User talk:SBJohnny/Archive 1

Just posting something up because I hate having a red link for my talk page :).

Re: Vermicomposting
''Thanks so much Rob for your quick and thoughtful replies to my many posts in the staff lounge. I hope I'm not stepping on too many toes (or at least not stepping on toes with too much force.''

No problem. Welcome to Wikibooks, and I sincerly mean it. (BTW, I hate the "canned" welcome text some admins throw up, as I like to personalize the welcomes to let people know a real person is here adding this text.)

This is a fascinating topic for a Wikibook, and I'm not trying to shoot it down. I am simply suggesting that you have a long road ahead, and simply changing all of the links to point to Wikipedia is perhaps only the first step.

BTW, is the image found on Vermicomposting (aka w:Image:Wormbin.jpg) found on Commons? It would be a good candidate to move, especially if you are going to use it on this project as well.

Relax and enjoy the environment here on Wikibooks. We tend to be quite a bit more laid-back than Wikipedia here, with a definite slower pace to decisions and (unfortunately) content building as well. Often to the dismay of people who enjoy that pace on Wikipedia. I see you found the Staff Lounge, which is a good place to ask questions... even common new user questions as well.

If you have any specific comments or questions, feel free to drop by my user talk page again, even if it is form some content review and checking up on what you've written. I'm hardly an expert, but it is often useful to get a second glance with some feedback from a fellow writer. --Rob Horning 17:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

''As for moving images around, I really don't know how to do that. In fact, I don't even know about how to upload images onto the commons... I have 1,000s of botanical and gardening photos I'd like to upload, but so far I've been more motivated to get the text information out than to figure out images. Part of the problem for me is that I have a very nice camera (5mpx), and don't have the time to cut them down to size (nor do I know what size I should cut them down to).''


 * The best way that I've found to "move" the images from Wikipedia (or any other Wikimedia project) to Wikicommons is to simply save the image on your hard drive (from Wikipedia) in a reserved directory, open up a web page on Wikicommons and then upload the image there using the normal conventions. You need to be a registered (logged-in) user in order to upload multimedia content, but that isn't a big deal.  Once you are logged in, just click on the "Upload file" link on the sidebar (the list of links to the left side of the web pages for most Wikimedia projects), and follow the instructions including tagging the image for copyright status and recording the source of the image.  For images copied from Wikipedia, simply note that you pulled the image from Wikipedia and use the same licensing terms that appeared on Wikipedia, even if no licensing terms were stated.  Afterward (on Wikipedia), add the    markup tag to the image, letting the admins on Wikipedia know that you have helped move the content.  There are so many images on Wikipedia that nobody has agressively gone and moved content from Wikipedia to Commons, so any help this way is always appreciated. As far as uploading original photos, don't worry about cutting them down too much.  I think the current limit is 20 MB per file, but Commons actually likes very high resolution images.  The MediaWiki software cuts the images down automatically to fit on the web page and is done "automagically" through an automated process when you put the image link on the page.  As you are editing the content you specify exactly how big you want to image to appear, and can tweak the image size through just the normal content editing process of writing the Wiki markup.  If you use the image multiple times, you don't need to  "re upload" the image for a new size.  I would recommend that you also try to categorize the images as you upload them as well, so other users could try and find the content.  This is using the same content categories that also apply to text (HTML) pages as well.  Look at the main page of Commons to see some of the potential categories you can put the images into, but feel free to create brand new categories on Commons as well.  If some of the images are nice asthetically, there is a running contest for the image of the day, with some simply stunning images that have been uploaded and given credit.  Let me know if you need any more help in this area. --Rob Horning 18:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi there
"Aha!", I said, "vermicomposting - an organic gardener.." Nice! Just dropped in to say hello. You might also be interested in Wikiversity (which is currently residing here, but might well have its own sister project space soon). When you're finished your book, you might like to add some materials there, maybe even set up a vermicomposting community :-). Oh, and the general term for people here is "Wikibookians". Cormaggio 18:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Open proxies
I think you may have misunderstood what was going on with User:Julie and the anonymous ip edits. These were all coming from open proxies, which are usually used on Wikimedia projects by disruptive editors to vandalise, troll and spam. Wikimedia has a policy of blocking such edits as a result. If you look at the block log, you will see that User:Kernigh blocked a whole lot of them pre-emptively a short while ago. In the present instance we had an anonymous editor, clearly familiar with other Wikimedia wikis, who was using open proxies to open up Wikibooks to an issue that has been very controversial on wikipedia. Once warned, the user continued the objectionable behaviour, and then when banned opened up other open proxies to post the usual troll's refrain of 'administrator abuse' on the staff lounge. All very unfortunate, and all very common on our sister project wikipedia. There were good reasons for me acting as I did (although I admit I could have acted slower at the start to prove that my suspicions of what was going on were right). However, at the same time I am satisfied that another block of open proxies has been closed off so future disruptive editors cannot exploit them, Jguk 17:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Help, please...
I'm having a hard time adjusting from WP to WB... do you have time to walk me through a couple things? Assuming you're willing, here's a few questions:

1. Is there a way to set up a TOC on the main page of a WB so that it automatically adds new chapters when they're created? If not, how does one find new chapters that might have been created?

2. Is it better to set up a glossary of terms in a wikibook, or just use "w:" links when a term seems like it needs a bit of explanation?

3. I'm pretty sure you're familiar with what I'm working on (A Wikimanual of Gardening). As I move the WP how-to stuff over here, I feel the next step should be to rm the stuff in the WP article and leave a link to the appropriate chapter of that book. Am I asking for trolly edit wars here? (Well, I'm not asking, but will it be percieved that way?) Any advice on handling that part?

