[ Apologies in advance for not distilling this to a minimum example.
I'm not sure how to do so without a bunch of edits in production pages,
and I can't immediately duplicate it in my sandbox. Since I can't figure
out how two pieces of the puzzle are interacting, I don't want to
blindly drop out something that might be related. ]
I have a template
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Template:OpenSCAD_Tutorial/example that
attempts to encapsulate the layout for an example.
It's not terribly complex:
<table class="wikitable" style="border: 2px solid Gold;">
<caption style="text-align: left;">[[{{BOOKNAME}}/examples/{{{name}}}|Code - {{{name}}}.scad]]</caption>
<tr><td>
{{Pre|{{{content|{{msgnw::{{BOOKNAME}}/examples/{{{name}}}}}}}}}}
</td></tr>
</table>
[[File:{{{name}}}.{{{imgtype|jpg}}}|{{{size|680px}}}]]
<noinclude>{{BookCat}}</noinclude>
The intent is that it's invoked like so:
{{OpenSCAD Tutorial/example|name=a_small_cube}}
to suck in example source text and an example image from separate pages.
It can also be invoked as:
{{OpenSCAD Tutorial/example|name=a_small_cube|content=
cube(10);
}}
to specify the source text in-line.[*]
[*] Yes, I know the header still tries to link to the separate
page. It's still a work in progress.
When I first put it together with the separate-page style, everything
seemed OK. Then somebody wrapped the {{BookCat}} in <noinclude>, and
"{{BookCat}}" started appearing on the final pages. I'm not completely
sure how <noinclude> works, but OK, I can believe that. I started a
conversation with the other editor about why they added the <noinclude>.
Meanwhile, other editors had commented that the
example-in-a-separate-page scheme would be unwieldy. OK, so I went to
back off to the content= style.
And the BookCat problem went away. The BookCat problem is there for the
example-in-separate-page invocation, but not for the in-line invocation.
You can see this at
https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=OpenSCAD_Tutorial/Chapter_1&oldi…
. The first example (a_small_cube) uses the in-line style and does not
show {{BookCat}}. The second example
(a_cube_with_different_side_lengths) uses the separate-page style and
shows the {{BookCat}}.
I can't see how those two things can possibly be tied together.
Hi all,
Would you like to get more people taking part in the Wikimedia Foundation’s
Board of Trustees election?
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees announced the plan for the 2021
Board elections
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/2021…>.
That plan includes outreach and communication support for the Board
elections. The Board election facilitators will:
- Inform communities of the trustee selection process
- Invite communities to engage in voting
- Encourage people representing emerging Wikimedia communities to run as
candidates
Voter turnout in prior elections was about 10% globally. It was better in
communities with volunteer election support. Some of those communities
reached over 20% voter turnout. We know we can get more voters to help
assess and promote the best candidates, but to do that, we need your help.
We are looking for volunteers to serve as Election Volunteers. Election
Volunteers should have a good understanding of their communities. The
facilitation team sees Election Volunteers as doing the following:
- Promote the election in their communities’ channels
- Organize discussions about the election in their communities
- Translate messages for their communities
*Who are the Election Volunteers to connect your community with this
movement effort? Is it you? Or someone you know?* *Check out more details
about Election Volunteers*
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Electio…>
and
add your name next to the community you will support in this table
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Electio…>
or get in contact with a facilitator
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021#Team>.
We aim to have at least one Election Volunteer for Wiki Projects in the top
30 for eligible voters. Even better if there are two or more sharing the
work.
Best,
--
*Jackie Koerner*
*she/her*
Board Election Facilitator
*English language communities and Meta-Wiki*
source as a super viable alternative to the current way of doing things.
Sanford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Moeller" <erik_moeller(a)gmx.de>
To: <textbook-l(a)wikipedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] how to get attention
> Karl-
> > What can we do to bring more attention to this project ?
