User talk:Dave Braunschweig/2016

howdy Dave could you lend a hand on Lynx? thank you. --DonLandry2 (discuss • contribs) 19:34, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

What type of assistance are you looking for? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:36, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Anything you can assist with. Possibly collabing? --DonLandry2 (discuss • contribs) 19:36, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the offer, but I have other projects I'm already working on right now. If you need specific assistance, I'd be happy to help. Otherwise, you might try checking with User:Atcovi. The Lynx project is similar to other projects he has worked on in the past. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:47, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Okay --DonLandry2 (discuss • contribs) 19:49, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Dave, I'm working on Bash programming, adding functions in what i hope is the "Wiki Way", e.g. collaboratively.

See my profile for credentials. I want the work to be credible, and as before "Wikifield",

Applemcg (discuss • contribs) 20:56, 4 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Applemcg: Looks good. I made a couple of minor corrections. Wikiversity doesn't have the same Sentence case requirement as Wikipedia. Title Case is fine here. But consistency is preferred, so I title-cased one of the headings. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

If you do any portal overhaul editing might I ask that you bump Portal:Science as a higher priority? No rush, this is for the Wikiversity Year of Science. --mikeu ^talk 04:27, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'll work on Science next. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Your work on improving these Portal's is essential and I like what I see. We all have been thinking hard about how we increase the growth of WV, and I can think of nothing that is more important than improving these "front window" pages. We need a lot less clutter at the front end where many visitors get their first impressions.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:14, 6 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I'm hoping that the template and process will be simple enough that many can participate in this effort. It's not quite there yet, but close. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Portal:Science update is done. The Featured Resource and Featured Picture sections need review. I just used what was on the old site. There should be other / additional resources and pictures available. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

History Geek enters the discussion... can you work on Portal:History as well if you can? Thank you for all the improvements! ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 00:31, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Portal:History update is done. Featured Resource and Featured Picture need contributions. Categories are cleaned up. The Learn page needs content added. The Research Projects on the Participate page need to be cleaned up. Most of those are not history projects. Just use HotCat and remove History from the ones that do not seem related. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

First of all, Dave, thanks for all the work you put in to help me.

Can you get the bathymetric map I have uploaded on the wikiversity Atlantis post? I really am out of my element here.

Thanks again for all of the work you have done. I found some suggestions from Sidelight12. Maybe I can incorporate that into the Atlantis site, also.

Thinking about how Machu Picu (spelled wrong) got so high in the mountains on the west coast od South America.Is it possible that the North American Plate tilted when Atlantis sank? Hmmm...

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs) 20:27, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've updated the file code on Atlantis to provide examples. See mw:Help:Images for more information and many more options. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

In the "Tools" section of the sidebar there is Files needing licenses defined at MediaWiki:ExtraTabs.js which is a link to a discontinued project. I'm not sure how to remove it without breaking the js. --mikeu ^talk 17:36, 6 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done. See https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:ExtraTabs.js&diff=prev&oldid=1498224 . -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm a contributor of fr.wikiversity. I begun to translate your Lua course yesterday. I just wanted to avise and congratulate. It's a smart work easy and useful to work with. Any comment, i'm down there: Lua pour la wikivertsité (english translation). Happy New Year --Youni Verciti (discuss • contribs) 11:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Very cool! Thanks for letting me know. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Moved to Wikiversity_talk:Bots#Temporary_Custodian_flag_for_automated_actions -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:43, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've updated the bots policy and assigned the Curator flag [1] --mikeu ^talk 05:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

which policy strickly prohibits all forms of solicitation, even on user pages? Is you putting information about your background not a form of self promotion? Is all self promotion prohibited on Wikiversity? Michael Ten (discuss • contribs) 22:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Solicitation means basically, self promotion. Self promotion usually is linking to a website to promote something, like a product, or something like that. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 22:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

"Background", like... in your personal history? ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 22:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please see Wikiversity:External links. The link you added was not educational. It was solicitation, specifically directing users to fund your efforts. You may educate others about you, but don't ask them to pay for the privilege. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:11, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please also see the Wikimedia global policy meta:External links policy which applies here. --mikeu ^talk 23:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that there are still about 100 pages in Category:Open proxies blocked on Wikiversity. Some were tagged OP but never blocked, some were unblocked 5 or more years ago, and a couple were from earlier this month. I don't see any indef blocked OPs left. I've made a dent in the remaining but was wondering if the bot can clean the last few up or should we manually look at them? --mikeu ^talk 21:59, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Easy enough to do. I already have code to collect pages in a category. I just haven't had time this afternoon to even notice the bot was done. I ended up teaching seven classes this semester, two of which I wasn't expecting, and one of which has a new book with a completely different approach. So, I'm pedaling as fast as I can just to stay ahead of my students. But I'll see what I can do later this evening or tomorrow. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

No rush at all, it's not like a few more days or even weeks makes much of a difference after 5 or 10 years ;) The unblock was more important and thanks for taking caring of this~ --mikeu ^talk 23:59, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 04:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is the page TELE 5330 GROUP4 suppose to be under Data Networking? ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:10, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Sometimes I don't move them if they are in mid-project and I'm concerned they'll get lost. I often tag them with a rename, but I missed that one. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:12, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

FYI, my bot is now flagged at beta to work on the English pages that we might want to import. I'm going to tag the pages that look worthwhile with Category:en-wv or some such identifier. Many of the pages are computer graphics, networking, operating systems, etc. I don't think there is any urgency, but the proposal for closure is imho likely to happen eventually. You may want to request the flag for future use at Wikiversity:Candidates for Botship/En as they don't consider it a big deal. --mikeu ^talk 16:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

How do we edit the title of a main page? Must we contact an administrator? I am unable to find any information on this type of edit unfortunately. -- danny (discuss • contribs) 19:34, 31 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think what you are looking for is to rename a page. We do that by moving it. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Moving a page for more information. You should be able to do that here, but if the page has subpages, it's easier to have a custodian do it, because we can move all pages at once vs. having to move the subpages individually. What page did you want to rename? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:40, 31 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your response. Yes there are numerous pages associated with the main page. For now I would like to change the name to the main page as, 'Pre-Late Egyptian Reconstruction', as it suits the topics better and the name is a bit smaller than the previous title. Here's the link. Could you possibly fix this for me, it would greatly be appreciated. -- danny (discuss • contribs) 23:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:44, 31 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Regarding Lua/Table Library, the sample code for a descending order sort produces an ascending order sort. Thanks for the course, Bazj (discuss • contribs) 10:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

It worked when the course was written. They apparently modified the library and broke the code. Now corrected. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:18, 6 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Bazj (discuss • contribs) 18:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

With uses of Template:Sisterlinks, which redirects to Template:Sisterprojectsearch I'm now getting error messages "Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Yesno' not found." This just started a few minutes ago. Ideas? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 00:44, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

User:Mu301 has been updating templates. Module:Yesno is one of them. The updates must have broken something. I'd prefer to let Mike respond to this, because I'm not sure of what's involved in the various updates. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 05:12, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I had a bit of a problem with a botched import. I believe that it is now fixed. The solution to the error messages is to append "?action=purge"(d) to the URL of the page that shows the error message. I have done this for Template:Sisterlinks and the error message disappeared. Sorry for the confusion. --07:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

The correct URL is "?action=purge". I've asked MaintenanceBot to go through all pages that embed Module:Yesno and request a purge to clear this error. I'm surprised it has hung on so long, but I was still seeing pages with errors on them this morning. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

This is ultimately called by thousands of pages. I purged at least a thousand, but couldn't get to all of them. It seemed to be repeating, so I stopped it. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your kind edit of my Atlantis efforts.

I have been busy with DailyKos under the moniker "AnotherOldJohn" arguing in favor of Bernie Sanders. Plus, I am back to work taking x-rays again and out of medical records limited duty. I will have less time to do the Atlantis research but will progress slow.

Thanks again.

I live in Terre Haute, Indiana. I am close to you. Perhaps we will meet some day.

John Garner aka Rayleigh22

— Preceding unsigned comment added by RAYLEIGH22 (talk • contribs) 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm curious about the ~10k media files in Files with no machine-readable license such as File:-1--4tiles.png. That file contains a legitimate license template which places it in the correct (GFDL document) category. I don't see why this is not machine readable. Other files like File:1-6.png have a correct license template but are not auto-included in the correct category. The reason that I'm asking is because I plan to use a bot to upload images and I want to configure it to include the license info in the correct format. I'd also like to write up a description of how to correctly provide machine readable info in a media description page for our style guide. We should review the license templates to make sure they include an auto-categorization. Another consideration is that we should compare our file tagging to commons to insure compatibility so that any free license files moved there will require minimal changes. While I'm on the topic, there is a disturbing lack of usage of {{Non-free media rationale}} which should be included on all pages where fair use is asserted per our exemption doctrine policy. I'm a bit relieved that the WMF has not noticed our lax treatment of this as it has legal ramifications. This is not an urgent issue, but something we should look into. --mikeu ^talk 15:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

See the introduction at Commons:Category:Files with no machine-readable license. I didn't have time to look through the details, but that seems to have an explanation of why and how to fix "machine-readable".

Regarding non-free rationale, there are two parts to the story. The first is we have a lot of "own work" files that were contributed without proper licensing. The engineering instructors from both Florida Howard County asked that the work be kept if possible. The community decided that tagging it all as Fair Use was the best approach. That addressed the usage, but not yet the rationale. The second part is that we need to switch to using the File Upload Wizard so that files are properly licensed when they are uploaded. So far, I have been unable to get the community to support this. There haven't been clear objections, but no one willing to Support. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:03, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Regarding using File Upload Wizard to get files properly licensed initially, as I recall I was the only other Support after yourself. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:08, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

If Mu301 is also interested regarding using File Upload Wizard, we could see if one of our curators say user Atcovi who already has experience at submitting requests at the Phabricator is interested and try again at the Colloquium. What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:26, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'll take a look at the guidelines at commons. Re: classwork, I wasn't even considering the obvious "self" or "own work" files, I was thinking of uploads where a file was taken from a commercial website or Google image search - the ones that could be a possible copyvio. I would be tempted to re-tag the obvious self produced class work as CC given that the instructor should have explained this to students. It might be a little late to make a decision like that. We should inform new instructors of the need to explain copyright to students when they assign editing here as homework.

I wouldn't make any requests to change the user interface just yet until we know exactly what we want it to do. I think the first step is to verify that the templates are correctly categorizing files and that they are used in a machine readable format. In the short term we could modify the upload page boilerplate message to make it clearer and to emphasize the important aspects of the license policy. If it is technically possible to implement I would like to see public domain on the dropdown menu redirect to commons. That would save us having to monitor that category of files.

Our community doesn't have a choice regarding this - we are required by WMF Resolution to implement an Exemption Doctrine Policy if we accept fair use files, or we are required to not accept such files if our EDP system is not correctly implemented. Even just hosting files that do not have a machine readable EDP or a valid rationale violates Resolution:Licensing policy. We are supposed to be immediately deleting these files, regardless of community consensus to keep them. Luckily for us the foundation is not paying attention to our lax enforcement of this. --mikeu ^talk 16:22, 5 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Just FYI but Fair Use as included on our files is the EDP rationale. See for reference Fair Use rationale. Sorry about forgetting to sign. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 06:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm copyting this discussion to Wikiversity:Community Review/Fair Use so as not to clutter Dave's talk page. Please continue there. --mikeu ^talk 01:57, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm going to continue the fair use discussion at the community review, but I wanted to post a note here specifically about the machine readability of files. It turns out there is a good reason why files should include the {{Upload_Information}} - the machine readable info is transcluded via this. I think we can probably have a bot update file upload information to fix this, though I'm unclear on what specific changes need to be made. I've learned a bit about this but I also broke some templates (now fixed, I think) in the process. I'll write up what I've learned in my userspace and ping you later. This is not at all urgent, but it is something we need to get under control eventually. --mikeu ^talk 05:36, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the breakdown Dave!

107 subpages do add up. The stats for January 2016 show the same pattern as in 2014 when the hit counter was working. Readers prefer the lectures over the quizzes by almost a factor of ten. Apparently, no one even looked at more than one laboratory. I'm still considering putting the lessons as subpages of radiation astronomy. The subpages of astronomy used in the course took some counts away from the course. February's may say something about fixing the mobile edits or perhaps March would be more definitive. Curiously, using Motivation and emotion as a control group and project statistics (340,352 for 2015 thru October divided by total subpages 930 = 366 per subpage. Radiation astronomy for project statistics 39138 same period divided by 107 subpages = 366, total subpages of 110 = 356. Or, about at most 3 % less. May not be significant. I'm not sure what this says about our reader interests. What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 22:24, 14 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

From what I saw in a brief review of the statistics, there's no benefit to spending time developing quizzes unless one is teaching a course with real-world students. The other thing that really jumped out at me was that you should try to figure out why Astronomy/Mathematics has a viewership almost six times higher than anything else in the project, and three times greater than the project home page. What are users looking for that brings them to that page?

Regarding comparisons to other projects, the IT Fundamentals content was finished last April. Statistics through October show 34,490 views, or a little over 2,000 hits per page. Looking at the last three months, that project is on track for just under 3,000 hits per page per year, on average. I think users tell us what they are interested in based on views. If they like what they see, they follow links and look at more or come back again later. If what they see doesn't meet their needs, they go elsewhere. For example, one of these days, I'm going to find time to work on Principles of Management. That's an underdeveloped resource users are consistently looking for. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I noticed the numbers for Astronomy/Mathematics or mathematical astronomy from earlier! That's a puzzle. I'm presenting mathematics there in a simple form where it's applicable to astronomy. I use to tutor mathematics and it seems students are always struggling with it. When I tried to find a math course, not a computer course, for comparison, there wasn't much on the statistics lists. The presentation is a lot more how to do it than Wikipedia. Thanks for the feedback! --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 12:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Discussion moved to Talk:Emergence to keep it with the article in question. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:58, 17 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Prof Messer has all his videos for the 900 series uploaded, and i've linked to them all on their respective pages in the course, so the videos are all done now. i've been slowly adding summaries to the pages, do you have any content you specifically want added? Lingawakad (discuss • contribs) 03:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't. I teach the networking courses, so I'm working on Computer Networks right now. I was hoping one of our A+ instructors would have his students use and enhance the A+ materials this semester, but I couldn't talk him into it. Your efforts are still valuable, as my students keep commenting on how useful they find that material for review before certification. You're getting about 10 views a day on average on the main Computer Support page. When you're ready to bring in more traffic, we can add a "recently updated" news item to the front page. That should more than double readership. Let me know when you're ready for that. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 04:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ah ok, no worries, just wanted to make sure i wasn't duplicating effort. i'll keep at it slowly, as i'm actually studying more networking/telecommunications and security myself. probably not ready for more readership yet, but i'm glad people are finding it useful! Lingawakad (discuss • contribs) 20:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

This File:01 Project Preparation.png lacks appropriate copyright information, but this and several others are used in a management course(s), did you want to try to curate these for the course by making them Fair use? Once we have decided on what template(s) to use we can add an appropriate fair use rationale. If you do, I can skip those without proper licensing information and only put those up for deletion where I can upload it to commons. What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 18:49, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Information is available for these files. It just needs to be collected from the page history. I'll look at whether or not it can be done in an automated process. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good! I'll continue with using CommonsHelper a while longer then back to my stuff. If we could get more people using CommonsHelper it might take less than a year to clear the Category:Files with no machine-readable license. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I tried deleting this file since you've confirmed the name of the author and I'm getting this very strange message, "Error deleting file: The file "mwstore://local-multiwrite/local-deleted/k/9/a/k9art0b8dzdhxjty717rlz46bliwu3z.png" is in an inconsistent state within the internal storage backends". Clues? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 21:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

This sounds like a replication issue inside the wiki database, as though it might still be trying to copy content from one location to another. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

The Franz Kies files on Project Management look better with the Template:Upload Information replacing the table. Do we want to put these up for deletion again since there are files on Commons with duplicate names or wait? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 22:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

If they were copied to Commons before the clean-up to using the Information template, they need to be copied over again before deletion here. I don't think the table content was machine readable. After that, they can be deleted. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I tried CommonsHelper again with the Template:Upload Information update, but it would not over-right the file. I was successful in deleting the two next files used in this same PM course. But, there is one difference I've found between these: this file contains at its beginning "* Wikiversity:Main Page --> Practical Arts and Sciences --> School of Project Management --> Project Management - A course in Project Management based on Mindmaps". The other two did not. Perhaps, somehow this link is creating a problem? I might remove it before trying to delete, then would this linkage still work? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

MaintenanceBot seems to have missed File:025 PM Project Organization.png and File:030 PM Project Preparation.png with including and filling out the Template:Upload Information. I have not yet moved these to Commons using CommonsHelper. Would you like me to remove the deletion tag on each for lack of copyright information so the Bot can update these two? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:57, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

While I personally assume that the creator intended the same licensing on these files, that is not supported by the files themselves. Any files that did not include the word "self" were not updated. I can run through and change them to an Information template format, but there won't be enough information available to move them to Commons and have them remain there. But this is a much larger issue than only these two files. Rather than deleting them now, we should wait to determine how the community wants to approach this for all of the files without sufficient copyright information. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:18, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Okay with me! I'll remove the deletion tags on the four or five others like this I've found so far. I can open a discussion of this on the Colloquium. What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 20:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think the discussion should be moved to Wikiversity:Community Review/Fair Use and let the community know that's where the discussion is. Putting it in the Colloquium didn't draw anyone else in, and the discussion in the Colloquium may turn away others who are just visiting. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave. I've never been active here and am really not completely clear as to how you all work. I'm an Admin and Arbitration Committee member at enWiki so am pretty familar with their policies and guidelines, but not Wikiveristy's. I know original research is fine here. But the Atlantis article seems pretty dreadful. The editor editing it recently has his signature all over the article, which I realise is to some extent because he's copying material from the talk page. The lead now states "The following contribution was added to the talk page quite some time ago. It discusses the glaciation particulars of the North Atlantic, North America and Northern Europe during the last period of glaciation prior to 10 - 12 thousand years ago. This is the epoch when Atlantis is being postulated to have existed in the mid-Atlantic by Plato's writings. Thanks, Entripic, for your contribution. Sorry it took me so long to find it." It doesn't read like an essay, a research document, or anything I'm familiar with. The talk page itself, and some of the material in the article, is from enwiki - I see it includes several posts of mine. As a minor point, is that legitimate? I know copying article material with attribution is fine, but I'm not sure that talk pages should be copied from one Wikipedia to another. Anyway, I don't know if you have any system of getting help for this editor. I can't do it and am in conflict with him - first for breaking our original research policy and today I found him completely misrepresenting a source. But at the moment the Atlantis page just seems like an embarassment. Doug Weller (discuss • contribs) 09:31, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've moved the original page to Atlantis/Location Hypotheses and created a main page on Atlantis that provides a more traditional learning resource introduction to the subject. I've also cleaned up the talk page with a link back to the original Wikipedia discussion. As for how we work, we depend on users such as yourself to identify concerns and either be bold or, appropriately in this situation, request others to step in. Please continue to make corrections here or let us know when a resource needs additional support. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much. That was quick! I'm still not clear about the signatures on the Atlantis/Location Hypotheses, the fact that much of that page is from a talk page (as it says, "The following contribution was added to the talk page quite some time ago. It discusses the glaciation particulars of the North Atlantic, North America and Northern Europe during the last period of glaciation prior to 10 - 12 thousand years ago. This is the epoch when Atlantis is being postulated to have existed in the mid-Atlantic by Plato's writings.", the thanks ("Thanks, Entripic, for your contribution. Sorry it took me so long to find it." on the page, etc. Doug Weller (discuss • contribs) 15:03, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Subpages here can take many forms. Some are interactive discussions. Some are lectures. Some are collections of data. Some are strange ramblings by geniuses that none of the rest of us understand. There's no "right" way to share information in this context. It's more of an arm's length assessment of whether or not it is consistent with the Wikiversity:Mission, and what introductions or notices, if any, are necessary so that others understand the context of what they are reading before they get into it. Atlantis/Location Hypotheses is consistent with the Wikiversity mission in that it provides a learning opportunity both for the creator and for anyone willing to try to read it. This is different from a Wikipedia approach, where the content itself is the goal. Someone interested in the content should just read the Wikipedia articles.

