Wikinews has wikinewsie.org, and wikipedians have wikipedian.org, so I was thinking maybe it's high-time we had a wikibookian.org for the members of wikibooks. It would be a site where established wikibookians (of course, there would be a need to define "established") could have a variety of services offered:
*Blog hosting (especially blogs about wikibooks, books, writing/editing/authoring, education, etc) *Email aliasing (username@wikibookian.org) *Posts of news and announcements *Ability to host personal information, including images, which are not freely-licensed *Embedded IRC client with access to #Wikibooks, #cvn-wb-en, and #en.wikibooks *Applets and other tools specific to wikibooks (similar to the toolserver, but primarily for wikibooks)
There are lots of things that we could do with such a domain for the benefit of our members. I've taken the liberty of reserving the domain name wikibookian.org to help protect it from squatters. What do people think of this?
--Andrew Whitworth
At this point, anyone who asks can probably be considered "established" (and I'm not kidding) But yes, this could be very useful, if only for email aliasing and the IRC client. I also like the idea of hosting WB-specific tools, though I don't think we currently have any. How would this be paid for, though? -Mike
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Whitworth [mailto:wknight8111@gmail.com] Sent: December 4, 2007 12:14 PM To: Wikimedia textbook discussion Subject: [Textbook-l] Website for Wikibookians
Wikinews has wikinewsie.org, and wikipedians have wikipedian.org, so I was thinking maybe it's high-time we had a wikibookian.org for the members of wikibooks. It would be a site where established wikibookians (of course, there would be a need to define "established") could have a variety of services offered:
*Blog hosting (especially blogs about wikibooks, books, writing/editing/authoring, education, etc) *Email aliasing (username@wikibookian.org) *Posts of news and announcements *Ability to host personal information, including images, which are not freely-licensed *Embedded IRC client with access to #Wikibooks, #cvn-wb-en, and #en.wikibooks *Applets and other tools specific to wikibooks (similar to the toolserver, but primarily for wikibooks)
There are lots of things that we could do with such a domain for the benefit of our members. I've taken the liberty of reserving the domain name wikibookian.org to help protect it from squatters. What do people think of this?
--Andrew Whitworth
On Dec 5, 2007 2:00 PM, mike.lifeguard mike.lifeguard@gmail.com wrote:
At this point, anyone who asks can probably be considered "established" (and I'm not kidding) But yes, this could be very useful, if only for email aliasing and the IRC client. I also like the idea of hosting WB-specific tools, though I don't think we currently have any. How would this be paid for, though? -Mike
The issue of pay is a tricky one. Veropedia uses some advertising to offset the cost of hosting, mostly unobtrusive book links from Amazon. I think we could go a similar route, using advertisements from Amazon or Google to try and offset costs a little. We certainly wouldn't want any crazy flashing banner ads or anything. A small hosting package, with a basic HTML-based site, some blog software, and email aliasing would not cost too much to operate. I would need to get some quotes, and I would also like to see if there were ways we could get hosting donated. We could use a free site such as google pages or geocities or something to start.
--Andrew Whitworth
I have to say, I'm in the "no ads under any circumstances" camp. I really think we need to avoid using ads to pay for anything. At all. Ever. If that means this can't go forward, so be it. Looking into free or donated options is worthwhile, I think. I've had good experiences with Googlepages, so that might be a good starting point. -Mike
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Whitworth [mailto:wknight8111@gmail.com] Sent: December 5, 2007 3:42 PM To: Wikimedia textbook discussion Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] Website for Wikibookians
On Dec 5, 2007 2:00 PM, mike.lifeguard mike.lifeguard@gmail.com wrote:
At this point, anyone who asks can probably be considered "established"
(and
I'm not kidding) But yes, this could be very useful, if only for email aliasing and the IRC client. I also like the idea of hosting WB-specific tools, though I don't think we currently have any. How would this be paid for, though? -Mike
The issue of pay is a tricky one. Veropedia uses some advertising to offset the cost of hosting, mostly unobtrusive book links from Amazon. I think we could go a similar route, using advertisements from Amazon or Google to try and offset costs a little. We certainly wouldn't want any crazy flashing banner ads or anything. A small hosting package, with a basic HTML-based site, some blog software, and email aliasing would not cost too much to operate. I would need to get some quotes, and I would also like to see if there were ways we could get hosting donated. We could use a free site such as google pages or geocities or something to start.