> > Are there ways to get it registered in online directories
> > more quickly ? What about submitting it for a Slashdot
> > article ? (Should we wait until more work has been done
> > before we get it Slashdotted, or do it in conjuction with
> > the announcement of the Wikimedia Foundation?)
>
> I think a big cool Wikimedia announcement would make sense:
>
> * Wikimedia foundation takes donations
> * Wikipedia reaches 150,000 articles
> * New logo
> * New spinoffs: Wikiquote, Wikibooks
>
> Regards,
>
> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> Textbook-l mailing list
> Textbook-l(a)wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
constructing the conntent; 2) conventional approaches to constructing the
content, with a twist; 3) new (novel) approaches to constructing content;
and, 4) radical approaches - staying within the framework guidelines - that
set new standards, and stimulate completelt new ways to think about content.
In fact, a testbook project could "live beside itself", in parallel, as many
different potential 'products; and/or, once it gets going, begins to take on
a 'flavor' or demeanor' that resonates with certain contributors.
This is one beauty of open sourcing K-12 content, in that it permits conent
innovation around a basic structure, and can organically evolve in a way
that fills the needs of people beyond the original "textbook content"
intention. Really, a K-12 'textbook' in geometry, authored by wickipedia,
could be one part (or the core, whichever) of a massive project that fills
many needs, outside the initial mandate of the project.
University texts can be treated somewhat differently; there, one can
dispense with preceding structure, and 'go for it'. If the material is
compelling, people will use it. Unfortunately, this is not the case at K-12.
(but open source can slowly help to change that; in fact, *only* open source
can change that...certainly, the commercial publishers never will).
Sanford
the best way to ensure inexpensive texts.
> Again, has competition in this sector led to lower textbook costs?
Go back to the drawing board and think about the difference between
commodity texts and proprietary texts.
> I can walk into Barnes and Noble today and purchase a trade version
> of a geometry text for $25. The very same (or similar) content in a
> commercial textbook will cost *three to four times* that amount. Soo
> where's your commercial 'efficiency'?
My commercial efficiency is demonstrated *right there*, in your hands,
that $25 book, as opposed to the $75-$100 book produced by a
politicized and *proprietary* process.
> You ar completely misunderstanding my proposition. Would you like to
> turn over the highways to private enterprise? How about medical care
> (look what a great job private enterprise has done there)? How about
> pharma (there's a really cool example of private enterprise creating
> something that only the wealthy can afford).
Yes, I think that all of those things should be privatized. Next
question?
> What I am saying, is that we will see (counterintuitively), some
> price inefficiencies rising from that.
Which is why you propose a state takeover of the textbook business.
You say that you don't, but then you turn around and say that you do.
> Now, there might be ways to deal with those inefficiencies. Maybe we
> help the adopting states by finding our own publishers, who are
> willing to state (via contract) up front that they will not charge
> over a certain raw cost percentage of the content. There are many
> (hypothetical, at present) ways to deal with this.
Why do we need to do that, it doesn't make any sense to do that.
I don't think you've thought this through very well at all.
Consider: we create a textbook, call it "Wikimedia: 9th Grade American
History". We get it accepted, as a paper text, by the committee. If
the committee is corrupt (bribed) or whatever, and refuses to consider
it, then that's a big problem, and your lobbying should focus strongly
on that.
But once it's accepted, then the "Wikimedia: 9th Grade American
History" will easily outcompete all the other textbooks on price,
because it can and will be produced by highly competitive low cost
printers. We've removed the proprietary 'edge'. And if those
low cost printers make big profits, all the better!
> With due respect (and I mean that), you are illustrating a complete
> ignorance of the textbook publishing business. The "print" side of the
> business is very competitive, because the barriers to entry are very low
> (more economics).
Right, that's what I've been trying to explain to you.
> The content side is *not* competitive, because there is essentially
> a private content publishing cartel, owned by just a few publishing
> giants.
Right, and that's where we come in.
You see, I do understand this business, and I understand what open
source can do for it, better than you think.
I just don't think you've thought through the implications of what
you're advocating.
--Jimbo