In this case, the learning for the creator is the challenge of trying to organize thoughts on a subject in a format that others find engaging, and hopefully learning from the experience when others aren't engaged. For the reader, it's the opportunity to consider the ideas and the perspective of the author. For example, I see no credibility in the content, but I find it a fascinating documentation of the consistency of fringe articles in general. They are about a subject that is not widely accepted, tend to be presented in formats that are not widely used, and often include references to the author as some sort of personal validation of their effort. See the subpages of HIV for a similar non-conformist, self-referential approach.

It would be possible to edit the page to have the content be more accessible to others, but I don't think that would improve its value. In fact, it may be better presented as is, with the format itself providing a clear warning to others that the ideas presented are not widely accepted. Ask yourself, would making it easier to read make it any better? For me, the answer is no. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much for the explanation. As you can imagine, it's a strange place for someone basically only familiar with Wikipedia (although with a long history on Usenet and a couple of forums). But that all makes sense to me now. And yes, I think leaving it as it is is the best idea and agree with your observations. And in any case, I certainly don't have the time (although I did make a correction at Historical Archaeology as the editor seemed to think it was about using texts). Doug Weller (discuss • contribs) 17:52, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please see above. The previous Atlantis page has been moved to Atlantis/Location Hypotheses, a subpage of Atlantis, based on the concerns noted.

We have no control over your password. That's something you would set yourself. If you have an email address on your account, you should be able to reset your password. If not, you'll need to create a new account.

You are welcome to continue your efforts, but not at the main / top level. Please let me know if you have additional questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have found everything. I welcomed Thierry613. I hope that the discussion of the hypothesis can continue. Thanks for your work and support.

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs)

John Garner

The place to discuss your work is on the article's talk page at Talk:Atlantis/Location Hypotheses. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dave,

I understand copyright concerns with music and images. What I’m unclear about is referencing published authors, especially scientific publications. I was about to reference John W Moffat from his work reinventing gravity where he refers to Wheeler’s description of quantum foam found at Planck length, when I reviewed the copyright: ”No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means…” Does this mean that all direct quotation is off limits and may only be referred to and paraphrased? - or is that also violation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarrokam (talk • contribs) 29 February 2016 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Copyright. Fair use of copyrighted works is allowed. See Wikipedia:Fair use for more information. Your use of a copyrighted work is evaluated based on purpose, amount, and effect on the original work. Note that paraphrasing by itself generally doesn't resolve licensing issues. For example, copying any Wikipedia or Wikiversity content requires a reference, whether it is quoted or paraphrased, based on the BY part of the Wikipedia:Creative Commons license. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave, sorry to bother you, I know you're busy. I just noticed a new batch of these Federal Writers' Project - Life Histories coming in with a different naming convention going on. - FederalWritersProject/LifeHistories/Spring2016. Do we need to make these more homogenous or have the professor at UNC do it? I'm supposed to be a custodian but I don't have a resilient Internet connection. I'm only online in short spurts, so I'm pretty much useless for now as a custodian. I've notice your excellent work, by the way. Thanks! :) CQ (discuss • contribs) 23:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I saw it. I'm always challenged between immediately correcting the issue and confusing students who are following explicit, likely written instructions, or waiting until the end of the project or semester and then moving the pages with the rest of the project. In this case, I'd like to leave the files alone until they've finished writing. This is the first year everyone created their subpage under the project as instructed and seemed to be able to start editing right away. When they're done, the whole project (four or more locations now) can be combined into a single overall project with subpages for semesters. I hope that approach is okay with you. If so, I'll leave a note for the instructor to let me know when they are done. I can rename by bot and add proper spacing to each subpage title. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Very well, Thanks! (I always wanted to run a bot. Never can get the resources together.) Well cool. I put the /Spring2016/ subpage page in the Category with the older stuff, so At least there's a connect. I'm just glad to see real students in real colleges using the V :) CQ (discuss • contribs) 00:47, 4 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for welcoming me to Wikiversity. --Prof tpms (discuss • contribs) 13:56, 23 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the correction a while ago on my talk page. Since then, I've taken the hint and been using w:foo|bar for Wikipedia links. With the optical mouse link that you just fixed, it seems I accidentally pasted, after the w:, the full URI instead of just the page and section. Thanks for picking that up and fixing it.Alkhowarizmi (discuss • contribs) 14:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:08, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure... Maybe I have created too much ones ? Or too less relevant ?

If you have little time left, can you verify what I am doing with categories ?

Thanks !

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Categories should help users find related information. That would happen in one of two ways. Either users are looking at a specific resource and click at the bottom to find other resources in the same category, or users are navigating from one of the portals (Main Page / Browse / School / Topic / Portal) down to find what they are looking for.

I haven't done much research on category usage yet, but I have noted that less than 15 categories are regularly in the top 1,000 page views. This suggests to me that we have too many categories, and that most are not helping users find related information. Perhaps fewer categories overall would make them more useful. I'll try to create a Wikiversity:Category Review page with statistics and see what we find. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:51, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. I do like statistics !

Just an idea : sometimes I ask to myself if we could be inspired by an existing classification like UDC or Dewey ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 15:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, we can. I researched this in the fall looking at Dewey, and then Library of Congress. I didn't look at UDC, but should have. In the end I went with a combination of all the above, plus historical Wikiversity structure and usage, plus Wikipedia structure as an example of what works on a wiki. I only looked at top-level categories, and then one or two levels down from there. See Category:Contents for where we are now. Ensuring that each of the Wikipedia:Universal Decimal Classification main classes is either a top or second-level category makes sense to me. We can then structure down from there. I've got the bot generating Wikiversity:Category Review now. There are something like 7,000 categories, so it will take awhile, and there will be plenty to do once we see what it generates. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:45, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

FYI, the bot is now up to the mid "C's", so it will likely be several hours before it posts the results. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Waouh ! I suppose the bot will give a list with more informations than on the page Special:Categories... This list will be very useful...

each of the Wikipedia:Universal Decimal Classification main classes is either a top or second-level category : I agree with you.

7000 categories are too much, considering about 22000 pages at all, with a lot of stubs among these latter ones. A lot of (interesting) work is waiting for us ! --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 16:16, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Wikiversity:Category Review is now updated. Unfortunately, I think each category page will need consideration. We can't just automatically delete. Some should be empty. Some shouldn't be empty but have no content (yet). Some don't belong. But it will be easier to focus on those that have no pages or subcategories first. When it comes time to clean up categories with pages or subcategories, we'll need to work more carefully. After reviewing the available information, let me know what you think next steps should be. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:54, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK for me. I began to look at Wikiversity:Category Review's data and I have seen already some weird stuffs :

• some categories with very (too ?) long name ; others with very (too ? ) short one...
• some strange-looking categories ;
• there is 760 categories without any subcategories nor pages nor files... Some of them are of the different types you said. But I guess there is a lot of cleaning to do ;
• I began these days to process uncategorized pages. But I don't know if it has to be done before cleaning categories. What is the priority ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 10:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

That's a good question. Reviewing uncategorized pages can help to understand the scope of the problem. Adding categories to pages that are later eliminated causes more work, though. It might be more effective to have a good category structure before adding categories to additional pages. Category restructuring may be easier by bot, but there are several ways we can do that when the time comes. I recommend just selecting a place to start (either categories or pages) and going with that for a bit to learn more about the problem and appropriate solutions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:58, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 23:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi !

What is the difference between Category:Candidates for deletion and Category:Proposed deletions ?

(I prefer keep on processing categories ; music portal can wait for the moment, I think... )

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 12:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

It's hard to tell, because categories included in templates only appear when the template is used. So we can't see what links to either category. I suspect that Candidates for deletion isn't used, but I can't confirm. Proposed deletions is used by Template:Proposed deletion. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:12, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. Then I keep on using "Proposed deletions". --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 13:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

You'll want to use {{subst:prod}}. Just adding a category of proposed deletions won't go anywhere, because it never expires. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

One other point on this. You must use {{subst:prod}} rather than putting in your own copy of {{proposed deletion}}. The proposed deletion you've been copying has a March 5 date in it. The date should be the current date, which the substitution will generate for you. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK ! I wondered about this date of March, 5... If I understand correctly, the concerned page will automatically be deleted two months later if nobody does anything on the page ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

The only thing that is automatic is the changing of categories. After 90 days it goes into Category:Pending deletions. Someone still needs to review that category and actually delete the files. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:08, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 15:12, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Deletions you proposed in March have now been updated with the date of proposal. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello !

What should we do with "/" in category's titles, as in Category:Pragmatics/History ?

Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 09:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't know that there's going to be a standard rule for these, but it will likely depend on how and why the category was created initially. I did notice that subcategories such as these are almost never viewed. In this case, the category comes from {{BookCat|filing=deep}}. I would convert these to {{CourseCat}}, which would bring them up to the main Pragmatics category. The advantage of using CourseCat on subpages is that it will automatically change categories if the pages are moved later. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 19:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have a metaphysical doubt about my recent deletions of :

• Introduction to Robotics (several ancient pages)
• Bloom Clock (several ancient pages)

Maybe these pages have historic interest ?