4. During our little scuffle last week, I noticed that you responded to me here (on your talk), rather than on my talk. Is that the normal thing on WB? (I don't like "watching" other people's UPs... makes me feel like I'm eavesdropping).

-Johnny 18:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Always happy to help if I have the time:


 * 1. To do it, you need to make sure you always keep to the naming convention, so that every page begins with "Booktitle/". If you then type in then all pages in the book will appear (provided there aren't too many - have a look on Special:Allpages and you'll see how many can appear on one page). If you want to you can go directly to Special:Prefixindex/Booktitle. With either approach, clicking on "Related changes" on the relevant page will show the most recent changes made to the book.


 * COOL! thanks! Johnny 19:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That tag doesn't seem to work as far as the automation goes. I'll just use the prefixindex trick to keep it up to date. Johnny 19:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * 2. It's better to set up a glossary. Wikibooks is a separate project, and each textbook on wikibooks should be a separate textbook. Link to Wikipedia if you would include a "see also" or a "for extra information see..." bit in the textbook.


 * Well, for some terms I'd want to do that, because they might have specific applications in horticulture. But for others, it seems to make more sense to go with the WP articles. Johnny 19:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * 3. Wikipedia is a separate project, though still under the Wikimedia umbrella. I am no longer a Wikipedian, and you will have to ask a current Wikipedian for definitive guidance, but I believe if the material is considered within the scope of Wikipedia, then it should not be removed from there.


 * Well, I've recieved nothing but support and encouragement over there from the "active" editors... just thought you might have some words of wisdom on dealing with editors who might insist on putting in BCE (oops, I mean "how to grow" :)) in an article even though it's against WP policy ("how-to" is pretty much verboten over there). Johnny 19:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * 4. As with other Wikimedia projects, some people sometimes respond on their own talk pages, others on yours, and sometimes on both. People do not see anything wrong with "eavesdropping" on others' talkpages. If you feel uncomfortable with it, I would recommend that if you have not received a reply you were expecting you then look on the talkpage, Jguk 18:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I think over there it's just easier to do it that way... I'm only watching a few things here, but hundreds over there, and watching another person's page doesn't necessarily tell you much since you can't watch the particular section that includes the relevant conversation. Johnny 19:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Gardening/Cookbook linking
You can use the template to link between cookbook pages and the gardening book. This is already used on a small number of pages. Kellen T 11:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool, why didn't you just replace the "growing" template? Please add any cookbook pages on ingredients you feel will be helpful. Kellen T 18:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply from Oscar
Hi Johnny, I cant for the life of me remember where I got half of my info from as i was referring to a lot of different websites for information while I was growing my garlic. I know I used "plants for a future" http://www.pfaf.org/ among others, but I couldnt tell you all the sources I used. In the future I'll make a note of my sources.

"Patron Saint"
I don't think you would necessarily need to do an RfA first, all you need to do is take a strong, obvious interest in the bookshelf. For instance, I spend most of my time on the engineering bookshelf. So much so, in fact, that I am one of the only contributors on that bookshelf with any regularity. Without me, I venture to say that the engineering bookshelf wouldn't have changed or been updated in any large way in almost a year.

The term "Patron Saint" is clearly an unofficial term. You don't need any special qualifications, there is no election process, and the community actually might not notice all your hard work, because it will be spread out among all the books on an entire bookshelf. However, the How-Tos bookshelf is in desperate need of help, and if you have enough determination, you could turn it into something really great. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 11:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If you have a delete list, you can certainly come to me if you would like, or you can use a delete template, or a vfd template, to mark it as being suitable for deletion. If you need anything else, definately let me know. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 16:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

VFD Tags
If you do find books with old vfd tags, that have been kept, you are more then welcome to remove the old tags (or, you could potentially renominate the pages, if you so see fit). After a Vfd is over, we frequently forget to do some of the cleanup. Thanks for the help! --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 14:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Cocktails
Cocktails should probably go into the Bartending book rather than the Cookbook. The cookbook should get most other beverage recipes. Kellen T 23:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Naming Convention
You are more then welcome to reopen discussion on the naming convention policy. That policy could be altered, amended, or abandoned completely if you can gather enough consensus to do so. I would warn you that things will be very slow going until we finalize the General voting rules policy, so you might want to focus your energy on that project first. If you want to change the naming convention policy, i recommend you draft a replacement policy, and put a note on staff lounge that you are reopening the discussion. I know I will be certain to give my opinion on the matter, when the time comes. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 20:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, i understand the difficulties about coming to our podunk project from wikipedia, and I know that our slow atmosphere. On the other hand, however, wikibooks is more of a blank slate, and we are at a time when wikibooks is being molded into the form that will take it into the future. Things might be slower here, but each of us has the oportunity to make such a gigantic impact. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 02:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

editcountitis
I couldnt help but see the message that you left to User:Withinfocus. I don't think that there is a current minimum edit count needed to participate in a VfD discussion. However, the current text of General voting rules does instatiate a 20 contribution minimum, as a safeguard against puppetry. When that policy becomes enforced, there will be a 20 contribution requirement for VfD. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 15:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

