Arbiter planning

wordgamesios sportsappsios winapps appcolt
 20 June 21:47   Note: See aswell page for altercation of Wikiversity / WikiU.


    The afterward areas were [ afresh appropriate in the commitment list] as important to boldness in commendations to the .

    When applicable, account your username to vote for (a) accurate opinion(s).

    (This is a vote alone in the faculty of a appearance of support; no accommodation has been taken to calculation votes in any accurate way, or even at all, to create final choices.)

    Write arguments for your position afterwards the account of options; aswell add added options if you like.

    If theres not a account of options, but instead a account of credibility defective discussion, then you can account added credibility or accord sublists of options for a accurate point of discussion.

    Et cetera.

    See aswell for anachronistic discussion.

    [ sites Implemented on bags of sites and in 30 languages].

    See [ website] and [ development site].

    The activity wikibooks does not assume to be adequate the aforementioned array of advance that the aboriginal wikipedia did. There are apparently a amount of causes for this. I shall accord a few causes I anticipate are important and then chase up with some suggestions for the activity that could be taken to antidote this.

    1) Wikibooks requires a altered logon to wikipedia. IMHO it would be bigger for the activity if absolute wikipedia developers could be automatically allotment of wikibooks. This would acquiesce added chargeless movement of labour from wikipedia to wikibooks. A able affective agency for humans developing in wikipedia is the cutting up of acclaim in the anatomy of edited articles. Why not acquiesce make a contributions page that gives acclaim to all actual formed on in any wiki project?

    2) Wikibooks is not commutual in the aforementioned way that wikipedia is. There is a bright charge for a altered anatomy to the books as they are meant to be (at atomic eventually) printed and should accordingly accept a beeline style. However, if links were create in such a way that they could deleted after interfering with the superior of the argument then we could accept the aforementioned alternation that wikipedia has after that necessarily causing problems with the appearance of the books.

    3) Aswell links can be create from relevent pages of wikipedia to wikibooks. This should draw in abundant added labour to activate up wikibooks. This is one affair that I can apparatus on my own. So I shall alpha introducing a area on some called wikipedia pages advantaged relevent wikibooks. I may aswell alpha links to wikibooks in the capital argument of some onlinewriting in wikipedia. However, after 2) we may acquisition that humans apprentice to avoid links to wikibooks as they are deadends.

    Please animadversion on these proposals.

     11:44, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC) (Barnaby dawson)

    At atomic one wikibook is commutual in the aforementioned way that wikipedia is. The is awful self-connected. If anything, some access charge to be severed. At the basal of alotof recipes you will acquisition a Categories link. This should account all the categories in the cookbook. Unfortunately, it lists all sorts of additional accidental different stuff. Cookbook advice is drowned out by the noise. -- 20:40, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

    Is #2 absolutely the case? I tend to anticipate that Wikibooks should be created to best serve the user. If that best way is by creating a non-linear book, so be it. Lets use the average we accept and not be angry to an old advice medium. 05:28, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

    Learning a new affair needs to be beeline (at atomic to an extent). For example, acquirements about ionic bonding in allure afore acquirements about the alternate table would be actual difficult. Advancing aback to a affair you accept already learnt is if non-linear agreeable is about added advantageous (which is area Acceptable appendices and indices appear in).

     02:06, 06 Jul 2005 (UTC)

    :Maybe the alotof important affair is accretion the adeptness for this chargeless movement of labour from wikipedia. There is all-inclusive beginning abeyant for all those experts to get absorbed in and aflame about wikibooks. The two best ways, which I anticipate accept been floated about as ambiguous proposals for some time, are as mentioned aloft - automated or affiliated logon for absolute wikipedia editors, and actual simply, far added links to wikibooks for the click-happy wikipediholics! Is there anywhere on Wikipedia adequately heavily trafficked by humans with the abstruse knowhow that could abutment or debris these suggestions? 22:21, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

    Yes, please!

    You who are account this, and anyone else.

    See also:

    -- 02:15 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)



Tags: important, links, options, people, learning, project, think

 wikipedia, wikibooks, links, discussion, linear, options, labour, people, learning, project, important, particular, moodle, textbook, think, , 2005 utc, way that, wikibooks this, way that wikipedia, labour from wikipedia,

Share Arbiter planning: Digg it!   Google Bookmarks   Yahoo! MyWeb   Furl  Binklist   Reddit!   Stumble Upon   Technorati   Windows Live   Bookmark

Text link code :
Hyper link code:

Also see ...

Article In : Reference & Education  -  Book