Wikipedia talk:WikiReader

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] first talk

A link to a wiki2PDF script under development:

Forget this script, it sucks and you won't be taken serious by anyone if you want to have professional copies of the WikiReader. Use OpenOffice.org (good PDF-Export) or Scribus.
I did not propose to use this script in production, but to start a discussion about methods. Please keep it to the facs rather than resorting to "this sucks and that sucks, and..". [[User:Sverdrup|✏ SverdrupSverdrup]] 21:21, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
You didn't try it yet. Try both, the script and OO.o, before you accuse me of not relaying onto facts. --TomK32 21:29, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
It is not that bad. -- Kaihsu 17:36, 2004 Aug 3 (UTC)
It's a great proof of concept. Too bad development hasn't continued and files aren't released --Balubino 00:20, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I also think it's quite good, and I've tried both OO.o and the script. I believe the source can be obtained using CVS from the site, if that's what you meant by "files aren't released". — Matt 00:45, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Ideas for other WikiReaders (in English)

I am really fascinated with this whole project ever since it was announced.
Here are some beginning ideas for fruitful subjects:
Twentieth-Century Hollywood about the people, institutions and the place, as well as history and current trends. It would be made out of various actor and director articles, as well as cast and crew. I think it would make a useful popular WikiReader, as well as an interesting complement to the Shakespeare one.
Anxiety Disorders an important psychology reader about the conditions.
Terrorism looking at its place in international law and how it has affected nations over history and currently. Will focus on ongoing incidents.
European Studies languages, literature and politics of the continent
Asian Studies the same but for Asia, especially China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam. Perhaps especially philosophy would be good.
Critical Theory based on the WikiProject's contents and extra information
Australia and the South Pacific All about Australia and the South Pacific Thank you, EuropracBHIT 11:22, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] WikiReader? Try Wikireader

We have Wikimedia foundation, Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wikisource, etc. Why the CamelCase in WikiReader? Except for some very well thought-out exceptions (iPod, iMac), CamelCase names tend to be harder on the eye, and generally more confusing. Its a reason that few publishers will keep CamelCase titles on books when they are published. Anyways, I suggest an immediate change from WikiReader to Wikireader. —siroχo 05:09, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

Comment: WikiProject is done in CamelCase. Opinion: WikiReader looks better to me than Wikireader, but I don't know whether it's because I'm used to the former. — Matt 05:19, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
MediaWiki uses CamelCase as well. I prefer WikiReader because it makes it seem something separate from the projects which don't use CamelCase. It also seems like it's meant to be short for Wikipedia reader (or, if the sister projects start to produce them, Wikibooks reader etc) and Wikipediareader wouldn't make sense. Angela. 15:10, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)
I would prefer Mediawiki and Wikireader, it is easier to type, and why use these odd camel case spellings when there is no need?--Patrick 20:46, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Amen brother The bellman 09:44, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I second that. —Vespristiano 06:30, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I Third that. - Hamster2.0 02:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TALC: Teaching-aids At Low Cost

http://talcuk.org/ http://talcuk.org/about_talc.htm

I think Jimbo Wales once said that he wants to send Wikipedia on CD-Roms to Africa. This charity (= not-for-profit organization) might help. -- Kaihsu 17:36, 2004 Aug 3 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Do any of the converters allow for images to be used yet? Just wondering, as I work to help plan out Shakespeare a bit more. Lyellin 03:10, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] content vs. usability

We are currently having a discussion on the shakespeare wikireader site about how much information to put into wikireaders. Since this seems important to all wikireaders, i think it should be discussed here. As i see it, we should put in as much info as is relevant to the subject (and no more) and make that info as modular as possible, so that end users can take bits out if they want to create there own reader for futher distribution (ie. a teacher who wants a handout for background to hamlet, can easily keep all the info about shakespeare in the reader, but take out some of the stuff about the comidies and histories). What are the thoughts of others? The bellman 09:43, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] A Novel idea i am thinking of

I am thinking of Getting all the info we have on wikipedia on a CD and selling it. Their would of course be a folder of it on the internet for people to download but still, just a though.

