Want to be part of the largest group-writing project in human history? Learn how to contribute to Wikipedia, the user-generated online reference for the 21st century. Considered more popular than eBay, Microsoft.com, and Amazon.com, Wikipedia generates approximately 30,000 requests per second, or about 2.5 billion per day. It's become the first point of reference for people the world over who need a fact fast. If you want to jump on board and add to the content, Wikipedia: The Missing Manual is your first-class ticket. Wikipedia has more than 6 million entries in 250 languages, over 2 million articles in the English language alone. Each one is written and edited by an ever-changing cast of volunteer editors. You can be one of them. With the tips in this book, you'll quickly learn how to get more out of and put more into this valuable online resource. Wikipedia: The Missing Manual gives you practical advice on creating articles and collaborating with fellow editors, improving existing articles, and working with the Wikipedia community to review new articles, mediate disputes, and maintain the site. Up to the challenge? This one-of-a-kind book includes: Basic editing techniques, including the right and wrong ways to edit Pinpoint advice about which types of articles do and do not belong on Wikipedia Tips on using Wikipedia page histories and reversing inaccurate edits Ways to learn from other editors and communicate with them via the site's talk pages Tricks for using templates and timesaving automated editing tools Tools for fighting spam and vandalism Guidance on adding citations, links, and images to your articles You also learn about other Wikimedia services, such as Wikinews, Wikiquote, and Wikibooks. Wikipedia depends on people just like you to help the site grow and maintain the highest quality. With Wikipedia: The Missing Manual, you get all the tools you need to be part of the crew.
--This text refers to the
Kindle Edition
edition.
Wikipedia: The Missing Manual
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
New! Introducing the tech.book(store), a hub for Software Developers and Architects, Networking Administrators, TPMs, and other technology professionals to find highly-rated and highly-relevant career resources. Shop books on programming and big data, or read this week's blog posts by authors and thought-leaders in the tech industry. > Shop now |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
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.
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.
About the Author
John Broughton has been a registered editor at Wikipedia since August 2005, with more than 15,000 edits by the time he wrote this book. His biggest Wikipedia endeavor was to build the Editor's index to Wikipedia (just type that in the "search" box at the left of any Wikipedia page). This index lists every important reference page on Wikipedia, as well as hundreds of off-Wikipedia Web pages with useful information and tools for Wikipedia editors. John's first experience with programming computers was in a 1969 National Science Foundation program. Since then, he's held various computer-related management positions in the headquarters of a U.S. Army Reserve division, worked in internal audit departments as a Certified Information Systems Auditor, and was the Campus Y2K Coordinator at U.C. Berkeley. A Certified Management Accountant, John has B.S. in Mathematical Sciences from Johns Hopkins University; an M.B.A. from Golden Gate University; an M.S. in Education from the University of Southern California; and a Masters in Public Policy from the University of California at Berkeley.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
18 of 21 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
Wikipedia, the free access online encyclopedia to which anyone can contribute, is a remarkable achievement. Started only in 2001, it now comprises over 9 million articles is written in over 250 languages, and is the first choice for reference material for millions of Internet users. Despite criticisms by some for the variable quality of its material, the value of the contributions of tens of thousands of unpaid volunteers is enormous, not only in notable and verified content accessible to the vast majority of the world's population in their native languages, but in the opportunity for everyone to contribute to this repository of knowledge in his or her own way (subject to the review and editing of others just like themselves.)
More importantly, in my view, is the model it represents in human collaboration efforts, this one in creating a repository of knowledge, but applicable more broadly to other efforts. Besides merely creating enormously useful things, the collaborative efforts result in a community of people and groups which has its own intrinsic values. Imagine thousands of volunteers committing their personal time and effort into a nonhierarchical, consensus-based collaboration having as its selfless main purpose the improvement of human society. Socialism at its best! It seems to me that the model may be useful in areas of politics, management and administration, education, and other social endeavors.. The Open-Source software movement, predating Wikipedia, operates in much the same way. Perhaps the earliest example of this collaborative model was the developmental years of the Internet.
