Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/2011/May

heya
I've haven't been here since forever. Dropping by. :) Frozen Wind  want to be chilly?  22:29, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice to see you. Thenub314 (talk) 00:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Importing a structure from the French Wikibooks
Hello, given the fact that our ingredients definitions were too redundant of Wikipedia and the Wiktionary, yesterday we've created fr:Template:i which categorizes the cookbook recipes by ingredients. Now we've got plenty of categories like Recipes including some oranges, pointing to orange and orange. My bot has just quickly filled them from the former ingredients redirections, and the "JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 23:55, 1 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Seems like that would go against the great deal of work QuiteUnusual put in removing excessive wikilinking in the Cookbook a while back. – Adrignola discuss 00:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Which I removed because, if you are looking at a recipe, having a link to a dictionary definition of orange or an encyclopedic description of an orange is kind of useless. Red links are better (i.e., red linked here) because at least that allows a proper Cookbook ingredient page to be inserted later. QU TalkQu 21:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's what we didn't find on fr.b: our proper Cookbook ingredient pages were just too redundant. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 19:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

use my own class
hi, I want to use a set of CSS classes (purpose: make an image appear when hovering over some text). I cannot find where to put my classes and/or how to implement them in my page (same as common classes e.g. -div class="nonumtoc"-?) thanks Leo van der Ven (discuss • contribs) 11:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I moved it to User:Leovanderven/per book/The Zebrafish in Toxicology.css, which based on our code in MediaWiki:Common.js/Perbook.js will let you test the settings yourself. When it has been thoroughly tested you can request that an administrator move it to MediaWiki:Perbook/The Zebrafish in Toxicology to apply it to all users. – Adrignola discuss 14:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks - still how do I access the setttings, or where can I test? Leo van der Ven (discuss • contribs) 21:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * sorry, it works fine - just didn't show in the preview Leo van der Ven (discuss • contribs) 22:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The CSS does the job when tested locally with FF, IE, Chrome. In the wikibook only FF interprets the CSS correctly (tested in page http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_Zebrafish_in_Toxicology/Test). Is there a solution? IE and Chrome interpretations are not acceptable. Leo van der Ven (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello
I thought I would review the BigWelcome templates for basic instructions, in case I am overlooking the obvious. And then I realized that I had never clicked on Introduce Yourself. Well, it won't do for other folks, whom perhaps even I may welcome, might find themselves the only ones actually following through upon that kind suggestion to introduce themselves. So, not to be a hypocrit, I am herewith introducing myself as a long time wikiworlder {neologism alert) who is rather tired of POV warriors and find the level of courteousy, professionalism, and friendliness at WB to be quite a bit above the crowd. I have enjoyed many of the technically superior features, such as the option of auto-minorizing edits, and the capacity to import and reorganize disparate pages which then enables one to reconceptualize the relationship between previously disjointed articles. Ultimately, such aggregations do not become true books until and unless they are brought into a consistent editing style. But you already knew that!

Personal quirk: I actually read Books
Books {cf.wiktionary, archaic/obsolete}. Yes, genuine, dusty, paper, bound, old, crackling, three dimensional objects with interleaved "pages" consisting of pressed tree pulp. (Trees {cf.wiktionary, archaic/obslolete} are organic growths reprocessing global-warming induced carbon dioxide...)Geofferybard (discuss • contribs) 23:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

