Wikibooks:Reading room/Assistance

ArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions	Assistance	Requests	Announcements
General \| Proposals \| Projects \| Featured books	General \| Technical \| Administrative	Deletion \| Undeletion \| Import \| Permissions	Bulletin Board

Shortcut:
WB:HELP

Welcome to the Assistance reading room where Wikibookians help each other solve problems encountered while contributing to books or otherwise taking part in the Wikibooks community.

How do I make a table float to the right side of the page?

Latest comment: 1 month ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:52, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

By default these are inline. I have one in my Pokémon guide, and I want to move it. Thanks! SupremeUmanu (discuss • contribs) 17:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

After where it says class="wikitable", write style="float:right", as I put in a very simple test at the bottom of User:L10nM4st3r/sandbox. ^{— L10nM4st3r} / _{ROAR at me!} 22:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

@SupremeUmanu: sorry I forgot to ping, see my comment above. For more styling tips, see User:L10nM4st3r/Wikihelp/Styling#Inline styles ^{— L10nM4st3r} / _{ROAR at me!} 22:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Got it. Thanks so much! SupremeUmanu (discuss • contribs) 01:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is this the same as Wikipedia

Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

this is a lot like Wikipedia can someone please explain the difference Ducklan (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Ducklan! No, Wikibooks is not the same as Wikipedia—Wikibooks has a different mission and serves a different purpose. For detailed information, you can see Wikibooks:What is Wikibooks?. Generally speaking, Wikibooks is for the creation of entire books with well-defined scope and aims. Wikibooks are very similar to other published books, with the added advantages of being a web-hosted medium. I would recommend reading through Wikibooks:Policies and guidelines before you continue editing so you get a general idea of the standards here. Reach out if you have any questions! —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 17:31, 12 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Side-by-side paraphrase for a book in the public domain?

Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

I'd like to collaborate with some friends to make and 'publish' a paraphrased edition of John Henry Newman's Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine. The original work is in the public domain, but the style of English is somewhat archaic and difficult to understand. For the ease of construction, I'd thought that we would work on the paraphrase in a two-column table. Is such a project as this within the scope of Wikibooks? :) JohnLittle1993 (discuss • contribs) 01:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes that would be in scope. Original source texts are out of scope, but an annotated text is allowed. MarcGarver (discuss • contribs) 09:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Creating African Literature Books

Latest comment: 1 month ago5 comments4 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I want to ask if this idea fits into wikibooks. Kind Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylvesterchukwu04 (talk • contribs)

Yes, you could write a textbook about or guide to that topic, but you could not just include the original works. If you have original works of African literature that are freely-licensed, they would go to s:. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Koavf Alright Thanks.I will be glad if you could explain better Sylvesterchukwu04 (discuss • contribs) 21:17, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Sylvesterchukwu04: You can write a book about African literature here. That book could be a textbook intended for students who want to learn about African literature. You cannot upload pieces of fiction or poems or other pieces of literature here. Those belong at Wikisource, but only if they are allowed to be uploaded there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:24, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think that's something Greatful to share the knowledge an Eploring the vision of the Continent people.improve the Article

My pleasure. Coast G (discuss • contribs) 18:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

How to get a new book on a shelf

Latest comment: 1 month ago6 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I am kind of new here and seem to be too clumsy to get my book (Kitchen Remodel) on a shelf. How is that being done? I am also not sure on which shelf it belongs. --Stilfehler (discuss • contribs) 21:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for contributing and asking. It can be arcane. The process is here: Wikibooks Stacks/Adding books. I think it fits in Shelf:Maintenance and repair, so that's what I added. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much! --Stilfehler (discuss • contribs) 23:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Danke yourself. Let me know how else I can help and note that I rated your book as being 50% done, which was a sheer guess. Please correct it if that's inaccurate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:47, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

50% was a very good guess. Thanks for your help and for the offer of more help in the future! --Stilfehler (discuss • contribs) 02:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Expanding an outdated book