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 20:34, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I looked through the Introduction to Robotics deletions. I think they are appropriate, although I would have listed the reason as No educational objectives or discussion in history. Since they were already subpages of a larger project, I don't think the deletion gains us much. Procedurally, it would be better to tag them as proposed deletions and wait for them to expire. That allows everyone (who cares) to come to the same conclusion.

I didn't see any deletions from BCP, but several moves proposed. Because these are already subpages of a larger project, I'm not sure there's anywhere to archive them to that would be better than where they are now. Also, as subpages, I wouldn't see them as a very high priority. BCP is an important historical project because it shows the potential of shared, distributed learning and the approach taken at that time. I would recommend leaving those pages where they are.

I did revert one deletion. See Hospitality Exchange Networks/From Muslims Hospitality till Internet based Plattforms. It had an incoming link, making it appropriate as a subpage. There is some (minimal) content there, so a speedy deletion didn't seem appropriate. It could be proposed for deletion, but again, as a subpage, it didn't seem to be a high priority.

Overall, you're doing fine. Keep up the good work, and keep questioning yourself. That's a sign that you care more about the content than the cleanup, which is a good perspective for the community. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:46, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thanks a lot ! --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 10:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

May I create a couple of temporary categories for personal trials ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely! You may want to note that they are temporary in the page content or summary, so if someone finds them years from now and wonders what they are for, there's an explanation. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Fine ! But where can I put them ? Or more exactly, the root category ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what you're trying yet, but something like Category:Wikiversity studies might work. There are other Wikiversity categories you could look at or create if that one doesn't work. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

It is better with an example. It would look like this :

• UDC categories (root, to be putted somewhere, with a little explanation on the category page)
  • 78 Music
    • 780
    • 781
    • 782
    • etc.
  • other categories

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:50, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done See Category:UDC studies.

Then I can do my stuffs without annoying anyone... --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 15:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Keep in mind Wikiversity:Naming conventions. We don't include numbers in titles. I'm not sure if you are considering an actual Category:78 Music or if that's just a reference point. If this is implemented, we would want 78 Music to redirect to Music. People could find 78 Music if they know UDC, but Music would be the category for everyone, those who know UDC and those who don't. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:46, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes. But remember it is just for trial. I will not keep numbers. Of course UDC numbers would disturb "normal" contributors/readers. And I will also try to "match" the outline list from Wikipedia (User:Thierry613/sandbox). In fact, I would like to handle by myself a navigation in a hierarchical list. After that, I will remove all the categories. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 15:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi !

I tried to correct my mistakes about topics with not moved subpages : User:Thierry613/sandbox 4. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 11:19, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

What should we do with all these categories in Category:Wikimedian Demographics/Response categories ?

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 11:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ignore them? They are accurate, and seem like the only way to organize the content they link to. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thanks. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:06, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Have replied here: User_talk:Jtneill#Files_Missing_Source_Information. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:48, 15 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dave,

I tried to make the following edit on Atlantis. I have changed the http and the https to htp and htps to fool the blocker. I do not even know what site reference was blacklisted or why.

Can you explain to me what the problem might be with the reference from the U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1900?

<Unnecessary content removed. Difference link is [2]>

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs) 04:29, 18 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

John Garner

First, some etiquette issues. There is no reason to add 8,000+ characters of text to anyone's talk page. Second, typing in ALL CAPS is considered shouting, even if it's only in an edit summary. Shouting at people is unlikely to get the response you are seeking.

Identifying blacklisted URLs requires a trial and error approach to identify the problem URL. Add content in smaller chunks so that you are only adding one URL at a time until you can identify the one causing the problem. You can also check MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist and meta:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist to identify blacklisted sites. After identifying the problem, if you need additional assistance, you should post at Wikiversity:Request custodian action. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:42, 18 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Dave.

Again, my neanderthal computer skills could stand much refinement and polishing. Thank you for bearing with me and helping me along. I will attempt to patiently proceed as you have advised.

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs) 02:34, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

John Garner

Dave, I m the author of the book on Marconomics that Emerald Group Publishing will put out this July.

---

Krblawatt (discuss • contribs) 06:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Ken BlawattReply

Hi !

How are you ?

Could you tell me the difference between these 2 categories ? :

• Category:GFDL
• Category:GFDL documents

Thanks ! --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 16:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

GFDL documents appears to be something set up initially as a way to separate images from other types of GFDL files. Since it was effectively unused, I deleted it and moved the one subcategory over to GFDL instead. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 17:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Somehow the use of e.g. CURRENTMONTH, etc is triggering putting the Wikiversity:License tags into pending deletions. Suggestions? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Use the Purge option on whatever page you are seeing this on. Not using current date information was triggering a pending deletion. I updated it Saturday to add the current date and remove the Licence tags page from pending deletions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Just used Purge option and Template:Nld and Wikiversity:License tags are the only resources still in Category:Pending deletions. I'm using Firefox. I'll check it on Safari. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ditto with Safari on Category:Pending deletions. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Now corrected. What I corrected on Saturday was them showing up in Speedy deletions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi !

Sorry for all my questions.

I am a little annoyed by the simultaneous existence of these categories :

• Language‎ (9 cats, 29 pgs), part of Humanities
• Languages‎ (4 cats), part of Humanities
• Language and Literature‎ (6 cats, 19 pgs), part of Literature
• Literature and English Studies‎ (2 pgs), part of Literature
• Languages and language families‎ (64 cats, 31 pgs), part of Language and Literature (itself part of Language)

When I think about it, I feel quite discouraged

What is your opinion ? What should we do with that ?

I suggest, obviously, to regroup (step by step) all those categories in just 1. But if we do, which one ?

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 16:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Both LCC and UDC list Language and Literature as separate but equal classifications, with Languages under Language. I would move Languages under Language. Literature and English Studies looks like it just needs to be cleaned up or removed. Languages and language families should be moved to Languages. Language and Literature should be separated into either Language, Languages, or Literature, as appropriate to the content. If you tag them with Move, or Category redirect, I can have the bot make the changes. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Great ! Thanks ! --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 08:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I made Wikiversity talk:Research Namespace a bit more complicated with the suggestion that we postpone the Phabricator request, but felt it necessary because I needed a clarification before I could endorse. You and others clarified and I continue to support. Now I have another question about the "vote": I think now would be a good time to discuss how :Research namespace will be used, under the assumption that is approved. Should I just wait for a consensus to form research namespace to be declared , or should I start a new topic with the understanding that the new discussion should be conditional on the assumption that the namespace will be created. The advantage of the parallel (conditional) discussion is that it will allow people to better judge the merits of the question at hand ("to create a namespace or not too...") Basically I am saying that the fact that we don't know exactly how we will use researchspace has little bearing on the fact that most of us want it. I have always struggled with chaotic discussions, but fortunately the members of the current discussion seem capable of following instructions. So, should I wait for consensus to create the new namespace to discuss how to use it, or can we carry on both conversations at the same time? I am asking this off the Wikiversity talk:Research Namespace because I really don't want to have a discussion on whether or not to have a discussion! In other words, it's your call as to whether I start the parallel (conditional) discussion.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

• An alternative to holding the "how to use" discussion on the talk page would be for me to initiate the "how to use" guidelines on Wikiversity:Research Namespace and wait for somebody to disagree. I like that idea much better.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I would say to go ahead, and I would prefer the latter in terms of writing up guidelines for us to support or improve. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 20:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

What do you think of doing the following?

My proposal is conditional on the assumption that: It makes an assumption that the transclusion of {{anything}} to [[Template:anything]] can be replaced by the transclusion of {{WVtemplate/anything}} to [[WVtemplate/anything]]. If this assumption is false, then my idea won't work. If it is true, then we could:

1. Block the creation of all new templates on Wikiversity (but allow new subpages of [[WVtemplate]])
2. Create a bot that moves all Wikiversity templates from [[Template:anything]] to [[WVtemplate/anything]] (either keeping a temporary backup copy or leaving a redirect at the old address)
3. Another bot changes all instances of {{anything}} to {{[WVtemplate/anything}}.
4. A third bot goes through all Wikipedia templates and copies them into Wikiversity.
5. Wikiversarians could still create templates, but only as subpages of [[WVtemplate]]

I recall that people were moving pages from Wikipedia to Wikiversity and had the impression that this was creating havoc with templates that were also moved. Is that impression correct? Even if there is no harm in importing templates to WV, it would be nice if we could attempt to keep the Wikipedia and Wikiversity environments as closely aligned as possible. --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

One of the initiatives Wikimedia was going to work on this year was an implementation of templates through Commons. Then, rather than duplicating templates, we would be able to use them as is from the source. I'd like to hold off on this and see where that effort goes. Other than last year's Volleyball project, we haven't had too many problems with users creating or duplicating unnecessary templates. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

For future reference, the Phabricator ticket is Phab:T121470. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:41, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the info --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 15:17, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I also agree with Dave on this! I tried importing some Wikipedia templates here and occasionally found they carried hidden problems over here which so far remain unsolved or unsolvable. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 00:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have had some problems sometimes with the merge function. The last message I got is :

Merge page histories.

Source revisions overlap or come after destination revisions.

What does it mean ?

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 13:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

The automated history merge is designed to take an old page and add it to a new page. It doesn't like when the old (source) page has newer edits than the new (destination). In this situation, you probably have to tag it for a custodian to merge. We can do it as a move with delete, followed by an undelete to merge the histories together. Curators don't have undelete, so you wouldn't be able to do this. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thanks. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

On the article Julius_Caesar...

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 16:51, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Definitely a problem, from multiple sources, some of which appear to also violate the original copyright. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:55, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi !

I would like to try a category "Places", which would correspond to (1/9) Common auxiliaries of place. Table 1e in the UDC.

What do you think of this idea ?