LGBT Wikibooks?
Hi all! I have recently noticed the embarrassing lack of LGBT content on wikibooks. In the coming months and years, I am planning on creating a few wikibooks that reflect LGBT experience and history. I was wondering if any users had any constructive comments, ideas or general support for projects like this? Additionally, any links or references to get me started would be highly appreciated. Thank you! --Thereen (discuss • contribs) 16:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The dearth of books on the subject is probably due to controversies surrounding the subject due to varying viewpoints (nature/nurture) and the risk of treading into original research. I see you've started LGBT Young Adult Literature.  The move from "Queer Young Adult Literature" was a good one as otherwise the title could have been seen as POV. – Adrignola discuss 01:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I have a few comments. Number 1, homosexuality is not a topic that would feel at home on Wikibooks, since everything can be covered on Wikipedia. Number 2, I am glad that you changed it to what it is, since homosexuality isn't exactly queer, it is sin. Number 3, as far as the psychological side of it, that is for the professionals and Wikisource to cover. -Arlen22 (talk) 16:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Arlen22, regarding your first point I see no reason LGBT Young Adult Literature why couldn't be just as home here as other types of literary studies such as American Literature. Your second point is just a statement of your own point of view, to which you are quite entitled in as much as it affects your own behaviour, but is probably not susceptible to productive debate. If homosexuality makes you uncomfortable, then don't read about it. Your third point seems unreasonably to impose more rigorous demands on LGBT content than other books we already have here on psychology. Why not just live and let live? Recent Runes (discuss • contribs) 17:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * That isn't just my point of view, that is what God said. -Arlen22 (talk) 17:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Q.E.D. Recent Runes (discuss • contribs) 17:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * ὅπερ ἔδει δεῖξαι20:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The argument being presented is, in effect, that we should censor Wikibooks to fit with the view of a religious group. All the points made could equally be applied to any textbook including all the ones here focused on religion. Wikibooks isn't censored, and that includes for religious reasons. QU TalkQu 22:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I feel the need to comment here and will do my best to divorce my own personal feelings from the conversation. I feel that Recent Runes hits the nail on the head.  My response to Number one is that Mathematics also would not find a home here by this criteria, because it can be all be covered on wikipedia (and generally speaking wp has better coverage).  But there is a real difference in writing style, scope, pace, etc. between a book and encyclopedia article.  This is why we allow a duplication of topics between the two projects.  About Number 2 there is nothing much to say, except to point out it is only a sin in some religions but not others (even including some Christian religions!).  I only point this out so that you realize that some people will see your point as exactly correct, while others will find it exactly incorrect so it is not convincing.  For example for an old neighbor of mine it was a sin to use  electricity on the sabbath, but if he asked us to turn off the servers because to leave them on is a sin... well that wouldn't happen.  I would have to explain that it is unfair to ask everyone else to live by the rules of a religion they don't believe in. As for Number 3, I have not more to say that wasn't said by RR.
 * I must say I can't quite understand why you are surprised that some Christian religions condemn homosexuality since the Bible clearly condemns it. -Arlen22 (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Your right, I worded that terribly. I tried to fix it.  I meant to express the idea that even some Christian churches do not condemn homosexuality.  Sometimes I get ahead of myself typing and leave out important bits of the sentences I mean to type :).  I am glad you called me on it though, it gives me a chance to show I was not being so obviously dense. Thenub314 (talk) 22:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Finally we fully accept and understand that those words represent the His words (with the appropriate capital!). But it comes down to your point of view that those words belong to Him.  A large portion of the world wouldn't even except the concept of a single deity.  We can make no claims about which groups correct or incorrect.  And this is why we have a Neutral point of view policy, there has to be room for all of us, even things that might be considered by some a sin.  Otherwise the fighting would keep us from getting anything done.


 * To address Thereen's original questions: One good way to come up with references is the find a good wikipedia article written on the subject and look at what they cite.  Then visit the local library :). That is often how I approach a new subject.  Also keep an eye out for books you can legally preview on amazon/google/etc.  This is often a good way to find citations without the hard foot work of getting physical books. Thenub314 (talk) 19:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Thenub! I find myself to be a better wikignome than a creator of content, so I'm having trouble getting started. I'm just nervous, I guess. --Thereen (discuss • contribs) 16:19, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thumbnail for gif file
While viewing Calculus/Definite integral, I notice that the thumbnail of Riemann.gif (with caption Figure 3) looks badly pixelated on my browser (Firefox 4 running on Ubuntu 11.04). Is there any way to prevent the pixelation from occurring in the thumbnail version? I'm adding the thumb and full versions of the file below. Could you tell me if it renders correctly on your browser? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenbreen (discuss • contribs) 11:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You can't downscale an animated gif. It will not render correctly on any platform. – Adrignola discuss 16:39, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

right place for a book with lots of screenshots?
Over the past few years I've developed a "cluster database hand-on learning lab" handbook. I've now used this book several times in real classrooms; most recently at the national user group conference for oracle database professionals. I've been talking with several other instructors in the professional community about making the whole thing more collaborative - and all of the content is now under CC-BY-SA as part of this discussion. Because of my subject (and field), the book is very heavy on screenshots and text output captures from proprietary software (Oracle, VMware, Microsoft). Also, it has a very narrow focus which is more geared to one specific professional community than the broader academic community. Seems to me that wikibooks (and the wikimedia community in general) is a little more academic.

I'm wondering if wikibooks is a good place to host a growing collaborative lab handbook project like this? I don't want to be the "odd man out" who's a bit different from all the other books, which makes it very easy for my whole project to get deleted if someone gets copyright paranoia about the liberal use of "fair use" screenshots.

FYI, the project really isn't worth doing without the screenshots. For reference, you can see the current book here: http://www.ardentperf.com/pub/schneider-RAC11g-lab.pdf - 99.132.248.237 (discuss) 15:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, and welcome to Wikibooks. The short answer is that we do allow fair use screen shots of software.  You might want to read through WB:Media and in particular WB:FU and make sure that you agree that our policies apply to your particular case.  At a very quick glance your book reminds me of Using SPSS and PASW, in the sense that it is about technical software for a specialized group of users and it contains lots of screen shots.  So I don't think you need to worry about being the odd man out.  You need to take a look at WB:Uploaders, you need special permissions to upload.  So you'll definitely need an account to start with.  Every image will need a fair use rational given.  Hope this helps! Thenub314 (talk) 22:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I've been reading a lot, I signed up for an account and I started the book here: RAC Attack - Oracle Cluster Database at Home.  --ArdentPerf (discuss • contribs) 20:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

deviant performance of css in wb?
My hover CSS (User:Leovanderven/per book/The Zebrafish in Toxicology.css) does the job perfectly when tested locally with FF, IE, Chrome. In the wikibook only FF interprets the CSS correctly (tested in page http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_Zebrafish_in_Toxicology/Test), IE and Chrome interpretations are not acceptable (similar to FF in preview mode). Is there a solution? Leo van der Ven (discuss • contribs) 20:15, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Announcing our new community liaison
I’m delighted to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation has engaged Maggie Dennis (User:Moonriddengirl) to serve as our first Community Liaison. The Community Liaison role is envisioned to be a rotating assignment, filled by a new Wikimedian each year, half year or quarter. One of Maggie’s responsibilities is to begin to lay out a process for how this rotating posting would work.

Maggie has been a contributor to the projects since 2007 and is an administrator on the English Wikipedia and an OTRS volunteer. She has over 100,000 edits, including edits to 40 of the language versions of our projects. Her broad experience and knowledge made her a natural fit for this role.

This role is a response to requests from community members who have sometimes felt they didn’t know who to ask about something or weren’t sure the right person to go through to bring up a suggestion or issue. Her initial thrust will be to create systems so that every contributor to the projects has a way to reach the Foundation if they wish and to make sure that the Foundation effectively connects the right resources with people who contact us. If you aren’t sure who to call, Maggie will help you. Obviously, most community members will never need this communications channel - they’re happy editing, doing the things that make the projects great - but we want to make it as easy as possible for people to communicate with the Foundation.

The job of the liaison will have two major parts. First are standard duties that every liaison will perform which may include maintaining a FAQ about what each department does, making sure that inquiries from email or mailing lists are brought to the attention of appropriate staff members, etc. However, we also want liaisons to be free to pursue unique projects suited to their particular skill sets. Maggie will develop such projects in the coming weeks.

Maggie will be on the projects as User:Mdennis (WMF) and can be reached at mdennis@undefinedwikimedia.org. Her initial appointment runs for six months. I look forward to working with Maggie in this new role!

Philippe (WMF) (discuss • contribs) 22:06, 25 May 2011 (UTC)