Wikibooks:Reading room/General

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

ArchivesReading rooms

Assistance	Discussions	Requests	Proposals
General | Technical | Administrative (Usurps/Renaming)	General | Projects	Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions | Features	Featured books | Policies/Guidelines

Contents 1 Restriction of image uploads 2 ebooks 3 Volunteers still needed 4 Deleting a new book 5 Protect Featured Books listing 6 How to contact editor of a page? Or make comment to clarify issue on page. 7 COMPARISON POEMS 8 Please I need help!!

Shortcut: WB:SLC WB:CHAT WB:RR/G Welcome to the General reading room. On this page, Wikibookians are free to talk about the Wikibooks project, and all sorts of related subjects. Post a comment Please title your request and sign your name and date (by adding four tildes thus: ~~~~. General References: Reference works to use to build books Public domain and fair use Newest Books Open Source Music Guide Digital Integrated Circuits Easy Japanese Linux Kernel - The Final Reference Guide to Internet Culture The Use of English with Other Members of the Thai Academic Community among Dhurakij Pundit University’s Postgraduate Business Students GCSE Computing Random Processes in Communication and Control Social Networking RCA Open Source Application: ROSA Manual Extremaduran Standard ML Programming The Complete Encyclopedia of Self-Help Techniques The Prince New Zealand's Search for Security 1945-1985 An Imaging Guide to Mars Historical Rhetorics Strategy for Information Markets Black Dragon Martial Arts International English Language Testing System The Singularity Aramaic Linux For Users When It Hits the Fan Lojban Made Easy start a book • suggest a book

[edit] Restriction of image uploads

I would like to propose restricting image uploads to administrators only and for fair use images only. There are 4,168 GFDL images, 595 GPL images, 369 public domain works, and 753 free screenshots that all have valid licenses and could be moved to Commons with CommonsHelper. I've done so myself for some. There's no point in me doing so if more could be uploaded, however. These images are unable to be used by any other project by keeping them here. Allowing image uploading puts additional burden on our administrators to not only check for licensing, but to also ensure said licensing is valid for the images in question. Administrators on Commons have become experts in their field and the tools on commons are far better suited to handling images. In addition, the fact that people can upload images here means we get a great number of images conflicting with those on Commons, meaning that people can effectively prevent others from using images thought to be generally available. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 01:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I advise separating out upload as a separate right, because this would become a PITA as non admins couldn't upload PDFs Geoff Plourde (talk) 02:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Support. Also worth mentioning in this proposal discussion is that the only reason why we should keep and support fair use images is because they aren't supported on Wikimedia Commons (see their FAQ for the reason]. --Panic (talk) 02:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that would only increase work for admins from requests to upload fair use files. If upload was made a separate right that admins could give out and take from users than perhaps. Wikimedia Commons accepts PDFs too so I don't think what Geoff Plourde raised would be an issue. As an experiment down that road perhaps first uploads could be limited to users with the editors flag? --darklama 02:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Since the project is primarily text based and only editors would require uploading PDFs (mostly as static snapshots of the works), this would avoid errors and permit commons to be used to deal with everyday image issues (granting the right to more experienced/invested users would also reduce issues of verifying the fair use status). --Panic (talk) 02:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Darklama, this is wikibooks, Commons may appreciate the PDF files, but people would be snickering as to why the books aren't on the bookcase. Geoff Plourde (talk) 02:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I support restricting the rights in some way. I'd prefer it to be to those with the editor right or a separate upload right rather than Admins only. We do, however, allow uploading of personal images (e.g., for a user page) that the user may not want to put on Commons. Not sure if this is a big issue. Unusual? Quite ^TalkQu 08:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say uploads of images for personal use on user pages was allowed. I think that is another problem area. WB:HOST and image requirements would both disqualify them. Of course that is another area of repeated discussion. --darklama 13:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

