There have been numerous disagreements over it, several of them have been
voiced at this link:
Basically people disagree to what extent things that are not textbooks
should be excluded, the definition of textbooks, the process by which the
policy was brought to the fore, how strictly we should follow the letter of
the policy/guideline, and various other things.
I also do not feel that the name "wikibooks" is particularly problematic
because some of the things on there it would be somewhat a stretch to call
them textbooks (eg chess) but they're closer to it than VG walkthroughs.
Plus I do agree that "wikipedia textbooks" is clunky AND implies a
dependence on Wikipedia which, as far as I know, we are trying to avoid in
the interest of maintaining a sort of separate identity between us.
Matt
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Florence Devouard <Anthere9(a)yahoo.com>
To: textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 08:40:57 +0200
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
Robert Horning wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 5/8/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Besides everything else which has been said
already, I do not find
these names particularly appealing. "Wikibooks" is short and catchy,
"Wikipedia Textbooks" is long and clumsy and has a taste of
ugly marketspeak.
Wikibooks is actually one of our most problematic names, as the focus
is very much on textbook development. Short and catchy as it ma ybe,
it is misleading. Fundamentally, I can see problems with the project's
conception around a very specific type of knowledge representation (be
it generally a book or specifically a textbook), but if that is how we
define it, then we should at least be clear what _kind_ of books we
are talking about.
(Cross posting to textbook-l as this is a perennial issue that still
needs to be resolved)
I don't see that the name "Wikibooks" is necessarily as problematic as
you are suggesting here, Eric. Nor do I see that "textbook development"
is necessarily the only focus of Wikibooks, even though I would admit
that it is a major component of the Wikibooks and should be emphasized.
It would be interesting to see what the sense of the WMF board is on
this issue in terms of how focused Wikibooks ought to be on textbooks
and what kind of definition of textbooks could be used to distinguish
what should or should not be found on Wikibooks. A massive campaign to
remove whole categories of content from Wikibooks has been underway for
some time, but the actual working definition of what really should
belong on that project has never been made clear by those who would have
the authority to define this sort of scope of the project.
An effort by the community is currently under way on Wikibooks to help
define this scope as best as can be done at the moment without WMF board
assistance:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstable
I would hope that WMF board members would be aware of this current
version of this fundamental policy,
ok
as it appears very likely that this
will become official and enforced policy on
en.wikibooks in the very
near future. I have raised some objections to this policy as it has
been written, but this is as much of a compromise as we ordinary folks
trying to figure out the mayhem of our little project can muster at the
moment, and represents nearly a full year of effort by very active
community members to help come up with this definition.
I would hope that non-textbook books could also eventually have a role
on Wikibooks, but mine is a small voice that is mostly ignored on this
subject.
I would be curious to hear more about what you disagree with in that
definition.
I, for one, think it is great to work on better defining the mission of
Wikibooks. I have one question though, do you know if the definition
worked upon is generally shared with other wikibooks people ? Are they
other wikibooks that have worked on such a definition, and where the
outcome differs widely from yours ?
ant
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l