VFD
Although it's technically proposed (and you know this since you've made some comments there), General voting rules has influenced voting procedures for a while even though it's not "official" from an official voting process. The number has floated around 20 edits or so, but the ones I marked were well below that and so I thought it was important to mention (as in each user has essentially done nothing here besides vote and/or link their userpage back to Wikipedia). I tried to use the words "generally-accepted" since it's not concrete. I also highly suspect that the voting users are sockpuppets of one person, but unfortunately we don't have CheckUser available to look into this. -within focus 15:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hah, we made comments at the same time and it was only after saving that I saw Whiteknight had responded to you. I believe that one of the listed arguments was appropriate and several of the others from a sockpuppet. Even though keep/delete vote counts don't decide the vote, I only consider one vote having weight, and little since that user seems brand new to Wikibooks and its policies. I believe this vote is very policy-driven since it's a semi-political issue. We have CheckUser nominations going, and Derbeth will most likely be the only one receiving it. I wouldn't recommend adding yourself, since it's a pretty serious responsibility and few people have the clout like Derbeth has here to prove himself. -within focus 15:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't believe he's trolling either. It seems that Wikipedia, since it has so many more users, likes to get "straw polls" going where vote counts matter. His comments on the vote were weak and somewhat condescending and you don't see him coming back to continue the discussion. It may be a bit paranoid, but his being an experienced admin makes me think that he believes he can push his Wikipedia ideas onto this project. Swoop-in votes hold no value in my book. He has no experience here. -within focus 21:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser
Jguk refused his nomination, and Derbeth was away for two weeks but is back now (although conspicuously less active, I think). I do think that Jguk should get checkuser, but unfortunately, I think it was my comments that dissuaded him from accepting the nomination. User:Robert Horning mentioned that he thinks I should get checkuser by virtue of being a bureaucrat and being active. I wouldn't decline such a nomination, but I am not nearly as well-known a vandal fighter as derbeth is. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 16:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Admins, policy, etc
If you think that some outspoken WP members could come in here and give an impartial opinion, that would be fine by me, but I would want to get more wikibookians looking at that policy first, so that we as a community can hammer out all the finer points on the policy before we start looking for outside opinions.

I personally am going to try and revamp/rewrite almost the entire policy cannon here at wikibooks. Unfortunately, there is alot of work to do to make everything "better" (things will never be perfect). I think that wikibooks has gone on for entirely too long without even a basic policy foundation that can be relied on to take us anywhere. I have the philosophical viewpoint that policy should be vague and open to some interpretation: Wikibookians should have the rights and responsibilities to do things their own ways, so long as they stay within basic operational guidelines. This methodology is evident in my original proposal for the general voting rules policy (General voting rules/Proposal/Version 1). Some things do need to be written out explicitly though, and wikibooks policy fails on many points, in my opinion. The reason why I've been pushing so hard to get the voting rules policy in order is because I want to start overhauling much of our policy, and I want a framework on the books to make decisions on those policies in an orderly way. There has been a proposal to completely rework policy at: Policies and guidelines/Proposed reform, and I agree with most of these changes (and conceed that many of the changes that I don't agree with are probably for the best).

I don't mind all the WP references. I have been reading alot of WP policy and guidelines, as inspiration for some of the changes I want to enact here. If wikipedia does things a good way, we can emulate it. If WP does something in a bad way, we can do our own thing instead. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

20 vote minimum
I wasn't particularly interested in the 20 vote minimum either. I understand the point of it (that any sockpuppet must produce 20 beneficial contributions before they can vote) but I still worry that new users with be disenfranchised. I would like to alter the text a little to make the 20 vote minimum a "soft rule", in that a user with fewer then 20 votes can be allowed to vote if they aren't disruptive. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * PS. I am under the assumption that if we pass this policy now, we can remove the 20 vote clause in the future, if we need. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed the text about requiring 20 contributions minimum to vote. I also reworded the text of the "Who is eligible to vote" section. I hope this addresses your concerns, but I worry that changing this text is just going to draw further criticism from User:Jguk, and User:Robert Horning, if not others. Everybody wants to talk about consensus and compromise being great things, but few people in this discussion so far seem willing to make many concessions or compromises on any points. If User:Derbeth could get his checkuser rights eventually, we could easily remove the contribution limit, because Derbeth could quickly and easily determine if votes are from sockpuppets or not. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

IRC
Despite my best efforts, I appear to be unable to access IRC from school. Not for lack of trying, however. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of IRC and so I don't use it. Dropping messages on my talk page is as good as it will get. -within focus 21:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've decided to try it out again. I'm on. -within focus 21:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm on IRC nowish, if you want to chat. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

OTOH
I have to be honest, I have no idea what this acronym stands for. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Backgammon
Hi. I noticed you placed a at Backgammon/History. The glossary, opening moves, and rules modules at Backgammon also contain information from Wikipedia articles. I am not sure exactly what to do here. Their inclusion there has not been disputed, and as far as I know, there is no intention to remove them. The only portion that no longer exists at en is the "sample game". In any case, there is not a one-to-one correspondence between the articles at en and their arrangement here, that is to say, there is not an article that's been "moved" en toto from one to the other, so I don't think moving the edit history here would even be technically feasible.

I take it that noting the origin in the edit history is not sufficient. What is the right way to handle this? Ptkfgs 00:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I am in the process of noting the specific revisions for everything sourced from w:en. Is it a problem to have duplicate content? A lot of what is there applies here (but not all of it). Ptkfgs 00:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Categories
Hi Johnny, Thanks for visiting my Talk Page. Yes, I'd be happy if you would add sub-categories to the chapters in the Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book. I think that would probably be a better way to categorize it. Jim Thomas 12:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Alay-e-Abbas
Why computational physics? is an introductory note on the importance and philosophy of computational physics. it is aime at giving the reader an idead about the scope and aims of the book. Threrfore it becomes a section or part of the introduction. Waiting for feedback Alay -e-abbas 1:56 PM 21st August 2006 (PST)

vandalism, redirects
I am going to start going through the redirects, but the recent changes list, and my watchlist are so filled with moves and reverts, that i might miss some of the entries. feel free to mark them for speedy delete if you want, or, just double-check me that i don't miss anything. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The first user, User:Jimbo WaIes was created this morning at 12:48 UTC (8:48 our time, i think). This first user was the only one who made edits that were "normal-looking". The rest of the vandals made highly visible page moves to pages like "PENIS PENIS PENIS", etc, so you should be able to spot them all easily. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 15:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!
Hey, thanks for the help with this already! I wanted to upload one of the books from this donation first, so that everybody could get a good look at how the conversion will work. The better this first book looks, the happier everybody will be, i think. you online? i'll log onto irc soonish. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, good luck with everything. I'll talk to you later. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

2 quick thoughts
I've replied here: User_talk:Kellen. Kellen T 14:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Boing. Kellen T 20:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Adminship
You have 5 votes for, none against, and I can't see any reason to let the vote sit for another week, especially if the result is going to be the same. congrats. If you need any help about any of the new tools, just let me know. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Userboxen Category names
I just wonder... Are we Wikibookians? Most Userboxes use "Wikipedians which uses xyz"... Should I change it ro Wikibookians or are we something else? ^^

--Aschoeke 14:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

MovedToWikiversity template
I think it shouldn't be so different from the existing MovedToWikiversity, but it should mention that it was moved manually, and IMO, it should have a parameter for the new page name (e.g. if I wanted to move b:Wikiversity:Biochemistry to Topic:Biochemistry, I can use something like .--Steven Fruitsmaak (Talk) 15:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * RU building it somewhere where I might be of help?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Talk) 18:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Raising Chickens and Cattle
Thanks for your contributions to these books. Klingoncowboy4 02:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Johnny
I appreciate your message out Social and Cultural Foundations of American Education and I don't want to sound like an idiot, but I'm having a tough time understanding what you meant about changing my links to read Social and Cultural Foundations of American Education. As you can probably guess, I'm a beginner. Actually, I'm a TA at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, VA working on a Student-authored textbook. I'm wondering if you can explain to me what this change in the page names will do, functionally, and why the way I had them before was wrong. If you don't have time for this, I totally understand but would really appreciate any info. you could offer.

On another note, I'm an amateur organic gardener myself, (mostly summer and fall stuff), and we've got some beautiful rich black dirt down here in coastal VA. Lastly, when I graduated from William and Mary, the New School was on the top of my list. I'm sure you had some brilliant experiences there, but aren't all the courses taught in French? OK, thanks for your time, and I really appreciate your help with the book

Pete 19:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes Sir
You guessed it correctly. These new contributors to the book will be writing short sections of the text during the coming weeks. If you have any advice for how we can streamline the process or if you know of tutorials that would be helpful in the training of a couple hundred newbies, I would really appreciate it. Have a great weekend in PA!

Pete 17:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Your Advice
Hi Johnny,

Thanks very much for your reply. In response to your questions,

1. The students will be graded on their chapters, but one of the project's goals is to observe the extent to which the outside Wiki community becomes involved in the book's development, (for instance, all the admin. support you've given me), so I would like to leave the book open for contribution from anyone. To discern what is student work and what is outside contributions, I plan to use the "History" function on each individual page. Does this sound viable to you?


 * Yup, that'll work. Convincing people not to help out would have posed a rather more serious challenge :). SB_Johnny  | talk 19:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

2. I am all for moving the sign-up pages to a talk page. If you'd like to direct me through one such move, I would be happy to follow the formula and move the others. This will save you some time and work. In addition, once moved, will it be difficult to direct student to the sign-up page's new location? By and large, the idea sounds good to me, and I'm sure it will make the book better organized.

It will be easy to follow... there will be a template message on the top of the chapter's main page about where students should sign up. SB_Johnny | talk 19:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

3. An informational page about the project would be a great addition, and I'll begin work on it today. Once it's up, if you think of info. I didn't mention, your suggestions will be much appreciated!


 * I look foreward to seeing it. I wish there were wikis when I wasn in college :). SB_Johnny  | talk 19:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Once again, thanks so much for your support. I'll let the students know your regular hours, because I deem it vitally important for them to "feel" as though there's a real support network in place to help them succeed. Have a great day!


 * You're most welcome. Andrew (Whiteknight) is following your project too, but I'm not sure what his hours are like. SB_Johnny  | talk 19:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Pete 18:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good! Pete 19:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikiversity templates
I created a new category, Category:Wikiversity templates to keep track of the various templates that have been created for use with wikiversity (when it was still here), and all the different templates that have been created to facilitate the move to the new server. I put two templates into this category, let me know if I missed any. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 23:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Win2Lin
Hello, thanks for your comment about the Linux for Windows users book. I'll move the book to the main namespace quite soon, but I want to develop the structure and concept of this book further. In my opinion, this is absolutely essential, and the part that takes most time ; I also think that it is very difficult for several people to come up with a coherent structure together, it is much better if one person works out a coherent and comprehensive structure on which others can then improve. I feel too many Wikibooks are not that effective at teaching because they suffer from a poor structure. - Pir

Good idea
Johnny, I like the idea of making an additional chapter at the end of the book dedicated to grading wiki's. The rationale behind single authors was kind of muddled. We wanted each student to be primarily responsible for the upkeep of each individual version of each article; at the same time, we want them to benefit from the wiki system of peer-editing. In fact, we are giving extra credit based on the amount of effort students put into editing their peers' work. I guess, in short, we broke it up this way so that every individual has a concrete responsbility, without losing the advantages of wiki. At the end of the term, we plan to give the students the option of reverting back to their original article, taking some of the changes, or taking all of the changes for their final grade. The assumption is that the articles will be better after editing than before, (and this seems reasonable). We want the students to leave the course with a richer, more practical sense of the value of the collective(or common)-mind. Whadya think?

