For some reason, I have the impression that important administrative things take too long to do in Wikibooks. For example, pages are on vfd or speedy for months without any resolution. A lot still has to be transwikied out of en.wikibooks and into their language books, and there are few who would discuss policy such as a uniform book naming scheme (much less few who could get to any consensus or make every book conform to such a standard).
Is there something going on that I should be aware of, or is it that Wikibooks really is way too undermanned in terms of people in positions of authority?
[[en:b:User:kelvSYC]], [[en:w:User:kelvSYC]], [[en:wikt:User:kelvSYC]]
On 22/04/05, kelvSYC kelvsyc@shaw.ca wrote:
For some reason, I have the impression that important administrative things take too long to do in Wikibooks.
Is there something going on that I should be aware of, or is it that Wikibooks really is way too undermanned in terms of people in positions of authority?
Undermanned overall. Definately.
El vie, 22-04-2005 a las 13:38, Tomer Chachamu escribió:
On 22/04/05, kelvSYC kelvsyc@shaw.ca wrote:
For some reason, I have the impression that important administrative things take too long to do in Wikibooks.
Is there something going on that I should be aware of, or is it that Wikibooks really is way too undermanned in terms of people in positions of authority?
Undermanned overall. Definately.
Probably Wikibooks needs more administrators or at least more active ones.
On 23 Apr 2005 00:24:43 +0200, Manuel GR mgrojo@ya.com wrote:
Probably Wikibooks needs more administrators or at least more active ones.
I think the main problem is that nobody is really interested in Wikibooks. They just want to contribute to their own group of (no more than) 5 books. Therefore, we also have no {{cleanup}}, low activity on VfD, etc.
On Apr 22, 2005, at 4:55 PM, Tomer Chachamu wrote:
On 23 Apr 2005 00:24:43 +0200, Manuel GR mgrojo@ya.com wrote:
Probably Wikibooks needs more administrators or at least more active ones.
I think the main problem is that nobody is really interested in Wikibooks. They just want to contribute to their own group of (no more than) 5 books. Therefore, we also have no {{cleanup}}, low activity on VfD, etc.
I already put my name in the hat at [[Wikibooks:Requests for adminship]], but even then requests are backlogged six months. One even withdrew their own request because it's taking so long to get processed.
I already put my name in the hat at [[Wikibooks:Requests for adminship]], but even then requests are backlogged six months.
Try post at a better visited mailing list like wikitech to draw attention to it.
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Erik Zachte
On 4/23/05, Erik Zachte epzachte@chello.nl wrote:
I already put my name in the hat at [[Wikibooks:Requests for adminship]], but even then requests are backlogged six months.
Try post at a better visited mailing list like wikitech to draw attention to it.
Please don't email wikitech-l with these requests since developers are no longer involved in making admins.
The bureaucrats on the wiki (Tuf-Kat and Dysprosia) should be making admins and http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Requests_for_adminship suggests contacting them on their talk pages when requests are made. If they are not able to do so, it would be best for the Wikibooks community to nominate some additional bureaucrats. Until that happens, any steward can make admins if the existing bureaucrats are inactive. Just leave a message at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions.
Angela.
Tomer Chachamu wrote:
On 23 Apr 2005 00:24:43 +0200, Manuel GR mgrojo@ya.com wrote:
Probably Wikibooks needs more administrators or at least more active ones.
I think the main problem is that nobody is really interested in Wikibooks. They just want to contribute to their own group of (no more than) 5 books. Therefore, we also have no {{cleanup}}, low activity on VfD, etc.
The problem is not this I belive - there are many people who are interested - most of them are very active in other older projects (wikipedia, wiktionary etc.) and so they spend some additional time on wikibooks - it is the same to me - the admin of the Italian wiktionary does not allow to follow up things like I would on wikibooks. What I am trying to do is to interest other people who are potential" new editors" to go to wikibooks, but this takes time. Out of 50 conversations you have maybe one who is going to contribute. It is not like wikisource or wikiquote or wikinews that you write short articles or add just a quote - you "write books" and that is hard work.
One thing wikibooks should try to insert are software manuals - those of the OpenSource community that are under GFDL. This helps both: the software project and wikibooks as any user going there to search for information is a potential contributer.
I will start with our OmegaT manual - on the English wikibooks and then translate it into German and/or Italian. We will insert the link to the OmegaT website and when I give explanations I will send people there to look up a how-to. This makes the project known. People using OmegaT are language professionals - so it is quite likely that sooner or later they read the books being edited to learn their specific language and they very likely will then start to add.
What I am also trying to create on the Italian wikibooks is not so much a German teaching book, but an exercise book teachers at a certain point can use in the class, Anyone can use for own exercises. There are no solutions up to now - people will have to ask me for now - so I have a reason to talk about the project.
For the admins: they should concentrate on their rule of cleaning up things and only after having done that edit. But even this is hard, as most admins are the major contributors ...
Hmmm ... whoever thinks there's not enough done: why don't you just start to do what needs to be done?
Wishing you a great weekend!
Sabine
I really don't know. I'm not active on wikibooks myself. Just run stats for it.
-----Original Message----- From: textbook-l-bounces@wikimedia.org [mailto:textbook-l-bounces@wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of kelvSYC Sent: Friday, 22 April 2005 08:43 To: Wikimedia textbook discussion Subject: [Textbook-l] Executive inaction?
For some reason, I have the impression that important administrative things take too long to do in Wikibooks. For example, pages are on vfd or speedy for months without any resolution. A lot still has to be transwikied out of en.wikibooks and into their language books, and there are few who would discuss policy such as a uniform book naming scheme (much less few who could get to any consensus or make every book conform to such a standard).
Is there something going on that I should be aware of, or is it that Wikibooks really is way too undermanned in terms of people in positions of authority?
[[en:b:User:kelvSYC]], [[en:w:User:kelvSYC]], [[en:wikt:User:kelvSYC]]
_______________________________________________ Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
This is funny. Me posting to a mailing list that I have nothing to contribute to the matter at hand. I thought I replied to a private mail :) Erik Zachte
textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org