If they lack licensing, I've deleted pictures used on user pages just as if they were used elsewhere in the wiki. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 14:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I delete them too. I meant sending people over to Commons to upload a personal image would possibly discourage them from doing so (a properly licensed personal image that is) - was that a big problem? Of course, the other issue with this proposal is we then create loads of work for Admins at Commons dealing with our problem - i.e., handling incorrectly licensed media uploaded by Wikibooks contributors. They might not be pleased! Unusual? Quite ^TalkQu 14:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I support disabling uploads of images to Wikibooks. Keep it simple, stupid! ;) --Martin Kraus (talk) 11:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not so sure this is a great idea. (I no longer oppose this restriction - Jomegat (talk) 02:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)) Book covers really don't belong at the Commons, as they aren't generally applicable. Several people have "About the Author" pages in their user space, and I could see them not wanting their pictures so broadly available. As for them not being allowed, I have never seen that as a policy, and I think having author images is highly useful (especially when arranging meet-ups with fellow Wikimedians). The Board of Trustees election features images of the candidates too. Restricting rights should be the last option exercised for solving a problem, and I just don't see that this is a huge one. I don't think it warrants the restriction anyhow. --Jomegat (talk) 14:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Your very example with the candidates, when examined, shows that many of the candidates are using pictures hosted at Commons. If a picture is using a license compatible with commons, there's nothing prohibiting me or someone else (as far as I'm aware) from using CommonsHelper to move it and then delete the local copy. Also, why wouldn't someone want their picture at Commons to easily use it on their user pages across all projects? -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 14:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

That example was intended to demonstrate that hard-core Wikimedians do upload their own images to Wikimedia servers. New Wikibookians may not want their images as widely available, but I would concede the point that we could force them to upload those to the Commons. But take a look at who mostly does this - class projects. They are new to WB, and adding an additional barrier to their participation here seems like an ill-advised move. Those are exactly the people we want to attract to this project. As to why they wouldn't want them available for all WM projects, I think I can make a case for that. They may want to test the waters here before jumping into the larger WM ocean. When I started here, I wanted to be about as low-key as I could, not wanting to advertise my presence far and wide, and I certainly did not want to attract any attention. I had no idea if the folk here were friendly or hostile (turns out they are friendly!) Once I was comfortable here, I was willing to branch out to other projects. IMO, this project is already hard enough for the newbie without us erecting more barriers to participation. --Jomegat (talk) 14:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure hardcore Wikimedians upload images of themselves, but they need to be properly licensed. Images "for personal use" aren't compatible with WMFs licensing requirements. I think the barrier for new Wikibookians is that they don't understand there is no difference in using an image uploaded to Wikimedia Commons because often times new Wikibookians ask "How do I use an image I've uploaded to Commons?" The upload link could be made to point directly to Wikimedia Commons' upload forum to reduce confusion on what needs to be done to upload files there which I think would reduce any barriers for new Wikibookians. --darklama 18:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

If that could be done, then I would agree that it would remove the barriers to which I object. It would also remove my objections. --Jomegat (talk) 20:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed it can be done. I did some research and it looks like $wgUploadNavigationUrl is just the thing we need. It should have http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload rather than the link shown in the example, however. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 13:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment Since vfd on the Template:GFDL-presumed as been rightfully closed due to the prioritization of the steps, even that the discussion seemed not to be only about the template but all tagged files (at least I thought that was the debate). A question (that runs parallel and was the precursor to this proposal discussion) needs to be resolved. What should we do with those images tagged with that template. Should we re-tag them with {{No license}} and re-notify the creators so we can delete any unlicensed images ? --Panic (talk) 02:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose I strongly believe that uploads to Wikibooks should be allowed. Registered users should be allowed, that is mainly what the group is for. Arlen22 (talk) 02:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The proposal is not for preventing uploads to Wikibooks (the discussion is lengthy and maybe something have escaped you). As a simplification to what was already said consider an alternative thread/proposal name like "Avoid the duplication of efforts with Commons" or "Free Wikibooks images from Wikibooks".

Do you have any reason not to want others outside Wikibook to use "our" images or see anything positive in duplicating the work of Commons on Wikibooks with a cost of time to the administrators and an extra layer of abstraction to Wikipediasn in general for using commons images on Wikibooks ? --Panic (talk) 02:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

No, but I think it would be better to just simply make it a policy instead of restricting upload rights. Arlen22 (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Changing $wgUploadNavigationUrl in LocalSettings.php will simply direct them to Commons, which has a much better system set up. Only making it policy still requires enforcement of whatever the policy might be. When I first proposed this I wasn't aware we could change the URL with the aforementioned setting, but changing the URL means restrictions aren't needed because they would only apply here, not at Commons. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 17:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

