Wikibooks talk:Request for enabling special:import

Other stuff

 * I'd like to see the tool configured to automatically add pages to the Transwiki: namespace. Shouldn't be a problem for the devs.
 * Please note that I'm hoping to get Import enabled on Wikibooks, not Export enabled on other projects (that would just make the nightmare worse!) -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

On the disadvantages

 * As far as making more work, I'm willing to do quite a bit of it. I think there should be someone from the cookbook to look over recipes posted there however, since a substantial portion of the articles in w:Category:Copy to Wikibooks are recipes. (And does anyone actually work on the Bartending book, or is that pretty much a transwiki dump?)
 * Another potential problem related to adding to the edit counts through Import is that it will also raise the edit counts of vandals. On the other hand, this would also identify IP vandals to us here, since we'd have a better view of their histories. In many cases, simply removing the vandal edits from the histories might be a good idea. -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The "wikipedian votes" section
I'm advertising this on en.wikipedia's villiage pump, since it effects them as much as it effects us (i.e., this will make the cleaning up of w:Category:Copy to Wikibooks and w:Category:Articles containing how-to sections a lot easier for us, and therefore easier for them. -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

How would it work?
How would Import work? How would an import feature determan what to import? Would pages link to get imported? Would it perhap show a list of pages linked to that may need to be imported as well giving the chance to remove pages not to be imported? Would links referring to pages not imported be changed automatically so links aren't left broken? Would the edit history indicate where the page(s) were imported from? What about templates used or catagories that the page(s) belonged to?

Even though I'm not an admin, I would be willing to support it too, if it means less work for admins. Sounds to me like there would still be pleanty of work to do if all it does is import edit history as well. I think it would benifit from also trying to clean up whats imported, making even less work for admins or other users who wish to help once imported. --darklama 16:37, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It's fairly similar to the way "move page" works within wikibooks, but it leaves the original where it was. What gets transwikied depends on the reason for the move... some stuff gets requested for move on the other project (see w:Category:Copy to Wikibooks for examples), others might be imposted because someone wants them here (e.g., if you wanted to write a book on energy efficiency, you might want to import a number of wikipedia articles on the subject and arrange them here as book chapters)... we'd just need to set up a "requests for import" page here for that.
 * Unfortunately I don't know how to make screen shots, or I'd just post what the dialog box looks like, but it just asks you what project to import from and what page you want to import, then click the import button and it's done. The pagehistory comes with the page, but the talk page (and it's history) require a second round, then it has to be moved to it's final location here (using normal pagemove). When we move to SUL, this will mean anyone who had contributed on the other project would also be marked as having contributed to the module here.
 * It doesn't moved linked pages... that would be a nightmare if you think about it (a lot of wikipedia pages in particular have hundreds of linked pages). -- SB_Johnny | talk 23:24, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Please vote on bugzilla...
See http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7579 for details. -- SB_Johnny | talk 17:04, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Transwiki namespace
If this section is approved, it will require a bot to go through all the Talk:Transwiki:Foo pages and move them to Transwiki talk:Foo. Gentgeen 20:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * We've got bots a'plenty... no worries :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)