Wikibooks:Reading room/Administrative Assistance/Archives/2009/April

Textbook of Psychiatry
A group of people have come to Wikibooks recently and have begun working on Textbook of Psychiatry. I have been attempting a few gentle corrections, but so far my advice has been rejected.

It seems to me that they are in clear violation of Wikibooks policy - isn't our mantra "anyone can edit?" I am hesitant to be less gentle, but can't think of a good way to address this without being a little more forceful (i.e., page protection to block edits by unregistered users). So far they have ignored all my attempts to discuss the matter. Since their editing is always done from unregistered ip's, perhaps they have missed my comments to them. Or perhaps being psychiatrists, they're just playing with my head ;-)

They really ought to break this mondo page into about 25 new ones, and they also need to quit saying "only we can edit."

Any advice here is much appreciated, or if another admin wants to tackle this, please do. --Jomegat (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I noticed your comments & they were spot-on. I'm going to remove the notice about editing and attribution from the page, and start splitting it up... &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 21:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I found the email address of the coordinator of that project - so I've emailed them. Hopefully a personal touch will get them to notice. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 21:11, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I share your concerns, but they aren't so much in violation of policy as they are in violation of the spirit. If they repeatedly revert your reasonable improvements, you can give them a short block or ask another admin to do so. --Swift (talk) 22:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help guys (especially Mike who did all the hard stuff). Swift, you're probably right about it being against the spirit vs policy.  I don't normally like to add more policies, but I wonder if "anyone can edit" ought to be one.  --Jomegat (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, good job, Mike!
 * As for a policy dictating that anyone is allowed to edit, I don't see the need for one. It's implied by the software settings. If someone tries to excert editorial control or authorship without considering comunity input, such edits will be seen as disruptive and treated as such. --Swift (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyone can edit is a non-negotiable community foundation issue. There is no need to restate it as a project-level policy. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 00:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm onboard with that. There was some other behaviour that was questionable, like blanking and redirecting other books without actually incorporating the content. Hopefully at some point it'll settle down. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 07:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Where did that happen?
 * So you folks know, I am in contact with the coordinator. This is really an issue about understanding what Wikibooks is, why wikis work, and so on. It's not malicious and I don't think a hardline stance like "such edits will be seen as disruptive and treated as such" will be helpful. Dan is responsive to my concerns, and is modifying both attitudes and actions as I discuss this with him. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 12:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The redirects happened here and here. I didn't realize they failed to absorb the material, or I would have done something about it when I saw the redirects. --Jomegat (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
Please view the contributions of Special:Contributions/En_208.80.152.2. This user has been deliberately making incorrect changes to many books, randomly and in a short period of time. NipplesMeCool (talk) 20:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. Blocked for 1 week. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 20:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Please view Special:Contributions/Thommiddleton. I believe every contribution is an external link to some supplies company. I have already notified his talk page, but he continues. Mr. NMC (talk ) 19:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, blocked indef, and the domain will probably end up being blacklisted. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 19:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Import question
I was planning to start a textbook on the history of the NHL. It's an off-shoot off the Wikipedia project, in that it's based, but I plan to make it go in more detail (hopefully invite & and get more hockey editors from WP here too :-) ). Since the foundation of this book are the five Wikipedia articles (main one, plus four sub-articles each covering 25 years to avoid making the main article ridiculously long), should these articles be imported into WikiBooks for proper attribution? Maxim (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This is me basing it on my experiences at Simple English Wikipedia, so it might not be correct. I normally simply permalink the article I found it from and stick it in the edit summary, as This version of this article was based on xxxxx. But that's me, I don't know if there is any proper policy. <font color="#778899" face="high tower text">Microchip08 <font color="#B0C4DE" size="2">@simple 22:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There's a separate page—WB:RFI—for requesting imports for proper history attribution, to which I was led to when opening the editwindow; also, it would see to be better attribution to import it outright. Simple English Wikipedia is facing somewhat of a "crisis" with proper attribution, no? Anyways, most of the time they're chasing their, which is one of the many reasons why I left that project. Maxim (talk) 22:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, you can (and should) request a full history import of material you want to use from Wikipedia, unless it is only a small amount (say, a paragraph). &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 23:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

66.68.218.211
Created Mega Man VS The Simple Bots‎‎ and Mega_Man_(video_game) and countless templates to support the pages which may be in violation of policy at WB:GUIDE. The former was deleted at Wikipedia and the latter is ripped straight from Wikipedia. The former page has some links which point to User:Bobesh8, whose talk page has notes on previous complete rips from Wikpedia and the creation of a game guide on Sonic the Hedgehog. It may be the same person, just not logged in. See Special:Contributions/66.68.218.211 for a full list. Something to look at. I left a note on the IP's talk page on game guides. -- Adrignola (talk) 17:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Each and every one of the contributions was a copyvio. I've deleted these and made a note on the IP talk page. --Swift (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)