The following are the rules and conditions for voting for the Collaboration of the Month:
- Only registered users with 20 or more edits to their name may vote.
- You may vote under as many nominations as you wish, however, you may only vote for each book itself once.
- Sign your vote with a number sign and four tildes, #~~~~, after the most previous vote under the book's nomination. Unsigned votes will be removed.
- Any nomination which receives 3 or more votes in one month will automatically be renominated the next month if it is not chosen.
- If you wish to include a short comment for your vote, then you may do so. Make sure that if you leave such a comment, that you are also voting for that page.
- Do not post objection votes as these will have no effect on the final tally.
- Voting will end at 00:00 UTC on the first day of each month. In essence, when a new month begins voting ends. Any votes added after this time will be discarded.
- The nomination with most votes will be chosen as the Collaboration of the Month. In case of a tie, the older Wikibook will be chosen.
World History (11)Edit
- See my nomination comment above.--Naryathegreat|(talk) 22:33, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, this is a very important subject and most people can contribute something --Bobbyandck 08:26, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I think a huge 'encyclopedic' work like this can play a great part in attracting more users to wikibooks. --risk 23:52, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Grimm 02:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Jshadias 06:08, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Cnelson 23:59, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Mad Ant 11:42, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Snargle 11:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) Beekeeping sounds good too.
- --Constantijn 19:11, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- SamE 14:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- --Sterio 13:34, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This wikibook has been growing over time in an uncontrolled way. A collaboration on this book would first work out in a discussion how to best organize the book, and then take action. --Andreas 08:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Andreas 08:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- SamE 14:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Naryathegreat|(talk) 03:26, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) - Interesting, possible useful if cleaned up.
- KelvSYC 06:28, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) - Really needs cleanup - no one could ever find out that 4. or Solution is part of this wikibook....
Open Culture (1)Edit
This Wikibook is an explanation on what we all are participating to: Open Culture, It would be interesting to develop this Wikibook because it would explain to other people why we want to contribute to things like Wiki or Open Source. It gives us the possibility of understanding what we are doing. --Bobbyandck 08:33, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Bobbyandck 08:33, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Good project but the giudelines for this suggest that books have a fairly concrete structure already worked out. Grimm 02:23, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This WikiBook is part of a project to provide educational materials in Africa where budgets do not extend to expensive royalty laden books. The book is very close to being finished and with a concerted effort from a community like the WikiBooks community it could be finished very quickly. It's a first step on the way to providing educational materials to all. Education is the only way to facilitate lasting peace and stability in developing/3rd world countries. Marknewlyn 03:13, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Help make a real lasting difference through education! Marknewlyn 03:13, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Moldi 05:36, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Sarblyth 19:57, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Grimm 01:00, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Eyu100 14:36, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Possible sockpuppet votes:
- HeikoStamer 06:38, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Rianameyer 08:31, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Vanessa 07:15, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The three voters HeikoStamer, Vanessa, and Rianameyer don't show any user contribution (, , ) other than the vote on this page. Although this is not part of the rules (yet?) I would suggest that these people make a couple of edits on a wikibook while logged in, before their votes can be counted. --Andreas 12:00, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, in principle, with the concerns raised by Andreas. However, I would like to claim that these are somewhat unusual circumstances in that the voters are members of the FHSST project who have helped write the 375 page FHSST_Physics text that was uploaded to WikiBooks. Because the book was uploaded in an advanced state its edit history is external to WikiBooks but does exist. Irrespective of what happens with vote counting we are all working towards the same thing which is great and I am very glad that people like Andreas are concerned about what happens on WikiBooks and are on the lookout for problems :) Marknewlyn 19:54, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed. These may or may not be sockpuppets, but we can't risk it. Their votes are nullified. I have not removed them per se, but moved them.--Naryathegreat|(talk) 03:22, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)