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 08:55, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

UDC lists Geography as a primary classification, with Place as auxiliaries. LCC also lists Geography as the classification. Wikipedia solves the problem by putting Places inside Geography, allowing the common term Places to be used as a Geography reference. That makes sense to me. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:48, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

You mean "Places" belonging to "Geography", don't you ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 17:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Places belonging to Geography. It provides a connection between the two that is supported by both UDC and LCC, and used by Wikipedia. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:08, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 17:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

...with HIV/HIV_swing_effect

Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 08:22, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

The article isn't new, only the addition of his self-given title. You're welcome to post the article at Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion or remove the edit as being self-promotional / not about the article. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:20, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

What's the best ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 12:34, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

It depends on the article. In this case, the more the article develops, the less value it seems to provide. It might be time to see if the community will support deleting it. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:31, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. I try the Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion. Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 13:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

with User talk:2601:245:D001:3A39:BDF5:3F8B:2178:320E.

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 16:56, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

I also messaged Thierry about my entry is it acceptable for wikiversity? thanks. --Moogy9282 (discuss • contribs) 15:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC) thank you. --Moogy9282 (discuss • contribs) 15:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

It's a good start. I've moved it under Spiders to Spiders/Brown Recluse and added an image and link to background readings. You'll want to think about how this develops into a learning project. If it's just information about Brown Recluse spiders, that's where Wikipedia comes in. We want to enhance Wikipedia by providing learning opportunities rather than duplicating their efforts. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:40, 11 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

What may I do ? Do I keep on processing pages and categories ? Or do I wait James500's answer ? What's your opinion ? Do I clean too much ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 13:27, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think you should continue working on categories. James500's concerns were related to topic deletion, and no additional work is being done on that right now. We know that the extensive category list isn't being utilized. That means it isn't serving user needs. There's no advantage to having an extensive infrastructure no one uses (or no one is able to use?). Regarding cleaning too much, I think the answer there is also yes, but as long as you propose instead of actually deleting, we can deal with that, too. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thanks ! --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 14:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave. I trust you're fine. I created School:Biomedical Sciences today. I am aware of School:Biology but I think we could have School:Biomedical Sciences as a separate school. I will keep working on it for the next few months. What do you think? Warm regards. Wikicology (discuss • contribs) 12:52, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

I welcome your contribution. But I personally think Wikiversity has too many overlapping constructs. There are schools, topics, portals, and categories. Categories don't lend themselves to content editing, but that leaves schools, topics, and portals all serving essentially the same purpose. The founding members of Wikiversity envisioned Schools and Topics to engage contributors, and Portals to engage learners. But in practice, everyone who comes to Wikiversity tries to use School, Topic, and/or Portal to engage learners, and there aren't enough contributors in any given area (except perhaps physics, computers, and medicine) to sustain even a department, much less a school.

To help put this into perspective, several months ago I created Wikiversity:Topic Review. More recently I added Wikiversity:Category Review. Today I created Wikiversity:School Review. If you look at the Daily Views column for schools, you will find that there are maybe 30 schools that users consistently look for or look to on a daily basis. The rest is just clutter. Very important clutter to some contributor, but not something that enhances Wikiversity viewership overall.

As I consider Biomedical Sciences, I think it would make an excellent portal. As a school, I think it detracts from and/or fragments School:Biology and School:Medicine, which are the two already "popular" schools that relate to this content. So my recommendation would be to create a biomedical sciences portal, and add that as a link to both School:Biology and School:Medicine. But you might also check with other contributors, User:Mikael Häggström in particular, and see if there is any interest in collaborating on a biomedical sciences school. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave, I trust you're fine. I want to let you know that I started the portal here. Do you suggest a redirect from School:Biomedical Sciences to Portal:Biomedical Sciences? I plan to contact User:Mikael Häggström for possible collaboration. Warm regards. Wikicology (discuss • contribs) 10:38, 15 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:38, 15 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

If you see my latest post on the parapsychology talk-page, I would say that you and others have been mislead by what is really going on here. Abd has pretended to be neutral, but all these people like Radin, Steigmann or Josephson joined Wikipedia in league with each other because they were either banned off Wikipedia or not happy that their paranormal beliefs were treated skeptically over there. They are using this website to canvass their paranormal beliefs and attack wikipedia. As a mainstream encyclopedia that students use, I do not believe this is acceptable. I will like to direct this to a wikiversity admin please. Thank you. TreeTrailer (discuss • contribs) 10:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate that you are passionate about this subject, but your concerns have been directed at contributors rather than content. If there is a problem with Wikiversity content, I encourage you to accept Abd's invitation to post your own essay on the subject as a subpage of Parapsychology/Dispute over Scientific Status. Regarding Wikipedia content, if there is an issue there, you would need to contact Wikipedia admins for assistance. If you have specific evidence that Wikiversity is being used to stage attacks on Wikipedia, please forward it to meta stewards for assistance. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:51, 19 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dave, this has to do with climate change. I somehow got a blacklisted message about this research paper. http://paleoviva.fc.ul.pt/cmsbibliogafia/cms075.pdf

Could we get this one off of the blacklist?

While I am discussing this with your a lot of recent changes that have to do with climate change fit right into the Azores - Atlantis research. It is truly fascinating and I find myself returning in thought to this subject constantly.

Thanks again for all of your help and guidance.

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs) 02:33, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Try the link edit again. If it was blacklisted, you wouldn't be able to post it on this page, either. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:51, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have made at about 2 edits to Wikiversity, I believe, if I remember correctly. However, when I check my contribs, I don't see them. Do you know what's wrong, or does this work differently from Wikipedia? Peter SamFan (discuss • contribs) 15:05, 16 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

You had one on Content Management System as a proposed deletion. Since it didn't have any educational objectives or discussion in history, I used your recommendation as a speedy deletion request instead. You can see this contribution at Special:DeletedContributions/Peter_SamFan. That's the only contribution I see other than the one on this page. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:22, 16 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Dave, for all that you have done for me. I find solace here.^[1]

https://explorable.com/fringe-science   

So can we change the Fringe Science reference at the beginning to something OTHER than the Wikipedia definition? Maybe by slipping in the above reference in its place?

Wikipedia is in my opinion a self-serving place of science. In other words, no cutting edge science is allowed. I understand... Dave, they are all but ignoring climate change. Big mistake, YUGE mistake...

In my Physics education at the undergraduate and Master Degree levels I watched as the Professors tore each other apart regarding significance of research. I was the last one to get a Masters Degree in Physics at Indiana State University. It was sad. It's why my PhD is in education...

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs) 02:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

This isn't up to me. You are welcome to ask for the community's perspective in the Wikiversity:Colloquium, but I caution you on pursuing this. We have already had users come and request that the entire hypotheses page be deleted. Drawing attention to it may not be in the project's best interests. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:48, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dave,

I am pretty sure that there have been deletions. I have been going through the islands of the Azores Archipelago documenting volcanic eruptions that have occurred 12 - 14,000 years ago. I cannot find the first two, nor can I find the section or the edits to them.

Jacob Lowenstern of the USGS has showed me that Mt. Pico, a stratovolcano was formed in an VEI 5 eruption 12- 14k years ago. If I can document volcanic eruptions on the other islands of significant VEI, add them all together, we have an eruption of the supervolcano that is sufficient to sink the Azores Plateau the 2 km to where it now resides, possibly even more land mass. This, of course, when followed by the melt of the glaciers over Nowth America could amount to a 250 ft or more sea level rise globally.

That would be why there is a submerged Pyramid off the coast of Japan. That would be why there is a submerged city off the coast of India, that would be why the records are missing of the times before 10k years ago in mankind's history.

That would be why it looks like civilization only started 10k years ago. Everything else is lost. Submerged off the coasts of the world.

Yeah, I can see why they want to erase my Atlantis page.

Can't you?

But this won't go away. If I don't work it up now, somebody will later. Most of the research is already done.

RAYLEIGH22 (discuss • contribs) 00:07, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

I currently writing MATLAB code that will create study guides for Quizbank. The pages contain only permalinks, because sabatoge is inevitable if this bank ever engages a large population of students. Not now, but at some point in the future, protection for images needs to be included. I might be wrong, but I believe this is accomplished by w:Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Cascading_protection. How difficult would it be to get this for Wikiversity, if it is not already available?

You should know that there are alternatives to cascading protection. One is to rely only on pdf files stored on Wikiversity, and the other is to store the pdf files on an alternative server. In the latter case, protected Wikiversity pages would contain external links this server. If this is done, Wikiversity can still play a significant role by providing a platform where instructors create and edit exam questions (and also to assign such activities to students and education majors).

FYI, once I perfect the exam banks for my students, I plan to make randomized exams available upon request via email, using the matlab codes currently under construction. Also, I think my matlab code is sufficiently user friendly that a truly interested and computer-savy instructor could run the matlab code to design their own set of exams, which is the ultimate goal of this project.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

See mw:Manual:Administrators. The check box is already there on our protection pages, so I assume cascading protection is already available. I haven't tried it, though.

Also see mw:Manual:$wgEnableCascadingProtection. It appears as though cascading protection is always available.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I'm not sure how I will test this, but there is no rush. When the matlab code is finished, I will try to "vanalize" an image using User:Guy vandegriftSock1. A moc course syllabus is currently in my sandbox at Special:Permalink/1579547.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 20:19, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave!

