Wikibooks:Reading room/Archives/2017/March

Linking to other Wiki*edia sites and a few other questions
Hello Reading Room. I'm a new user and I wanted to know if I'm allowed to do things like link to pages on Wikipedia so long as they pertain to the topic of the book or chapter I am working on. As an example, say I'm trying to write a book about Presidents of the United States and I want to link to the Wikipedia article about Presidents so people can have a greater understanding of what that position is. Am I allowed to do that or is it generally frowned upon?

I also want to know how to add pictures to the pages I write on, since my team and I are having trouble with uploading them and getting them to work. Do we need to post them to an image hosting website and then link to them, or can we upload them directly to the site and link to that page from our book?

Please let me know as soon as you can, since this information will be invaluable to our work. ZachIsWack (discuss • contribs) 16:52, 4 March 2017 (UTC)


 * , as far as I know, linking Wikipedia links in a Wikijunior book is something that is frowned upon/not allowed since Wikipedia is too complicated for a young readers to understand, but from your contributions, the book you are [about to] work on is not a Wikijunior book, and [as far as I know], it's fine to add links to Wikipedia articles for the purposes you have stated. But I'd like a second opinion on this just to make sure.
 * To upload a picture of your own, go to Commons and from there, provide all the licensing you need to provide. But to copy an existing image, you would have to go to Commons and copy the file name and add it to the article using the "File Icon". You don't link them from an image hosting website, such as Flickr. So for example if I wanted a picture of George Washington, I'd go to Wikipedia and search up "George Washington" (because there is a picture of him on Wikipedia that I can use) or go to Wikimedia Commons and search up "George Washington". [For the Commons Route]: Then, you would click on that image and copy the file name (not including "File:"). So, for me, I picked this picture: File:George Washington by Gilbert Stuart, 1795-96.png, so I will proceed to copy "George Washington by Gilbert Stuart, 1795-96.png", and then go to my editing box here at Wikibooks and click on the File Icon. Once I am there, I will paste "George Washington by Gilbert Stuart, 1795-96.png" to Filename, and add a Caption of my choice. And then viola! George Washington is up for me and you to see. Also, you can click the Edit button to see the wikicoding for this, which, in the editing box, will appear as so:.
 * Hope this helps, and please ask more questions. Thanks! --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:52, 4 March 2017 (UTC)


 * A book should be pretty much self-contained. So, links that stay within the book are best.  Links to other books on Wikibooks are the least undesirable kind of wikilink outside the book itself.  Occasional links to another project are tolerated, though when possible it's best to set them apart in special sections where it's clear they are (relatively) non-local links.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:09, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Contribs negative numbers
I noticed on my contribs page, there are numbers, some with a red negative number such as, (-10). What does this mean? Littlekatie1 (discuss • contribs) 01:14, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Those numbers are the change in page size caused by the edit. The red ones are where the edit made the page smaller.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 04:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Requesting permission to host agglomerated editions of Indian Copyright Act editions which are not supported by wikisource
Hi,

Wikisource is a project which allows only pre-published works/Acts. Now Indian Copyright Act 1957 has 6 amendments and those are hosted on english wikisource.

Undersigned would like to build agglomerated (i.e. constructed editions) from these pre published acts which are already hosted on wikisource. Fo example

I want to get build/constructed following on wikibooks


 * 1) Indian Copyright act 1957 + 1'st amendment =  Second edition after amendments (Since  Indian Copyright act 1957  initself amounts to be first edition.)
 * 2) Indian Copyright act 1957 + 1'st+2'nd  amendment = Third edition  after amendments
 * 3) Indian Copyright act 1957 + 1'st+2'nd + 3rd amendment = Fourth edition after amendment
 * 4) Indian Copyright act 1957 + 1'st+2'nd + 3rd+ 4th amendment = Fifth edition
 * 5) Indian Copyright act 1957 + 1'st+2'nd + 3rd+ 4th+ 5th  amendment = sixth edition
 * 6) Indian Copyright act 1957 + 1'st+2'nd + 3rd+ 4th+ 5th + 6th amendment = seventh edition

The seventh edition (and the previous also) proposed is/are supposed to look some thing like present condition of Indian_Copyright_Law page

These editions are basically (mounting texts of subseuent published texts of the act on previous added texts of the act) i.e. detailed annotations by adding every later publication of the amendment to earlier edition of the act annoted in detail.

