[Textbook-l] Game Guides

Fri Jun 9 15:25:30 UTC 2006

On 6/8/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:

[snip some intersting stuff]
>
> So are the various Wikia projects considered sister projects to
> Wikimedia projects?  Local links (not external references) exist going
> both ways, including to the Uncyclopedia.  My understanding was that
> they were very distinct groups (Wikia and Wikimedia) and the policies
> and even existance of a Wikia project has no bearing on Wikimedia
> projects.  Apparently this line is being blurred considerably now with
> the new textbook only philosophy for Wikibooks, and it does have an
> impact on future content being developed on Wikibooks.  Moving the
> How-to books to the How-to Wikia seems like an attempt (to me) of
> capturing Wikibooks content without having to do any work, especially
> given that the how-to books on Wikibooks predate the How-to Wikia.  Six
> months ago the idea would have been considered ludicrious to even
> suggest removing the how-to books.
>
> --
> Robert Scott Horning
>

Wikia and Wikimedia are very clearly separate entities with different
philosophies - as I would put it, basically, Wikimedia is for the
dissemination of information and knowledge, whereas the purpose of
Wikia is for building communities around common interests.

Do you mean, though, that the 'How-to' books are being removed from
Wikibooks to Wikia, or simply used there under the GFDL? I hope it's
the latter, but, if the former, which ones? There are very clearly
How-to books that belong on Wikibooks (and that would very definitely
be useful as part of an accredited course).

I can't say much on Wikibooks' policies, as I simply don't participate
in Wikibooks enough, or know enough about its history. Lord Voldemort
has some interesting questions here, and I can't resist answering one
of them in particular:

"3. Who has control over the overall content of Wikibooks? The
Wikimedia Foundation, the WMF Board, the community of Wikibookians?"

As far as I see it: the community has control over the content, and
the board bears the legal liability for the content. Jimbo's unique
part in this is that he retains the power to dictate policy where he
deems necessary, and when he thinks a project has veered off course
significantly from its goals or the goals of the foundation. I'm not
sure of what other times he has exercised this power, apart from the
recent debate about the content of Wikibooks - maybe someone else,
perhaps Jimbo himself, can clarify this.

That's all for now..

Cormac