Just curious! Why did you decide to unhide the username (blocked IP) and edit summary on School:Mathematics and the others? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 00:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Because the IP address and edit summaries were not "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive". Having the IP address visible is important so others can identify why the IP is globally blocked. And there's no reason to hide summaries that aren't offensive. It's an extension of the least restrictions and least privileges principles. Only do the minimum of what must be done to achieve the desired result. There's also no past practice supporting hiding user information. That's only been done when the username itself is offensive -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:55, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Okay, thanks! I usually believe that such egregious libel, its perpetrator, and description should also be hidden so that the perpetrator gains nothing from its actions (no one else can see any effects). Hopefully, in a year the perpetrator's attention will be elsewhere. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 01:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

How to languages request? I request wikiversity (bengali-bn-বাংলা) language --Shakibul Alam Risvy (discuss • contribs) 13:00, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

New languages start at Wikiversity Beta. "To have a new Wikiversity site, you need ten active participants for the project. Then you can request (at meta) for a new language domain to be set up." -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:09, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Regarding the deletions of interwikiversity links by Dexbot, the links I've checked so far are to resources that still exist on, for example, the French Wikiversity. Do you know if there is some update coming for interwikiversity links or are they just being done away with? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 21:52, 19 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

The update was completed in February. See Wikiversity:Colloquium/archives/February_2016#language_links_via_Wikidata_are_coming. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:38, 19 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello Dave, I'm currently undertaking a master's degree in instructional design. To complete my work about Wikiversity, I need data from contributors through completion of a survey in English. The work actually focuses on interface design and community (https://www.sondageonline.fr/s/questionnaire-wikiversite)

Your contribution would be useful.

Thank you

Laurent Abeskaos/ PlymouthCad (discuss • contribs) 08:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC) UserName PlymouthCadReply

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hey, by any chance, did you get my email? Thanks. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 13:33, 11 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

I didn't. Not sure why. I just tested the email feature from my user page and it worked. If you want to try a different approach, my college email address is pretty easy to find. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I remember you were helping me migrate pages for one of my projects earlier and I went back to look at how you did that but I couldn't totally figure it out from the example at hand. What I observed is that you went to the page links that existed and added // around them in the source code. That seems to create a subpage related to the project but it does not seem to migrate an existing page to a subordinate page position. Any advice on this or should I just remake my pages from scratch? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon michael swift (talk • contribs) 19 August 2016 (UTC)

In the upper right on each page there is a More menu. Use the Move option to move or rename pages. Recreating the page would still leave the old page, which would then need to be deleted. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:03, 19 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Could you very shortly educate me about the hierarchy / composition of things here at Wikiversity? What makes some page a course and what makes is just a learning resource? Are there protocols to follow when building a course? Can I develop a number of courses and then combine them into a program? Zaheen (discuss • contribs) 15:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Generally, a course or learning project is multiple related pages on a subject, often with a direct correspondence to a typical semester outline at a real-world learning institution. A learning resource would be a stand-alone page not intended to be part of a larger course or learning project. Courses can be sequenced as part of a program. The sequence may be indicated in the course introductions, in an overview page on that subject, and/or on the appropriate subject Portal: page. Did you have something specific in mind that you are considering? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:59, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the explanation. I was wondering if eventually I were to develop multiple courses on the Bengali language and tie all of them into a program, is there a well-defined community guideline of doing such a thing, or do I improvise? Or may be I am thinking way ahead. Right now I am just culling / creating Bengali language related stuff in a quite random manner. But I would eventually want to organize all that into a coherent whole. Thus my query. I will look around to see how things are generally done. But I might bother you now and then with more questions like this. Thanks again. Zaheen (discuss • contribs) 17:15, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

See Swedish for an example of a language with multiple courses. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave, Are you interested in possibly becoming a Bureaucrat here on en.wv? From my point of view you've been around and involved for long enough and have both technical and communication/interpersonal skills etc., level-headedness etc. to be more than capable. And, as you know, the activity level/availability of current Bureaucrats is on the thin-side. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, if the community supports it, I would be interested in serving in the Bureaucrat role. Thanks for asking! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Great - here we go - Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Dave Braunschweig (Bureaucrat). -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:00, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dear Dave, I can not have proper PDF of my lecture notes, especially when I have tables. They do not appear at all. You can have a look at here and try yourself. Fluid Mechanics for Mechanical Engineers/Introduction How can I solve the problem properly once forever.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertunc (talk • contribs) 18 September 2016 (UTC)

There are several issues here. First, never use tables for page layout. Use <div> for that. There are many reasons for this, but the most important is that divs can float depending on the user's screen size (phone, mobile, standard 4:3 screen, standard 16:9 screen, standard 16:10 screen, etc.). By default, English wiki text floats left. Images may be set to float center or float right and everything takes care of itself. If you want to force clean section breaks, use {{clear}} at the end of a section.

Second, the Book Creator (PDF tool) doesn't currently support tables. It hasn't for two years now. See Wikipedia:Help:Books/Feedback#Infoboxes and tables do not appear in PDFs. Using <div> for layout solves part of the problem. Unfortunately, not using tables for content seems to be the only way to solve the other part of the problem. You might look for a web tool that converts tables to <div> tags to see if you can generate this content a different way. Otherwise, save it as an image and use the image for table display.

Third, please use internal wiki links such as [[Title]] when referencing wiki pages. These show up on "What links here" and make maintaining wiki pages easier if pages are moved later.

Fourth, please always sign your discussion posts with ~~~~.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

You are now a bureaucrat - welcome aboard. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Remember to update: Wikiversity:Support staff. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:24, 29 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave Braunschweig, it seems you accidentaly indef blocked an it.wiki administrator reverting a spambot which was blanking one of B9 hummingbird hovering's sandboxes. --Vituzzu (discuss • contribs) 21:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Now corrected. Thanks for letting me know. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

No problem, it happens, those who are never wrong are those who do nothing :) Thank you, --Elwood (discuss • contribs) 21:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave Braunschweig,

Thank you for the welcome! I recently updated the page Hysteretic_damper but i'm not sure how to sign it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfrazao (talk • contribs) 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@Rfrazao: It isn't necessary to sign contributions on resource pages. The page's history shows you as the contributor. On the other hand, we do sign our discussion posts. It makes it easier to identify who is participating and provide other ways to follow up, when necessary. To sign your discussion posts, either click on the Signature and timestamp icon on the Edit toolbar or add ~~~~ to the end of your post. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:38, 7 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave, Thank you for the edit of Wikipedia internal links. It looks like you inserted a space like this: Wikipedia:spaceLentil while it looks like the syntax says I should not add a space: Wikipedia:Lentil. What is correct? Thanks again. Boe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boe Devi (talk • contribs) 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Either approach works. Wikipedia:Title without the space is more common. I personally write it with a space, because, to me, content written with no space suggests a local namespace page, such as Wikiversity:Mission. Adding the space, helps the user recognize that they are being redirected to a page at a different site. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dear Dave, Will you please create a school page for me and call it Vegan Studies? I'm having trouble finding out how to start a school. It can go in the best place that you think it could fit. I would love for it to go under the Portal for Schools, School:Vegan Studies (along with other traditional schools.) There's another area in Wikiversity for something called trades or continuing studies. It could go there as well. I have a lot of content to start adding and I'm positive the vegan world will also start adding content. My content consists of vegan cooking lessons and K-12 lessons. I am an elementary school teacher. Vegan Studies will have a lot of departments because it affects so many areas of education such as Bullyism, literature (I believe that Tolstoy was a vegan, for example), art, war, water, medicine, education, food, equality studies, animal rights (law), climate change, food supply. It also overlaps with gender studies, workers' rights, environmental justice. I think it could support its own school. Will you please help me with this? I apologize for asking this in the first place, but I can't seem find the way to start a school. Thank you for your support and assistance with my own education. I appreciate it. Sincerely Boe Devi --Boe Devi (discuss • contribs) 12:10, 21 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

There are several things I'd like to address here.

1. We have a variety of namespaces available. Portals are used to organize content on a specific subject. Schools are used to organize users rather than organize content.
2. We have an extensive history at Wikiversity of people having a grand vision for a department, division, or entire school, but after several years all they had was placeholders for that subject area, and no one else joining them and no content developed. We recently cleaned up (eliminated) more than a thousand inactive departments and around a hundred inactive schools. Those that had useful content were converted to portals. The rest were deleted.
3. To create a new portal for Veganism, you would include Portal: in the title, such as Portal:Veganism. The same is true for schools, so the school would be School:Vegan Studies.
4. Content is included in a particular grouping by using Wikiversity:Categories. The Category:Portals category causes a page to list as a portal, The Category:Schools category causes a page to list as a school.
5. Only content in the main namespace (regular resource page) appears in a default Wikiversity search. Schools and Portals are not included in the search.
6. At this point there is effectively no content on vegan studies or veganism, and there are no supporting categories.

Your specific request is for me to create a school page for vegan studies. I'm going to decline that request at this time, because I'd like to encourage you to go in a different direction first to build support for your vision. I'd like to see you start by creating a learning project on Veganism. Add some of the content you have in mind to that learning project. Add appropriate categories for Veganism and add them to our existing category structure so that the various resources you mention can be tagged and related to this subject.

When there is enough content on veganism developed across several learning projects, and you need a way to organize the content, create a Portal: to direct interested users to that content. Invite other users to participate in developing the portal and extending the content. If, at some point, you and the many other users who come to help you create this content outgrow the portal, we can look at creating a separate school for this subject.

If you need help creating the learning project or adding categories, please let me know. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave, Thank you for your detailed response. I agree with you about having grand ideas and then no follow up. Thank you for directing me to the Categories and Learning Projects areas to start my work. That should have been my question: Where can I start my work? I'll read up on how to start a new category and/or a learning project. I'll get back to you if I need more help with that. Thanks again. Boe --Boe Devi (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 21 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

I would start with Veganism. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

I properly understood your message about wikiversity is a worldwide platform and therefore think accordingly while writing and making contributions. I will always have that in mind. Orhokpor Onoriode 12th Oct. 2016.

How do you do ?

I've been a long time "far" from wikiversity because of a recent death in my family. I try to come back and do some work here. Is there anything I can do on categorization or something else ?

--Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 24 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry to hear about your loss. As you look at Wikiversity from a fresh perspective, what do you see that most needs to be addressed? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 25 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Well... I couldn't say... I still have a list of categories to be verified but I'm not sure it is a priority. I wonder if it can be useful to review oldest pages or uncategorized pages. What is your opinion ? --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 18:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

I see two potential approaches. One would be to clean up things no one is using (oldest, uncategorized, etc.). The other would be to focus on the most visited resources and make them better or more useful. Oldest and Uncategorized already have Special: pages. To focus on most visited resources, refer to Wikiversity:Statistics. If you do look at oldest, I would recommend focusing on main pages rather than subpages. Cleaning up subpages should probably go with cleaning up an entire project rather than working on a page-by-page basis. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:47, 26 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

I just came across something that needs to be cleaned up. Take a look at Special:ListDuplicatedFiles. If there are unused duplicates, they can be removed with a "Duplicated file, still available as". If all of the duplicates are in use, one should be selected as the file to use, and the links to the others should be updated to reference that file, then delete the unused duplicates. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I will try to take time to work on the different points you talked about. --Thierry613 (discuss • contribs) 19:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dave!

The resource Autism spectrum appears to be well developed as of 1 November 2016! Would you like me to add it to the Main Page/News? If so, type of resource, e.g., medical resource?, ready for students or? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 21:25, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I created the learning project for that a couple of years ago just to provide a container. None of the underlying content is mine. You might check with User:Guy vandegrift regarding progress and resource type. Otherwise, I'd say no. Several of the pages are just stubs, and there's no format consistency across the project. It's not ready to be featured yet. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:33, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I need to recuse myself from this discussion.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 03:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please tag Autism spectrum/A few impertinent questions with Category:Completed resources when it is finished. Discussion won't be necessary. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:32, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Dave Braunschweig and Marshallsumter: The book contains images that would be bother to place on commons because I have little knowledge of copyright issues. So that readers my see the original images, I placed a pdf copy at File:A few impertinant questions by Berthajane Vandegrift.pdf and hope some sort of "fair use" applies. My sister and I inherited the copyright from our mother, and that this posting fulfills her wishes. She also requested that I make paper copies for family members, but I have no intention of marketing that book on Wikiversity or anywhere else. And I seriously doubt that my sister has any such intentions (especially since any such effort is likely to be futile). One question: I will put the Category:Completed resources on the main page. If I put it in the "Questions" section, it will be transcluded onto all the pages. I presume you need it on only the main page, right?- (stupid question - of course you don't want it on every page...) Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:23, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

If you inherited the copyright, you are free to publish the images however you wish. I think it would be good to add the cover page as a separate image file to be displayed with the resource. You might also consider publishing it at Wikisource. That may actually be the best place for it. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I didn't know about Wikisource -- but since I spent several days on this, I would like to keep my mother's book here for a while. I am starting to get students to create miraheze wikis in an effort to establish a wikitext academic culture. Moving the Autism book to Wikisource would be a good activity for students, but it will take several months for me to figure out how to manage large numbers of students on Miraheze. The Miraheze wikis are private so that students can be assigned lab reports and such without being able to see each other's efforts. See Wright State University Lake Campus/Eng 1100 for an example of a student's English essays being posted on Wikiversity (with permission of the instructor). If we can routinely assign student work to be submitted on Miraheze, the best efforts can be made public on Wikiversity.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 20:55, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

To understand my question, please refer to to the image at Special:Permalink/1631485. It shows student work in a subpage not likely pollute Wikiversity namespace. Yet it is very convenient for me (the instructor) because I can quickly find it as item #18 in the roster at Wright_State_University_Lake_Campus/2016-9/Phy2410 (Just click the letter S in "log.S" after his name. However, the image File:Wsul Tom Lietz007.jpg does pollute Wikiversity filespace (and perhaps space in commons?). We have two options:

Option A) Place such low-value image files in Wikiversity, perhaps requesting that students use a prefix such as Wsul (Wright State University Lake), and perhaps creating a category for such files.

Option B) Place them on a Miraheze wiki. (See for example this hand-drawn student effort)

I have two questions:

1. Does Wikiversity have a preference between options A or B?
2. Even if we go for option B, it would be good for me to know whether all images in Wikiversity are automatically transferred to Commons.

Thanks-Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if Wikiversity has a preference. We would need to ask the Community.

I'm fine with having the images on Wikiversity, if you don't mind having the work be public. A good naming convention, followed by effective use of categories is probably the best approach, and would allow for future (automated) organization if desired.

Images are not automatically transferred to Commons. These would be the types of images that I would recommend remain at Wikiversity. They have educational value, but probably not much shared value on Commons.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:19, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

By bringing to the Community, do you mean posting a new topic on Wikiversity:Colloquium? If so, I might wait to do it until after such files begin to appear on Wikiversity, probably sometime next Spring. That way the question won't be hypothetical.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 23:23, 18 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is this any people here like at w:Wikipedia:Translation? I would like to promote the idea of translating Calculus I--2602:304:CDC1:90:5DEE:B66E:376:2E7B (discuss)

What languages would you like to translate it from and/or to? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:37, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

(I am logged in now). I would like to start with French and maybe follow up with German and then an Asian language.--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 00:09, 22 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Translating Calculus I into those other languages, or translating Calculus I content from those languages into the project here? If you are bringing in content and want it translated, tag it with {{Translate}}. Remember to note the source when you copy. In order to meet cc-BY-sa license requirements, we must reference the source with all copied content. This can be in the edit summary or with <ref> tags in the content itself. My preference is for ref tags in the content, because it appears in any printed works based on that content. It is certainly possible that Calculus I content would be printed in the future.

One other thought on Calculus I. Have you looked at https://openstax.org/details/calculus-volume-1 ? It might be best to develop Calculus 1 lessons and activities based on this already well-accepted open textbook. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:05, 22 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I expect that, within a few months, that page is going to become a high-traffic page.--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 03:21, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

What is the basis for your expectations? -- Dave Braunschweig (discFuss • contribs) 04:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Because I sacrifice EVERYTHING for w:speed learning.--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 07:58, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

As if I wanted only for the knowledge to seat properly within the young minds on the first attempt as if I were concerned with matters of the w:Apollo Command/Service Module itself. and stay there on the first attempt. I know what I am about and I know matters of proper w:pedagogy.--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 08:10, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Your desire for everyone to be able to learn Calculus quickly is admirable. However, the content developed so far is more appropriate for Wikibooks than it is for Wikiversity. See Wikiversity:Learning by doing. For another perspective on the same idea, see Contextual Learning. I'm sure with your experience in pedagogy, you agree that learners must actively engage with the content to learn effectively. I trust you are also familiar with w:Chunking (psychology) and the necessity to break up long lessons into smaller, more manageable units. Wikiversity:Subpages are a good way to address both of these issues without overburdening the main article page.

I again encourage you to take a look at https://openstax.org/details/calculus-volume-1 . It is a well-respected, peer-reviewed open resource on Calculus that includes engaging activities and appropriate chunking. I would also look at https://clep.collegeboard.org/exam/calculus and https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/apcourse/ap-calculus-ab/course-details to ensure a proper outline for Calculus I. Remember to reference all sources used.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Huh. I just read your response here. I already created and hooked up the French page for Calculus I. I think I am just going to go on to Spanish and others now, if that is OK.---2602:304:CDC1:90:64C5:4976:D62C:FF33 (discuss) 06:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I recommend renaming this page to Calculus Overview. At this point it seems clear that you don't intend to create a Calculus I learning project. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)``Reply

How about "Fast introduction to Calculus"?--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 02:10, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

It depends on whether you want anyone to be able to find it or not. If I'm looking for Calculus, I don't spell it starting with an F. Learners searching for Fast generally aren't looking for Calculus. If you check Wikiversity:Statistics/2016/10, you'll find users don't search for either one in terms of the top 1,000 pages, so you need to think carefully about how it is that users will find this content. Starting it with the word Calculus at least allows them to see it when searching for Calculus. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:44, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

How about Calculus quickstart?--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 04:32, 27 November 2016 (UTC

That sounds very appropriate, although according to Wikipedia, it should be Calculus QuickStart. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

(outdemt)

There is also w:Quickstart guide, which is a little less about geeky software (and w:Camel case which does not translate to Asian languages even thought there is ja:w:キャメルケース). I am not going to resist User:MaintenanceBot, but that means I have to copy along Template:lw with every translation. Note that for fr:Calcul infinitésimal an admin already broke it up into 13 pages! Please, please never ever do that to this English page because it would increase the labor involved with a translation a lot while having gained nothing much of value. I have gained much experience from the two translations that I have attempted. You see how I already removed my use of {{sfn}} on the English version? That is because that template is not easily available on the German version. I went and added a warning to the top of the English article. I am now minimizing the use of English language conjunction, especially the word "and". I will think about this article naming some more.--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 00:29, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

In response:

• See Wikiversity:Naming conventions. Camel case isn't a requirement at Wikiversity. Most academics prefer Title Case.
• As indicated above, splitting up the content is the appropriate approach from a pedagogical perspective. Despite your best intentions, no one is going to learn Calculus in one sitting. They may be able to use it for review, or as a quick overview before moving on, but there won't be any retention.
• If the article is renamed with QuickStart/quickstart or Overview/overview, I'd leave it alone as a quick start experiment. If it remains named Calculus I, at some point it will need to be split up for consistency with a first semester Calculus course.
• You are welcome to copy templates from the English Wikiversity, but remember that they are licensed as CC-BY-SA and require attribution for reuse.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:54, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Roger all that commander. I am asking for some time, maybe up to six months, to get some feedback on this first. I came into this totally ignorant of the problems I was going to encounter. I am learning, but I need time. I am repeating some of this over at Talk:Calculus I.--Samantha9798 (discuss • contribs) 19:58, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello!

I took a look at the Cólera en el Ingenio page that you mentioned in es.Wikiversity's community page. The Spanish in the text is very bad, almost unreadable, it does not have a learning project structure and looks like the main contributor (User:Aldenis~enwikiversity) is no longer active (the last edit seems to be on 2009). Based on that, I would recommend deleting the page instead of moving it to es.wv because I don't think anyone will work on it after it is moved. Let me know if you disagree.