Pete 17:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandal
Johnny, I think your talk page has been vandalized, and if I had to guess, it seems as though it's the same vandal that has, for the second time, vandalized my book. Don't know if you have the power to block this user, but I'd sure appreciate it. He's becoming sort of a pain. Thanks if you can help.

Pete 15:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Signatures on Social and Cultural Foundations of American Education
Thanks for making this clear. --Derbeth talk 12:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Panic Disorder
reg your comment that "Panic Disorder" looks more like a wikipedia entry than a book:

Hi SBJohnny, thanks for the feedback. I probably need to read more on the difference between books and encyclopedia articles this weekend. My goal is to start expanding the psychiatry section of that textbook into something my students can use, and then get my psych friends to work on it as well. Let me learn and add more over the next few days to see if I can get it more "booklike."Robertboland 23:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Psychiatry
thanks. I sorta jumped in to test, need to better understand the organizational stuff (I assumed when I created the link, it would be subordinate to the first page--I guess not). Will read more of the help stuff first.

As to the title, not mine, someone else began this, but as it is, it is too sparse just yet, hence my trying to add on some. I'm comfortable with the title--most medical school textbooks and courses just call the subject Psychiatry, abnormal is assumed (unlike psychology, where one can study normal or abnormal behavior).

Also, quick question--the Psychiatry page (which I'm planning on using as the starting/organizing page) is listed as a module. Does this mean Psychiatry is a book itself, or part of some larger medical science text. (Like I said, still trying to understand the organizational part, I will soon).Robertboland 23:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

excellent, thanks for the explanationRobertboland 23:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

qr-em
No, because it has not been added to WB:TM as it should. And yes, in this case I did not look carefully at the content, this should not have been marked with speedy deletion. --Derbeth talk 20:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Deletion, I think. --Derbeth talk 22:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again
Johnny,

Thanks very much for your help and instruction. I'll begin making these changes today. Hopefully will finish the job today. If you have a chance, I'd really appreciate you letting me know if I've made any important mistakes. By the way, should I add category tags to each individual page or just the Chapter menu pages? Thanks again for your help, and I hope you all are drying out after all the rain!

Pete 14:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Johnny, I understand your worry and will add the category tabs to all the pages in the book post-haste. As far as the text's several versions go, we plan to, (through a process of grading and peer-rating), identify a "best" version of each chapter's topics by the end of the semester, December. After this point, we will go back and delete all the entries that weren't best. This should alleviate the forking problem. I just hope we can get through this semester. It would have been best to try this experiment, I think, with a small class of grad students rather than 250 undergrads. This way, we could have dealt with these logistical issues once and learned what it was that we were in store for. Either way, we're in the pool now, so it's sink or swim time! On another note, this textbook will not be a one-shot deal. We plan to use this book for our course text in future semesters and have students perform different types of editing and adding new sections to keep the Wiki process alive. That said, neither the boss nor I want to make too much unnecessary work for you or any other admin., so anytime you run into an issue with the book, please let me know, and I'll be happy to follow your instructions. (I need to keep a good relationship with you guys, since you're my info. source!:)) Take care.

Moving books
Hi again Johnny - about moving the books on micro and nanotechnology: from what you write it sounds like it needs an admin to do the move correctly. If I can do it myself i'll do it - just let me know! thanx for the help! By the way, do you know if its possible to get some user statistics about how many hits and visits the books have? /KristianMolhave 09:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

A Question about Citation of Copyrighted Materials
Hi Johnny,

One of our course's students wants to use a hilarious video about Wikipedia, (taken from YouTube, but originally from Comedy Central's "Colbert Report"), in her article, and I am not sure how to instruct her with regard to citing this copyrighted material. Do you know of any resources around Wiki that can help me with this always-touchy issue, or would it be convenient for you to answer this question for me? As always, thanks so much for your help. Our book would not have made the progress it's made without your expertise.

Pete 15:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Deletion requests (darklama)
Do you have consensus on these deletions? Also, some are marked with tags saying they are templates, when they are not templates.

Please respond on my talk. -- SB_Johnny | talk 08:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have no problems with the deletions the original workers/creator/editors were User:Merrheim and User:Orderud and was a work in progress (I did not participate, use or monitor it), the work seems to have stalled but this was what they intended at the time:
 * Talk:C%2B%2B_Programming/Conventions
 * Talk:C%2B%2B_Programming/Conventions


 * --Panic 17:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

The C++ Programming/V3/Parts/ pages were all created by me moving all Template:Programming:C plus plus V3/ pages and Template:Programming C++ V3 page.

The reasoning I used was
 * the names no longer reflected the wikibook that they belonged to.
 * only this wikibook used them, so should be part of the wikibook.
 * should make it easier to automate renaming if the wikibook should ever go through renaming again.

Later after I had moved them, I decided to rework the templates into a single chapters template that would remain part of the wikibook's namespace and made changes to the necessary pages to use the new single template. where &lt;value&gt; effects what chapters are displayed. For example results in:

After this I read the requirements for speedy deletion, I reasoned the old pages met the criteria:


 * A page that has been nominated for deletion due to a general reorganization of the Wikibook by the contributors. In this situation, please note the location of the relevant discussion that occured regarding the page cleanup.