What exacly is being planned


 * 1. Indian Copyright Act 1957 (1st edition) This will remain on en wikisource
 * 2. Indian Copyright (1st Amendment) Act 1983 This will remain on en wikisource
 * 2.1 Indian Copyright Act 1957 (1983 edition) (i.e. 2nd edition →page will be constructed at wikibooks by adding texts of no.2 to no.1 )
 * 3. Indian Copyright (2nd Amendment) Act 1984 This will remain on en wikisource
 * 3.1 Indian Copyright Act 1957 (1984 edition) (i.e. 3rd edition →page will be constructed at wikibooks by adding texts of no.3 to no.2.1 )
 * 4. Indian Copyright (3rd Amendment) Act 1992 This will remain on en wikisource


 * 4.1 Indian Copyright Act 1957 (1992 edition) (i.e. 4th edition →page will be constructed at wikibooks by adding texts of no.4 to no.3.1 )
 * 5. Indian Copyright (4th Amendment) Act 1994 - This will remain on en wikisource
 * 5.1 Indian Copyright Act 1957 (1994 edition) (i.e. 5th edition →page will be constructed at wikibooks by adding texts of no.5 to no.4.1 )
 * 6. Indian Copyright (5th Amendment) Act 1999 This will remain on en wikisource
 * 6.1 Indian Copyright Act 1957 (1999 edition) (i.e. 6th edition →page will be constructed at wikibooks by adding texts of no.6 to no.5.1 )
 * 7. Indian Copyright (6th Amendment) Act 2012 This will remain on en wikisource
 * 7.1 Indian Copyright Act 1957 (2012 edition) (i.e. 7th edition →page will be constructed at wikibooks by adding texts of no.7 to no.6.1 )

So namely 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 7.1 are the editions proposed to be hosted on en wikibooks. Whether it has educational value ? Ceratainly it will be having value to students of copyright law besides it will be valuable to Public at large. Along with wikisource hosted data it will work as a reference source too to some extatnt wherever allowd on Help pages for indic wiki community and in articles if allowed by wp.

Plese let me know at your earliest whether wikibooks will be willing to allow and host proposed edition pages.

Thanks and regards to all

Mahitgar (discuss • contribs) 19:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Let me see if I understand the issue is there are some acts that have not been published and that is why they can't be included on wikisource ?
 * It makes no sense to me, if a law isn't published in some form it can't be enacted. Why can't wikisource host it ?
 * In any case as a derived project you should add a partial duplicate to wikisource static material (as I can't see it being segmented across the projects and being useful).
 * You need only add a educational spin or start it as an annotation work (my understanding is that the original material already has annotations), adding historical references even interlinks to the reasons behind creation and changes to the laws. Note in any case that contrary to wikisource our material is open to changes and it requires curation from someone with enough understanding to keep it correct and useful and stable in its intent. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

In India, when usually any amendment to any act is passed, only the amended clauses are mentioned,(Original act and its amendment acts are avaialable under fairdeal since those were parliamentary documents. The parliamentary amendment act documentation does not include how an act would look/read along with amended clauses; Now that work is done by private sector ie. expert advocates or legal firms and these works are copyrighted.

Now problem before online (even ofline) Indic community is all these editions either are not available and where those are available are usually copyrighted; since this edition creation is usually done by non-govt agencies or indivisuals is usually copyrighted and fair dealing provisions can not be used easily, And many Indic wikipedians suffer much more and end up using some wrong editions from online. Getting copyright free versions of these editions is not an easy job. My personal experience is Indian legal fraternity still doesnot look wiki projects favourably enough so asking them to make it copyright free is a distant dream.

Only option as of now is we construct the same on our own. Segmenting across the projects was not prefered option but english wikisource community says (wikisource discussion ref)  that they would host only single pre-published documents whenever those will come in public domain and are reluctant to allow hosting the above requested wikimedian constructed editions.

Curation from someone with enough understanding to keep it correct and useful and stable in its intent would not be too defficult since we have already conducted an iternship project on en-wikisource with help of New law college, Pune  students and we (Indic wikimedian community) and CIS is looking forward to take internship project to next level of the work described as above to be performed, what we need is wiki community go ahead signal.

Thanks for looking into this issue. Regards

Mahitgar (discuss • contribs) 13:44, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok I now understand the problem, it still seems a bit silly since public money may have paid for that work (or not?). How are firms selected to provide such work, is it by some sort of bid process ? If not it seems a system prone to corruption and exploitation of public resources.
 * Can you please post the license of the content you intend to put on wikibooks (the one that wikisource refused), so we can see if the license is compatible...
 * Yup, you can duplicate projects (request the imports from wikisource) and expand on them after... --Panic (discuss • contribs) 16:11, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Yup it is silly - Human beings do have potential to be rational but they are always not :), without knowing how an act is going to look after amendments, govt might not be bringing amedment acts. So what is wrong in publishing a complete law after amendment act from govt side itself but they dont do. There is no bidding process any one can workout and publish the amended edition of law but usually work is done by advocates and such work remains copyrighted.

Wikisource objection is of technical nature not related to licencing of the work we propose to do. We are basically working on acts of Indian legislatures so it is covered by fairdealing provisions; there are only certain restrictions relating to translations. If any translation is made need to be written that translation is not approved by govt, and this translation fairdealing is available to Indian languages only ofcourse english covered since acts mostly are made in english. You can see licencing on wikimedia commons File:Indian_Copyright_Act_1957.djvu and for the document refused by wikisource licencing below the document s:Indian Copyright Law.

Please do suggest

Mahitgar (discuss • contribs) 17:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Just to satisfy my curiosity and further my understanding. In India law firms (as independent members of the public) have the special ability to propose law changes to the legislature ? They do it freely and keep ownership over the legal reasoning for the proposed changes. I guess that they offer some limited copies of that "privately owned" reasoning to the legislative body for the subsequent debate but everyone else has to pay to be able to read it. Will the record of the debate of such changes not be public domain and will it not duplicate that copyrighted content? Does the firms' copyright only prevent some forms of distribution ? Is a firm's copyright expressed (written and enforced) or only assumed ? (is it stated and has anyone been persecuted by violating it?)
 * Most legislative processes have the ability of having the public present at least motions for debate (not necessarily to enact laws, but a step to it) open to everyone (with numbers as a basis to reach the goal), having law firms have a special leg up in the process seems prone to exacerbate the influence of special interest groups in state's legislature.
 * I see no problem in having you start your project, select a proper name like "Agglomerated and annotated editions of Indian Copyright Acts" create the raw book structure request the imports (or you can do it yourself copy paste style as edit history will not be that important, but please create some attribution to the wikisource repository (you should also post there in its discussion area your project creation if noting else to keep a link and advertise it). --Panic (discuss • contribs) 07:26, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

For formal process of suggesting formation and changes to law There is some thing called "Law commission" -suggessions of law commission are not binding on govt. The indian law firms may not necesssarily adopting an official channle in practical terms. Legal fraternity usually joins politics have connection with politicians, several top lawyers find thee way in legislatures representing various political parties. Parliamentary debate documentation is supposed to be copyright free still, the copies of consolidated versions may be with govt department or parliamentary commitees where in commons public does not have easy access to documentation.

Thanks The way wikisource syntax works we will preferably import some pages and templates (including the licence) and then customise for this project.

Mahitgar (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I feel I could easily have missed some important points in the above. Here's my understanding of what's going on:
 * The legislation and its updates are available as separate pieces but not as a coherent whole with all the pieces assembled, and since the assembled document is a construct it is technically out of scope for Wikisource.
 * The one concern I see with hosting this at Wikibooks is that, in order to be within our scope, there needs to be more for Wikibooks contributors to do than just echoing Indian legislation as it comes out. There's a full-page policy on annotated texts at WB:AT, and a shorter discussion of it at WB:WIW with the remark
 * As a point of overlap between the two projects, Wikisource also allows the inclusion of annotated texts. If you would like to write a sparsely annotated text or a sparsely critical edition of a text, consider hosting your work more appropriately on Wikisource instead.
 * So, as I see it, you need to design the wikibook to be more than just an assembled form of the Indian legislation, and then there's no problem at all with doing the assembly here. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 00:00, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming changes
There are a lot of small changes happening in the next couple of weeks, and I wanted to give you all a quick heads-up about them. Please share this information with other people/languages/projects that will be interested:


 * There's a change to how columns in reference lists are handled, at the request of the German Wikipedia. This change will improve accessibility by automatically formatting long lists of  s into columns, based on each reader's screen width.
 * What you need to do: Nothing visible is happening now.  If your project uses the normal   tag (or doesn't really use refs at all), then file a Phabricator task or just tell me, and I'll get your wiki on the list for the next config change.  If your project uses a "reflist" template to create columns, then please consider deprecating it, or update the template to work with the new feature.
 * The label on the " " button will change on most projects tomorrow (Wednesday) to say "  ".  This has been discussed for years, is supported by user research, and is meant to be clearer for new contributors.  (Most of us who have been editing for years don't even look at the button any more, and we all already know that all of our changes can be seen by anyone on the internet, so this doesn't really affect us.)
 * If you have questions or encounter problems (e.g., a bad translation, problems fixing the documentation, etc.), then please tell me as soon as possible.
 * When we split "Save page" into "Save page" and "Save changes" last August, a couple of communities wondered whether a local label would be possible. (For example, someone at the English Wikipedia asked if different namespaces could have different labels [answer:  not technically possible], and the Chinese Wikipedia has some extra language on their "Save page" button [about the importance of previewing, I think].)  Whether the Legal team can agree to a change may depend upon the language/country involved, so please ask me first if you have any questions.
 * As part of the ongoing, years-long user-interface standardization project, the color and shape of the " " (or now "  "), "  " and "  " buttons on some desktop wikitext editors will change.  The buttons will be bigger and easier to find, and the "Save" button will be bright blue.  (T111088)  Unfortunately, it is not technically possible to completely override this change and restore the appearance of the old buttons for either your account or an entire site.
 * Last April, nobody could edit for about 30 minutes twice because of some work that Technical Ops was doing on the servers. The same kind of planned maintenance is happening again.  It's currently scheduled for Wednesday, April 19th and Wednesday, May 3rd.  The time of day is unknown, but it will probably afternoon in Europe and morning in North America.  This will be announced repeatedly, but please mark your calendars now.

That's everything on my mind at the moment, but I may have forgotten something. If you have questions (about this or any other WMF work), then please ping me, and I'll see what I can find out for you. Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (discuss • contribs) 19:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Questions before starting a book to review citizenship laws of the world
Inspired by originally but no longer at the US Defense Security Service and  featuring a PDF authored by Office of Personnel Management of the US government, perhaps the texts qualify for s:Template:PD-USGov? If so, I would like to copy the texts with known updates to start a book titled "Citizenship", with subpages per country, then further subpages to teach readers how to acquire or lose the citizenship of a country and how to apply for a passport of a country, when information is available. Proposed examples include "Citizenship/United States", "Citizenship/United States/Naturalization", "Citizenship/United States/Loss", "Citizenship/United States/Passport", etc. However, the texts under "ANY QUESTIONS" in each country will not be copied here while not very good for readers outside the USA. Any comments before I start, please?--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have uploaded File:US OPM Citizenship Laws of the World 2001.pdf to Wikimedia Commons and I would like to use its text to be updated here.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 02:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * With no comment, I am starting Citizenship and Nationality.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 02:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

We invite you to join the movement strategy conversation (now through April 15)

 * This message, "We invite you to join the movement strategy conversation (now through April 15)", was sent through multiple channels by Gregory Varnum on 15 and 16 of March 2017 to village pumps, affiliate talk pages, movement mailing lists, and MassMessage groups. A similar message was sent by Nicole Ebber to organized groups and their mailing lists on 15 of March 2017. This version of the message is available for translation and documentation purposes

Dear Wikimedians/Wikipedians:

Today we are starting a broad discussion to define Wikimedia's future role in the world and develop a collaborative strategy to fulfill that role. You are warmly invited to join the conversation.

There are many ways to participate, by joining an existing conversation or starting your own:

Track A (organized groups): Discussions with your affiliate, committee or other organized group (these are groups that support the Wikimedia movement).

Track B (individual contributors): On Meta or your local language or project wiki.

This is the first of three conversations, and it will run between now and April 15. The purpose of cycle 1 is to discuss the future of the movement and generate major themes around potential directions. What do we want to build or achieve together over the next 15 years?

We welcome you, as we create this conversation together, and look forward to broad and diverse participation from all parts of our movement.


 * Find out more about the movement strategy process
 * Learn more about volunteering to be a Discussion Coordinator

Sincerely,

Nicole Ebber (Track A Lead), Jaime Anstee (Track B Lead), & the engagement support teams 05:09, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * A local page for this at Wikimedia Strategy 2017 has been created, if you'd prefer to participate here instead of on Metawiki. Looking forward to your input! :) Quiddity (WMF) (discuss • contribs) 00:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)