--Andrew Whitworth
On Dec 6, 2007 8:55 AM, mike.lifeguard mike.lifeguard@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say, I'm in the "no ads under any circumstances" camp. I really think we need to avoid using ads to pay for anything. At all. Ever. If that means this can't go forward, so be it. Looking into free or donated options is worthwhile, I think. I've had good experiences with Googlepages, so that might be a good starting point. -Mike
Really, no advertisments at all? Even if this site was basically just for us (that is, we wouldn't be bothering readers with them) and if they were small and unobtrusive? I'm not generally a fan of advertisements, but I have seen some sites where they are integrated in a way which is not unpleasant. I'm certainly not pro-advertisements myself, but I don't want to be closing the door on any options this early in the process.
--Andrew Whitworth
Why not use wikibooks itself for this? What features are you looking for in a separate website?
Andrew Whitworth wrote:
On Dec 6, 2007 8:55 AM, mike.lifeguard mike.lifeguard@gmail.com wrote:
I have to say, I'm in the "no ads under any circumstances" camp. I really think we need to avoid using ads to pay for anything. At all. Ever. If that means this can't go forward, so be it. Looking into free or donated options is worthwhile, I think. I've had good experiences with Googlepages, so that might be a good starting point. -Mike
Really, no advertisments at all? Even if this site was basically just for us (that is, we wouldn't be bothering readers with them) and if they were small and unobtrusive? I'm not generally a fan of advertisements, but I have seen some sites where they are integrated in a way which is not unpleasant. I'm certainly not pro-advertisements myself, but I don't want to be closing the door on any options this early in the process.
--Andrew Whitworth
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
On Dec 8, 2007 8:30 AM, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Why not use wikibooks itself for this? What features are you looking for in a separate website?
The email aliasing is perhaps the biggest point of attraction for me, but blogging would be a big help too. Our community has voted once before to not allow blogging on-wiki, despite the fact that Wikiversity allows it. Some other items that I mentioned in my first email would also be difficult to do on-wiki:
*Ability to host personal information, including images, which are not freely-licensed *Embedded IRC client with access to #Wikibooks, #cvn-wb-en, and #en.wikibooks *Applets and other tools specific to wikibooks (similar to the toolserver, but primarily for wikibooks)
--Andrew Whitworth
Hi Andrew,
Perhaps you could explain a bit better the rationale behind this. It might also build up interest among those who haven't realised what the benefits of these tools would be.
On 12/10/07, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:
The email aliasing is perhaps the biggest point of attraction for me, but blogging would be a big help too.
Why?
Our community has voted once before to not allow blogging on-wiki,
How about just aggregating posts from various blogs.
*Ability to host personal information, including images, which are not freely-licensed
What would this be for?
*Embedded IRC client with access to #Wikibooks, #cvn-wb-en, and #en.wikibooks *Applets and other tools specific to wikibooks (similar to the toolserver, but primarily for wikibooks)
Can this not be done on the same server with the same hostname, but off-wiki (e.g. wikibooks.org/tools/)?
Cheers, Martin
Perhaps you could explain a bit better the rationale behind this. It might also build up interest among those who haven't realised what the benefits of these tools would be.
Fair enough. The most important aspect for me would be the email aliasing. Imagine a YOURUSERNAME@wikibooks.org, or even @wikibookian.org. This would make it look more "official" for when we are having to do business on behalf of Wikibooks. If we're trying to keep in touch with a class project, or if we are trying to secure a book donation, an "official" looking email address would do a lot for our credibility. For instance, when I am sending an email to a professor or to one of my students, I use my school address.
Blogging is another big deal. On wikibooks, we once voted (and this may be an issue we could reopen, if there were enough support) to not allow our users to blog on Wikibooks. Wikiversity allows it's users to blog directly on-wiki in their user pages. These blogs, of course, have to be on topic. I wanted to have a blog about Wikibooks, so I had to go to an external site and start one up myself. This extra effort, plus the need to create a new account at a blogging site will be a turn off to many people. If we put a blog in front of people though, and say "this is open for wikibookians to use with no hassle" I think more people will use it. This also allows people to keep their blogs tied in to their regular wikibooks accounts.