I thought the discussions regarding the merging of Programming: C plus plus and Programming: C -/- -/- into the single book C++ Programming met this criteria and would satisfy consensus. I thought I also read somewhere in the talk pages for C++ Programming that eventually request for deletion, or a deletion of wikibooks Programming: C plus plus and Programming: C -/- -/- would take place, which also suggested a reasonal consensus for deletion. However, I admit I never discussed it with anyone to see what there concenious was. I mention what I did though on this talk page.


 * A redirect where it is unlikely that anyone will inadventently search for a page under that name.
 * Note * When deleting redirect pages, make sure that any links pointing to those redirects have been changed first, including other websites including other Wikimedia projects.

I think my changes made it unlikely that anyone would inadvertently search for the pages, since they would be searching for C++ not C plus plus and C -/- -/-. I also made sure that links pointing to the redirected page were changed so that their deletion wouldn't create broken links.

Additionally the old template pages became duplicate contents of the single chapters template.

I wasn't sure what a good brief explanation for speedly deleting these pages would be. If you have any suggestions for the future, that would be helpful to me. --darklama 16:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Okey-dokey. I was waiting to hear from User:Panic2k4 just in case (he's pretty active there as well). So long as they're not linked in anywhere, no problem. -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * They should only be linked in to other pages I marked for speedy deletion. I also just found some duplicates of these templates I marked for deletion as well under the titles Template:C++ Programming that I didn't notice before. So hmm. Should I update speedy deletion reasons for the ones currently marked for deletion as being duplicates of these templates and mark Template:C++ Programming as being duplicate contents of the single template, clarify them all as having duplicate contents or what? --darklama 11:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Nah, I'll get to them... if they're linked by other things in SD they won't be linked after the linking articles are deleted. (&larr; This sentence almost makes sense, hopefully you get my meaning.) -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you mean the pages I marked for deleted pages won't be linked togher any more when there deleted. This I knew I just wanted to be clear that while they may have links under "what links here" the only linked pages should be ones I've marked for deletion too. After looking more at Template:C++ Programming I see it links to copies of the table of contents and a print friendly version both of which are not kept up to date and the templates link to pages that don't exist yet. From what I can tell the templates and the pages that use them only link to the wikibook but not the other way around, so the only way they can be found is from looking at "what links here". I guess I might try to resolve all these copies to make it easier to maintain before it becomes a big issue. --darklama 14:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Print Version Creator
Derbeth's print version creator script simply creates a page that transcludes the text of other pages, and then appends the full text of the GFDL license to the end of the page. For an example of where it was used, see: FOSS Licensing/Print Version. It doesnt create a PDF, and it doesnt actually print anything. You are probably better off printing each individual page you want, if you want to put a bunch of them into a binder. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * By the way, I wanted to make Title pages the policy of the week, because it has been proposed for a long time, and we really should make a decision on it one way or the other. However, I will also devote some of my energy to helping with the import function enable proposal of yours. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Colour chemistry/colour deletion
I am baffled: 11:31, 15 September 2006 SBJohnny (Talk | contribs) deleted "A-level Applied Science/Colour Chemistry/Colour" (GFDL violation (source of this document restricts against commercial use))

It took 2 hours after Derbeth posted an alert to remove this page, which contained a great deal of my original work. Thanks a bunch! I only found the deletion this morning when one of my students tried to use the book. You know better than me about what is and isn't copyright violation, I guess; but how about giving me the chance to edit the article to avoid the issue rather than deleting it. Without your help, I'll have to start over: Either that, or take my contributions somewhere else.

Please could you explain the issue to me and restore the page so I can fix the problem.

Ewen 13:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC) e.mclaughlin(at)swancoll.ac.uk


 * Now resolved. Thank you. Ewen 18:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Merging Programming:Java to Java Programming
Hi John, I moved all the pages from "Programming:Java" to "Java Programming book". What is the next step? Should we delete Programming:Java page and any templates it may have? Please advise, or help. Thanks, Ervinn 21:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Question About Images
Hi Johnny,

Just wondering if you could take a look at the cartoon at the top of []. This feels a lot like copyright infringement to me, and I'd hate to get the students in trouble. What do you think?

Pete 19:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Calvin and Hobbes
Johnny,

Thanks so much for the quick feedback. It sounds extreme, but you're just conveying the truth and trying to keep us out of trouble. I really appreciate that, (and all your advice). I'll make sure that the student talks about the source of the pic on the talk page. Have a good day, Johnny!

Pete 15:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

One more image issue
Johnny,

Just wondering if you could recommend any web-based sources where students may find cool, entertaining images like the cartoon we talked about earlier that are part of the public domain? I wish I had time to become expert in the copyright laws, but there must be some simple rules the kids can follow while still being able to use images they like. Any recommendations? Thanks again for your time!

Pete 15:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks (or interwiki) template project
Now that most of the unnecessary Wikibooks templates have been deleted, I'm interested in starting on the project that we discussed on my WP user talk page. Your user contribs show you very busy! Would you be able to help (even reviewing would be greatly appreciated). --Swift 19:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment copied from User talk:Swift:
 * Yup, I'm game... though I'm a little busy working on books (and wp articles) for a while. -- SB_Johnny | talk 23:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll formalise something in the next days (perhaps week) and let you know where to find it. --Swift 06:03, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * How's this: Template duplication. I found this old meager attempt at a list of transwiki templates (by the way transwiki or interwiki?) and figured I'd put my ideas down there, if only to move it to a more sensible name and not forget to delete (sorry: redirect ) the old one.
 * I'd appreciate your comments before taking it to meta:Meta:Babel to request for comments from the Meta community. --Swift 07:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Great Info.
Thanks Johnny,

Once again, perfect advice. The commons provide some great stuff, in general, and the Google searches gave me tons of hits. I'm really encouraged by the fact that there's so much free stuff out there. For a minute, I was getting a little discouraged. Thanks for the advice, and have a great day!

