Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/2014/June

This is a minor edit
Is there any way to change it so that the minor edit link just above the Save Edits button will open in a new window? It is extremely frustrating to write lots of text and then accidentally click on the minor edit button by mistake and then have to go back and start all over again. This is especially frustrating on a notebook mousepad or a touch screen notebook.--ЗAНИA talk 17:35, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Under Editing preferences there is an option to warn you when you leave a page with unsaved changes. Perhaps that would help? --dark lama  18:12, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Already checked so it either doesn't work or it's intended for something else (not sure what). Has nobody else experienced this?  It makes me want to hit the computer every time it happens (usually once a week and only after I've added lots of text rather than a little typo correction or something like that).  Thanks.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 19:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Sounds like it isn't working for you. For me this results in a dialog box prompt, "This page is asking you to confirm that you want to leave - data you have entered may not be saved", and I have to choose between the "stay on page" or "leave page" button before I can continue. --dark lama  20:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Here's how to make the link use a new window. Add to your common.js:
 * -dark lama  21:21, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Didn't seem to work. Just opens in the same window as always.  However it's less of a problem now becausethe edit window opens quickly and smoothly now (as per my messages on your talk page).  The slow responsiveness when entering text and scrolling was what caused most of the problems.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]]talk 11:40, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Some quick research suggests that Opera has a preference setting to ignore link targets, which causes links to open in the same window when set. In the address bar typing "opera:config" will reveal a large list of settings that can be changed, including "User Prefs" and within that there is a preference called "Ignore Target" with a checkbox which shouldn't be checked. --dark lama  14:33, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks but it wasn't that. It was already unchecked.  Selected links on other websites open correctly in new tabs (sometimes in new windows too).  Not important now provided I continue to use the simple toolbar and avoid clicking on the minor edit link.  I have also just noticed that the link which says Editing help (opens in a new window) works exactly as it should.  Wouldn't it be best if all of the links in that area did the same.  This must be something that pisses off a lot of people.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]]talk 15:58, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I only saw the editing help link after the cancel link with the simple toolbar. Looks like the mediawiki software is setting it to open in a new window. Maybe this should be filed as a bug or feature request? Maybe the minor link isn't opening in a new window because the javascript code is running too soon then. --dark lama  16:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I only saw the editing help link after the cancel link with the simple toolbar. Looks like the mediawiki software is setting it to open in a new window. Maybe this should be filed as a bug or feature request? Maybe the minor link isn't opening in a new window because the javascript code is running too soon then. --dark lama  16:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Beta Feature Bug Report
I just enabled the Compact Personal Bar site beta feature, and found out that it greatly improves the aesthetics of the user interface. However, I found a bug in the new UI. Namely, the “Help” link doesn’t work. I understand that it is supposed to point to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents, except that it really points to, which doesn’t actually exist. Does anyone know how this could be fixed? (Not that I’d ever use this feature, but I still thought I would bring this issue to light.)

Thanks, SupremeUmanu (discuss • contribs) 00:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)


 * This is a known bug, so I reported it as effecting this project too at 65427. --dark lama  01:54, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Accidentally Unfinished Edit Summary
I was summarizing this edit, and accidentally pressed Return before I had finished my edit summary (or previewed the results of the edit, for that matter). The error is that the linked diff has an incomplete edit summary. I assume that this is no problem; however, are there any steps I can take if this happens again?

Thanks — SupremeUmanu (discuss • contribs) 21:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * To the best of my knowledge, there’s nothing that could be done with incomplete or otherwise defective edit summaries. The only thing an administrator may do to such a summary is to hide it, but that should probably be reserved to the cases where it’s strictly necessary.  — Ivan Shmakov (d ▞ c) 21:37, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It can't be "fixed", and it is nothing to worry about. An administrator will not hide the edit summary unless it discloses personal details, is libellous or grossly offensive. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Read-only back-ups of Wiki books?
I have pretty much by myself created the Wikibook "International Postage Meter Stamp Catalog". Several changes have been made to it by others. Some were useful as they corrected errors or added new information. A few others may have been done with good intentions but ended up deleting links, destroying the formatting, or otherwise causing more problems than they solved. In an effort to recover from such mistakes I was wondering if there is a way I can store a read-only copy of the catalog somewhere online as a backup. This could be used as a starting point if the Wiki version goes FUBAR (screwed up beyond all repair). At some point I will be too old, senile, or deceased to continue monitoring the catalog, so a back-up would be valuable. I don't know how to do this. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Rickstambaugh (discuss • contribs) 02:44, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You can use the PDF creator to create a saved version. Alternatively you can ensure that all the pages have been reviewed. If you review every page to the highest level (Good) then this enables that version to be retrieved at any time in the future. Or you could just save a permanent link to the current version of each page (click the "Permanent link" link on the left hand sidebar) somewhere like your userpage. Of if you really want to go to town do the following:


 * Go to Special:Export.
 * In "Add Pages from Category" enter the name of your book (it should have every page in the book in the category of the same name as the book).
 * Click "Add". You will see a list of all the pages.
 * I suggest you tick all three checkboxes (Include only the current revision; Include templates; Save as file
 * Click export
 * You will be prompted to save the file (about 3.1Mb in size)
 * This file contains all the pages and templates for the book and can be imported into any other wiki (assuming you have access), even your own wiki. For example, you could import it into a Wikia site. As a backup, this is the most complete and secure way to do it. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 08:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your help. It is a big relief.

--Rickstambaugh (discuss • contribs) 21:01, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Random book becomes random page?
Is it just me or did the Random book button on the sidebar use to point to a random book? Now it just seems to load a page. I actually prefer this because a problem with random book was that 70% of the time you ended up with a Cookbook recipe (as it thinks each recipe is a separate book). Was something changed recently? Could we maybe have both on the sidebar?--ЗAНИA talk 23:55, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The default is a random page (because MediaWiki is built for Wikipedia) but here it is overridden to use Randomrootpage. A Bugzilla was filed on 11 June 2014 for this function. Not sure if it is related but I will track the bug. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 08:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Either Wikibooks is using an older version of the extension now or something else is going on because Randomrootpage_body.php has been the same for 2 years and from what I can tell is acting like the "NOT" was removed as I only ever get subpages with it now. --dark lama  13:20, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Whatever happened, happened in the last 4-6 weeks. I remember using it for reviewing random books fairly recently and it only showed root pages (annoyingly, mostly Cookbook recipes).  Now, just subpages.  --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]]talk 13:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I used it June 12th to make sure a Gadget was working by checking random books. I think I've used it since then and it was working fine. My guess is a change happened in the last week, as I only noticed a change after you mentioned it here. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  13:44, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * MediaWiki 1.24/Roadmap suggests MediaWiki 1.24/wmf9 was deployed to Wikibooks June 17th, and wmf10 is due to be deployed to Wikibooks June 24th. Based on that the problem probably surfaced June 17th. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  13:52, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * A passing thought: If one were to generate a random page in content space, without attempting to limit it to root pages, and then simply take the root page of it, that ought to greatly reduce the probability of turning up a cookbook page.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 13:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I meant to write this last time. I never got Cookbook pages before and I believe the random root page extension is supposed to only return pages from the main space (ns = 0). This is really odd as Xania implies he has always got a ~ 70% hit on Cookbook pages. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 14:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I had the same problem of it turning up cookbook pages a majority of the time, I had been getting around that by using Special:RandomRootpage/: rather than relying on the sidebar link. 46420, which you previously linked to, is about it returning random root pages from any namespace rather than just the main namespace. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  14:12, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I notice sometimes random root pages are also returned when I tested it at Wikisource, which suggests the condition set by the RandomRootPage extension is simply being ignored. I notice in the bug fixes for wmf9 that CirrusSearch overrides Special:Random, which the RandomRootPage extension depends on to do most of the work. Maybe CirrusSearch is why it isn't working any more. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  14:34, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * … There’s a Russian saying, which I’d translate as: “we never knew no woe, then came updates, though.” — Ivan Shmakov (d ▞ c) 14:50, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks like this will be fixed July 1st according to 66879. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  14:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Acknowledging contributors?
Hello all. I am trying to persuade colleagues to contribute to our Wikibook. The downside for them is that they could put a lot of work into a page, but their name won't appear on it (unless someone looks at the history), so their work won't be acknowledged. I am wondering if there is any established best practice for acknowledging contributors who put time into contributing to a book? Thanks, Peterz (discuss • contribs) 11:11, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Some books have a page to list contributors who wish to be acknowledged. However anyone who contributes must agree to Terms of Use and because of that agreement anyone may choose to include a hyperlink or URL to a copy of the book rather than include the list when distributing copies of the book or when making derivative works. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  12:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, many books at Wikibooks have a page where contributors (if they want their name to appear in the book) can add their own name.
 * The most common arrangement I've seen is an "About" page that has an "Authors" section --
 * Indonesian/About, Video Game Design/About the Book, English in Use/About, German/About, Nanotechnology/About, C++ Programming/About the Book, Isometric Pixel Art/About, Transportation Economics/About, Fundamentals of Transportation/About, Hypnosis/About the Book, Urdu/About, etc.
 * --DavidCary (discuss • contribs) 05:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks both! Peterz