OOOOkkkkaaaayyyy we could maybe do that. But what about book covers. I used wikibooks to design the cover for Messier Index but not all covers can be done that way. How would we handle that. Arlen22 (talk) 12:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

When you say design I think you meant upload or use. That remains the same the only change would be the repository of the files, I don't see how it could be a problem with any cover... --Panic (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I meant what I said. Check it out. Messier Index/Cover Arlen22 (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The cover you made for Messier Index uses images from Commons. Should someone want to create an original image, it can be uploaded to Commons. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 14:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I meant that instead of drawing it using Inkscape or PictureIt, I made it using a <div> tag. Arlen22 (talk) 19:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I agree with restricted uploads on Wikibooks. Arlen22 (talk) 19:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Otherwise, I don't have a problem with it. It would eliminate some problems. But it should be a available to Admins so they can upload fair-use images and book covers. Otherwise, I heartily support it. Thanks for reminding me about this discussion, Panic, I had my mind on other things and saw an email saying you had edited my talk page. Arlen22 (talk) 12:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Now that I look at it, I think that we could change the link, but still have the special page available, and have an uploader right (I think we might have that already). This would be better. But what would we do with registered users? Arlen22 (talk) 12:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment While I think this is a good idea in general, I strongly recommend setting this up as a usergroup (like "Uploader"), rather than restricting to admins. It could also easily be set up as revocable by either admins or 'crats, if there's any concern about that. --SB_Johnny ^talk 15:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment I was thinking there was an uploader group already. But there is none, you are right. We could do that. There is an import group already, not upload. Arlen22 (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Question: Are we going to allow personal pictures on Wikibooks or not? Arlen22 (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Why should we? This point was already covered above and there is already viable solutions to reduce the barriers to Wikibookians. The images would be ok on commons.

If you feel that all your points have now been resolved or have been given a viable resolution, please consider altering you vote so we can work out the details and start reducing duplications and move some of the pictures to commons this in itself will take some time. --Panic (talk) 20:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Support Thank-you, all my questions have been answered now. As for Registered Users, that is also good for other stuff, this would not render it useless. Arlen22 (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, this closes any of the objections put forward so far. Some solutions were given to the raised issues and the last post to the thread was done in 14 Sep. So I'm moving for a close on this proposal as adopted if no new objection is raised in the next 7 days. --Panic (talk) 20:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

This proposal by User:Adrignola in 4 August 2009 should now be considered as adopted without any standing opposition.
A resume of the positions and solution expressed above and resulting pending tasks by steps (if something is missing or can be better stated, feel free to correct it).

• The upload page will be redesigned so to indicate Wikibookians to use Commons by changing $wgUploadNavigationUrl in LocalSettings.php will simply direct them to Commons.
• All the images and PDFs GFDL, GPL, public domain works, and free screenshots that have valid licenses should be moved to Commons with CommonsHelper.
• Local Image uploads will be restricted to fair use images only.
• Image uploads will be by default restricted to administrators+ (they will have the flag on by default).
• Adminstration will create a separate right/usergroup (like "Uploader") that can then be requested/given to other registered Wikibookians.
• A standard solution to address conflicting images with those on Commons must be created.
• Any files still using the Template:No license, Template:Nfur, Template:No license alternate or Template:Nld should be deleted and the templates merged/deleted. We should probably add Template:GFDL-presumed files to that list too.

--Panic (talk) 02:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Posted to Bugzilla as bug 21011. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 04:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] ebooks

what about sharing and uploading of ebooks on wiki ? many people have prewritten books in pdf or word format that he might have obtained from somewhere or else written himself with hard work and right-protected it so that it could not be edited. isn't it possible to directly upload the books on wiki and regulate their existence on wiki based upon their relevance of contents and stuff written that could be checked on by some regulating authority....or administrators etc.

Er.RohitKashyap@gmail.com

That isn't the objective of the project. See Wikibooks:What is Wikibooks?, you are free to propose changes to that policy... --Panic (talk) 18:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Volunteers still needed

Hi all,
Although we soon will remove the centralnotice that is up, the Wikimedia Foundation is still looking for volunteers to serve as subject area experts or to sit on task forces that will study particular areas and make recommendations to the Foundation about its strategic plan. You may apply to serve on a task force or register your name as an expert in a specific area at http://volunteer.wikimedia.org.