Having an embedded IRC client available will also, hopefully, increase participating in the chat rooms. Only a few people do participate in the chat room, but it's a resource that I think we should use more often. On the occasions when multiple admins are in the chatroom, dealing with problems or vandalism becomes trivial because of the instantaneous communication. Many people do not have IRC clients, and would probably be intimidated by them anyway. By having an embedded IRC client available, we could help increase participation in this.
These are just a few of the points that seem to have attracted the most interest, this is certainly not an exhaustive list. The key point is that this kind of tool would make it easier for people to communicate with each other, and it would make it easier for new users to get involved with the community.
Our community has voted once before to not allow blogging on-wiki,
How about just aggregating posts from various blogs.
Again, people would have to create their own blogs on an external site, which may not be an attractive option for many people. Aggregating from existing blogs may be nice, but I want to make the whole process of blogging more easy, and more accessible.
*Ability to host personal information, including images, which are not freely-licensed
What would this be for?
This is actually an issue that was more of a problem on Wikiversity, and it's not something that we've really had to deal with, yet. Consider the case of an image of yourself: Several users, myself included, post images of themselves on their user page. The problem with the current set-up is that to post a picture of myself, I must release it under a free license. This means that other people can use my picture in ways that I might not necessarily approve of beforehand. Of course, this opens the issue of whether we want to post pictures of ourselves online anyway, but I'm side-stepping that question.
We at Wikibooks have voted before to not allow people to post things like resumes on-wiki. This follows pretty directly from the 'not a personal webhost' clause. However, I think that we can do things to promote our active contributors, such as hosting resumes. This is a topic that we could talk a long time about, so i'll just drop it for now.
*Embedded IRC client with access to #Wikibooks, #cvn-wb-en, and #en.wikibooks *Applets and other tools specific to wikibooks (similar to the toolserver, but primarily for wikibooks)
Can this not be done on the same server with the same hostname, but off-wiki (e.g. wikibooks.org/tools/)?
I'm sure lots of things "can" be done that will probably never be accomplished. We would need to get these kinds of programs installed by the devs, and that would likely require all sorts of testing for performance and security, etc. Also, that would put additional (albeit small) strain on the servers, and that's something that nobody would want. Having a separate website that we (wikibookians) develop and maintain would keep this strain off our developers, off our hardware, etc. If we are going to do any of this stuff, I want to do it without creating any stress on other people.
I hope this answered some questions, sorry for the verbosity.
--Andrew Whitworth
one of the things you say you want it an IRC function. you may like to know that we have a page on wikinews which allows users to easily access CGI:IRC from the wiki page.
see : http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/WN:IRC
thanks
Mark
(User:Markie)
one of the things you say you want it an IRC function. you may like to know that we have a page on wikinews which allows users to easily access CGI:IRC from the wiki page.
But this method still requires using the IRC function on wikizine.org. I wouldn't be interested in off-loading our IRC traffic (small as it may be) onto another website without contributing in some way to it's operation. This does, however, solve the problem of creating an IRC client that is more accessible.
--Andrew Whitworth
the traffic doesn't unnecessarily have to be offloaded onto wikizine, it can be any server but i can see your point. however i also cannot see the foundation allowing you to host an IRC server on any of their servers, so why not just donate to wikizine or IRC@work or somebody??
as for the useability, yes i agree that CGI:IRC isnt exactly the best but im hoping to (try at least) to get the same kinda stuff set up to use the java client here -> http://java.freenode.net
thanks
mark
On Dec 9, 2007 11:07 PM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:
one of the things you say you want it an IRC function. you may like to
know
that we have a page on wikinews which allows users to easily access
CGI:IRC
from the wiki page.
But this method still requires using the IRC function on wikizine.org. I wouldn't be interested in off-loading our IRC traffic (small as it may be) onto another website without contributing in some way to it's operation. This does, however, solve the problem of creating an IRC client that is more accessible.
--Andrew Whitworth
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
On Dec 9, 2007 6:12 PM, Wikinews Markie newsmarkie@googlemail.com wrote:
the traffic doesn't unnecessarily have to be offloaded onto wikizine, it can be any server but i can see your point. however i also cannot see the foundation allowing you to host an IRC server on any of their servers, so why not just donate to wikizine or IRC@work or somebody??
