Wikibooks:Reading room/General

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

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.

Pywikibot compat will no longer be supported - Please migrate to pywikibot core[edit]

Sorry for English, I hope someone translates this.
Pywikibot (then "Pywikipediabot") was started back in 2002. In 2007 a new branch (formerly known as "rewrite", now called "core") was started from scratch using the MediaWiki API. The developers of Pywikibot have decided to stop supporting the compat version of Pywikibot due to bad performance and architectural errors that make it hard to update, compared to core. If you are using pywikibot compat it is likely your code will break due to upcoming MediaWiki API changes (e.g. T101524). It is highly recommended you migrate to the core framework. There is a migration guide, and please contact us if you have any problem.

There is an upcoming MediaWiki API breaking change that compat will not be updated for. If your bot's name is in this list, your bot will most likely break.

Thank you,
The Pywikibot development team, 19:30, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #3—2015[edit]

10:44, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #3—2015[edit]

13:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Annotated Jurassic World Wikibook. Good idea?[edit]

I'm sure you're all aware that the summer blockbuster Jurassic World has just been released. Wikibooks's annotated texts policy states that works annotating movies can be created, and the featured status of the Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter suggests that these sorts of companion pieces to copyrighted works are acceptable here, so I was wondering if a book-length scene by scene breakdown of the screenwriting, cinematography, effects, scientific accuracy (especially), etc of Jurassic World, like a movie version of Cliffs or Spark Notes, would be a viable project here. Abyssal (discusscontribs) 01:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

It all depends on the "educational" content, in general blockbuster movies are not worth speaking much about in regards to creative writing or even the cinematography. This one in particular, Jurassic World, is a very poor example of movie art, its full of cliches and the logic of the script goes out of the window about 30m in. In general it would be better to go about it like we go about biographies, avoid covering contemporaneous subjects since they bring about a lot of emotional baggage... --Panic (discusscontribs) 09:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Wouldn't pointing out cliches have merit of its own? Abyssal (discusscontribs) 14:29, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Also, despite starting the list with "movie stuff" like the screenwriting and cinematography, I'm personally more interested in scientific criticism. If contemporaneous topics aren't allowed, then why is the Harry Potter book featured? Abyssal (discusscontribs) 17:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I would very much appreciate a book about writing/script writing clinches in general not particular to a specific movie, that would be educational.
Now regarding contemporaneous material I did not say we prohibit it but common sense dictates that it tends to be problematic and in general should be avoided. It rarely has any merit as contemporaneous topics are too "recent" to be of historic remark and importance (value, especially educational), lacking the time to contrast with what have and will happen. As an example, many movies had a very different status at the time they got to market (and a bit after) especially those that have very specific niches and did not get the blockbuster marketing expenses. For example w:Re-animator or the cycle w:Hellraiser did not had any special notability. Time is was defines what is culturally relevant.
In any case Jurassic World is bad-science fiction (very few connections to science facts or even scientific speculation) script wise, there is not much that is scientific about it, besides the points that it got from the first movie there isn't much positive to say in that regard. --Panic (discusscontribs) 00:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
"Jurassic World is bad-science fiction (very few connections to science facts or even scientific speculation) script wise, there is not much that is scientific about it,"
Well, yeah, that's kind of the point. Abyssal (discusscontribs) 19:22, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
As Panic writes, it is clearly allowed (i.e., fits within our content policies). In general, and this is a generalisation, book and other media annotations have tended to be for media that is either considered "classic" or appear as a set text for an educational course. But that doesn't exclude other work. Certainly detailed discussion of how such films are produced, using a particular film as an example, would be valuable. Personally I'd recommend starting the book and seeing how it evolves. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 11:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

HTTPS[edit]

22:00, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposal to create PNG thumbnails of static GIF images[edit]

The thumbnail of this gif is of really bad quality.
How a PNG thumb of this GIF would look like

There is a proposal at the Commons Village Pump requesting feedback about the thumbnails of static GIF images: It states that static GIF files should have their thumbnails created in PNG. The advantages of PNG over GIF would be visible especially with GIF images using an alpha channel. (compare the thumbnails on the side)

This change would affect all wikis, so if you support/oppose or want to give general feedback/concerns, please post them to the proposal page. Thank you. --McZusatz (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (discusscontribs) 05:08, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

What does a Healthy Community look like to you?[edit]

Community Health Cover art News portal.png

Hi,
The Community Engagement department at the Wikimedia Foundation has launched a new learning campaign. The WMF wants to record community impressions about what makes a healthy online community. Share your views and/or create a drawing and take a chance to win a Wikimania 2016 scholarship! Join the WMF as we begin a conversation about Community Health. Contribute a drawing or answer the questions on the campaign's page.

Why get involved?[edit]

The world is changing. The way we relate to knowledge is transforming. As the next billion people come online, the Wikimedia movement is working to bring more users on the wiki projects. The way we interact and collaborate online are key to building sustainable projects. How accessible are Wikimedia projects to newcomers today? Are we helping each other learn?
Share your views on this matter that affects us all!
We invite everyone to take part in this learning campaign. Wikimedia Foundation will distribute one Wikimania Scholarship 2016 among those participants who are eligible.

More information[edit]


Happy editing!

MediaWiki message delivery (discusscontribs) 23:42, 31 July 2015 (UTC)