Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/2005/July

21 Century Math
21 Century Math: This seems to be an obscure project. Please look to the webpage. I propose to delete it.


 * Can whoever proposed this actually tag the relevant article with a VfD tag and put up for discussion on the Votes For Deletion page? - Lynx7725 6 July 2005 07:13 (UTC)

Restructuring of the Front Page of Wikibooks
I am providing a more detailed explanation on the Talk:Main Page, and please post comments there as well. The point I'm trying to make for people who don't frequent that page is that there is a need to restructure the bookshelves somewhat. The IT Bookshelf has been split between three different bookshelves, based on discussions at. It is something that has been needed for some time, but has created a few minor problems on the front page. I'm just asking for some advise on how to proceed, and advertising here in the Staff Lounge. Rob Horning 19:09, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Uploading BMP
I would like to know why I am not able to upload a BMP file to Wikibooks. I know that PNG is much smaller (in most cases), and there's JPG as an alternative for photos. These are the formats I normally use (apart from a very rare exception like this).

I understand that allowing people to upload BMP files could result in bandwidth issues, but I think it's not that hard to communicate that issue after someone is trying to upload a BMP file - much like it is now, only with an option to continue anyway, and of course instructions on how to convert to another format.

I raise this question because for my how-to, I instruct the reader on how to install an icon. Maya only excepts BMP files. Right now I have a PNG of that icon uploaded to Wikibooks, but I instruct the reader to download the BMP from my own site (I cannot garantee it will remain, unfortunately!). The PNG and the BMP don't differ much in size: BMP = 2100 bytes, PNG = 1419 bytes - both around 2Kb, so that should not be the problem I believe. I think it's even a bigger mistake that right now the image is doubly-hosted. 1983 6 July 2005 09:58 (UTC)


 * As you say, BMPs are huge! However MediaWiki doesn't seem to assess filesize--I've uploaded some greedy PNGs/JPEGs without complaint--and instead bans anything and everything with the BMP extension.
 * As for the solutions, I really don't know. The problem is that BMP support could be hugely abused and drag things down with unnecessary usage of things best shown in PNG, and to add support in would require special modification of the software... hmmm...
 * ...what you could do is upload the image(s) to a free image host like Maj.com. Unlike your own hosting, they will certainly exist for the forseeable future. And if you're really worried about them dying off you could upload the image to more than one to increase your odds :)
 * But if you want the image to be displayed inline and have an Image: page and be directly saveable and all... well... I guess you could upload the image as a PNG and tell them to convert it in MS Paint. Yes that's annoying, but it would work. Or just upload the BMP with a PNG extension and tell them to rename it. That would also work, and I *assume* MediaWiki can display such a "bastard" image it's not supposed to support, but even so it isn't the ideal solution. Hmmm...
 * So, yeah. Try something like that. :) Master Thief Garrett 6 July 2005 11:47 (UTC)


 * The renaming trick won't work, but I was just hoping that someone could change the software, to enable the uploading of BMP below a certain filesize (let's say 50kb), AND extend the warning like I suggested. 1983 6 July 2005 15:24 (UTC)


 * You're in the wrong place. Try the MediaWiki development site. Aya 6 July 2005 15:35 (UTC)

Navigation
I noticed when trying to read some of the content here that you can't actually read any of the books here like you would an e-book. That is there is no next page or next section functionality. I suspect this has been discussed somewhere but I wonder if it was a conscious decision requiring excessive use of the back button to read these books or if it is a technical problem that is still looking for a solution, or perhaps I am missing something significant and this sort of thing can be done I just failed to figure it out. It strikes me that any page that requires the use of the back button for normal navigation/usage is a poor user interface, it prevents the user from becoming really involved in the books and acts as a barrier to the sections fitting together in logical ways. If this issue has been discussed could someone point me to it? Dalf 20:43, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * eeep ..... minor use of my browsers find feature and I found mention of this on this very page. Still no resolution just a few people asking the same question.  From the looks of it its a technical/convention based problem at this point.  But, one I think should be solved to differentiate wikibooks from being just a collection of related wikipedia articles on a single subject grouped together.  If the pages are done by chapter and not section then its a simpler problem because you are less likely to have sections inserted between other sections which would require a more complex TOC based solution. Dalf 20:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * You might want to review tasks in the Wikipedia Usability Project to make sure your problem is being addressed. AlMac 14:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Request for extra eyeballs
I'll be away from my keyboard for most of the coming week, because I'm going on holiday. So, would anyone who has a chance please look over recent changes list from time to time to eliminate any link spam and newbie tests that you find (not that you guys aren't doing that already ;). The more eyeballs we have looking the better, because it's easier to eliminate spam when it enters Wikibooks than it is to do it later. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 03:56, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * I'll see what I can do, but yeah, we need more eyeballs, preferably with a brain attached. - Lynx7725 04:59, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't mind pitching in too. Need a break from writing about Grand Theft Auto anyways. Aya 16:04, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks Aya, but it looks like GTA tends to draw the hits.... ^_^; I've pretty much scanned all the way back to 01 July 2005, think most if not all vandalism has been caught. - Lynx7725 4 July 2005 11:39 (UTC)


