The text awards
These seem the hardest to judge, which may be why no one's tried to stick in anything yet. What exactly is supposed to be nominated? Entire articles? If so, the potential field is, of course, staggeringly vast. And what is the protocol for determining who the "important authors" of an article are? Is that up to the nominator? Please, someone clarify. Chocodile 20:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
What is more, all the awards here seem to be extremely English-centric. Unless you want to judge and compare the articles in all the languages but when even this page hasn't been translated into a single other language I really doubt. That's the pity as other Wikipedias like German, French, Polish, Japanese, Dutch, etc. etc. are a part and parcel of Wikimedia movement and they do have good articles.
Created by Wikimedians
ie, people with a registered account. This seems like an implicit requirement but it's not explicitly mentioned as far as I can see.
- Hm, maybe it's a bit late! Image:Makasiinit tulessa.jpg & Image:Aberdeenshire scenery.jpg are from flickr. --commons:User:pfctdayelise 23:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Submissions may not have been uploaded to a Wikimedia project prior to Jan 1, 2006
Shouldn't this be for things which were uploaded since the last Wikimania? This is excluding half a year's content isn't it?. --liquidGhoul
Standards for Textbooks/Wikibooks
Dismissing the issue of if Wikibooks should be only textbooks or if it can be more than that, I am curious about the standards for what is going to be recieving an award here for textbooks.
Unlike a Wikipedia article, it indeed can take more than a year to get a Wikibook to completion, with sometimes taking two or more years for a good book.
It is interesting that b:Ada Programming has been chosen to be included with the Liberty Textbooks CD-ROM package as one of the best all-time e-books on the internet (by at least that group of independent reviewers). Indeed, that is the only Wikibook or even Wikimedia project that is even mentioned on that site, which seems like an especial kind of praise indeed.
The problem with nominating individual textbook modules is that often they don't stand alone. This is like trying to nominate a single chapter out of a whole novel as the "best" chapter. I guess that makes some sense, but some special recognition ought to go to a complete textbook that is available for people to actually use, and has been rounded out into something useful. That is the real mission of Wikibooks, not the creation of isolated textbook modules.
Textbooks that have moved from relatively poor and incomplete content to become a complete book over the past year perhaps ought to be the standard used here?
BTW, I'm also going to note a few Wikibooks in other languages that deserve some special attention as well, notably German Wikibooks that has some very interesting content. --Robert Horning 05:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
This seems to be contradictory; the first header says "submissions must be your own work", but the "Rules" section says "...and note the creators" which implies that it doesn't have to be one's own work. Now, I don't particularly care either way --- some people are too timid to nominate something they've done themselves [me, for one; I asked someone else to pick from the list of articles on my enwiki_p userpage and nominated the one they chose...], and, on the other side of the coin, there are many good pieces of writing / images that may not be known to anyone but their creator. So it doesn't particularly matter to me, but it should be made clear.--SB 03:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'll fix the rules. The work has to be substantially the creation of a Wikimedian. Crops of some external PD work will not be accepted unless the crop is absolutely and unimaginably brilliant. :) --Gmaxwell 04:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Its over? Who won?
i see that wikimania has concluded, and a list of "finalists" has been drawn up. when will the final selections be made? cheers. Zzzzz
- Ditto, I would like to know too Fir0002
- Me too. Also why is Zzzz listed as self-nom for The KLF? He nom'd the article for FA, and helped out in the final stages, but it was substantially the work of Kingboyk and Vinoir, based on one of Wikipedia's oldest articles. --126.96.36.199 12:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Ditto, I would like to know too Fir0002