Regards, Lsanabria (discuss • contribs) 03:03, 25 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:24, 25 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

A request: please expand the options offered by that page to at least include w:Google Books. Compare to fr:Spécial:Ouvrages de référence/9780961408824.--2602:304:CDC1:90:64C5:4976:D62C:FF33 (discuss) 06:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I understand and thanks for the tips!--Πανεπιστήμιο (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! -- 13:19, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I did make that page a redirect by accident. I have been telling others of that short URL. Now they probably visited, they could not find the calc course and they blew me off as some flake. Please do not do that to me again. Please.--68.65.169.6 (discuss) 02:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

We do not redirect to templates. We transclude them. You are welcome to change Systematic English to include links to relevant projects if you wish. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I am asking for a 24 hour reprieve starting now. I have to have my cards reprinted with the longer URL. I am trying to network with people now and your femtosecond-to-femtosecond enforcement of matters of style is messing me up. Is you attention span so short? Can you not just put doing your changes on your todo list for tommorrow? I am trying to be flexible but I have already burned up some people's goodwill because I asked them to try again and it is still wrong for them tonight.--172.56.32.205 (discuss) 03:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

You have already been warned once to comment on content rather than contributors. If this approach is repeated, your account will be blocked. Regarding content and templates, we do not direct content pages to templates. We include/transclude them. Whatever it is that you believe must be on the template page can just as easily be created on the content page and included/transcluded where necessary. Please either update Systematic English to meet your requirements or redirect the template to Systematic English. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

What am I to conclude about the duration of your attention span?--172.56.1.140 (discuss) 03:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

This is Faraaz Ali,

I have a question, "This page has been nominated for cleanup for the following reason: Replace external links with interwiki links". How can I replace?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz (talk • contribs) 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz: See Making links and Help:Contents/Links. Use either [[w:quantity|quantity]] or [[Wikipedia:quantity|quantity]]. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

My hyperlinks are already in square brackets, Can you make an Edit on my page to help me know how exactly it works?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz (talk • contribs) 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz: External links use square brackets. Internal and inter-wiki links use double-square brackets. I can edit the page, but it's much more important for you to learn by doing.

Note when editing Talk pages, we try to keep content together under the same heading. See Wikiversity:Signature for how to sign your comments. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:52, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Dave Braunschweig Thank you, I made changes would you like to check? Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Faraaz AliReply

@Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz: Close. See https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=General_mathematics&type=revision&diff=1639053&oldid=1639051 for how to format the first paragraph. The second paragraph is left for you to clean up. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Dave Braunschweig Thank you so much, that helped me :) Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz (discuss • contribs) 07:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Dave Braunschweig My page still shows it needs a cleanup, I have replaced all the external links with wiki links. Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz (discuss • contribs) 13:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Mohammed Zulfequar Ali Faraaz: Then you should remove the {{cleanup}} code at the top of the page. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:33, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

thanks for your help with organising the avant-garde art pages. you deleted TOWARDS A INDUSTRIAL UNION OF PSYCHIC WORKERS 007/700 for being copyright but on what basis do you assert that it is copyright? The material on the Alytusbiennial site is not copyright. do i need to contact them and tell them to change their site information? Dx (discuss • contribs) 04:49, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

All content is copyrighted unless it explicitly states otherwise. Alternatives are to have the content indicate that it is public domain, or publish it under an open license such as Creative Commons. But note there are two different issues here. One is the content, and the other is Wikiversity's mission. If the content was open content, it would be legal to host it on Wikiversity, but it still wouldn't be consistent with our mission of hosting free learning materials and projects. To archive the work of others, use the Internet Archive. To create free learning materials and activities using the works of others, provide a link to that content and then provide additional information explaining how viewing that material extends learning for the reader. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks - I am in contact with the site administrators. They are currently talking about what license to use. there is a page for a DAMTP Commons license they are trying to build - would it be ok for them to use that or woud they need to use Creative Commons? DAMTP/Commons Dx (discuss • contribs) 11:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

DAMTP/Commons is not an open license. It is limited in who controls the work and how many copies one may have. It is also non-commercial, which causes problems with Wikimedia being CC-BY-SA rather than CC-BY-NC-SA. Anything hosted on Wikiversity would immediately lose its NC status. DAMTP would be much better off leaving the content on their site and linking to it from Wikiversity.

Separately, there is / will ultimately be a notability issue for DAMTP. Wikipedia:DAMTP is the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at the University of Cambridge. If DAMTP is a legitimate organization, it will need to meet notability requirements for an article at Wikipedia. As it stands now, Google searches for DEWOU-DAMTP suggest that this use of Wikiversity could be interpreted as promotional and an attempt to provide legitimacy to an organization that otherwise doesn't have it. Articles like this are usually deleted as either being promotional or having no educational objectives.

You could avoid issues by creating a page that educates users about the organization and its efforts, and add links to any relevant content rather than duplicating it.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:05, 15 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

My students will start uploading more files on Wikiversity files. Incidentally, files almost certainly not to be used here will be placed on private wikis affiliated with wright.miraheze.org.

Here are some options for the category:

1. WSUL file
2. WSU-file
3. Wsuf
4. Wright State University file
5. WSUF

My understanding is that short cryptic category names are ok. That's certainly true on commons.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I prefer WSU file. Another option would be to just have a WSU category. The namespace indicates that it is a file. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:59, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I know you delete resource pages with little or no educational value. What is the policy for files that are never used on Wikiversity?--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 00:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Fair use files must be used to stay at Wikiversity. Open files don't need to be used, per se. We've never done any file cleanup for this, just for licensing. I suppose at some point we could look and see if we have unused files (not linked or embedded) with very low view counts and make a decision. But they aren't really in the way, and aren't viewed in terms of quality one way or the other. And deleting them doesn't save any storage space, because nothing deleted ever goes away, it just gets hidden. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi i am hasan alhajji i would like to shre literature partment. Haifa132 (discuss • contribs) 22:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi i hasanalhajji Haifa132 (discuss • contribs) 22:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Welcome Hasan! Let me know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Good evenning doctors, i would like to follow my high study and need a help Haifa132 (discuss • contribs) 16:49, 17 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hope Dave does not mind me butting in but what help do you need? -Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:03, 17 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi doctor drama or theater if you like to help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haifa132 (talk • contribs) 17 December 2016 (UTC)

@Haifa132: Literature and drama aren't my areas of expertise, but if you have a specific Wikiversity question, I'd be happy to point you in the right direction. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Are you referring possibly to creating educational resources about drama/theaters? -Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:15, 17 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Are there protocols in Wikiversity for documenting personal stories that relate to a common theme? In other words, are there any guidelines for how to turn anecdotes into data on Wikiversity -- or at least how to label documentation of personal experiences that translate dry wonk into wow?

I think that compelling discussions of serious empirical research must include illustrative anecdotes. Without the personal stories, few people will read the general commentary.

Unless I hear otherwise, I will assume that I should somehow just make a clear distinction between personal stories, theoretical hypotheses, and empirical results.

Comments? Thanks for your interest. DavidMCEddy (discuss • contribs) 01:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

@DavidMCEddy: I'm not aware of any common approach to this. You might ask in the Wikiversity:Colloquium and see if anyone else has ideas. It might be as simple as coming up with some sort of template or templates that would indicate the distinction. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:20, 17 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the reply. I've got something that looks like it will work, so I don't think I'll bother with Wikiversity:Colloquium unless you think I should. DavidMCEddy (discuss • contribs) 00:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Most of the people who would be able to help also watch my discussion page. If you've got something that works for you, go for it. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:23, 18 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I never mastered the question of where to put resources, and have recently found myself placing everything in subspaces of resources that I created long ago. I placed Russell's paradox in mainspace because I inserted a sister-link in Wikipedia:Russell's paradox. Let me know where to move it and I will reconfigure the sister link. It is not difficult to reconfigure sisterlinks to go into subpages.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Guy vandegrift: It's probably fine where it is. Nothing links to it right now, and it isn't obvious to me what other learning project it might be a part of. If you do create something larger, you can move it then. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:58, 19 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I placed this screenshot on a Miraheze wiki instead of Wikiversity out of copyright concerns. It documents an apparent copyright violation involving the sale of instructors' exam banks. The website URL is not on the figure, and I have qualms about even placing it on Wikiversity because it might encourage students to purchase such banks. But, those wishing to "make education free" might see this as a reason to advocate an open-source policy regarding exam banks. (My idea is that educators use both "private" and "public" banks.) Would this image be allowed in Wikiversity files under fair use? If so, is it wise to place this on Wikiversity files?--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 15:18, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Fair use allows the use of copyrighted images if the use is transformative and non-commercial/educational, (two additional factors not relevant in this example), and the value of the original work is not impacted. Wikiversity is non-commercial/educational, so as long as the use is transformative and the value of the original work would not be impacted, the image could be hosted here under Fair Use guidelines. Your use of the image is transformative and educational. It probably requires an attorney to figure out how the value of the original work is impacted, as it both draws attention to it (promoting it) and discourages use of it.

But the product itself would appear to be illegal. So it isn't so much a Fair Use question as a wmf:Terms of Use question. Would there be any way to communicate the same information without inadvertently promoting an illegal site? Is it possible to address the concept without the supporting image? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:58, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I can modify the image so that somebody using a Google Image search would be unable to find it. I will do this by vanalizing the Paint file, mispelling the title, and changing the book's image. It will be fun and totally legal.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:25, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Isaac should be honored, but based on http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/prism.php?id=40, one never knows. Good work! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:42, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the helpful message. I'm interested in joining the Spanish course but I have a bit of a problem while doing so. The instructions are complicated and I don't understand. PrincessT (discuss • contribs) 20:37, 28 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Try starting with Spanish 1. I'd also recommend trying http://duolingo.com for learning languages. DuoLingo is also free. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)Reply