The Foundation's strategy project is a year-long collaborative process which is hosted on the strategy wiki, at http://strategy.wikimedia.org. Your input is welcome (and greatly desired) there. When the task forces begin to meet, they will do their work transparently and on that wiki, and any member of the community may join fully in their work. This process is specifically designed to involve as many community members as possible.

Any questions can be addressed to me either on my talk page here or on the strategy wiki or by email to philippe at wikimedia.org.

I hope you'll consider joining us!

(strategy:User:Philippe) 01:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting a new book

I am totally new to Wikibooks but I tried to create a new book named: Visual Prolog for Windows but I didn't understood how it works so I typed Visual Prolog 7.2 for Windows I want to delete the book. I saw the sandbox reference but I didn't know how to access it but now I am starting to get it. So how can I delete the book ? It is totally empty.

I don't want to pollute the site with junk. I hope I am in the right section. PY (talk) 19:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC).

Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks. Only administrators can delete books. To request deletion you put {{delete}} at the top of the page and an administrator will delete it for you (I've deleted the one you requested to be deleted). The sandbox can be found by entering "WB:Sandbox" in the Search box or by clicking here Unusual? Quite ^TalkQu 18:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

An easier way is to use redirect instead of deletion. For example the page could say #REDIRECT [[Visual Prolog for Windows]]. SunCreator (talk) 15:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Protect Featured Books listing

I propose that we increase the protection placed on Featured Books so that it can be edited only by admins. There have been several edits to this page in the past where people have added books that have not been officially featured. These are usually caught and rolled back, but not always. In one case, a book was added that doesn't even exist here, and it was not caught until today. Since promoting a book to FB status requires a discussion and consensus, I really don't see a reason why any registered user should be able to edit the official list. This suggestion was prompted by an anonymous user who noted that there are several books on the list that do not indicate their status on their own pages (which is fine). I did some digging and found that most (perhaps all) of these books actually are featured, but the authoritative source of that info is in the archives. We could have a lot more trust in WB:FB if it were protected. --Jomegat (talk) 13:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

What went wrong with your edit to that page? The description says you were removing "Proakis" (though what that is, I'm not actually sure), but in fact you removed two books that, honestly, I thought were legitimately featured, and added a random word to the bottom of the page. If the former weren't mistakes, the latter surely was. (And you want to protect the page such that only an admin could fix little flubs like that? ... asked the non-admin.)

It does seem as if ideally the page would simply be subject to review, which should limit editing to registered users with a bit more maturity (or if not, then perhaps they should lose that bit). Might we move Featured Books to a reviewable namespace (or, more radically, make the Wikibooks: namespace reviewable)?

(BTW, in composing this note I actually had some of my edit buffer get garbled somewhere in process, which makes me wonder if that could have happened to the edit to Featured Books.) --Pi zero (talk) 14:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what went wrong with that edit. I rolled it back. I can also not find any trace of the Proakis entry. (Proakis is the author of several books on Digital Signal Processing, but of course, none of those are available here. Someone had at one point added one of his DSP books to WB:FB.) Maybe I was hallucinating, but I am somewhat relieved of that notion by your note that you too have experienced a bit of weirdness. --Jomegat (talk) 16:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] How to contact editor of a page? Or make comment to clarify issue on page.

I am just getting started with wiki-books and need a bit of help. I don't want to go editing another persons hard work needlessly.

There is a page whereon the editor used a term midway with no definition of that term. I would like to contact them to ask for a definition of that term.

Is there a way to contact that person without "editing" his/her page?

I cannot "edit" the page because I do not know the intended use of that word.

Mindbender 10 NOV. 2009Mindbender (talk) 17:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Usually the thing to do is to ask your question (about the meaning of the term, in this case) on the talk page of the page in question. Click on the "discussion" tab when viewing the page; that will take you to its talk page. --Pi zero (talk) 18:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] COMPARISON POEMS

Nobody has posted bout comparison poems!!! HELO?!

Feel free to fix that oversight. I don't even know what comparison poems are. BTW, please end your posts with ~~~~ so we can see who said what, and when. Those four tildes will be replaced by a customizable signature →  — Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 15:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please I need help!!

How can I find a book about Chinese textbook? --Pessoa (talk) 22:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)pessoa

You can find plenty of books on Chinese at Subject:Chinese language. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 23:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)