and the subpage name (Chapter 3: Always-on Culture.) I think I’ve just fixed that. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 16:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah okay, I see now. Thanks very much for your help. Sophie Michele Addison (discusscontribs) 18:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

QuiteUnusual's advice is very wise. I'd also suggest checking oproblemtalk]] 18:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

For this, I was then wondering how you can link one section to another within a book/page, if this at all possible. ButtonsElizabeth (discusscontribs) 20:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

If I understand correctly - I'm not that technical - you want to add a link to somewhere else on the same page? This page (Wikibooks:Reading room/Assistance) has such a link. You can link to headings / sections of a page like this [[Wikibooks:Reading_room/Assistance#Linking_to_other_pages|whatever title you want]] which would appear on the page as whatever title you want. This link, if placed anywhere on Wikibooks, would link automatically to this section of the Reading room/Assistance page. Hope that makes some sense.--ЗAНИA Flag of Estonia.svgtalk 20:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
… Except that one does not have to use underscores (_) in such links. (And, arguably, should just use spaces instead.) — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 20:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Good point. I just copy and pasted from the TOC at the top of the page.--ЗAНИA Flag of Estonia.svgtalk 00:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problem[edit]

To me, it seems that the text on this website this website is provided for public use. Can I copy something from it to here? Please guide me.--Doostdar (discusscontribs) 19:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

The short answer is: yes, you can copy it, provided that you follow certain conditions.
Specifically, the textual contents of Wikibooks is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license. You can refer to its license deed page (available in several languages), or read the license text itself. The images here are also expected to be available under this or similar licenses, but in general, these should be examined individually.
See also the “Creative Commons license” and “Wikibooks” articles on Wikipedia.
Ivan Shmakov (dc) 19:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
sorry I corrected website's name and thanks for your quick answers. I didn't expect that--Doostdar (discusscontribs) 19:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Their ToU mentions postings, which makes the resource seem like some kind of a Web forum to me. The usual practice for Web fora is, AIUI, for the copyright to remain with the respective authors, with the forum service itself getting only some narrow “unlimited royalty-free verbatim redistribution” right, which is more restrictive than CC BY-SA employed at Wikibooks. Moreover, while the author grants (even if implicitly) the Web forum and its affiliates the right to redistribute the work, he or she does not necessarily allow that for any other party (such as the readers of the forum, or Wikibooks.) — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 19:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks. --Doostdar (discusscontribs) 20:09, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

How to justify the text[edit]

I am not sure if this is the place but if you can help me... I would like to set in my preferences the old feature "justify the text". How can I do it? --Circuit-fantasist (discusscontribs) 20:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

LGBT collaboration as part of Wiki Loves Pride 2014?[edit]

Greetings! I was wondering about the possibility of having a Wikibooks collaboration related to LGBT culture and history, as part of en:Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride 2014. This would be for the month (or part of the month) of June, when pride celebrations often take place. Thoughts? Or, is there another avenue in which this discussion should take place? I'd be more than happy to update the Wiki Loves Pride page with details about the Wikibooks project, if one comes to fruition. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for your consideration. --Another Believer (discusscontribs) 18:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Acknowledging contributors?[edit]

Hello all. I am trying to persuade colleagues to contribute to our Wikibook. The downside for them is that they could put a lot of work into a page, but their name won't appear on it (unless someone looks at the history), so their work won't be acknowledged. I am wondering if there is any established best practice for acknowledging contributors who put time into contributing to a book? Thanks, Peterz (discusscontribs) 11:11, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Some books have a page to list contributors who wish to be acknowledged. However anyone who contributes must agree to Foundation:Terms of Use#7. Licensing of Content and because of that agreement anyone may choose to include a hyperlink or URL to a copy of the book rather than include the list when distributing copies of the book or when making derivative works. --darklama 12:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, many books at Wikibooks have a page where contributors (if they want their name to appear in the book) can add their own name.
The most common arrangement I've seen is an "About" page that has an "Authors" section --
Indonesian/About#Authors, Video Game Design/About the Book#Authors, English in Use/About#Authors, German/About#Authors, Nanotechnology/About#Authors and Editors, C++ Programming/About the Book#Authors, Isometric Pixel Art/About, Transportation Economics/About#Authors, Fundamentals of Transportation/About#Authors, Hypnosis/About the Book#Authors, Urdu/About#Authors, etc.
--DavidCary (discusscontribs) 05:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks both! Peterz

Guidance on Research[edit]

Hi, Wikibooks! I am considering contributing significant amounts of material to the computer software section, but am unsure about the rules regarding research from printed sources. Specifically:

I have access to a substantial library of printed computer reference material. What is the policy for using such materials as research? I understand that I cannot simply copy/paste or transcribe material from copyrighted sources. However, what is the rule for using printed books as reference, and then writing the final version in my own words? As much as I’d like to, I cannot research everything myself, as I do not have immediate access to some of the software I want to document. Any pointers?

