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.

Openstax Principles of Microeconomics[edit]

Three faculty at my college are interested in using and enhancing the Openstax Principles of Microeconomics CC-BY textbook. Would this be a project that the Wikibooks community would accept / support? If this goes well, we would likely want to follow with additional Openstax titles, including the other economics books and the sociology book.

I've done some brief testing. The content is available in HTML format, and that copies and pastes fairly well into the VisualEditor. Other than structuring the sections and the number of subpages required, I don't think the workload would be overwhelming for us in terms of getting the book added here.

If there is support for such a project, do you have any recommendations on examples of how it should be structured? It has 20 chapters, and each chapter has an average of four sections. The way the content is designed, it would be preferable to keep those sections separated, as different instructors may want to link to the sections in different sequences, etc.

Should this book be added as a new title of Principles of Microeconomics, or should it replace the existing Microeconomics?

And finally, do you have recommendations for how to properly reference the source when adding this content? Would you rather see it referenced in the page content, in the edit summary, or on the talk page? What is the community's preference for referencing imported content? I personally am inclined to include it in the page content so it appears when printed, but having the reference print on 80 separate pages may be overwhelming.

Thank you for your consideration and suggestions.

Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: This is a great opportunity. I'd be happy to help import it. As far as replacing the current Micro text, I'm hesitant because I don't want anything good to get lost between the two. There's no problem having two textbooks on the same topic if they are intended for different audiences (e.g. Intro to Algebra and Algebra or a WikiJunior Let's Meet the Presidents of the United States along with a serious book on presidential history and scholarship) but I don't see value in having two separate textbooks on the same topic for the same audience. I think references should be in some front matter and the edit summaries--most subpages really shouldn't have blue link talk pages in my opinion unless there is a narrow question about that subpage. I hope more Wikibookians contribute. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:56, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

This project is started at Principles of Microeconomics. All text is imported. Images still need to be imported and links corrected. If anyone wants to help import images, please feel free to join in. The source is CNX. I've been using Google Image Search to find the free source. Flickr images can be imported using the Flickr2Commons upload tool. When the original image isn't a CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, I've been looking for either Commons or open Flickr alternatives.

Regarding Wikibooks:Reviewers, what is local best practice? Are we allowed to review our own edits, or is it assumed that someone else should review a reviewer's edits?

Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:25, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: On en.wb flaggedrevs is an anti-vandalism device, so there's no problem with self-sighting edits. Presumably you aren't yourself vandalizing pages or you wouldn't have the review bit here, yes? :-)  Autoreview is enabled here (I think that's what it's called): when you edit a page whose most recent version is sighted, you automatically sight your own edit. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 20:12, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Character name appendix clean-up[edit]

Hey, I have a task force page called User:Cilantrohead/Character_name_appendix_clean-up now. Basically the crew monitors and cleans up the character name pages in the appenfix to Writing Adolescent Fiction in the ways listed. If you're interested in joining, or if in practice you've already been doing it, check out the task force and add your name to the list! Cilantrohead (discusscontribs) 04:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Redirects to cookbook from normal namespace[edit]

I propose creating redirects from pages that are in the cookbook from pages that have the same title but do not have the Cookbook prefix.

I mean that Cookbook:Some Page would have a redirect to it from Some Page. It could be implemented by bot. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 02:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

@PokestarFan: I would oppose this (btw, would have thought this would go in the proposals reading room rather than projects, but, whatever).
  • Pages in cookbook space are essentially module-level, whereas standalone pages in mainspace are book-level. So, redirecting from mainspace to cookbook pages would be similar, in that sense, to having mainspace redirects to individual pages in books, defying our convention that pages within a book are subpages of the book's main page.
  • The namespaces are separate in order to distinguish pages in one space from pages in another, and this would seem to degrade that separation. If one wants to search both spaces, one can; if one wants to search just one space, one can, but creating these redirects would make that less true.
At some point in the future, I hope we'll do things to facilitate searching modules by topic. Our category infrastructure has never properly supported that, due to confusion in the category hierarchy arising from our various other uses of categories, hence the massive category rearrangements I've set in motion (which various others have been helping with). Module-level topic categories are presumably something to be thinking about now, in preparation for acting on it sometime after the current phase of category rearrangement is completed. At the current rate, it might be a half a year or more before completion of the current phase. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 03:10, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm opposed to this too, because the mainspace page could have multiple targets. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 20:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Advice on a new category about cultivation[edit]

I was thinking of creating some pages about plants cultivation, not in general but specifically for each plant. This project could become big, if there is a good response from people, so I would like to start it in a proper and scalable way from now.

Should I just create the pages at top level and then add them to the category, For example: Cultivation of Urtica dioica and add the plant cultivation category?

Or should I do as the cookbook does, so Cultivation:Urtica dioica, and then also add the category of course? Could you point me out using wikibooks best practices for doing so? Maybe something like the wikiprojects on wikipedia?

Thanks :) -- Beleriandcrises (discusscontribs) 20:25, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@Beleriandcrises: Here we create coherent books, rather than individual pages. What you're describing sounds like a book with modules for individual plants. There would probably be some elements of the book that would be independent of any one plant, too; and/or, cross-reference to related books. We have a book Horticulture, which belongs to Subject:Agriculture and husbandry.

You may find useful material in our (featured!) book Using Wikibooks, which includes how to create new books. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 21:53, 8 October 2017 (UTC)