Proposal talk:In a Hardcovered Book

Books are bad for the environment (physical ones anyways) because they need trees to make books and trees help absorb carbon dixoide. This is the year 2009, not 1509. Gutenberg's Press is no longer the coolest thing in learning; Wikipedia (in electronic form is). GVnayR 03:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

And we can hire an army of salespeople to go door-to-door selling it. They could make folks feel like "A Bad Parent" if they fail to make this essential investment in their children's education. Than we can put copies in places called "libraries" for those who can't afford their own copy. And put a copy on-line for those who don't have a "public library" nearby... perhaps at the suggestion of someone called Jimbo? </ sarcasm> Bazj 11:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

It's a good idea, but not realizable. Did you ever checked how many edits of the Wikipedia articles were done? And in what a small time? The level of the article changes, and that very often and fast. There would be as much updates to the books as for a navigation software, and even more often! --Darklordjr8 17:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Impact?

Some proposals will have massive impact on end-users, including non-editors. Some will have minimal impact. What will be the impact of this proposal on our end-users? -- Philippe 00:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)