Wikipedia is a little too big for that. ;) Mga 03:13, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The german wikipedia has already done that - it sold out its 5000 copies after a few days, and was one of the bestsellers on amazon.de at the time. However, for the english wikipedia, the above is valid - i think that the english wikipedia might just fit onto a dvd. however, there are several projects (eg. wikipedia 1.0, concise, forum for encyclopedia something-or-other) that aim to introduce some sort of selection process for the best, most encyclopedic articles which have the ultimate aim of producing a 'frozen' version that is small enough for release on cd or other media. --Mark Lewis 20:51, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Conversion technology

Has a consensus been reached regarding what program will be used to convert Wiki to PDF? Heck, is there even a consensus that it should go to PDF? If the results will be PDF or printed or both, I would like to suggest that we write a converter from Wiki to LaTeX (unless, of course, one already exists), from which point it's easy to convert to several other formats (and besides, TeX makes for snazzy-looking docs). Since equations are already in LaTeX format, the hardest part is already done. Is there interest/need?

One-dimensional Tangent 01:41, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC) (May weak-bladdered camels never find your jellybean jar.)

Ah, I just found meta:WikiReader.

One-dimensional Tangent 02:04, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC) (May my wisdom be less like a fish's feathers.)

LaTeX isn't in my experience that easy to convert from. I would suggest an intermediate format (or just wiki->latex and wiki->other formats directly) which is then converted to LaTeX for typesetting. — David Remahl 12:02, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
What other formats do we need? pdflatex does a reasonable job for PDF, and mediawiki already does HTML ... — Matt 12:36, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
My belief is that for good results the conversion will have to be done at least partially by hand to get sane page splits, neat elimination of nonfree images (if desired), elimination of whitespace and other properties desired for print. IMO the easyest way would probablly be to use the chick skin to get a reasonablly clean html render of the page then import than into an office suite and clean it up. Plugwash 15:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
The joy of LaTeX is that it will do sensible page (and section/paragraph) splits automatically, and produce PDF (or postscript or DVI). Sure, some images will have to be removed by hand, but that happens anyway. Plus wiki-markup coverts very easily to LaTeX (e.g. ==heading== to \section{heading} and so on). (Also, any maths article uses LaTeX for formulae, and it would be very tricky to translate complciated equations into anythign else). Tompw (talk) 16:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meaning of the term “Reader”?

Can someone of the native speakers please write something about the term “reader”? In German, “(der) Reader” is youth slang and means something like “pamphlet” or “brochure”, sometimes also “loose collection of text”. When I hear the term in an English context, I associate a “reader” as someone who is reading or a reading tool like in “mail reader”. So, maybe it's not the correct term, anyway? -- 213.39.143.240 19:11, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm a native English (U.S.) speaker, and I like the "WikiReader" name. My main reference in hearing "reader" used to mean "pamphlet" was back in elementary school when they handed out The Weekly Reader. There are also several U.S. newspapers named "Reader" (Chicago Reader, Omaha Reader, San Diego Reader), so I had no problem making the association when I first saw reference to "WikiReader". -- RobLa 04:59, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] LaTeX experiences

Greetings. I'm an active Wikipedian who is also on the editorial board of The PracTeX Journal. If an English WikiReader is published using LaTeX, ConTeXt, or some other TeX-related tool, we would be interested in hearing about it. Our journal prints articles about how large publishing projects are accomplished using TeX tools. Feel free to get in contact with me or submit a story on how you used TeX to produce a WikiReader. Psychonaut 9 July 2005 17:01 (UTC)

[edit] Topic Overviews

The thought has occured to me before that it could be useful to have a list of wikipedia articles on a particular topic, as 'essential reading', to get an general overview on that topic. This could be useful for people wanting to know what articles would be useful in having a basic understanding of a broad topic (such as cryptography or history, for example), without being distracted by articles that are not so relevant to the topic (although interesting :) ). Could lists like this be made as part of the process of developing a WikiReader? Or perhaps even as precursors, and then interest in the essential reading of a topic could indicate that a WikiReader on that topic would also be useful?--ColdFeet 18:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hurricane WikiReader?