Guidance on Research
Hi, Wikibooks! I am considering contributing significant amounts of material to the computer software section, but am unsure about the rules regarding research from printed sources. Specifically:

I have access to a substantial library of printed computer reference material. What is the policy for using such materials as research? I understand that I cannot simply copy/paste or transcribe material from copyrighted sources. However, what is the rule for using printed books as reference, and then writing the final version in my own words? As much as I’d like to, I cannot research everything myself, as I do not have immediate access to some of the software I want to document. Any pointers?

Thanks! — SupremeUmanu (discuss • contribs) 23:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * You can use printed books as references. Usually published books have an ISDN that can be used to refer to a book in combination with Special:BookSources, like US History . People will often reference material available for free online as well. References to multiple materials should be collected together in a bibliography like page within a book, rather then referencing material on every page like Wikipedia does. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  00:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikibooks At Wikimania 2014
Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project? We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply. For more information, click the link below. Project leaflets Adikhajuria (discuss • contribs) 13:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice idea, I'll take a look. I will be at Wikimania this year, so it'd be good to have something for our project! QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 14:37, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

I attempted to create a redirect notice, and now it's restricted from creating the template.
What does this mean? 2602:306:CC2E:EFB0:9DE5:C0F:4860:935D (discuss) 20:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * What precisely did you try to do? (For example, what page was involved?  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 04:24, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Listen and Learn Science
Hello, I am in the process of writing a science book for Visually Impaired students. The completed modules have been given to some students, in MP3 format, along with a player. Feed back is positive. Wish to publish ( and keep adding and updating ) this book in Wikibooks. The objective, is to reach out to more visually impaired students. They would be able to access the contents, using a screen reader. The content has no diagrams, or visuals. The contents ( like punctuation, spelling ) is tweaked, for a better audio experience. Though sighted children could refer to this book, I would expect the lack of visuals would be a handicap. Have put in a sample page called - Atomic Structure. I have a broad structure for the book. It is about 20% complete. I invite suggestions and contributions. --DManohar (discuss • contribs) 13:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Please follow the normal structure for Wikibooks. Pages should be created as sub-pages. For rxample, Listen and Learn Science should have a sub-page of Listen and Learn Science/Atomic Structure and not Atomic Structure. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 10:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Lidepla wikibook
Hi all! I'm from Russia and I would like to make a translation of Russian wikibook on Lingwa de planeta. Hope you will edit my English, when necessary. Thank you! --Sunnynai (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello Sunnynai. I am Vishal. A warm welcome to the world of the books (though not physical, but still a vast one). It is really appreciative to know that you are contributing for the good. Please feel free to ask any time, anything. All the very best. :)

Danke Schôn. Vishal Bakhai - Works 18:42, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Twitter: WeAreWikipedia
The @WeAreWikipedia account on Twitter is run by a different Wikipedian each week. This week it's me, and I'm trying to include something about each sister project. Do drop by, and follow it if that's your thing. Pigsonthewing (discuss • contribs) 19:57, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Authority control
I have imported the template Authority control and several sub-templates from simple.Wikipedia - you can see an example on my user page. The same template (or variants) is in use on several Wikipedias, Wikidata, Commons Wikiquote and Wikisource. See w:WP:Authority control for background.

The template links to several library-catalogue authority databases, such as w:VIAF and w:ISNI.

Of particular note is the w:ORCID parameter. As explained at W:WP:ORCID, individual contributors may register for an ORCID identifier, and then use it on their contributions/ user page here.

I am the Wikipedian- [sic: Wikimedian-] in-Residence at ORCID, and happy to answer any questions about that system and its use in Wikimedia projects.