Pete 13:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikimanual of Gardening Volume x/y/z redirects...
Hi,

Don't bother marking those up... I'm going to be speedying all of them. They all come out of the original bad planning behind that book, by yours truly. I'm slowly cleaning it up, but other admin duties take up a lot of time too :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok I won't then. I was going through the list of broken redirect pages. Taking a look at "what links here" and if nothing linked to it marking it for speedy deletion. There's one broken redirect that seems like it was meant for transwikied that I was unsure about listed there too, so I'm not touching it. I wonder if I should go ahead and blank out the redirect part (as you suggested I should do in the future) of all those C plus plus pages I marked too, to make it easier on you or other admins who are looking at deleting them :) --darklama 16:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Another big cleanup task, if you're interested...
If you're into doing some cleanup chores, see Category:NowCommons... these are images that have been uploaded to commons, and many have different names. The links all need correcting, which is a pretty big task. I'm going to start going through the unlicenced images next week (which requires deletion tools), so I'm hoping someone else will deal with the nowcommons images :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Taking a quick look at the category, I'm left wondering about any issues that would be involved in a non-admin making the changes, since the page itself has a note for admins, and pages I could find related to image deletion say that there is no image undeletion and only mentions any user can delete images in the case of images without a license . I also am wondering if there is a policy page I overlooked that I could refer to that has explained the procedure for checking that the images listed can be safely deleted removed from the category. For example I'm uncertain of the equivalence between the templates used here at wikibooks and the templates used at wikicommons to mark the license of images and would hate to delete remove images that in fact did not have the same license due to wrong interpretation without any way to undo the damage . --darklama 17:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It's the pages that link to the image that are the problem. It's not found on "what links here", but rather at the bottom of the image description page (just scroll down). If it says "no files link to this", it's no problem. If there are files that link to it, and the file name on commons is different from the local file name, then those image links need to be changed. -- SB_Johnny | talk 18:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok so then I can just check what pages if any use the image and fix there links to use the correct name from common if it differs so then an admin can delete them? Sounds easy enough. I'll get started on it then. Should I also add the delete template to them once I've fixed all the links? --darklama 19:27, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for taking it on. Any thoughts on an RfA (or to put it another way, if I nominate you, would you accept? It's really no big deal, just a few more buttons and responsibilities, and the responsibilities only affect how you use those extra buttons.) -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Your welcome :)...I think it would be a bit premature for me to be an admin. I think I have a way to go on having enough experence to know what works and doesn't work at Wikibooks in collaberating with other people on books, if my experence so far is any clue. I think I'm just about done now fixing image links. So should I add to the images, so they will appear in SD? --darklama 20:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * PETDetectors1.jpg, PETDetectors2.jpg, PETProcessor.jpg and PETScanner.jpg all use the same name on wikicommons, so can be removed safely. With the exception of Red.png, Green.png and Yellow.png, all other image links have been taken care of and can be removed safely now. :) I'm not queit sure what to do about those three. I know template is suppose to be used instead, but to use the template properly would require knowing the state of the respective pages and how far along there to completion each is, which is suppose to be checked before using the new template, unless this has changed. Should I just remove the images from the pages for these instances? --darklama 21:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Nope, no need to tag for speedy, and no need to blank the ones that have the same name on commons (I'm not even sure you could do that...).


 * I meant should I deleted the inclusion of Green.jpg, Yellow.jpg and Red.jpg images from pages that include them here on Wikibooks. I wasn't talking about blanking anything. When I had first read about the change over from using Green.jpg, Yellow.jpg and Red.jpg to using the template I recall reading something about not just replacing them with , but to remove the [[Image:(Green/Yellow/Red).jpg]] from the page instead, unless the person is willing to verify the developement stage. --darklama 23:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As far as the admin thing goes, it's just about having someone like you (or me) who's willing to do cleanup sort of work. Though there are some who might disagree with me on this, I think it's more about a willingness to do what needs doing than a knowledge about everything that needs to be done. There's not a lot of complication involved, just use the tools when people ask you to, and don't do anything with them if you're not sure if you should. Since you're willing to do the cleanup work, you should probably have the tools to do it.


 * Dispite the hoo-hah that's made of adminship on wikipedia, it really is just a few extra tools that will come in handy for users (like you) who like doing cleanup work (which it seems you do). It's not like being elected a member of congress, but rather more like being given a copy of the keys to the janitor's closet (and yes, you'll have to keep in mind that most people will think you're a senator, but you'll know that you're a janitor). Seriously: you'd be good at this, and seriously: we're understaffed when it comes to people actually willing to do cleanup work. I've done a lot of work on admin tasks over the last couple months and managed to clear a lot of the backlog, but there's a lot more to do, and I'd really like to go back to mostly writing, rather than mostly adminning, but at the moment I'm feeling a bit stuck in a rut, because I'm quite certain that if I don't do it, no-one else will. -- SB_Johnny  | talk 22:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't like the idea of possibily being made the center of some dispute of what it takes to be an admin or what an admin's job is. I definitly wasn't looking at adminship as being fun. I know there is a level of responsibility involved. I tend to have adverse reaction to responsibility in general and tend to end up going for things below my actual ability, allowing someone else to step up and take most of blame and credit. I'm more of a behind the scenes person, who works on his own terms and just tries to get the job done. I guess my main concern would be what would be exspected of me and I'd probably want to give it up as soon as the job of cleaning the backlog is done or if whats exspected of me became more then what I had agreed to. --darklama 23:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

