Wikipedia talk:Historical archive/WikiReader/William Shakespeare

ideas

I figure it shouldn't just contain encyclopedia articles about shakespeare - if could contain some or all of the plays themselves (from Gutenberg or wikisource, as appropriate), articles about real historical personalities mentioned in the play (Julius Caesar, Macbeth, Richard III, etc.) and maybe some general "shakespeare's england" articles (contexutalisation stuff like Christopher Marlowe, and the prevailing prime minister, or any other historical events of the time for which we have articles). Maybe also (or as an alternative to the full article texts) add the relevant wikiquote stuff? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:20, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This is a good idea; I want to include Elizabethan theatre, but I didn't really know where to put it. It is a part of the 'shakespeare's england' section, though. Also, the quotes are good, but I don't know if we should include any plays... any of his plays that are very short? Currently, the mock-up is only 50 pages, and that makes 100 pages extra for a play seem ... unrelated. [[User:Sverdrup|✏ SverdrupSverdrup]] 22:28, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, the plays would make it very large (if it were actually being printed out on dead trees). I think Shakespeare's England would be a great section - it's just the stuff a learner needs (and a teacher craves) when reading the plays. Add Globe Theatre, Francis Bacon, Shakespearean authorship, Ben Jonson, Walter Raleigh, Francis Drake, Spanish Armada, Mary I of Scotland (a lot of these set the political stage, which the plays subtly and not so subtly mirror). Maybe one play (as a supposed decendant, Macbeth is my fave, but Hamlet is good as is Julius Caesar (play) and A Midsummer Night's Dream). Add a sonnet or two. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:17, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hamlet is my fav, so it will be included. :-) I have a little difficult time choosing which play articles one should include. 3 tragedies, 3 comedies and one history seemed reasonable, but then again, why not include all we have? What do you think? [[User:Sverdrup|✏ SverdrupSverdrup]] 23:48, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Just saw this, figured I'd jump in.... Why not include all the articles? May eventually make for a longer book, but in general, I would think it would make for a more comprehensive book, especially if this would ever be geared towards teachers, etc. just my .02 Lyellin 14:13, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

This is gonna be distributed in pdf form yes? if so is there an easy way that a teacher (or whomever) can download a big version with all the articles, (and possibly even the plays or sonnets as appendixs) and then EASILY (for non-computer literate ppl) deleate any sections that are not applicable to what they want the reader for? If so, i think including as many articles as possible is the best idea, if not, i think we should try and limit ourselves a little. The bellman 02:45, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on the distribution processes, so I'm not the final word. My understanding is that there is no easy way to remove articles. But I ask, why would you need to? The goal is to provide a comprehensive listing of our articles on W.S. If we have the articles, why not include them? If it's distributed in print form (which I think is how the German ones were distributed), then they can just turn to the correct page needed, and the cost will not be prohibitively higher ( a few dollars at most I'd suspect). In PDF, they could just print whatever pages they needed of the full book. Lyellin 03:12, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

If it was to be used as a handout within a normal highschool/first yr uni situation the last thing the teacher wants to be doing is printing out a whole lot of stuff that is irrelevent to what they want. For example teacher X wants a handout to provide backgound info about the bard for the study of hamlet. Life of shakespeare is important, shakesperean england is important, however info on the comidies and histories is not at all relevent, and niether is info on most of the other tragidies. As for money, i am not sure how printing/photocoping budgets are worked out in all education facilites, but at my mothers they have a specific budget, and each page costs about 2c. So in the above example the combined info on the tragidies (less hamlet), comidies, and histories, is going to add up to at least 50 pdf pages (probably more) which equals a dollar a copy, which equals $30 for the whole class. That's real money for a teacher. HENCE can i suggest that each section is started on a new page to make printing of only the wanted sections as easy as possible. The bellman 04:05, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Too true- although I'd caution that often the case is that professors assign books to be bought in a bookstore that they assemble (at least it is here). That way, a cheap book like this is not hurting the professor, and barely hurting the student. But we need to keep in mind something, which is that we are tailoring this for all situations, and not just students/uni/etc. I'm more inclined to include more, for the sheer fact that more information is good, in general. Lyellin 06:02, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

agreed, i think i may have been concentrating on the school/uni aspect too much. In general the more info the better, but i maintain that we must make sure the end product is properly modulised so that end-users can easily tailor the wikireader for thier needs. The bellman 09:28, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Finalizing listing

I've just added a bunch more possible articles- would be good if others could take a look, and see if they agree with them- and if so, a way to order them. I'm thinking alphabetical for the plays, at the least. The other stuff, I'm not so sure. Lyellin 15:51, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry about not having much spare time to really contribute to this project -- the studies are all going full speed now. Perhaps I can do something this weekend, and in the longer perspective, I can probably get more things done in two/three weeks time. ✏ Sverdrup 19:36, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I removed the full list of plays, as we already have subject lists, a chronology, and each play individually listed. Lyellin 18:36, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

Changes to Authorship Page

I've made some major changes to Shakespearean_authorship. The reasons for the changes are noted in discussion on that page. I invite commentary, discussion, and assistance with editing the changes, if need be, for clarity and correct usage. The existing page still needs considerable work, imo, before it can be taken seriously. Somehow, all previous commentators have not noticed that the alleged Sh. signature reproduced on the page is a fake, and moreover, in contravention to Wicki guidelines, is unsourced.--BenJonson 23:38, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

checked by...

Once you have checked a page to see if it is ready to be included in the wikiReader click the edit this page button on the page and save the exact same text as the last edit and with the comment checked for WikiReader. Click on the edit before you and copy the URL. Find the entry for the article on this page and next to it put the following

([http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Foo time, date] [[User:4711|4711]]; checked by ~~~)

then on the talk page for the article put the following notice.

This page has been reviewed and judged to be ready to be saved in static form as part of the [[Wikipedia:WikiReader/William_Shakespeare|William Shakespeare WikiReader]]. If you believe that the version of this page which was checked ([http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Foo]), is not suitable for static reproduction, please raise your concerns on the [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiReader/William_Shakespeare|WikiReader talk page]] ~~~~

Wikipedia:Stable versions

You can use Wikipedia:Stable versions to select your articles. -- Zondor 14:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page updated as of November 2008

This page has now been updated - as of November 2008 Kathleen.wright5 22:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]