As a casual user of Wikipedia, I had no idea of the nature of the Wikipedia project (and its sister projects - Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Wikinews, and Wikiversity - and no doubt others yet to come) until I read "Wikipedia: the Missing Manual," by John Broughton. He is an experienced Wikipedia editor with over 15,000 edits to his credit and is the creator of the "Editor's Index to Wikipedia" which lists every reference page on Wikipedia as well as other off site pages with information useful for serious Wikipedia editors. "Wikipedia: the Missing Manual" is an extremely thorough guide to creating and editing Wikipedia articles. The book is intended to help train new writers and editors and to improve the skills and knowledge of existing participants.
Broughton encourages people to join the Wikipedia community of researchers, fact checkers, and proofreaders. This community seems to be made up of committed, skilled, and serious people who take great pride in the project. There is little organizational hierarchy involved and a minimum of formal participatory rules, but a large set of informal mores and practices which help maintain production, efficiency, civility, and quality. There is always a need for more articles, although of the thousands created every day, nearly one half of them are deleted within 24 hours by attentive editors for a number of reasons explained in the book.
The book starts with an introduction to the basic principles of the Wikipedia project involving notability, credibility, balance, consensus, and good faith and moves quickly into the process of registering with Wikipedia, setting up a user account, and starting out practicing writing, previewing, and saving edits.
In six parts and 21 chapters, the book covers how to document sources, set up an editor's account, and personal workspaces, create new articles, use page histories, monitor changes, and dealing with vandalism and spam. It explains the value of collaborating with other editors and participants in creating and editing articles and in special Wiki Projects and other group efforts. There are several chapters describing how to deal with the inevitable conflict between editors and explains the Wikipedia editing mores of civility, ethics, legality (mostly copyright issues), and efficiency. He explains why editors disagree, in what ways, and how they resolve disputes. He also provides guidance on how disputes can be avoided in the first place.
Separate chapters of the book detail how to work with article pages and sections, tables, lists, markups and links, images and media, and categories. There are descriptions of what makes a good article and what doesn't and there are step-by-step tutorials on creating better articles and being systematic about good editing practices. A most interesting feature of Wikipedia is its large collection of free-to-use images, videos, sound clips, and other media in the Wikipedia Media Commons area which is available for article use and for non-Wikipedia use by anyone for any purpose.
Advanced topics include customizing your user account via preferences and skins and using JavaScript and templates to facilitate efficiency. There is a short 20 page appendix for those people content with being mere users of Wikipedia and learning how to get the most out of it. More involved users will benefit from Appendix C which itemizes the huge amount of Wikipedia help, reference, coaching, and other educational sources especially valuable for those determined to become better editors or higher-level participants like administrators of Wikipedia.
The presentation is thorough and articulate. It covers basic and advanced editing skills. Broughton frequently notes keyword search items and tips to be more productive and efficient. The community norms demand attentive and educated participants. Experience with coding is appreciated. The book has plenty of screenshots illustrating the discussions of Wikipedia features. Most of the sections contain Notes and Tips which provide more detailed explanations of features and an experienced editor's perspective to the prospective new editor as to how and why to do things. Broughton is (perhaps unintentionally) inspiring about participating in the Wikipedia editor community.
Although the book deserves great credit for its content and its tone a few problems with the layout and design detract a bit. The layout is dense with graphics a bit too tightly packed in with the text. Captions at the bottom of grayscale illustrations occasionally refer to nonexistent color clues resulting in some confusion. The density seems to reflect the nature of Wikipedia editing itself, which can be very involved. But, rewarding.
More importantly, in my view, is the model it represents in human collaboration efforts, this one in creating a repository of knowledge, but applicable more broadly to other efforts. Besides merely creating enormously useful things, the collaborative efforts result in a community of people and groups which has its own intrinsic values. Imagine thousands of volunteers committing their personal time and effort into a nonhierarchical, consensus-based collaboration having as its selfless main purpose the improvement of human society. Socialism at its best! It seems to me that the model may be useful in areas of politics, management and administration, education, and other social endeavors.. The Open-Source software movement, predating Wikipedia, operates in much the same way. Perhaps the earliest example of this collaborative model was the developmental years of the Internet.