Latest comment: 1 month ago6 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:00, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I'm new to this project, and so don't really know the rules and norms about creating content here. I stumbled across A-level Mathematics/Edexcel during revision a few months ago and some of the existing content is quite useful. However, I have noticed it needs expansion and it also seems to be out-of-date in terms of the way the content is covered with chapters, topics etc. I'm not sure how I should go about expanding this book. This (page 9) is how the topics are presented by Pearson/Edexcel on the specification. However, this is not how the topics are presented in my textbook. How would I go about deciding which way is the best way to present things, and then the structure of the book? Creating/building on the content that is already there doesn't appear to be too difficult, if I have done it correctly so far! Thanks in advance, Ferien (discuss • contribs) 21:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Re: rules and norms, there hardly are any. Wikibooks is a small project and in practice (if not by policy), any given book tends to be a passion project of a single author or maybe a couple of authors. So if you come across a book here that is incomplete, it's probably been abandoned by the one person who was really working on it back in 2010 or whatever. As far as policies about how to structure books, there are some actual policies about how they are done with the MediaWiki hierarchy (i.e. we use [title]/[chapter] or [title]/[subsection]), but if you want the most basic help page on how the site functions, you could start here: Help:Contributing and for the most basic intro the site, here: Wikibooks:Welcome. In other words, feel free to remix and restructure a book if it's really necessary or you think it makes more sense, with the caveat that you're likely going to be the only one really paying any attention to that book. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Ferien and welcome! Seconding everything that Justin said. There are general best practices plus some style/content policies; but, if you're the only person working on a book, you have a fair amount of leeway. Please reach out if you have more questions or need help! —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 13:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks @Koavf, Kittycataclysm: for both of your help! I will be sure to reach out if I need more help :) Ferien (discuss • contribs) 18:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

For sure. And to be clear, KC is a lot more active here than I am and is a very helpful Wikibookian. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chat GPT

Latest comment: 1 month ago17 comments5 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

What (if any) is wikibooks's ruling on using Chat GPT to write articles? (I've seen this here). --JCrue (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is a good (and complicated) question with a few different aspects to consider. In terms of copyright, it's worth taking a look at w:Wikipedia:Large language models and copyright. In terms of content accuracy and overall quality, w:Wikipedia:Large language models is useful. We don't have any relevant policies here at Wikibooks, and it may be worth discussing and creating some. I personally think it would be good to import w:Template:AI-generated and use it on pages with Chat GPT-generated content so that people know to double-check it for accuracy. —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pinging some other active folks and admins on here: @Koavf @MarcGarver @Xania @SHB2000 @MathXplore. —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 13:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

As someone who has used this and continues to use it professionally, there is the problem of copyright, but there is also the problem of the fact that this is not ready for prime time. Anyone attempting to publish anything of even the mildest importance or competence will have to vet and edit the nonsense that AIs spit out. So if someone is using this as a tool to go from the blank page to 20% of the final product or a nice outline with some useful bullet points, and then continues to actually write the book, then that just resolves the issue of copyright. In other words, our policy should be at minimum that AI-generated text needs to be vetted by humans prior to publication here. Note also that the AI detecting tools are not reliable enough and will have far too frequent false positives. Happy to give two more cents if anyone thinks my rambling is useful. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I know an English Wikiversity custodian and other editors making chatbot-based content. This seems to be accepted because the chatbot usage is declared at the page and/or their title, and there are valid attempts to examine the chatbot outputs. Therefore, I think importing w:Template:AI-generated is a good idea to assist with clarification. Please note that Wikiversity came out from Wikibooks, different scope but similar structures exist, and that is why I think the idea is also valid at here. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 14:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is a salient distinction between these two projects, as en.wv encourages this kind of real-time original research, so using AI on-wiki could be instructive for how AI works. Here, less so. Agreed that some kind of notice that substantial material was generated with AI (which tool, when, how) is a good policy to have. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks#What_Wikibooks_includes says "Wikibooks is for textbooks, annotated texts, instructional guides, and manuals.". If using AI could be instructive for how AI works, we may need to accept AI for making instructional guides to chatbots, etc. On the other hand, I think there should also be a quantity restriction for AI-generated content to reduce the risk of copyright issues. The main author of AI instructional guides should be humans rather than AI. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Illustrative examples would be fine, but on en.wv, it would be appropriate to have some iterative learning project on wiki and engage in some kind of exercise like that. Either way, clearly marking the text would be appropriate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

