|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.
What are the exceptions of the policy on redirects?
WB:SPEEDY includes "Orphaned redirects that do not conform with Wikibooks:Naming policy or where the names are unlikely to be inadvertently searched for by anyone" as a speedy deletion criterion. While I find the rationale behind that rule reasonable, in practice I feel that there are some reasonable uses of redirects in specific circumstances, and in fact I have created a few of them in my work at Haskell ("a few", as opposed to, say, systematically setting up alternate names for every page in the book, which would be quite unreasonable). I am thinking of three special cases:
- To begin with the uncontroversial one, there are the redirects automatically created for moved pages, which prevent link rot both within the book and across the Internet.
- A related possibility are what we might call "clairvoyance redirects", which are created to prevent link rot and minimise maintenance work due to a planned future reorganisation of the book. One example in the Haskell book is Haskell/Applicative functors II. I created that because I predicted the target page would eventually have to be split, and so it would be somewhat useful to have a link for using at off-wiki places that wouldn't break after the split. (In this case, though, I currently believe the split will not be necessary after all, and so this redirect will likely end up deleted in any case.)
- Finally, there are "shortener redirects", which exist merely for supplying convenient links (be them internal to the book or off-wiki) for pages with long titles. For instance, depending on the outcome of this discussion I will create Haskell/Applicative prologue as a redirect to the new and unorthodoxly-titled Haskell/Prologue: IO, an applicative functor (in fact, I might even add an information box to the top of the page telling readers about the redirect).
Are any of these use cases, or any others, acceptable?
- A general observation: in my experience, most projects aren't terribly red-tape-ish about speedy-deletion criteria; mostly, these sorts of criteria make it safe for an admin to exercise common sense in deleting various kinds of pages without risk of getting in seriously hot water for doing so. (En.wp tends to red tape, so I suspect their criteria may be treated more as directives than mere permission; of course, en.wp also notoriously has no regular mechanism for revoking adminship.)
- Link rot — how important it is to leave a link after moving probably depends on whether it's the main page of a book or merely one of its subpages, and how long it sat around under the old name, and various issues of old/new page content. Afaik the wiki software, at least in the non-mobile interface, provides a trail of breadcrumbs so it's usually possible to follow a link to the new location of the page after the redirect has been deleted. If someone involved with a book requests deletion of redirects left from moves, I'd probably honor the request in most cases.
- Shortner redirects — within a book, and within reason, this seems to me like mostly an internal choice for the book's contributors.
- --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:54, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pi zero: That sounds entirely reasonable -- and it's of course great that we can avoid excessive red tape by trusting our admins!
- (The only thing I would add is that I tend to care rather more than you suggest about external links to subpages. That is mainly because, despite our efforts to the contrary, people often talk about and share links to the Haskell book as if it was a collection of tutorials, rather than a cohesive book with a less pragmatic outlook. I believe that is in part thanks to cultural factors, and so there is not much we can do about it other than making the book even more cohesive and hoping readers appreciate the results. With such a state of affairs, I think it is worth it to play nice and see it that the links to the "Haskell tutorials at Wikibooks" across the Internet keep working, even if calling a chapter of the book a "tutorial" is, to my ears, akin to nails on a chalkboard...)
Where do phrasebooks for travellers belong? The question has come up in a Wikivoyage discussion and Wikibooks has been suggested. 2607:FEA8:E2A0:757:B093:6FBB:AD61:B5CB (discuss) 14:36, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
- Quite a few language books here have a section that's a phrase book. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:57, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Editing News #3—2016
17:49, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I apologise that this message is in English. ⧼Centralnotice-shared-help-translate⧽
We are having a problem with attackers taking over wiki accounts with privileged user rights (for example, admins, bureaucrats, oversighters, checkusers). It appears that this may be because of weak or reused passwords.
Community members are working along with members of multiple teams at the Wikimedia Foundation to address this issue.
In the meantime, we ask that everyone takes a look at the passwords they have chosen for their wiki accounts. If you know that you've chosen a weak password, or if you've chosen a password that you are using somewhere else, please change those passwords.
Select strong passwords – eight or more characters long, and containing letters, numbers, and punctuation. Joe Sutherland (discuss) / MediaWiki message delivery (discuss • contribs) 23:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Adding to the above section (Password reset)
Help test offline Wikipedia
Article creation wizard discussion
This proposal suggests WMF to fund the writing of an article creation wizard at Wikipedia, but with enough interest it may -- or may it not? -- be expanded to write an article creation wizards framework or library for use at non-Wikipedia wikis, such as here. If desired, please join the discussion before December 12. (I've sent this message to English wikis; I ask you to deliver it to non-English wikis, if you can. Even delivering it in English there may be better than nothing.)
- What tools do we use here, now, to make article creation easier for newbies?
- What requirements do we have for a potential implementation?
- How would you like to inform the people of the article creation perks and difficulties on this wiki?
- What else needs to be considered?
Thanks. --Gryllida 03:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- I've always suspected this problem — which I hope to tackle with assistants based on wikidialog — will be especially difficult on Wikibooks because we don't just create articles, we create books, and every book is different; it's as if Wikibooks is really thousands of different microprojects, banding together for a common administrative infrastructure but each with its own idiosyncrasies. (Making Wikibooks an idea place to explore the potential of wikidialog, of course.) --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 04:27, 6 December 2016 (UTC)