The point of all this would be to create our own website that isn't affiliated with WMF and is run on our own dime. This is similar to the Wikinews http://www.wikinewsie.org, but I'm having to think of many additional uses for it, to try and make the sale.
as for the useability, yes i agree that CGI:IRC isnt exactly the best but im hoping to (try at least) to get the same kinda stuff set up to use the java client here -> http://java.freenode.net
I wasn't aware that freenode had a java client, and since the WMF makes regular donations to freenode anyway, I wouldn't be upset about using it. Of course, this would only give us access to #wikibooks, #wikijunior, and #cvn-wb-en, not #en.wikibooks. Most people probably wouldn't want to see the raw feed anyway, so this could be an acceptable compromise.
Even if we ignore the IRC client issue, we still don't have email aliasing, blogging, or any other features that we could imagine. Really, what a lot of this is, is for us to imagine what more we want and what more we could use.
--Andrew Whitworth
Andrew Whitworth wrote:
On Dec 9, 2007 6:12 PM, Wikinews Markie newsmarkie@googlemail.com wrote:
the traffic doesn't unnecessarily have to be offloaded onto wikizine, it can be any server but i can see your point. however i also cannot see the foundation allowing you to host an IRC server on any of their servers, so why not just donate to wikizine or IRC@work or somebody??
The point of all this would be to create our own website that isn't affiliated with WMF and is run on our own dime. This is similar to the Wikinews http://www.wikinewsie.org, but I'm having to think of many additional uses for it, to try and make the sale.
--Andrew Whitworth
How much of this is similar to the idea of the "Wikibooks Foundation" idea I floated before the last board elections on the Staff Lounge? (More like a lead balloon that sank at sea, but I still raised it.)
There are some activities that the WMF board either doesn't want to get involved with or for various reasons legally can't.... which some Wikibookians do want to get involved with. Some of what you are saying here about having a completely independent website might have some good merit, and I am liking the general approach you are taking on doing this.
I want to make it clear that there certainly is a huge role that a WMF sponsored website for textbook and other book-length material to be hosted, and I'm not trying to say by any means to tell of the WMF off... but at the same time trying to organize activities, particularly some potentially profit-making activities, has been embarrassingly difficult to put together and at the same time maintain a distance to avoid the appearance of ethical conflicts.
Wikibooks is reaching a new level of development, and it will be interesting where the community will go from here.
-- Robert Horning
How much of this is similar to the idea of the "Wikibooks Foundation" idea I floated before the last board elections on the Staff Lounge? (More like a lead balloon that sank at sea, but I still raised it.)
There are some activities that the WMF board either doesn't want to get involved with or for various reasons legally can't.... which some Wikibookians do want to get involved with. Some of what you are saying here about having a completely independent website might have some good merit, and I am liking the general approach you are taking on doing this.
I want to make it clear that there certainly is a huge role that a WMF sponsored website for textbook and other book-length material to be hosted, and I'm not trying to say by any means to tell of the WMF off... but at the same time trying to organize activities, particularly some potentially profit-making activities, has been embarrassingly difficult to put together and at the same time maintain a distance to avoid the appearance of ethical conflicts.
Wikibooks is reaching a new level of development, and it will be interesting where the community will go from here.
-- Robert Horning
Hello Rob! how are you? You are right, this is basically the "sinister alterior motive" that I've had about this. The idea of having a separate "Wikibooks Foundation" might not have been a success, but it has been influential nonetheless. One thing I want is to have a platform that isn't dependant on WMF money or WMF developers/volunteers to run. People are busy enough as-is.
Consider as a parallel issue the fact that Google News refuses to aggregate Wikinews directly, because it is "untrustworthy". To circumvent this, Wikinews created a news blog to post it's stories (once they have been completed), and Google News will link to the Wikinews Blog. It's this kind of small step that can go a long way to promoting Wikinews, and ideally all other WMF projects. Imagine for a short moment a read-only website where "checked" and "approved" books could be hosted, and then included in Google Books searches. Think about what Veropedia does to improve the reliability of certain Wikipedia articles.
