[Textbook-l] Wikiversity and Wikibooks: can we answer the perennial question?

[Andrew Whitworth]

> ...And should we be thinking of "not splitting
> projects", "splitting and collaborating", or "merging into a larger
> goal"?

I know that there is at least a few people on wikibooks who feel that the definition of that project should be expanded beyond the limiting "for textbooks". We have recently formalized a change to say that wikibooks allows "textbooks, annotated texts, instructional guides, and manuals." This is a welcome expansion for many people, but it certainly is an encroachment on Wikiversities areas of expertise. There are a few people who advocate an even larger expansion. 

It's been my personal belief that one of the strengths of Wikibooks is the focus and the specialization. I worry that an expansion will compromise our position as a leading source for open-content ebooks. At the very least, expansion into other areas will dilute our "brand". Also, the more Wikibooks has, the less Wikiversity can or the more overlap between us. Enough expansion, and a project merger will not only become desirable, but maybe also a necessity.

I think Wikibooks does better to focus on it's core competency: books. This way, we can build a strong reputation as a good ebook resource. At the same time, that focus affords more freedom to Wikiversity to do more and try more. Wikiversity resources that are books should be moved to wikibooks, just like wikibooks modules that arent books can be moved to wikiversity. In this way, we help each other to grow.

--Andrew Whitworth


_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts!  Play Star Shuffle:  the word scramble challenge with star power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct