دسترسی نامحدود
برای کاربرانی که ثبت نام کرده اند
برای ارتباط با ما می توانید از طریق شماره موبایل زیر از طریق تماس و پیامک با ما در ارتباط باشید
در صورت عدم پاسخ گویی از طریق پیامک با پشتیبان در ارتباط باشید
برای کاربرانی که ثبت نام کرده اند
درصورت عدم همخوانی توضیحات با کتاب
از ساعت 7 صبح تا 10 شب
ویرایش: [1 ed.]
نویسندگان: John Broughton
سری:
ISBN (شابک) : 9780596515164, 0596515162
ناشر: O'Reilly Media
سال نشر: 2008
تعداد صفحات: 498
زبان: English
فرمت فایل : PDF (درصورت درخواست کاربر به PDF، EPUB یا AZW3 تبدیل می شود)
حجم فایل: 7 Mb
در صورت تبدیل فایل کتاب Wikipedia: the missing manual به فرمت های PDF، EPUB، AZW3، MOBI و یا DJVU می توانید به پشتیبان اطلاع دهید تا فایل مورد نظر را تبدیل نمایند.
توجه داشته باشید کتاب ویکی پدیا: کتابچه راهنمای گمشده نسخه زبان اصلی می باشد و کتاب ترجمه شده به فارسی نمی باشد. وبسایت اینترنشنال لایبرری ارائه دهنده کتاب های زبان اصلی می باشد و هیچ گونه کتاب ترجمه شده یا نوشته شده به فارسی را ارائه نمی دهد.
Amazon.com Review Wikipedia may be the biggest group
writing project ever, but the one thing you won't find in the
comprehensive online encyclopedia is easy-to-follow guidance
on how to contribute. Wikipedia: The Missing Manual helps you
avoid beginners' blunders and gets you sounding like a pro
from your first edit. Conversation
with John Broughton
Author of Wikipedia: The Missing Manual
What made you write the book? In November 2006 I started
working on an index for editors of Wikipedia – a single page
that had links to all relevant policies, guidelines, how-to
pages, reference pages, tools, and other things that an
editor might conceivably want to read. The more I worked on
the index, the more I discovered of the complexity of editing
Wikipedia. As the index developed, I realized that I had the
basis for the book. I also realized, given how incredibly
complex Wikipedia is, why there hadn’t yet been a book about
editing Wikipedia.
Why is your book especially important now?
Wikipedia is immensely popular as a source of information.
But it needs many more active editors than it has now,
because it is so incomplete. It also needs many more editors
who are experts in a particular subject matter. This book
helps such potential editors avoid a lot of the mistakes that
newcomers make, and shows them how to deal with various
situations as they are encountered.
What is the single most important thing readers of your book
will be able to do after buying your book?
Readers will be able to find specific things in Wikipedia
that they’re particularly interested in editing, and other
editors with the same interests.
How important is the subject matter of your book? What do you
think is on the horizon for your readers? I think as more and
more people grow up computer-immersed, Wikipedia will become
even more important, and the idea of editing it will be
intimidating to an ever-increasing percentage of people.
Someday perhaps chatting about recent Wikipedia editing
experiences may be almost as common as talking about the
weather or the traffic or sports.
In researching the book, did you come across any surprising
facts, figures, or statistics that the world might be
interested in? Before I did the book, I had no idea that
Wikimedia Commons – the central "stock photo" site for all
language versions of Wikipedia – had more than 2 million
images available for encyclopedia articles. I sometimes find
the sheer volume of transactions at Wikipedia to be
astonishing. 100 million article views per day. More than a
quarter of a million edits per day. Several thousand new
articles added every day. More than a thousand articles
deleted every day. More than 7,000 new registered user
accounts every day. And that’s just for the English language
Wikipedia - the other 250+ non-English language versions
combined are more than three times the size of the English
Wikipedia. Then there’s this odd statistic: The vast majority
of the more than 6 million registered user accounts have
never actually done an edit. Perhaps that says something
about how easy it is to register versus how easy it is to
edit? Finally, I still find it astonishing that Wikipedia and
the Commons and a bunch of sister projects (Wiktionary,
Wikinews, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Wikiversity,
and Wikibooks), in all languages across the globe, are all
being run by a non-profit foundation that has only a handful
of employees and a budget of only a couple of million dollars
per year. And that even includes developing and distributing
– for free - the wiki software that all these projects run
on. It shows what the Internet makes possible, given a good
idea, inspired leadership, and the opportunity for everyone
to contribute their time and knowledge.
Amazon Exclusive:
VIP Tips and
Tricks:
1. You can dive right in and start editing without setting up
a Wikipedia account (that is, getting a user name). However,
there are advantages to having a user name - increased
privacy, the ability to create new articles, and a personal
user page, to name a few.
2. Sometimes editing an entire article at once is necessary -
for example, if you're moving sections around, or moving text
from one section to another. But those are usually
exceptions; in general, it's better instead of clicking the
"edit this page" tab, to click an "edit" link for a section
that you want to edit. If you plan to edit two or three
sections of an article, you can efficiently do these as
separate edits of individual sections. Doing so helps you
(previewing your edit is much easier), helps other editors
(they can see exactly what sections you edited), and
minimizes edit conflicts between you and other editors.
3. If you encounter vandalism and don't know how to do
reverts, it's better to leave the vandalism in place and
check back in ten minutes or so. (Refresh your browser, to
make sure you're seeing the latest version of the page.) If
the problematic text is still there, then go ahead and delete
it, but make sure that your edit summary mentions something
like "removing vandalism." The reason for waiting a bit is to
see if another, more experienced editor can reverse the
vandalizing edit, putting back into the article any text that
was overwritten by the vandalism.
4. If you inadvertently add something to a page that you
later decide shouldn't be there - a home address, a complaint
about your employer, or other private information - you need
to do more than just edit the page again and delete that
information. Anyone visiting Wikipedia can still read the
previous version of the page, a version where that
information still exists, simply by going to the page history
and opening that prior version. To make something completely
inaccessible to other editors and readers, you have to ask an
administrator to help. Type "WP:SELDEL" into the search box
on the left for details. Even then, the problematic version
of the page is still in the database, but only administrators
can read it.
5. It's easy to add some information to a Wikipedia article -
but if you want that information to stick around, to be there
in a day or a month or year, it's critical that you cite the
source of that information. The best way is a footnote; you
can find out how to create one by typing "WP:CITE" into the
search box on the left of your screen. But if that seems to
complicated, then there are two easier options. If it’s from
an online source, just add the URL, within squared brackets,
at the end of the text you've added to an article, like this:
[http://webpageaddress]. If it’s from an offline source like
a book, go to the article talk page, start a new section (use
the "+" tab), and type in the text plus information about the
source (title, author, date of publication, page number,
etc.) and add a comment that you'd appreciate another editor
adding the information to the article.
6. Besides failing to cite a source, inexperienced editors
often make two other big mistakes. One, they cut-and-paste
large chunks of text into articles, which is a copyright
violation, Two, they use information from what Wikipedia
calls a "non-reliable" source: a discussion board, the blog
of someone who isn't an acknowledged expert on the topic of
the Wikipedia article, or a self-published book. (For more
information about what Wikipedia considers reliable sources,
type "WP:RS" into the search box on the left.)
7. Since January 2008, Wikipedia has had a new resource for
intermediate and advanced editors (and yet one more place
novice editors can use as a jumping-off place to find
information) - the Editor's Index to Wikipedia. You can get
to this via the shortcut "WP:EIW" (in the search box to the
left, of course).
8. You as a reader may not find answers to some of your
questions in Wikipedia articles because they're not really
questions for an encyclopedia. For example, "What's a good
camera to buy for someone who wants to be a professional
photographer?" You can take those questions to the Reference
desk (type the shortcut "WP:RD" in the search box on the
left). This Wikipedia department is similar to a librarian
service. (It's also a place where you can volunteer your
question-answering expertise, if you're so inclined).
9. When you type a date, avoid using a format like
"05-01-2007." In some countries that date would be May 1,
2007, in others it would be January 5, 2007. Remember that
you’re editing the English Wikipedia, not the American
Wikipedia. When Brits or Aussies or even Canadians write or
interpret written information differently than Americans,
then you should carefully design the information in an
article so that no one -wherever in the world they happen to
be from - is confused.
10. The Wikimedia Commons is the "stock photo" site for
Wikipedias in all languages; it's where you should upload an
image if you have one that you want to add to a Wikipedia
article (or think someone else might find useful). But it's
also a place where you can find millions of photos and other
images, often quite unique and stunning, for your own
personal use, at absolutely no cost. All you need to do is
follow the licensing terms - for example, attributing a photo
to the person who took it, if you share a photo with someone
else.