As a casual user of Wikipedia, I had no idea of the nature of the Wikipedia project (and its sister projects - Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Wikinews, and Wikiversity - and no doubt others yet to come) until I read "Wikipedia: the Missing Manual," by John Broughton. He is an experienced Wikipedia editor with over 15,000 edits to his credit and is the creator of the "Editor's Index to Wikipedia" which lists every reference page on Wikipedia as well as other off site pages with information useful for serious Wikipedia editors. "Wikipedia: the Missing Manual" is an extremely thorough guide to creating and editing Wikipedia articles. The book is intended to help train new writers and editors and to improve the skills and knowledge of existing participants.
Broughton encourages people to join the Wikipedia community of researchers, fact checkers, and proofreaders. This community seems to be made up of committed, skilled, and serious people who take great pride in the project. There is little organizational hierarchy involved and a minimum of formal participatory rules, but a large set of informal mores and practices which help maintain production, efficiency, civility, and quality. There is always a need for more articles, although of the thousands created every day, nearly one half of them are deleted within 24 hours by attentive editors for a number of reasons explained in the book.
The book starts with an introduction to the basic principles of the Wikipedia project involving notability, credibility, balance, consensus, and good faith and moves quickly into the process of registering with Wikipedia, setting up a user account, and starting out practicing writing, previewing, and saving edits.
In six parts and 21 chapters, the book covers how to document sources, set up an editor's account, and personal workspaces, create new articles, use page histories, monitor changes, and dealing with vandalism and spam. It explains the value of collaborating with other editors and participants in creating and editing articles and in special Wiki Projects and other group efforts. There are several chapters describing how to deal with the inevitable conflict between editors and explains the Wikipedia editing mores of civility, ethics, legality (mostly copyright issues), and efficiency. He explains why editors disagree, in what ways, and how they resolve disputes. He also provides guidance on how disputes can be avoided in the first place.
Separate chapters of the book detail how to work with article pages and sections, tables, lists, markups and links, images and media, and categories. There are descriptions of what makes a good article and what doesn't and there are step-by-step tutorials on creating better articles and being systematic about good editing practices. A most interesting feature of Wikipedia is its large collection of free-to-use images, videos, sound clips, and other media in the Wikipedia Media Commons area which is available for article use and for non-Wikipedia use by anyone for any purpose.
Advanced topics include customizing your user account via preferences and skins and using JavaScript and templates to facilitate efficiency. There is a short 20 page appendix for those people content with being mere users of Wikipedia and learning how to get the most out of it. More involved users will benefit from Appendix C which itemizes the huge amount of Wikipedia help, reference, coaching, and other educational sources especially valuable for those determined to become better editors or higher-level participants like administrators of Wikipedia.
The presentation is thorough and articulate. It covers basic and advanced editing skills. Broughton frequently notes keyword search items and tips to be more productive and efficient. The community norms demand attentive and educated participants. Experience with coding is appreciated. The book has plenty of screenshots illustrating the discussions of Wikipedia features. Most of the sections contain Notes and Tips which provide more detailed explanations of features and an experienced editor's perspective to the prospective new editor as to how and why to do things. Broughton is (perhaps unintentionally) inspiring about participating in the Wikipedia editor community.
Although the book deserves great credit for its content and its tone a few problems with the layout and design detract a bit. The layout is dense with graphics a bit too tightly packed in with the text. Captions at the bottom of grayscale illustrations occasionally refer to nonexistent color clues resulting in some confusion. The density seems to reflect the nature of Wikipedia editing itself, which can be very involved. But, rewarding.
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
I'll admit I was tempted think "why do you need a manual for Wikipedia?". I mean, you go in, you edit an article, you save it, and you're done, right? Not so fast... Wikipedia: The Missing Manual by John Broughton goes into great depth about how Wikipedia works, how to get the most out of it, and (in my opinion) how best to become part of the trusted Wikipedia contributors group. There's a lot more to Wikipedia than you might expect...
Contents:
Part 1 - Editing, Creating, and Maintaining Articles: Editing for the First Time; Documenting Your Sources; Setting Up Your Account and Personal Workspace; Creating a New Article; Who Did What - Page Histories and Reverting; Monitoring Changes; Dealing with Vandalism and Spam
Part 2 - Collaborating with Other Editors: Communicating with your Fellow Editors; WikiProjects and Other Group Efforts; Resolving Content Disputes; Handling Incivility and Personal Attacks; Lending Other Editors a Hand
Part 3 - Formatting and Illustrating Articles: Article Sections and Tables of Contents; Creating Lists and Tables; Adding Images
Part 4 - Building A Stronger Encyclopedia: Getting Readers to the Right Article - Naming, Redirects, and Disambiguation; Categorizing Articles; Better Articles - A Systematic Approach; Deleting Existing Articles
Part 5 - Customizing Wikipedia: Customizing with Preferences; Easier Editing with JavaScript
Part 6 - Appendixes: A Tour of the Wikipedia Page; Reader's Guide to Wikipedia; Learning More; Index
Broughton doesn't spend much time with a fluffy introduction to Wikipedia and all the benefits and drawbacks of the site. He just dives right in to how to use it. You learn the markup language, as well as the formal way a Wikipedia article is laid out in terms of headers, footnotes, etc. Meanwhile, he's also introducing you to the "rules" of Wikipedia that you'll need to know in order to be an effective contributor. Concepts such as "neutral point of view", "conflict of interest", "notability", and many others are essential to understand so that you don't end up getting locked out of the site before you even get started. One thing I didn't know about were all the shortcut paths to get to certain topics. For instance, typing WP:COI takes you automatically to the Conflict of Interest page so that you can find out how to handle that situation. Couple all his technical "how to" information with his knowledge of the Wikipedia culture, and you have a book that is an essential read for someone planning on adding content.
Another element you get out of this book is the understanding of how wikis work (or how they *should* work). If you're starting a wiki of your own, it's best to learn from someone who has been there and done that. Since Wikipedia is the best known example of a large-scale wiki implementation, you can use this book to understand what features you'll need as well as what controls you'll have to have in place to make it all work properly. After I finish this review, I'm mailing my copy off to someone who is in charge of a community wiki effort for a software firm. I have no doubt that this will help them gain a better understanding of what and where things are going...
If you are at all involved in the world of wikis, this book should be on your short list of titles to get.
Contents:
Part 1 - Editing, Creating, and Maintaining Articles: Editing for the First Time; Documenting Your Sources; Setting Up Your Account and Personal Workspace; Creating a New Article; Who Did What - Page Histories and Reverting; Monitoring Changes; Dealing with Vandalism and Spam
Part 2 - Collaborating with Other Editors: Communicating with your Fellow Editors; WikiProjects and Other Group Efforts; Resolving Content Disputes; Handling Incivility and Personal Attacks; Lending Other Editors a Hand
Part 3 - Formatting and Illustrating Articles: Article Sections and Tables of Contents; Creating Lists and Tables; Adding Images
Part 4 - Building A Stronger Encyclopedia: Getting Readers to the Right Article - Naming, Redirects, and Disambiguation; Categorizing Articles; Better Articles - A Systematic Approach; Deleting Existing Articles
Part 5 - Customizing Wikipedia: Customizing with Preferences; Easier Editing with JavaScript
Part 6 - Appendixes: A Tour of the Wikipedia Page; Reader's Guide to Wikipedia; Learning More; Index
Broughton doesn't spend much time with a fluffy introduction to Wikipedia and all the benefits and drawbacks of the site. He just dives right in to how to use it. You learn the markup language, as well as the formal way a Wikipedia article is laid out in terms of headers, footnotes, etc. Meanwhile, he's also introducing you to the "rules" of Wikipedia that you'll need to know in order to be an effective contributor. Concepts such as "neutral point of view", "conflict of interest", "notability", and many others are essential to understand so that you don't end up getting locked out of the site before you even get started. One thing I didn't know about were all the shortcut paths to get to certain topics. For instance, typing WP:COI takes you automatically to the Conflict of Interest page so that you can find out how to handle that situation. Couple all his technical "how to" information with his knowledge of the Wikipedia culture, and you have a book that is an essential read for someone planning on adding content.
