Wikibooks:Reading room/Projects

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 Projects reading room. On this page, Wikibookians can talk about subjects related to books, book projects, and other tasks here on Wikibooks that require discussion and organization.

New Wikibook-Text to glossary linking[edit]

Hi there,I wonder if anyone could give me some advice. I am collaborating on a wikibook for university and we were wondering how to mark words in the main text to let the readers know that they are further explained in the glossary Below? I was thinking, is it possible to link the word itself where they can just click on it and be taken to it's definition in the glossary while they read? Thanks for any help. JordanFerguson93 (discusscontribs) 01:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@JordanFerguson93: It looks like you're working on Perspectives in Digital Culture, right? You can have text like the following:
And now I will explain [[Perspectives in Digital Culture/Glossary#Cookies|cookies]]: blah, blah, blah
Using anchors just like in HTML, you can link to a part of a document. Please let me know if you need more help. —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Koavf,thank you for your help,I'll have a look about and try a few things to see what works best JordanFerguson93 (discusscontribs) 22:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
You can link the glossary section, such as Wikijunior:Asia/Sri Lanka#Where is Sri Lanka, which links to the specific section. Is that what you were looking for? --atcovi (talk) 01:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
I use a similar method, without the need to create sections in the glossary, in Castles of England. If you look at Castles of England/The Development of the Castle you'll see a link to the Glossary for "Feudal system" that uses what appears to be a section link (Castles of England/English Castle Glossary#Feudal system). In the glossary itself this isn't a section - it's an anchor to a section coded like this <div id="Feudal system"></div> to provide the target for the link. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 09:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Great thanks for your help,don't quite have the hang of it yet but I'll try again tommorow. JordanFerguson93 (discusscontribs) 22:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Time to archive this section? (discuss) 00:00, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

A+ Certification[edit]

Hello everyone,

I have come into a job role that includes mentoring individuals for A+ Certification, and have begun contributing to the A+ Certification wikibook as part of this. I came across the material some time ago, but the information was sparse and in a monolithic format. Given the size of the task, I'm not surpised that several people have contributed, then abandoned the book. Is it common for a large project to have just one editor for some time, or do you see that large projects eventually pick up steam?

Although I've been a registered user from quite some time, I had been hesitant to edit anything or step into the project. I doubt I would have been the saving grace of the project, but I realize that not contributing is exactly why the book is where it is right now. Just recently, I have begun to rearrange the information into a more hierarchical format centered around the exam objectives. Before I create too many pages that link back to the objectives, I was wondering if anyone had any advice about the current structure or what I can do to improve from here. SweBers (discusscontribs) 13:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, SweBers. It's not uncommon, I think, for a book to have only one active contributor at a time. It seems to me Wikibookians have more respect for contributors not now present, for this reason; I've got the impression Wikipedians tend to figure if somebody's not there now they don't get a say in what happens, but our project culture at Wikibooks is stronger on continuity. We do adopt books, make major changes, etc.; we just do it with more advanced notice, more consideration. It's happened to me twice. I slowly got more involved in, and eventually made some significant adjustments to, the Conlang Wikibook, and later on I cautiously, with advance notice, did a major overhaul of Wikijunior:World Religions, a book that had been started years before and had just failed to spark. With the religions book, I rewrote the list of questions to be answered for each religion, to make it easy to describe religions of very different kinds. Since the overhaul, we now get folks coming by from time to time and adding content to one or another page, which just never used to happen because it wasn't easy enough to do; even though there's not a whole lot of activity, the book is now alive in a way it wasn't before, which I admit gives me a good feeling. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 14:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Where is the best place to ask for bot assistance? I'm not even sure if there is a bot that can do what I need. If you look at the main list of objectives for this book, I want to make a page for each of these items, link each item to the page, and then add navigation from one page to the next, as you see at the bottom of the page. I have been doing it by hand, so someone would have to pick it up mid-stream and finish it. Theoretically, I would think a bot could handle this, but this is pretty specific.SweBers (discusscontribs) 20:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Geodesic Grids[edit]

Hello, everyone. I've been working on a Wikibook about geodesic grids. Geodesic grids are the way to go if you've ever wanted to put a triangular grid over the surface of a sphere. (You're in a pretty exclusive club if you have, but that's neither here nor there.)

I've reached a state where at least the basics are all there, and I'd appreciate a review from someone who knows what Wikibooks idioms I might be unwittingly violating. There are a lot of <math> statements too, so if you're any good at TeX, I'd appreciate another set of eyes on that. Thank you! -Apocheir (discusscontribs) 00:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)