My thoughts are similar to Justin's – it is for a similar reason why we banned it on my home wiki. --SHB2000 (discuss • contribs) 19:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Jumping in again—if I created a draft policy, would people help me outline it and put it together? —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes. I also recommend that we coordinate this with other projects or base ours on existing ones at other projects. e.g., I have seen this discussed at c:. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just created Wikibooks:Artificial Intelligence! —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 21:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I made some edits and made up {{Uses AI}}. I was bold, so please feel free to remix, remove, etc. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:04, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks @Koavf! I imported Template:AI-generated a couple days ago—should they be consolidated? —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 22:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes. No need for two. Unless we want to repurpose one of them into a talk page template where someone includes all of the things required by the policy (when, where, how). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:15, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I boldly did that repurposing, but I'm struggling to make the parameter work correctly. :/ At the moment, it doesn't matter, but I will need to actually make it work prior to this going live. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Template not working

Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry is this is the wrong place, but a template I made (link) doesn't work. I want the user to be able to enter the webpage name and URL (it would work something like Template:Wikipedia) but I'm not very good at wikitext and don't know how to make the template work. Can somebody tell me what is wrong/how it can be fixed? Thank you. Cintilo (discuss • contribs) 00:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

What I have done is to make it so that now, if you insert:

{{Simple Guide to Minecraft/Wiki|crafting}}

you will get this box floating to the right:

The Minecraft Wiki has related information at crafting

which I think is what you want. Let me know if there's more to do. If that is correct, please make the template documentation page. If you don't feel that you can, please respond to this message with anything that includes {{Ping|Koavf}} and I will make it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can I get the information on my deleted page?

Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi sorry if this is not the right place to ask this but my wikibooks page called "funding and finance" was deleted yesterday due to inactivity. I was just about the put more info into it when I saw this and I do not have any backup of the information in there. Can someone help me to recover those information please. Svrmustafa (discuss • contribs) 21:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Svrmustafa! The page was deleted because the scope was unclear and it seemed abandoned. I have moved the content to your user space at User:Svrmustafa/Sandbox/Funding and Finance. If you want to turn it into a book here, it will need to have its scope better elaborated. Cheers —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 22:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sources?

Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm a new user to Wikibooks (though not to Wikimedia), and I was wondering what WB's policy on sources is. Some pages, like this one, include references, (and it looks more like a Wikipedia article rather than a book on the whole), while some pages, like this, omit them. Cheers, Cremastra (discuss • contribs) 01:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Cremastra—good question! We don't have a single authoritative policy on sourcing like, for example, Wikipedia does. In fact, it looks like Wikibooks:Citing sources just redirects to w:Wikipedia:Citing_sources—I personally think it would be helpful for us to create a more clear guideline. We do have a smattering of relevant notes in other guidelines:

The draft policy Wikibooks:Original research says, "Textbooks, especially those containing information beyond what is considered "common knowledge" should contain proper citations and bibliographies. Unlike Wikipedia articles, individual Wikibooks may (at the discretion of the participating authors) forgo footnotes and instead create a separate chapter for citations and bibliographies."
Wikibooks:Wikibooks for Wikimedians says, "Most books, if they cite sources at all, gather all citation references in a single biographical type page, similar to what is commonly done in dead-tree books."

My view is that the content in textbooks/educational books here should be readily verifiable and should have a proper chain of attribution, which is best done through footnotes and citations—many serious published educational books I read do have footnotes and accompanying bibliographies for each chapter. Hope this helps! —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 14:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can one publish single articles on Wikibooks?

Latest comment: 1 month ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have developed a calculation to calculate the coal consumption of a coal-fired boiler from air. I have placed it on Wikipedia, but I was told that it is not suitable for Wikipedia ("Wikipedia is not a textbook or how-to guide"). Someone has referred me to Wikibooks. I have published the article HERE.

However, it seems that the purpose of Wikibooks is to place full text books. My single article will not count for that.

Any advice? Where is the best place to publish it?

Daniellouw (discuss • contribs) 19:22, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Daniellouw! Thank you for checking in. Since Wikibooks is meant for well-developed books, I don't really think your recent creation can stand on its own here. I would recommend instead trying at one of the following:

Wikiversity (possibly in the engineering department)
The Designing Buildings construction wiki (not affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation)

Cheers! —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 21:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much! I think this is the solution. I have moved the article to Wikiversity. Daniellouw (discuss • contribs) 08:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

How to Request Unblocking of an IP?

Latest comment: 1 month ago8 comments4 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I’m not sure if this is the right place to ask, so please forgive me if I’m mistaken.

My professor has been using Wikibooks for a long time as part of his class. Recently, he encountered an issue while trying to add new content under the topic “Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future Casebook.” It appears his account is blocked for two years.

