Macmillan's Wiki-textbooks and more

The New York Times reported that Macmillan Publishing is unveiling DynamicBooks, a Wikipedia-like system that allows logged-in instructors to modify textbooks online. Though customizable online textbooks already exist, DynamicBooks ups the ante by allowing fine-tuning of individual sentences without consulting the original authors. Macmillan will reserve the right to remove objectionable material. The customized textbooks will be available in various venues, often at one-third the cost of traditional textbooks.

• Jimbo Wales chatted about Wikipedia with David Mathison on his "Be The Media" show at Blogtalkradio for roughly a half-hour on 17 February. Jimbo began speaking at 22:46 into the show (downloadable MP3). Fellow commentator JD Lasica later covered the interview at Socialmedia.biz.
• The Financial Times reports in "Companies must play by the Wikipedia rules" that companies today must be careful of their image on Wikipedia. The article highlights a consulting company that advises clients how to do this appropriately.
• Joseph Janes speculated about the future of Wikipedia in an article at the American Library Association magazine online.

← Previous "In the news"

Next "In the news" →

In this issue

22 February 2010 (all comments)

News and notes

In the news

WikiProject report

Features and admins

Arbitration report

+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

A bit late and I don't know if it's been already covered: [1] and [2] So much for Wikipedia not giving legal or medical advice! 82.32.238.139 (talk) 13:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it hasn't been covered, and this week's edition hasn't been published yet, so if you want you can go ahead and write a note. Usually "In the news" focuses on recent media stories though.

The best place to make such suggestions is Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions, where this grave violation of WP:NOT#HOWTO had already been noted.

Regards, HaeB (talk) 14:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe some folks were in serious doubt wether the person actually used Wikipedia. Descriptions seem to indicate that it is more likely he used WikiHow. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting to note that we may be getting credited for information from other sites. I suppose the man in question could have seen wiki... and read ...pedia. Still it is nice to have positive feedback. Saga City (talk) 17:44, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. As mentioned in the newsroom suggestion thread, The Sun's article has been updated to say WikiHow, not Wikipedia. Apparently WikiHow is the first non-video Google hit. As many have noted, many others seem to think "wiki" is synonymous with "Wikipedia", that all wikis are run by WMF, that all wiki softwar is MediaWiki, etc. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 03:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]