This project page is move-protected.

Wikibooks:Reading room/General

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Replacement filing cabinet.svgArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions Assistance Requests Announcements
General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books General | Technical | Administrative Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions Bulletin Board

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.

Question about licensing[edit source]

Hi everyone,

if I publish a work that I authored on Wikibooks, can I publish the same work later as a copyrighted book with a publishing house? Or would that violate the terms of the CC license?

Thanks, --Dr.Viktor.B (discusscontribs) 18:36, 23 May 2021 (UTC) (moved here from above)[reply]

@Dr.Viktor.B: usually that would violate the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, unless the book itself is published under a compatible license with CC-BY-SA. CC-BY-SA is a share-alike license, meaning any derivative works have to be released under the same or similar licence as the original. This is also called copyleft. I would imagine that publishing houses would not want to publish under a copyleft licence, although I might be wrong in this regard. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 13:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 1[edit source]

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 1, June 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the first issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code, and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

Please note, this is the first issue of UCoC Newsletter which is delivered to all subscribers and projects as an announcement of the initiative. If you want the future issues delivered to your talk page, village pumps, or any specific pages you find appropriate, you need to subscribe here.

You can help us by translating the newsletter issues in your languages to spread the news and create awareness of the new conduct to keep our beloved community safe for all of us. Please add your name here if you want to be informed of the draft issue to translate beforehand. Your participation is valued and appreciated.

  • Affiliate consultations – Wikimedia affiliates of all sizes and types were invited to participate in the UCoC affiliate consultation throughout March and April 2021. (continue reading)
  • 2021 key consultations – The Wikimedia Foundation held enforcement key questions consultations in April and May 2021 to request input about UCoC enforcement from the broader Wikimedia community. (continue reading)
  • Roundtable discussions – The UCoC facilitation team hosted two 90-minute-long public roundtable discussions in May 2021 to discuss UCoC key enforcement questions. More conversations are scheduled. (continue reading)
  • Phase 2 drafting committee – The drafting committee for the phase 2 of the UCoC started their work on 12 May 2021. Read more about their work. (continue reading)
  • Diff blogs – The UCoC facilitators wrote several blog posts based on interesting findings and insights from each community during local project consultation that took place in the 1st quarter of 2021. (continue reading)

22:07, 10 June 2021‎ (UTC)

Wikimania 2021: Individual Program Submissions[edit source]

Wikimania logo with text 2.svg

Dear all,

Wikimania 2021 will be hosted virtually for the first time in the event's 15-year history. Since there is no in-person host, the event is being organized by a diverse group of Wikimedia volunteers that form the Core Organizing Team (COT) for Wikimania 2021.

Event Program - Individuals or a group of individuals can submit their session proposals to be a part of the program. There will be translation support for sessions provided in a number of languages. See more information here.

Below are some links to guide you through;

Please note that the deadline for submission is 18th June 2021.

Announcements- To keep up to date with the developments around Wikimania, the COT sends out weekly updates. You can view them in the Announcement section here.

Office Hour - If you are left with questions, the COT will be hosting some office hours (in multiple languages), in multiple time-zones, to answer any programming questions that you might have. Details can be found here.

Best regards,

MediaWiki message delivery (discusscontribs) 04:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of Wikimania 2021 Core Organizing Team

Please provide input here or on Meta and during an upcoming Global Conversation on 26-27 June 2021 about the Movement Charter drafting committee[edit source]

Hello, I'm one of the Movement Strategy and Governance facilitators working on community engagement for the Movement Charter initiative.

We're inviting input widely from users of many projects about the upcoming formation of the Movement Charter drafting committee. You can provide feedback here, at the central discussion on Meta, at other ongoing local conversations, and during a Global Conversation upcoming on 26 and 27 June 2021.

The Movement Charter drafting committee is expected to work as a diverse and skilled team of about 15 members for several months. They should receive regular support from experts, regular community reviews, and opportunities for training and an allowance to offset costs. When the draft is completed, the committee will oversee a wide community ratification process.

Creating the drafting committee

Further details and context about these questions is on Meta along with a recently-updated overview of the Movement Charter initiative. Feel free to ask questions, and add additional sub-sections as needed for other areas of interest about this topic.

If contributors are interested in participating in a call about these topics ahead of the Global Conversation on 26 and 27 June, please let me know. Xeno (WMF) (discusscontribs) 16:41, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The three questions are:

  1. What composition should the committee have in terms of movement roles, gender, regions, affiliations and other diversity factors?
  2. What is the best process to select the committee members to form a competent and diverse team?
  3. How much dedication is it reasonable to expect from committee members, in terms of hours per week and months of work?

Editing news 2021 #2[edit source]

14:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Server switch[edit source]

SGrabarczuk (WMF) 01:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What can I do here?[edit source]

Im scared to edit. I dont know what to do. Help, anyone? Thank you 😊. Unazcorp0 (discusscontribs) 20:06, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unazcorp0, and welcome to Wikibooks. You may want to start reading books and start small, e. g. by correcting spelling or grammar mistakes. My very first edit here was also just that. Kai Burghardt (discusscontribs) 10:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiAsk[edit source]

I ran across WikiAsk proposal recently. Some people oppose it with argument that the content fits in Wikibooks scope. So my question is, does Q&A fit in Wikibooks scope? Does any subset of Q&A, e.g. short HOWTOs, fit in Wikibooks scope? Is there any Q&A content already? I couldn't find any myself. HOWTOs occur only randomly as part of larger books. Policy seems to prohibit Q&A. HOWTOs could be argued to be instructional, but they are by no means textbooks. — Robert Važan (talk) 02:03, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert Važan: HOWTO materials aren't prohibited - after all, many of the more programming-oriented books and strategy guides are forms of "HOWTO". That being said, while we do have WB:RR, Wikibooks is not a replacement for StackOverflow, because the latter allows people to ask for questions to be answered, which is not the purpose of Wikibooks. MediaWiki in general is a poor choice for a Q/A style website - StackOverflow-style places are forum-first, not wiki-first, and something like Discourse would be a better choice. Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 11:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Leaderboard: Wiki is a good platform for Q&A if it is used correctly. Notice that many answers on StackOverflow are "community wiki" already, which is a workaround for flaws of the standard StackOverflow page structure. But usability of wiki for Q&A is beside the point here. I am asking about inclusion criteria and site structure. Can there be standalone (short) HOWTOs on Wikibooks or should they be always a part of some book? And if someone creates a page that asks a question, i.e. it contains only a notice requesting someone to fill in the content, will the page get deleted? — Robert Važan (talk) 13:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert Važan: While there is some precedent of what you describe, in general no, because a FAQ in itself cannot comprise a book. As part of a book perhaps. And "someone creates a page that asks a question" will generally be speedily-deleted after a week as abandoned or out-of-scope.
A book that contains FAQs as a side would be OK, a book that's only a FAQ isn't because that's not a book. Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 16:15, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Leaderboard: PS: Do FAQs belong in Wikibooks? Because Q&A site is essentially a giant shared FAQ. — Robert Važan (talk) 13:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert Važan: I don’t think so. Wikibooks is, hence its name, a site for books, you know, like textbooks. As such they are at some point “finished”, so you can, in theory, read them stem to stern. This will hardly be the case for a mere Q‘n’A‑“book”. Most users will simply duckduckgo their question and after it’s been solved [ideally] never consult the source again. IMO this is pretty similar to a dictionary. (Nonetheless, FAQs may still appear as part of books, but they rather have a “preemptive” character.) Kai Burghardt (discusscontribs) 14:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on WB:NFCC[edit source]

I'm looking for some clarification on WB:NFCC. I'd like to use Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney/Episode 2: Turnabout Sisters/Day 2 - Trial as an example page. This page (and the whole book associated with it) makes extensive use of non-free images, and I feel this contradicts a number of the Criteria.

  • 1b) The images are used repeatedly for aesthetic purposes.
  • 4) StrategyWiki is not the original copyright holder for any of these images.