RE:Lunch
I'll be around almost all day on friday, the rest of my week is shot to shit. If you want to grab lunch, let me know where and we can meet. I still have your number, somewhere. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 14:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * "The fox"? Never heard of that myself, but I dont make it out to phoenixville very often. We can meet wherever you would prefer, but if you want to go someplace I've never been, get the name of the place so I can mapquest it. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 21:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The pig around noon sounds fine to me. I'll be wearing a bright orange shirt. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:36, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 1PM is fine too. I have nothing to do all day. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Water resources pagemoves and delete nominations
That books needs even more work than that... the whole thing really needs to be tied together (the main editor on these books apparently disappeared a year ago). Might be better to keep the redirects in this case because there might be links from elsewhere (other wikis or websites, etc.). -- SB_Johnny | talk 01:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Ya I noticed that after I got to a certain point. I was trying to finish the renaming process to meet the naming policy as it seemed to have been stopped half way. I noticed eventually it really needed to be moved to Water Resources Directory in all likelyhood. I may do that unless you think I shouldn't. From a quick search now on Google from what it shows there are no links from other websites. --darklama 01:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I was about to suggest that this wikibook may need to be reevaluated for deletion on votes for deletion, but I see there still some contributions going on under Water Resources Directory, just not so much on the parts that haven't been moved there yet. So I guess I can forget making that suggestion and just go on with moving the rest of the wikibook there. :) --darklama 15:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I've decided to mention what I've done to KHatcher, since they appear to be an active contributor and I'm uncertain what additional moves from Georgia Water to Water Resources Directory should be done. The intended book layout looks different from whats present with Georgia Water. Was there something else or anything else you had in mind to tie them together? --darklama 18:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Doom
I have finished copying the history of the Doom guide  M in un  ''Spiderman 14:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the link to the new page. It's standard to keep the pages protected, so you did the right thing. -within focus 15:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

BOTM & COTM
Can you check BOTM and COTM boxes on the main page for grammatical and spelling correctness? --Derbeth talk 14:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

monobook.js
I got your monobook, and I agree that it looks very nice. However, I think that it can be improved. I'll fiddle with it, and let you know what I come up with. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 23:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

background color
Hi Johnny,

I wonder if you could tell me the code to change an entire page's background color if you have a chance. I want to change the background color on those articles which are voted "best" by the students in our class. Thanks a lot for your help!

Pete 16:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

categorization, etc.
Hi Johnny,

I had meant to do this categorization for weeks, now, but you know how easy it is for things to get pushed to the back-burner. Today is a perfect opportunity for me to get this done, and I think it will be finished today. Thanks for the reminder!

This project is going very well. We are feeling a bit of heat from the administration for the usual reasons, (you know, they're all very worried about the quality of a student-authored textbook), but the students really seem engaged by the process. We've actually gotten very little negative feedback from them, which comes as a bit of a surprise to me since they've all been educated in the traditional way with teachers doling out the required information and students scrambling to write down every bit of it. This process is a huge departure from that model, and they seem to be loving it.

As far as continuing the project goes, we are planning on it. The first step is to determine a way for next semester's students to be equally engaged in the process now that the bulk of the textbook has already been generated. I've been thinking of a couple ways we could go about this, but what do you think?

My only concern about becoming an administrator is that there are still some serious gaps in my knowledge of the Wikibooks system, (as you know from all of my frantic messages to you over the past months), but the good news is that I'm becoming very comfortable with what I do know, and I'm sure as I pick up new info. and strategies, it'll all become easier. I would be honored if you felt it legitimate to nominate me, and I'd certainly accept were I to receive the necessary votes. Thanks very much for the compliment!

Last, I wonder if it's possible for our textbook to be nominated for book of the month, or would our "Class Project" status disqualify us for consideration? I know, if the book got on the list, that would really be great for the students' morale. What do you think?

Hope you're having a great week!

Pete 14:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Monobook.js
I did a little bit of work on my monobook. Mostly it was just the addition of a tab before the book title. Check it out if you want to, and let me know what you think:


 * User:Whiteknight/monobook.js

Let me know if you think I should add/change anything. --Whiteknight (REPLY) 22:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Made some additional changes. Inside your copy (monobook.js) replace: for (j = 2; j < headings.length; j++) bookName.innerHTML+= " > " + headings[j]; with: for (j = 2; j < headings.length; j++) bookName.innerHTML+= "/" + headings[j]; to get:


 * Book name
 * Chapter name/Subchapter/Subsubchapter

Next if you add this to your monobook.css/main.css file: .booktitle { display: table; } .booktitle > li { list-style: none; font: bold 18pt sans-serif; border-top: 1px solid gray; border-bottom: 1px solid gray; padding: 5px; } .booktitle > li:first-child { font: bold 12pt sans-serif; border: none; }

you should get:

--darklama 21:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Untagged images
Hello Johnny. I have moved your message and answered it there: User:Guillom/Images without license. Cheers! guillom 20:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Jguk
Jguk has returned to editing Wikipedia (where he had been on hiatus since February), albeit sporadically. I suggest you try contacting him at w:User talk:Jguk. 22:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Categorization
You know, I have a bot that can be used to automatically categorize long lists of pages. I know that you are intent on cleaning out the Special:Uncategorizedpages list, but I could make the work go much more quickly. Let me know a couple books that are uncategorized, and I will help out if you want. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with you about the little % complete icons, they are nice as a quick-glance type of thing, but they are completely arbitrary. I am actually going to be away from my computer from tonight until sunday, so I wont be of much help to you until then. However, if you give me a list of books that need to be categorized, I will be able to knock it out in about 30 seconds on sunday night. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)