Another element you get out of this book is the understanding of how wikis work (or how they *should* work). If you're starting a wiki of your own, it's best to learn from someone who has been there and done that. Since Wikipedia is the best known example of a large-scale wiki implementation, you can use this book to understand what features you'll need as well as what controls you'll have to have in place to make it all work properly. After I finish this review, I'm mailing my copy off to someone who is in charge of a community wiki effort for a software firm. I have no doubt that this will help them gain a better understanding of what and where things are going...
If you are at all involved in the world of wikis, this book should be on your short list of titles to get.
9 of 12 people found the following review helpful
Format:Kindle Edition
I downloaded to my Kindle the sample for this book. I was very disappointed.
Let me state that: 1. I love my Kindle and 2. I liked the book and plan to buy its printed version. But, the Kindle version is useless. This is not because of its contents but because of its images. The book, being a computer "how to", has a lot of pictures mostly screen captures. These pictures are an essential part of the book and are referred to by the text. Unfortunately they are illegible. This make the whole book useless.
Let me state that: 1. I love my Kindle and 2. I liked the book and plan to buy its printed version. But, the Kindle version is useless. This is not because of its contents but because of its images. The book, being a computer "how to", has a lot of pictures mostly screen captures. These pictures are an essential part of the book and are referred to by the text. Unfortunately they are illegible. This make the whole book useless.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
Future editors, read this!
Great book for people tempted to contribute their own resources and knowledge to Wikipedia. I learned a lot from it. Read more
Published 1 month ago by Susan Barrett Price
4.0 out of 5 stars
Still stonewalled
Manual arrived whole and fast. It answers all questions I can answer without it, but it doesn't tell me how to communicate with _people_ at WP!
Published 9 months ago by Don F. B. Reed
4.0 out of 5 stars
covers everything
Wiki is a mystery when you sign up and try to do things, especially when you get a rejection or when your stuff just gets deleted. Read more
Published 20 months ago by Michael Beloved
5.0 out of 5 stars
A must if you WIKI...
If you want to know the ins and outs of Wikipedia without trying to wade throught their website to find your answers, this is the book to get! A MUST if you post on Wikipedia.
Published on February 6, 2011 by Rev. Ronald G. Cosseboom
5.0 out of 5 stars
Wikipedia and the Wiki Concept
Years ago when I first had the occasion to use Wikipedia, I remember thinking that this was an amateur effort to provide the masses with a free online encyclopedia they could use... Read more
Published on March 6, 2009 by Jose M. Baeza
1.0 out of 5 stars
You won't miss this manual
This is not the manual to guide you if you want to contribute good articles to Wikipedia. It is lacking good information on logos and trademarks, and its directions on how to use... Read more
Published on September 14, 2008 by Jane Aberdeen
1.0 out of 5 stars
Train wreck
This book was a total train wreck. It arrived with a bad binding, the pages were falling out. Then I realized... they were just trying to escape.
Published on August 5, 2008 by J. Kelley
5.0 out of 5 stars
Comprehensive
Having used Wikipedia for a long time as a reference tool, I liked it for being able to quickly look up topics. Read more
Published on July 25, 2008 by Todd Hawley
5.0 out of 5 stars
The definitive book on how to contribute and become a successful...
If you have ever thought about contributing to Wikipedia, or have done so in the past, this is the definitive book on how to contribute and become a successful Wikipedia... Read more
Published on April 19, 2008 by Scott Dorman
5.0 out of 5 stars
Never edit on Wikipedia without it
My earliest contributions to Wikipedia date back to 2005 but that means little when you consider I have created or edited an article on Wikipedia less than 50 times. Read more
Published on April 1, 2008 by Manny Hernandez
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Listmania!
|
|