Please consider this an invitation to register for an ORCID identifier, and to use it on your own user page. Pigsonthewing (discuss • contribs) 20:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer is now live on this wiki


Greetings,

The Wikimedia Foundation's Multimedia team is happy to announce that Media Viewer was just released on this site today.

Media Viewer displays images in larger size when you click on their thumbnails, to provide a better viewing experience. Users can now view images faster and more clearly, without having to jump to separate pages — and its user interface is more intuitive, offering easy access to full-resolution images and information, with links to the file repository for editing. The tool has been tested extensively across all Wikimedia wikis over the past six months as a Beta Feature and has been released to the largest Wikipedias, all language Wikisources, and the English Wikivoyage already.

If you do not like this feature, you can easily turn it off by clicking on "Disable Media Viewer" at the bottom of the screen, pulling up the information panel (or in your preferences) whether you have an account or not. Learn more in this Media Viewer Help page.

Please let us know if you have any questions or comments about Media Viewer. You are invited to share your feedback in this discussion on MediaWiki.org in any language, to help improve this feature. You are also welcome to take this quick survey in English, en français, o español.

We hope you enjoy Media Viewer. Many thanks to all the community members who helped make it possible. - Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 21:54, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

Jason Olshefsky—KiCAD for now
I've been using KiCAD as my circuit-design software-of-choice. As I work on it, I find some things are better documented than others. As I hit a problem, I've been documenting what I discover in the Kicad WikiBook. I'm sure I'll find other books to work on as well! Jason Olshefsky (discuss • contribs) 12:20, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Divulgative dictionary from it.wb
Hi! I'm from the Italian Wikibooks and I'd like to signal a book that could be very interesting but is being written only by me: it:Dizionario chimico divulgativo. It is a divulgative chemical dictionary that contains no strict definitions but explanations, examples, pictures and anything useful to make headword clear for anyone (some examples: Atomo, Composto chimico, Legame intermolecolare).

I've posted this message here because I think that this kind of book can be extremely useful for reading other wikibooks. Now it's only in Italian and about chemistry, but I'd like to make other divulgative dictionaries about any other topic and in different languages. Unfortunately, I didn't find anything similar to my idea and I have no help from other users (it.wb is very small. I've proposed my project also on it.wikt and it.wp but I've received only compliments). I can write only with an intermediate (and scanty) level of English, so I can't translate it by myself.

I hope here my project can arouse more interest. --Riccardo Rovinetti (discuss • contribs) 20:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks nice. I like the idea and I could see that it would be useful on English Wikibooks.  I can certainly help with translation from Italian but my knowledge of chemistry terms (in English or Italian) is weak.  Do any admins know of a way to import this here?  All of the other language Wikis and Wikibooks have import pages with the option to import from other languages (WJ Europe was imported to both DE and RO Wikibooks) but we don't seem to.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]]talk 21:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I have supported past efforts to give potential dictionaries time to develop into something more and to be more flexible in interpreting the intentions of Wikibooks is not a dictionary. I think if the book can teach anyone with an interest in chemistry to understand chemistry texts better then it can potentially be within the scope of Wikibooks. See A Researcher's Guide to Local History Terminology for an example of what has been allowed, and Talk:A Researcher's Guide to Local History Terminology for an example of potential problems that may need to be addressed. OTOH sometimes potential dictionaries have been turned into Appendices at Wiktionary, like Wiktionary:Appendix:List of astronomical terms. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  22:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I had already proposed to make my divulgative dictionary a sort of brother project of it.wikibooks, but they said that my idea is too young to be transformed in a wikimedia project or somehing similar, so I've decided to keep it as a Wikibook. Regard to translation, is not important to import the text but the idea! The headwords can be explained by en.wb users and my italian version contains few definitions. It also doesn't matter if you write a dictionary about chemistry or grammar, physics, botany, sport or anything else. My hope is that someone decides to start his own divulgative dictionary about the subject that he knows. --Riccardo Rovinetti (discuss • contribs) 15:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I will try to create this book using some of the ideas from the Italian version - I'll reply to your message on my talk page soon. The main page, as you said, can be translated from the Italian version and the other pages can be written fresh by us here at en.wikibooks.  --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_the_Isle_of_Mann.svg|15px]]talk 19:46, 3 June 2014 (UTC)