[pydotorg-www] Resource book lists are mostly one publishing house

Tue Jan 7 14:09:07 EST 2020

Here are a few more lists of books (from various publishers that we could
reach out and suggest this wiki page to)

We could add links to these additional lists (that don't require wiki privs
to update) to the wiki page

https://github.com/quobit/awesome-python-in-education/blob/master/README.md#books

https://www.reddit.com/r/learnpython/wiki/books

 Is there a good list of books written as/with Jupyter notebooks?

https://github.com/jupyter/jupyter/wiki/A-gallery-of-interesting-Jupyter-Notebooks#entire-books-or-other-large-collections-of-notebooks-on-a-topic

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, 1:27 PM Betsy Waliszewski <betsy at python.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for raising this. We're working on a general policy for use of the
> public wiki that will be posted on the website.
>
> Best,
>
> Betsy
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 9:59 AM Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
>
>> Escalate this to Board? There are clearly sponsorship issues to be
>> considered, and I know Packt generates a portion of revenues to the
>> Foundation so this needs to be considered where all the information is
>> available. Copying PSF staffers in.
>>
>> As a member of the sponsorship committee I believe it's time for the
>> Foundation to plant a clear stake in the ground, delete many or even all of
>> the references to Packt publications and publish a blog post stating why
>> the action was taken.
>>
>> I believe Packt have taken advantage of a liberal regime, but I think
>> rather than being punitive we should simply "reset" them: our fault for not
>> being clearer about the rules, now EVERYBODY knows what they are let's
>> start again. Or maybe we just need wiki editors to start giving their
>> publications some honest reviews. I withdrew as an editorial consultant
>> from one proposed work that still went ahead despite
>> serious quality issues, and I have heard enough similar stories from other
>> authors/reviewers that I believe Packt's actions may be against the
>> membership's interests in promoting works of dubious value. The ultimate
>> decision, however, is well above my now happily lowly pay grade.
>>
>> Given that I start my Christmas vacation tomorrow evening, let me take
>> this opportunity to wish all readers the very best of everything over their
>> festive season, and a prosperous new year.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Steve Holden
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 8:58 AM M.-A. Lemburg <mal at python.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed. We had this discussion before, but no action was taken AFAIK.
>>>
>>> On 15.12.2019 13:48, Steve Holden wrote:
>>> > They've already been warned once.
>>> >
>>> > Personal opinion: they should be stopped from spamming our Wiki, in
>>> > which they currently have undue prominence.
>>> >
>>> > Kind regards,
>>> > Steve Holden
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 5:20 AM Mats Wichmann <mats at wichmann.us
>>> > <mailto:mats at wichmann.us>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >     On 12/14/19 9:55 PM, Frances Hocutt wrote:
>>> >     > Hello all,
>>> >     >
>>> >     > While going through the wiki working on Python 3 updates, I
>>> noticed
>>> >     > that these two pages now stretch to hundreds of books from a
>>> single
>>> >     > publisher:
>>> >     >
>>> >     >   https://wiki.python.org/moin/IntroductoryBooks
>>> >     >   https://wiki.python.org/moin/AdvancedBooks
>>> >     >
>>> >     > This seems like it runs into spamming/broad self-promotion more
>>> than a
>>> >     > usefully curated list of resources, but I'm not familiar with
>>> how this
>>> >     > wiki usually handles that kind of thing. Could someone more
>>> familiar
>>> >     > with this wiki take a look?
>>> >
>>> >     We do have one publisher - Packt - that keeps updating all the
>>> time.
>>> >     They produce books at an astounding rate.  I've looked at a fair
>>> number
>>> >     and they're not useless, although they're of fairly low quality in
>>> my
>>> >     personal opinion - it's a kind of "book mill".
>>> >
>>> >     I haven't a clue what we think we should do about them.  I think we
>>> >     warned them a few times about changing the sorting to put their
>>> >     books at
>>> >     the top, and believe they stopped that and kept to the
>>> "alphabetical
>>> >     order" we suggest. Beyond that... don't think we can say they're
>>> doing
>>> >     something wrong. Without someone curating the list for quality,
>>> >     which we
>>> >     don't have, it's not clear there's any actual complaint we can
>>> make.
>>> >
>>> >     Thanks for asking - it's a good question.
>>> >
>>> >     Anybody else?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     _______________________________________________
>>> >     pydotorg-www mailing list
>>> >     pydotorg-www at python.org <mailto:pydotorg-www at python.org>
>>> >     https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > pydotorg-www mailing list
>>> > pydotorg-www at python.org
>>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Marc-Andre Lemburg
>>> Python Software Foundation
>>> http://www.python.org/psf/
>>> http://www.malemburg.com/
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Betsy Waliszewski
> Event Planner / Sponsorship Coordinator
> @ThePSF
>
> As a non-profit organization, the PSF depends on sponsorships and
> donations to support the Python community. Check out our Annual Impact
> Report for more details: https://www.python.org/psf/annual-report/2019/
>
> Please contribute to PSF; we can't continue our work without your support!
> https://www.python.org/psf/donations/
> _______________________________________________
> pydotorg-www mailing list
> pydotorg-www at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/pydotorg-www/attachments/20200107/89cf99b0/attachment-0001.html>