Wikidata:Wikibooks/Development

Wikidata:Wikibooks

Please add to this page.

Wikibooks namespaces

Content namespaces: Mainspace, Cookbook, Wikijunior

Proposal 1

Every page has a Wikidata item. Every subpage also has a Wikidata item, because some languages have the same structure of their books.

+1 this reflects the Entity=Object idea, it is also usefull for cookbooks and reference work --FischX (talk) 19:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support It should certainly be possible to use Wikidata for subpages, as every now and then there’s a book started as a translation of one in another language. No reason to require that every subpage has a Wikidata item, though. — Ivan Shmakov (d ▞ c) 20:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support The themes were refused on the English Wikibooks, but on the French one you can see them (from any book), which treat for example:
The colors management (usually to learn them from some languages books).

The regex (in five programming languages).

... JackPotte (talk) 17:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support subject to the qualification that, as Ivan Shmakov notes, not every subpage needs a Wikidata item. --Pi zero (talk) 13:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal does say "every subpage". Liam987 21:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which kind of hints at that this proposal should be amended, or a corrected one added. — Ivan Shmakov (d ▞ c) 10:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 2

Every page has a Wikidata item. Subpages do NOT have a Wikidata item, because there are too many differences between versions of the books.

I am not a specialist of Wikibooks but before creating a bunch of items about book chapters we have to think about the data we want to save in Wikidata. If this is just to have a link I think this is not enough. Snipre (talk) 08:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support--دوستدار ایران بزرگ (talk) 09:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Persian)

معمولا هر صفحه با یک صفحه از پروژه ویکی‌کتاب به زبان دیگر پیوند دارد. به ندرت اتفاق می‌افتد که دو پروژه ویکی‌کتاب در سطح زیرصفحه با هم پیوند میان‌ویکی داشته باشند.

Support. I prefer this option. Internal structures within books are never the same across projects. The comment under proposal 1 re. the Cookbook needs to be considered in line with how the Cookbook is viewed at Wikibooks. It is seen as a single book that has been given its own namespace. It is structurally different to all other books on Wikibooks and should not be used to drive how the project as a whole is handled. QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rs chen 7754 06:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
{{Agree}} This seems reasonable, as for the most part a book as a whole is more likely to correspond between languages, while individual pages within a book may show idosyncracies. The cookbook is, conveniently, a major exception, both in that its individual pages are more likely to correspond and more likely to be of particular interest, and in that its individual pages are not subpages since the book is represented by a namespace (at least, it is in English). --Pi zero (talk) 13:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
b:en:Cookbook is not the only “book of recipes” on English Wikibooks. One another example is b:en:Algorithm Implementation, whose subpages may (and often will) have counterparts across languages. Consider, e. g., b:en:Algorithm Implementation/Sorting/Quicksort and b:ru:Реализации алгоритмов/Сортировка/Быстрая. — Ivan Shmakov (d ▞ c) 09:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've reconsidered. --Pi zero (talk) 13:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per QuiteUnusual. Liam987 21:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki namespace

Proposal 3

Because the Transwiki: namespace is a temporary page until the content is transwikied, it should not have an item.

Support, it's a transit area with no permanence. QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support; just a staging area. --Pi zero (talk) 13:16, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support, a maintenance place to empty ASAP. JackPotte (talk) 17:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all above. Liam987 21:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 4

Because there are sometimes interwiki links in the Transwiki: namespace, every page in the namespace should have an item.

Wikibooks / Help

Same namespaces as Wikipedia / Help namespaces of Wikipedias. Require the exactly same support (i.e. mostly interlanguage links). Wikibooks should share the same items with Wikipedia for pages about the same topic. For example, there is a Wikipedia:Babel and a Wikibooks:Babel in most Wikipedias/Wikibooks; they share topics and often content, thus it would be relevant to have only one item for all these pages.

Ok. Snipre (talk) 08:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support JackPotte (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although I'm concerned that pages that are only nominally the same on Wikipedia and Wikibooks could be equated. Wikibooks operates in a completely different way from Wikipedia. Liam987 21:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category / Template

Same namespace and constraints as Wikipedia. Shared items with Wikipedia that store interlanguage links.

Support JackPotte (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Subject

Treated like the Portal: namespace on other wikis.

Support JackPotte (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems a natural association. --Pi zero (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bots

Do not operate an unflagged bot on en.wikibooks. This project uses FlaggedRevisions (aka, PendingChanges). This means an unflagged bot will push all its edits into the manual review queue and generates more work than it saves. Unflagged bots are typically blocked on sight because of the amount of disruption they cause. QuiteUnusual (talk) 15:21, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rschen7754/Wikibooks

En.wikibooks

There is a community discussion underway regarding the removal of interwikis. New editors turning up and removing them is causing disruption due to the conflict with the ongoing discussion and the PendingChanges backlog created by unflagged editors. I suggest nobody starts removing interwikis until the community decides how to progess as at this rate they'll be totally alienated and start blocking and reverting. QuiteUnusual (talk) 22:11, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]