User talk:Adrignola/2011/07

Delta3D
Looks like you were the last person to "touch" the wikibooks Delta3D topic. I have been "updating" the wikipedia article for Delta3D but am limited due to style and usage guidelines for content there and would like to extend the information available by adding to and revising the wikibooks information.

Thought I'd ask first rather than just jumping in and making changes. Are there any concerns or restrictions I should be aware of before diving in and modifying the "book"?

Jambay (discuss • contribs) 22:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I just performed some maintenance tasks on the book and have no real involvement. You're free to do what you like with it as it could really use some updating. – Adrignola discuss 02:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply and update to my discussion page. Here's hoping it (my editing) goes well and is received well.

Jambay (discuss • contribs) 09:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

At first I will just "add", in a monolithic style/format and then try to organize; not really sure what to do with page2 and page3 yet. I already realize I have content in the "wrong section" and there aren't that many so some re-work will be necessary to get the flow right and polish the content. Expect to add content periodically just to see how the community reacts to the changes. Jambay (discuss • contribs) 02:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Needs fixin'
Blackberry Blossum is both Bluegrass and Old Time but I am working on tunebook companion guides for both genres. For ease of printing they probably both need to have separate pages but I could not create a unique page for Fiddler's Companion because of the ol' WP blacklist issue. Perhaps you can fix that? Fiddlers Companion Volume III Bluegrass/Blackberry Blossom (tune) is the text which I wish to replicate. Many complex references which took a couple few hours or so to compile into the article. It would be nice to keep the references and have individual pages for each book, if you get time perhaps you can take a look?&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 01:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm really not sure what you're asking here. You can use to transclude a page onto another if a page needs to be a member of two books. – Adrignola discuss 03:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK I will try that. But I am not sure that when I get to creating printable versions if the issue will reassert itself. But I don't think that people necessarily want to print a lot of references for that particular book. I was asking for the blacklist to not block saving the edits. It seems that the blacklist is overly inclusive. It might be blogspot which is causing the problem. But edits will not save, I get an error message that says it is necessary to remove the blacklisted reference.&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 23:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Detail: The error message
Spam protection filter

Your edit was not saved because it contains a new external link to a site registered on Wikibooks' blacklist.

To save your changes now, you must go back and remove the blocked link (shown below), and then save.

If you feel the link is needed, you can:

Request that the entire website be allowed, that is, removed from the local or global spam blacklists (check both lists to see which one is affecting you).

Request that just the specific page be allowed, without unblocking the whole website, by asking on the spam whitelist talk page.

Blacklisting indicates past problems with the link, so any requests should clearly demonstrate how inclusion would benefit Wikibooks.

Detail: How the error message is generated
MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. – Adrignola discuss 14:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

What I wish to accomplish
I would like to be able to create a printable HTML version of this book: which includes the references. But the page in question resists re-creation at this book. The tune is used in both genres, and since I wrote the entire article there is no need to worry about edit histories. So what I would like would be for the blacklist to be eased up a bit, if possible. Alternatively, maybe there is a way to overide the block. If worse comes to worse, maybe there can be some kind of macro or bot that will isolate the blacklisted link, which is somewhat of a mystery.
 * It's reference #14. Blogspot is not a reference for facts and using it as a source is as bad as using Wikipedia as a citation in one's doctorate thesis. If you really can't live without it, it can be overridden at MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist, but I strongly suggest you consider the reliability of your sources. – Adrignola discuss 14:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's good advice but in some cases the blogger is reputable and known to the musician community; in others it is to corroborate rather than to establish something anecdotal> But I will check things over. In many instances if writing about fiddle music I may want to write something I know to be true and need to corroborate, and there are no academic papers on it, so a blogger fits. This is not true however on books about, say, nuclear energy policy!&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 02:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Summary and status report
I am going offline until at least tommorow. I started the Print Version here and got through the first couple of songs, Angeline the Baker and Arkansas Traverler. When I got to Blackberry Blossom, I got stuck...if you try to paste the copy from the main book into the printable version, everything is fine until you put in the references tag in curly brackets, and then you are blocked from saving. Some readers will definitely prefer having the footnotes, so maybe this can be remedied without too much trouble. If not, I can work around it. Thanks for your time and attention, I am quite pleased with this little book and look forward to upgrading it. OFFLINE 5:05 PM&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 23:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be copying and pasting into a print version. It won't be kept up to date with changes on the original pages themselves.  You need to use the method I showed for transcluding a page onto another.  This will also save you loads of time and you won't have to manually update the print version.  Harness the power of the wiki.  You can then use  tags around the references section on the page to keep them from showing up in the print version, if desired.  Please see Help:Print versions and the modifications I made to your print version page. – Adrignola discuss 14:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Aha...! Good idea : )&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 02:41, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note that there is a limit to the number of transclusions. It may be only possible to provide a by chapter/section print version. I also remember seeing a template/hack that permits to have all references in a print version aggregated into a single page, I think this is the page Annotations of The Complete Peanuts/References (don't know if it works). --Panic (discuss • contribs) 14:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the suggestion, but probably it's not a matter of the quantity of references, it seems the problem is that there are certain domains listed on the WikiBooks server which are blocked because they are suspected of obtrusive commercial activity (spamm). However, the page in question is not blocked at either Wikipedia nor at Wikiversity, where I tested, and so it is probable that WB has more sites blacklisted than WP or WV.But thanks for the suggestion.


