[Foundation-l] A Wikisource Definition (was: RfC: A Free Content and Expression Definition)

[Kernigh]

Erik Moeller <eloquence at ...> writes:  
  
> We have seen this with Wikibooks. Intended as a place to  
> collaboratively write textbooks, this definition clashes with a much  
> more inclusive practice that has long tolerated materials such as game  
> guides, jokes, or dating tips. How much do we know about the way the  
> meaning of Wikibooks or Wikisource is interpreted in other languages  
> than English, when we don't have a shared definition of its mission  
> which itself is literally translated into these languages?  
  
I now comment about en.wikibooks. My comments are invalid for the other  
language editions of Wikibooks.  
  
The page at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks  
gives little idea of what Wikibooks is for, instead giving a long list  
of "Wikibooks is not".  
  
  (De facto, though, the clause that "Wikibooks includes books based  
  on Wikipedia articles" allows textbooks for any topic that has a  
  Wikipedia article. I am thinking of abolishing this, because it could  
  be trouble to let Wikipedia determine the scope of Wikibooks.)  
  
>From what I know, en.wikibooks and the Wikimedia Foundation do not  
understand each other well. For example, on the talk page [2]  
  
 [2] http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks  
  
I started reading from one user:  
  
> Whichever one of us is right, however, does not really matter as it  
> does not change the fact that the President of the Wikimedia  
> Foundation, in his role as President of the Wikimedia Foundation,  
> has stated that going forward computer and video game guides (and  
> other books not meeting the criteria that they must be similar to  
> textbooks used for accredited learning of some description) should  
> not be on wikibooks and should (within a generous timeframe) be  
> removed. Come the end of the day, and whether you agree with it  
> or not, his decision is final.  
  
... as if every edit or mailing list post from [[User:Jimbo Wales]]  
is a policy decree even when not explicitly stated as such!  
  
Then from another user:  
  
> "Jimbo says" IMHO is not justification any more and not legally  
> binding because the WMF exists specifically to deal with decisions  
> like this.  This is a policy decision that affects a good many users  
> and is being done arbitrarily, not through some sort of community  
> concensus process such as most of our current policies have been  
> adopted. If this is to be changed and accepted as an official act  
> of the WMF, it should be done as an official action by the WMF  
> board. It hasn't been done that way.  
  
... as if the Presidency of Wikimedia is a meaningless position!  
  
Thus the role of the Wikimedia Foundation in Wikibooks is unknown.  
  
It has been worse than this. On 1 March 2006, we finally adopted our  
naming policy:  
  
  http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Naming_policy  
  
Wikibooks is now divided into textbooks. Each textbook has a page at  
[[Book Name]], and all other pages of that textbook must follow the  
slash convention: [[Book Name/Chapter Name]]. Older textbooks can use  
other conventions provided that the page name starts with the book name.  
  
>From 10 July 2003 to 28 February 2006, there was no naming policy, and  
we still have many pages that require merging into books.  
  
One principle though is clear, and has always remained constant since  
the founding of the project.  
  
Wikibooks always was and is built around the GNU Free Documentation  
License (with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no  
Back-Cover Texts). Wikibooks is free content.  
  
  (This might not be true of images and uploaded files. Some of us give  
  little attention to local uploaded files because we use Wikimedia  
  Commons for most things. However, two proposed policies would help:  
    http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Image_use_policy  
    http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Fair_use_policy  
  Together, they should require that all images are either free images  
  or belong to one of four strict fair use categories.)  
  
To contrast, http://wikitextbook.co.uk is NOT free content.  
  
-- [[Wikibooks:en:User:Kernigh]]  
   http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:Kernigh