Thanks! — SupremeUmanu (discusscontribs) 23:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

You can use printed books as references. Usually published books have an ISDN that can be used to refer to a book in combination with Special:BookSources, like [[Special:BookSources/0615538665|US History]]. People will often reference material available for free online as well. References to multiple materials should be collected together in a bibliography like page within a book, rather then referencing material on every page like Wikipedia does. --darklama 00:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikibooks At Wikimania 2014[edit]

Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (discusscontribs) 13:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Nice idea, I'll take a look. I will be at Wikimania this year, so it'd be good to have something for our project! QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 14:37, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

I attempted to create a redirect notice, and now it's restricted from creating the template.[edit]

What does this mean? 2602:306:CC2E:EFB0:9DE5:C0F:4860:935D (discuss) 20:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

What precisely did you try to do? (For example, what page was involved? --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 04:24, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Listen and Learn Science[edit]

Hello, I am in the process of writing a science book for Visually Impaired students. The completed modules have been given to some students, in MP3 format, along with a player. Feed back is positive. Wish to publish ( and keep adding and updating ) this book in Wikibooks. The objective, is to reach out to more visually impaired students. They would be able to access the contents, using a screen reader. The content has no diagrams, or visuals. The contents ( like punctuation, spelling ) is tweaked, for a better audio experience. Though sighted children could refer to this book, I would expect the lack of visuals would be a handicap. Have put in a sample page called - Atomic Structure. I have a broad structure for the book. It is about 20% complete. I invite suggestions and contributions. --DManohar (discusscontribs) 13:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Please follow the normal structure for Wikibooks. Pages should be created as sub-pages. For rxample, Listen and Learn Science should have a sub-page of Listen and Learn Science/Atomic Structure and not Atomic Structure. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 10:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Copy/Paste Moves of Content Within Wikibooks[edit]

I have just started renovating Microsoft Office. I have added some code to the Windows Basics subpage, but I now want to move some of that content to different pages. I don’t simply want to move that page, as I will be splitting the named subpage into two different subpages (I’m planning on calling them “Windows Versions” and “Logging In and Out”, if you’re curious). It would seem that the best way to do this is to create a new page and copy/paste the relevant text into the new page.

However, Wikipedia has rules that restrict the use of copy/paste moves of content from one Wikipedia page to another. I was wondering what is the policy for such moves here. (By the way, if anyone has a better way to split a page in this fashion, please don’t hesitate to tell me.) Thanks!

SupremeUmanu (discusscontribs) 19:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Note: As no one has responded, and having researched Wikipedia’s policy on copying within the project, I am going to proceed following their rules as if they apply here. If this isn’t true, please tell me. Specifically, I will place {{Copied}} on the source page’s talk page, as required by w:Copying within Wikipedia.
You can move content freely inside the same work (if no opposition arises from the changes made, note that if the book is active or well developed you should probably post about the intended changes first). You can even copy (duplicate) content with some considerations across distinct projects or better yet if the content benefits from keeping synchronized and updated you can also try trasnclusion of the significant part or you can simply merge projects (if the source project is "dead" and not great loss of content will result from it). --Panic (discusscontribs) 06:47, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
… But in any case, my personal advice would be to always include a link to the source page in the “summary” for the edit. (As in: Copying contents of [[Example Book/Its section#And subsection]].) Otherwise, the text added may seem an original contribution (as per its “history” record), and thus violate the “BY” clause of the CC BY-SA license used here. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 06:59, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Agree, adding the comment should be a no-brainer (what else would one put int as a comment) but the licensing/copyright part is not correct, the general view is that the Wikibooks project ^(as the aggregate of all projects) is a itself a aggregation of works and so site wide umbrella license exists and inside the wiki environment of Wikimedia servers licensing issue do not occur, any licensing problem may only occur outside of Wikibooks (in the segregation of the individual works, like the required attributions etc and in importing content into the project).
As for the page history capability of shading ling on copyright issue I have been for years very vocal that people that have/need/want interests in asserting copyright should not rely too much on them. --Panic (discusscontribs) 08:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I’d consider the “BY” clause to be violated if the link to the author becomes unreachable from either the history (whether directly or indirectly, – via a link to the source page) or the talk page. Besides, without this, determining authorship becomes quite an issue, which may be required irrespective of the specific license used here. So, this is more or less the way of doing content moves that I try my best to enforce at Russian Wikibooks.Ivan Shmakov (dc) 07:55, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Notice also that the CC is more lenient/less detailed in this respect than the GFDL but we are in agreement authorship/rights ownership should be protected and preserved where merited. This is something that sadly does not concern (or is fully understood, even in its simple implications) by a large part of the community and something that seems to not concern Wikimedia beyond protecting their own interests. --Panic (discusscontribs) 17:13, 13 July 2014 (UTC)