 * RE: references I thought that a curly bracket references tag at the end of the print version is all that would be needed. Perhaps if the book is kept short enough the threshold "transclusions" limit won't be reached? Actually I was thinking of a references-free "Economy Print" version which had a Bibliography at the end, anyway, because what with global warming [?] and all, I think we are supposed to be thrifty with paper. But it is important in the long run that WB books be able to go to print fully references. Cheers. w:Wikipedia:NODEADLINE&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 17:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Well for changes to the list you should continue to talk with Adrignola (he made some changes recently MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist or you can make a post on the administrative requests/discussion area), you can probably circumvent the block by using for instance the Wayback Machine http://www.archive.org (my favorite even if the resource is up and usable) or some working redirector (use only if you must).
 * Transclusions limit doesn't have to do with size but number of pages transcluded. I never use the reference stile on Wikibooks, I chose to add the a wikilink to wikipedia's relevant article or a direct (or using the Wayback Machine) to the relevant resource. My feeling is that it is easier to maintain, better for readers and more format portable (it would be marvelous if Wikimedia could support some sort of page formating scheme, even a special markup for the generation of collections PDFs would be great). --Panic (discuss • contribs) 17:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

===Copying this section to my Talk Page so I don't lose track of it as its archived.Thanks for the tips, both.&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 20:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Misc misusage
I was surprised to see pending revision review required for. What were your motivations for doing that and moving the book to misc? Jsalsman (discuss • contribs) 21:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * This book doesn't cover any of those in a dedicated matter and listing them in those subjects is disingenuous. You list a book's main area and not simply tag it with a subject because it mentions it tangentially. Additionally the book is out of scope for Wikibooks and I will be nominating it for deletion since this is going to be an issue. – Adrignola discuss 15:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * So after all your help with it over the past year and a half, you never expressed any scope concerns, but when questioned about a categorization decision, you nominate for deletion "since this is going to be an issue"? Could we please have a talk about this on the telephone, skype, google talk, or some medium where more nuance is available? Jsalsman (discuss • contribs) 20:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As in, this is going to be an issue indefinitely in the future, trying to figure out just where this goes. In fact it can't fit in anywhere at Wikibooks.  Better to address that, which is the larger issue rather than the categorization. – Adrignola discuss 21:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Please move it to my user space so I have time to move it somewhere that documentation of an event is not considered out of scope. Jsalsman (discuss • contribs) 15:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC) Another administrator has deleted pages under discussion at the request for deletion. I no longer consent to the move I requested, but if an independent administrator closes the deletion request and deletes the page, I ask that they be userfied. Jsalsman (discuss • contribs) 18:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for setting up the Tunebook
It looks pretty good I look forward to adding the rest of the book. I am about to go pick up my first full book print on WP, then I am headed for an old time fiddle jam..&#91;&#91;User:Geof Bard गीता&#93;&#93; (discuss • contribs) 00:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)