Hmm. I don't know how to propose a new WikiReader, but looking at the outline at Hurricane Katrina (contents), we have enough content to publish a large-size reader. With the current interest on the hurricane, maybe this is the opportunity we've been waiting for to publicize Wikipedia. Any ideas on this? --Titoxd 02:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Stable versions

Might you be interested in Wikipedia:Stable versions that helps WikiReader to be given already approved versions ready to print? -- Zondor 14:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Printing and binding

Dear Wikipedia Users,

I am the Senior Sales Manager of a company called myphotobook GmbH. Recently, I have been thinking a lot about how myphotobook could help support Jimmy Wales’ vision. His idea is to make the knowledge on Wikipedia available for people in Africa who cannot access the Internet or cannot pay for it. It goes without saying that this help should be free.

Kurt Jansson, from WikiMedia Germany, approves my project and has advised me to discuss it with you here so as to get your feedback.

I would like to propose printing and binding the Encyclopedia into a real book, which would be sold in the “First” World. For every copy sold, a free copy will be printed and delivered in Africa. This would be a great way to support the Third World.

Since we print every copy on demand (from one up to as many as required), it would not cost the Wikipedia Foundation anything, contrary to normal printing solutions.

A few questions are yet to be answered, such as how the whole work should be published or whether all entries should be included or not.

I would really appreciate it if you could send me your suggestions. Those of you who wish to contact me directly can send an email to:

wikipedia@myphotobook.de

Many thanks in advance!


Friendly regards,

Mike Zimmermann

myphotobook GmbH

[edit] Single article trial

I'm looking for some technical assistance in producing a "single-page WikiReader", as a trial to investigate how easily this sort of thing is to get done, the article in question being Marian Rejewski. What's the best way of going about this? I've tried saving a copy of the online article and then opening it in OpenOffice; however, the article looks awful! Any tips would be appreciated. — Matt Crypto 18:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It's not terribly straightforward to get a good looking PDF from an article page. What I did when creating the Decade Volcanoes wikireader was save the pages as HTML, then open them all in openoffice; remove extraneous things like [edit] etc; go through all the images and change 'anchor' to 'to page' and 'wrap' to 'optimal'; copy the appropriate text into the image caption; then set up styles for heading 1, heading 2 etc to make it look good. There may be a much more efficient way (and I don't think I'll be making many more WikiReaders unless there is!) but that's all I know so far. Worldtraveller 00:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I know the above comments are quite old but i thought this would be the right place to go. I wanted to see how it is going with the idea of the "single-page WikiReader" demo. I would be rally interessted in helping with this. I've got some wild wiki -> tex -> pdf ideas and wanted to talk about it to figure out if it would work :-). Cryptonit 18:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I recently completed a german WikiReader (195 pages, 200-300 pics) with LaTeX. I've written a Wordmacro, which converts Wikisource into LaTeX-code: wiki2latex.dot | Project WikiReader about trees (german) | Webfolder -- greetings, Migas (de). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.124.99.27 (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Idea for light WikiReaders

Rather than focussing on something beautiful, proofread and hand-crafted, how about producing a large number of pdf's that can easily be downloaded. In its simplest form, a WikiReader can be defined as:

  1. An introduction
  2. A series of articles arranged in order
  3. Some automatic processing to convert links to plain text, delete (?) "external links" sections, and convert the whole lot to a .pdf.

I've done a simple example at user:stevage/wikireadertest. Note the source code.

Opinions welcome. Stevage 14:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Update: By using the printable version link, you get a really good result with an absolute minimum of effort required. Have a look at this test version! Stevage 12:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Combined reader from Wikipedia and Wikibooks

Hi there, is there any problem doing this or doesn't it matter, where the content comes from? Best regards, --Flominator 22:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiReader_db6d.html"