 * Quite possibly the case. That Wikibook has been heavily advertised on the GameFAQs forum recently, and it seems for every sensible submission we receive, there are about ten newbie experiments or vandalism attempts. Not really much we can do about it, especially considering the GameFAQs forum is predominantly inhabited by young male teens, whose sexually-oriented vandalism attempts on this site (e.g. "[ suck | lick ] my ") can only be attributed to an excess of testosterone. I'm still keeping an eye on things there though. - Aya 4 July 2005 15:26 (UTC)


 * I did leave out a couple that should be deleted though... brain-fried. - Lynx7725 4 July 2005 11:39 (UTC)


 * If you're referring to new pages created with meaningless content, I've added some to the speedy deletion candidates, but I'm not sure it's worthwhile, since very few of the people who can actually do something about it seem to be active, and in the case of GTA, if the page names are correct, I'll probably fill in the correct info later on, and delete the spam in the process. - Aya 4 July 2005 15:26 (UTC)

HELP! I'm getting swamped by the large numbers of edit today. More eyeballs are needed on the ground! - Lynx7725 6 July 2005 07:08 (UTC)

I'm back. I really appreciate Lynx7725 stepping in to help out, along with Aya and any others that I have missed. I'm still pretty busy, so I won't be able to devote as much time to fighting vandalism as I used to. But, if we continue to share the workload, then there shouldn't be too many gaps in coverage. Again, if you are not already, then please lend a hand patrolling the Recent Changes list now and then. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 01:39, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Contributions not tracking correctly...
Hello. I set up an account on Wikipedia, and then I made some changes to a WikiBook here that didn't show up in my list of contributions until I created an account here also.

My contributions all show up in the history as coming from my static IP "24.87.56.253." How do I go about getting this fixed so that:

1. These changes (all done today) will show up in the "my contributions" section; and, 2. The history of the book will show "Randolf Richardson" instead of "24.87.56.253?"

The Book I've been making changes to (as I follow the tutorial) is Blender 3D: Noob to Pro

Thanks in advance.

Randolf Richardson - randolf@inter-corporate.com


 * Pardon me for asking the obvious, but have you logged into your named account yet? If you are not logged in (or logged out previously, or did not ask the computer to remember your login), the system would automatically put your contributions under your IP.


 * And I'm grateful that you got a named account; patrolling the edits for vandalism and newcomer tests is a lot easier when you see a name instead of an IP. - Lynx7725 6 July 2005 07:11 (UTC)

This page is too long + possible bug
This page is now 350k, and I think it's causing problems. The last 7 diffs in the history list are somewhat bizarre, and I received a conflict warning when there was no conflict. I think there may actually be a bug in the new v1.5 database schema code, since two consecutive diffs on this page imply different content for the same revision.

Perhaps in future, each new issue to be discussed should be given its own subpage, and just linked to from here. Simply cutting out old text and sticking it in an archive page seems a little primitive.

Aya 6 July 2005 17:43 (UTC)


 * The easiest way is to create subpages and link to them, not with  but with . So any page can be inserted into another. Then when the page gets old you just change it to   and it'll "vanish" to be a mere link. However how to guide someone asking a new question to use this method, hmmm... Master Thief Garrett 7 July 2005 11:19 (UTC)


 * Again, I was already aware of this, but I found problems with transclusion, in that a modfication to the transcluded page will not show up in the containing page automatically, unless the transcluded page is part of the "Template:" namespace. Furthermore, this still doesn't remove the fact that the page being downloaded, each time a user requests it, is still massive (saving bandwidth is still "a good thing (tm)"). All in all, transclusion is too flaky for my tastes. Pity really, it does have great potential.


 * I'm currently looking at alternate solutions for these "forum-esque" pages. My first idea was simply to create a new page called, perhaps, "Wikibooks:Forums", then link to several sub-forums, one of which would be this page, and a few others. Then by trying to classify what sort of queries should go on which pages, we could reduce the total size of each page.


 * Then it occurred to me: perhaps all the questions asked here are already answered elsewhere on the site, but it's just too damned disorganised to find anything. So I'm taking on the challenge of indexing/merging/reorganising all the appropriate content, as well as implementing some provisional standards (e.g. what to do in the case that this page reaches 350k). It's also about time some of the existing provisional standards became official (whatever that means in such an anarchic system). I had hinted at the possibility of doing this before, but was put off by the general apathy of other users, so I came to the conclusion that if I want it to happen, I'm gonna have to do it all myself. This will all take time, however, but luckily I'm between programming contracts right now, and I have about 3 weeks I can work full-time on this.


 * If this all sounds a little radical, don't worry. I shall be soliciting opinions from all active users before I make any major changes. In fact, most of it will be based on opinions of other users.


 * Aya 7 July 2005 17:12 (UTC)

business & economics
I think the business bookshelf ought to be moved. Bussiness is not a part of humanities. it should probably go under artsz& sciences, but, since we don't have that bookshelf, maybe it should go under the Sdiences one.


 * There are separate topics:

AlMac 14:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Science and Technology
 * Humanities and Arts
 * Business and Industry
 * Government
 * and International Institutions that are supported by governments, like UN agencies
 * Non-Government organizations
 * Economic Theory
 * Medicine
 * lots more