I believe 1a) is also not met on a number of pages, but not specifically on this one. -- Prod (discusscontribs) 19:14, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's some pages with more images than that, but in the rationale for those images (still being kept to a minimum) it says that these images show what the characters and icons look like. 2005-Fan (discusscontribs) 19:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
After the first interaction, the player should know who the character is without showing the same picture repeatedly. Having the image on the characters page should suffice. -- Prod (discusscontribs) 19:41, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good point. It prob does violate 1b, although I figured the rationale stated that the image wasn't uploaded solely for aesthetic purpose, but is to illustrate someone in the guide. 2005-Fan (discusscontribs) 19:45, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To me (and this is just my opinion looking at the page, others can disagree), I don't think it contradicts the criteria. While @SuperHamster: is right in that other Wikimedia projects are unlikely to tolerate the use of these non-free images, this is Wikibooks and to me at least, I can imagine the quality of the page being diminished if these images are removed (citing rule 8). I would agree with @2005-Fan: here. We certainly don't want to be as hard as Wikipedia with their irritating DatBot. Consider it as my thoughts under personal capacity. Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 18:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you guys feel that having the exact content from the game included on these pages falls under wikibooks fair use? -- Prod (discusscontribs) 15:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Linking to an over two hour video of gameplay footage without greater context, time stamps (I understand that since the YouTube shortlink is blocked on Wikimedia projects, this is a bit difficult to share natively), etc. makes it less likely to get a response, especially from general wikibooks users who aren't involved video game strategy guides (Since we are in the general section of the reading room). I think I get the gist of what you are saying though. At 1:09:18 (?t=4158) the Bellboy makes his testimony in the game. In the import from strategywiki at Phoenix_Wright:_Ace_Attorney/Episode_2:_Turnabout_Sisters/Day_2_-_Trial#Bellboy's_Testimony:_Miss_May's_Room_Service, this testimony is transcribed verbatim. I didn't scrub the video for other testimony scenes, but I understand you are saying that every testimony in this guide is transcribed in such an exact way, correct? Granted the proceeding and following conversations are not transcribed (Otherwise this guide would be substantially longer), but that is roughly a paragraph or so of direct quotations per testimony. I'm not knowledgeable enough about policy to comment on what exactly should be done though. Still I hope that this explanation helps other Wikibooks users make a decision. (Assuming I understood Prod correctly.) --Mbrickn (discusscontribs) 16:01, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I thought i copy-pasted the timestamp. I've updated the link above (t=2386), which corresponds to this section. But yes, as you mentioned, these segments of the game are transcribed verbatim from the game into the guide. -- Prod (discusscontribs) 18:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 2[edit source]

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 2, July 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the second issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

If you haven’t already, please remember to subscribe here if you would like to be notified about future editions of the newsletter, and also leave your username here if you’d like to be contacted to help with translations in the future.

  • Enforcement Draft Guidelines Review - Initial meetings of the drafting committee have helped to connect and align key topics on enforcement, while highlighting prior research around existing processes and gaps within our movement. (continue reading)
  • Targets of Harassment Research - To support the drafting committee, the Wikimedia Foundation has conducted a research project focused on experiences of harassment on Wikimedia projects. (continue reading)
  • Functionaries’ Consultation - Since June, Functionaries from across the various wikis have been meeting to discuss what the future will look like in a global context with the UCoC. (continue reading)
  • Roundtable Discussions - The UCoC facilitation team once again, hosted another roundtable discussion, this time for Korean-speaking community members and participants of other ESEAP projects to discuss the enforcement of the UCoC. (continue reading)
  • Early Adoption of UCoC by Communities - Since its ratification by the Board in February 2021, situations whereby UCoC is being adopted and applied within the Wikimedia community have grown. (continue reading)
  • New Timeline for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee - The CRC was originally expected to conclude by July 1. However, with the UCoC now expected to be in development until December, the timeline for the CRC has also changed. (continue reading)
  • Wikimania - The UCoC team is planning to hold a moderated discussion featuring representatives across the movement during Wikimania 2021. It also plans to have a presence at the conference’s Community Village. (continue reading)
  • Diff blogs - Check out the most recent publications about the UCoC on Wikimedia Diff blog. (continue reading)

Thanks for reading - we welcome feedback about this newsletter. Xeno (WMF) (discusscontribs) 02:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]