His username is User:JGiffordAtMason

Could someone assist us in understanding why his account is blocked and how we might resolve this issue?

Thank you very much for your help! Svrmustafa (discuss • contribs) 21:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Svrmustafa! It doesn't appear that the user in question is blocked on the Wiki, but it may be that the IP address he is editing from is blocked. You could check that by having him attempt to make the edit from a different location/network. You may want to read this page and send it to him: Wikibooks:IP block exemption. It explains the process of requesting an exemption for your IP block. Ternera (discuss • contribs) 21:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

HI @Ternera, It is indeed his IP that is blocked. Also, he tried to create a user page to ask for an unblocking using the unblock template but failed since his IP his blocked. So we are stuck, is there another way to ask for an unblocking? Svrmustafa (discuss • contribs) 22:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Svrmustafa has he tried using a different network? I'm not sure where that blocked IP is, but if it's one from a common location like a school, it might be due to vandalism from others on that network. Also looping in @MarcGarver and @Xania, who are check-users. —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 23:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Try asking on his user page at Meta (Meta:User talk:JGiffordAtMason) as even most global blocks don't block Meta by default. I may be able to see the login attempt and determine why the IP is blocked. MarcGarver (discuss • contribs) 08:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

This appears to be resolved as I see 2 successful login attempts. MarcGarver (discuss • contribs) 08:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes it is resolved thank you everyone for your help :) Svrmustafa (discuss • contribs) 01:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is this in scope?

Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Closed complete —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have a copy of a book called “SPACE!” From smithsonian and I want to put it on Wikibooks, is this in the scope? NoBrainFound (discuss • contribs) 02:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikibooks is for original textbooks, manuals, guides, etc. Wikisource is for typographic reproductions of original source works. Commons is a site that hosts media such as audio, video, and scans of documents. All of these sites require that content is appropriately licensed. While the Smithsonian was chartered by Congress and actual works of Congress are in the public domain, typically, works created by the Smithsonian have their copyrights fully retained, so we can't copy them on any of these sites. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Autoconfirmed?

Latest comment: 1 month ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I haven't contributed here on Wikibooks yet, but I'm already autoconfirmed over on the English Wikipedia. I don't seem to be able to edit pages like Cookbook talk:Table of Contents due to needing to be autoconfirmed. Is autoconfirmation here at Wikibooks separate from autoconfirmation at EN Wikipedia? Amstrad00 (discuss • contribs) 20:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Amstrad00! Yes, autoconfirmation exists here separately from the other projects much how adminship and other roles do. I presume this is to make sure that new users become familiar with the norms of the community before gaining additional rights. —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 04:06, 30 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

What a timely answer, you read my mind @Kittycataclysm :)

Is there a way to remove my autoconfirm status? I don't want to commit any infractions here or anywhere else in wiki-land, but I have a very short memory. Since I rarely visit this wiki it is only a mater of time before I do something that others here frown upon. Am I making any sense? Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 20:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ottawahitech FYI I'm moving this discussion over to your talk page. —Kittycataclysm (discuss • contribs) 15:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why do admins keep their reviewer rights?

Latest comment: 7 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

markAdmins shows me that Kittycataclysm, MarcGarver, Leaderboard, and Xania are all both administrators and reviewers. Why isn't the reviewer right removed when adminship is granted? JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 14:44, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it matters. However, speaking for myself I added +reviewer to myself after I was an admin because at the time (just after the launch of flaggedrevs here), the review function didn't work properly for admins. I can't remember why, but it is possible it wasn't included in the permission set for admins originally. MarcGarver (discuss • contribs) 17:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Xania was already an admin when he was autopromoted to reviewer. Leaderboard, I left their reviewer rights in place when promoting to admin. This must have been deliberate because I removed uploader when promoting to admin but I can't remember why. MarcGarver (discuss • contribs) 18:20, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

and finally, based on this comment from the original request to set up flaggedrevs here, it is possible that admins needed to be added to reviewer initially (i.e., that review rights were not in the sysop group)

The configuration section of FlaggedRevs.php in svn suggests that sysops and bureaucrats can't review and validate pages without belonging to the editor and reviewer groups. If this is the case than sysops and bureaucrats need to have all the editor and reviewer rights set for them as well, so that sysops and bureaucrats have the rights to 'review' and 'validate' pages.

MarcGarver (discuss • contribs) 18:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply