Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals/2015/August

Annotated Jurassic World Wikibook. Good idea?
I'm sure you're all aware that the summer blockbuster Jurassic World has just been released. Wikibooks's annotated texts policy states that works annotations for movies can be created here, and the featured status of the Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter suggests that these sorts of companion pieces to copyrighted works are acceptable here, so I was wondering if a book-length scene by scene breakdown of the scientific accuracy, effects, screenwriting, cinematography, etc of Jurassic World, like a movie version of Cliffs or Spark Notes, would be a viable project here. I posted this at the general reading room but it only got commented on by one (admittedly unenthusiastic) editor and I hoped posting it here too would attract some more eyes and comments. Abyssal (discuss • contribs) 17:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It all depends on the "educational" content, in general blockbuster movies are not worth speaking much about in regards to creative writing or even the cinematography. This one in particular, Jurassic World, is a very poor example of movie art, its full of cliches and the logic of the script goes out of the window about 30m in. In general it would be better to go about it like we go about biographies, avoid covering contemporaneous subjects since they bring about a lot of emotional baggage... --Panic (discuss • contribs) 09:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm reposting the above since it got "deleted" without notice even if I got it back from my contribution history it did not appear on this pages edit history... If you made a significant contribution check it out since it may have been a hiccup on the project's servers.--Panic (discuss • contribs) 17:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * . It's because Abyssal posted the question twice. Your original comments are over at Reading room/General. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 07:31, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose - write a book about the Jurassic era by all means, but content about the movie is more appropriate to Wikipedia or IMDB. 46.254.186.36 (discuss) 23:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Allowing reviewers to move pages while deleting the original page?
If you've ever patrolled recent changes while I was very active (i.e. 2009, 2010, 2013 or 2015), you've probably noticed that I move pages a lot when I write. I split pages, merge pages and rename pages a lot as I write, since I often come to the realisation, while writing, that this chapter will eventually grow too long or that chapter is too short to be independent. I think allowing reviewers to move pages while deleting the original page would lessen the workload on admins a bit and eliminate the minor and harmless (but annoying) inconvenience of waiting for an admin to delete the page. Kayau (talk · contribs) 08:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I ran into a similar scenario the other day − I messed up a few page moves and left a mess of requests for the admins to deal with so that I could undo the moves. However, I feel the change you propose is risky, as it effectively would give all reviewers a loophole to delete any page.--Duplode (discuss • contribs) 21:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Aye, there's the rub. Move-without-leaving-a-redirect is essentially a limited form of deletion; the power to delete is a big deal; and we hand out the review priv to users here on a fairly relaxed basis.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 01:26, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The obvious solution is to have more sysops. Perhaps a round of nominations is in order? 46.254.186.36 (discuss) 23:49, 29 August 2015 (UTC)