This is sort of a tangent, of course, but it illustrates the fact that sometimes our neat self-contained little wikis do need some support from other websites which are not necessarily WMF-affiliates.
--Andrew Whitworth
Andrew Whitworth wrote:
How much of this is similar to the idea of the "Wikibooks Foundation" idea I floated before the last board elections on the Staff Lounge? (More like a lead balloon that sank at sea, but I still raised it.)
There are some activities that the WMF board either doesn't want to get involved with or for various reasons legally can't.... which some Wikibookians do want to get involved with. Some of what you are saying here about having a completely independent website might have some good merit, and I am liking the general approach you are taking on doing this.
I want to make it clear that there certainly is a huge role that a WMF sponsored website for textbook and other book-length material to be hosted, and I'm not trying to say by any means to tell of the WMF off... but at the same time trying to organize activities, particularly some potentially profit-making activities, has been embarrassingly difficult to put together and at the same time maintain a distance to avoid the appearance of ethical conflicts.
Wikibooks is reaching a new level of development, and it will be interesting where the community will go from here.
-- Robert Horning
Hello Rob! how are you? You are right, this is basically the "sinister alterior motive" that I've had about this. The idea of having a separate "Wikibooks Foundation" might not have been a success, but it has been influential nonetheless. One thing I want is to have a platform that isn't dependant on WMF money or WMF developers/volunteers to run. People are busy enough as-is.
Consider as a parallel issue the fact that Google News refuses to aggregate Wikinews directly, because it is "untrustworthy". To circumvent this, Wikinews created a news blog to post it's stories (once they have been completed), and Google News will link to the Wikinews Blog. It's this kind of small step that can go a long way to promoting Wikinews, and ideally all other WMF projects. Imagine for a short moment a read-only website where "checked" and "approved" books could be hosted, and then included in Google Books searches. Think about what Veropedia does to improve the reliability of certain Wikipedia articles.
This is sort of a tangent, of course, but it illustrates the fact that sometimes our neat self-contained little wikis do need some support from other websites which are not necessarily WMF-affiliates.
--Andrew Whitworth
This said, whilst some of the activities you suggest seem best to "keep" aside from WMF, others totally fit under the umbrella of Wikimedia Foundation.
Blogs : I think the http://en.planet.wikimedia.org/ is a good start to consider. This aggregation is for all projects, english focused. http://de.planet.wikimedia.org/ is the same, german focused.
We could perfectly image a http://en.planet.wikibooks.org, for a wikibooks focus.
-------
Also, a website which would host Wikibooks pdf versions of books seem perfectly "inline" with the mission.
-------
News would seem logical to me as well
However, hosting personal website (photos) is really not our job indeed. Email aliasing as well.
Presumably, a separate association could be created, which could be a partner of Wikimedia Foundation, and which would have certain activities that the Foundation does not want to be involved in.
Ant
to someone who may concern: would you please take my email out of the list? thanks. merry christmas!
Fu Yan
On Dec 9, 2007 6:00 PM, Wikinews Markie newsmarkie@googlemail.com wrote:
one of the things you say you want it an IRC function. you may like to know that we have a page on wikinews which allows users to easily access CGI:IRC from the wiki page.
see : http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/WN:IRC
thanks
Mark
(User:Markie) _______________________________________________ Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
From my outside-of-Wikibooks perspective, this sounds like a great
idea for the Wikibookians. :-)
On Dec 4, 2007 11:13 AM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:
Wikinews has wikinewsie.org, and wikipedians have wikipedian.org, so I was thinking maybe it's high-time we had a wikibookian.org for the members of wikibooks. It would be a site where established wikibookians (of course, there would be a need to define "established") could have a variety of services offered:
*Blog hosting (especially blogs about wikibooks, books, writing/editing/authoring, education, etc) *Email aliasing (username@wikibookian.org) *Posts of news and announcements *Ability to host personal information, including images, which are not freely-licensed *Embedded IRC client with access to #Wikibooks, #cvn-wb-en, and #en.wikibooks *Applets and other tools specific to wikibooks (similar to the toolserver, but primarily for wikibooks)
There are lots of things that we could do with such a domain for the benefit of our members. I've taken the liberty of reserving the domain name wikibookian.org to help protect it from squatters. What do people think of this?
--Andrew Whitworth
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org