Wikiversity:Colloquium

From Wikiversity

Shortcut: WV:C

Start your discussion here Please sign with -- ~~~~

Welcome Do you have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That's what this page is for! You can also find some general information at: What is Wikiversity? Wikiversity Introduction Questions about Mediawiki software Also try: Chat · Mailing list

Organization of Wikiversity Portal News Chat Policies Discussions Support staff

Purge Cache - Colloquium Archives - RSS version

Contents 1 Publication of bachelor thesis or master's thesis 2 AcaWiki 3 Usergroups 4 smartphones 5 Policy discussion at en.wikipedia 6 What role does Wikimedia have to play in educational content? What content beyond encyclopedic content can/should Wikimedia provide? 7 Any physicists, specializing in QM out here? I need your input. 8 Authoring groups

[edit] Publication of bachelor thesis or master's thesis

Hello! I'm completly new to Wikiversity but I have some experience in other Wikimedia-projects. I have noticed that you allow original research here (as the only project, I think?). Is publication of bachelor projects and master's thesises welcomed here? If so, how does it work? Is PDF acceptable? How to categorize the uploaded file? Should links be added from somewhere in the project? And what about non-English publications? (I have noticed that a Danish Wikiversity does not exist.) If such texts are not welcomed, do you know where they would be suitable? --Nillerdk 08:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nillerdk, yes, your thesis would be very welcome. PDF upload would be fine/easy, perhaps with a dedicated mainspace page containing meta-info and abstract? If its in Dutch, it could go on http://beta.wikiversity.org. Category? Well, try whatever the subjects are - we can help out. For an overview try Wikiversity:Browse and Portal:Research. Hope this helps. Sincerely, James. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. So an English bachelor thesis or an English master's thesis is within the scope of en.wikiversity.org. So far so good. It seems that beta.wikiversity.org does not allow file uploads. So where do a thesis in another language (not being one of the few languages for which a xx.wikiversity.org exists) belong? Nillerdk 12:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Great question. Theoretically at beta, but you point out a problem (I wonder if someone more familiar with beta can help you?) Does there happen to be a Topic:Danish here? If so, that might be one place to link to it from. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 18:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe upload to commons:, then link from beta? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The last time I checked, you can upload .pdf files to Beta. What was your problem? Filesize? Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 17:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AcaWiki

AcaWiki AcaWiki is like "Wikipedia for academic research" -- Jtneill - Talk - c 14:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Have had a look, some interesting aspects:

1. http://acawiki.org/Special:Version
2. http://acawiki.org/User:Jtneill

Don't like the captcha for external links! And the restrictive userform/template. And it looks like its only for posting summaries of research - not for original research? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 14:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe they could merge with Wikiversity. Wikiversity could become an organization that bundles several individual efforts to make one larger successful.--Daanschr 19:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Magnus Manske is a prominant Wikipedian.--Daanschr 19:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Is he behind AcaWiki? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I do like the tagging/organisation etc. e.g., here for psychology - how is that achieved? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Manske is one of the most prominent programmers of the Wikimedia Foundation. He could have made the tagging option. I am not a programmer, so i don't know how to make it. Manske is the first name mentioned in the first link you provided.--Daanschr 07:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikiversity should only do tagging with subjects which are worth looking at, finished products.--Daanschr 07:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I started using the Category as a form of tagging.. what do you think? Leighblackall 08:55, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Usergroups

I think we could give ourselves a boost by creating usergroups that can help people network and find collaborators. A namespace dedicated to this would probably be helpful, but regardless it would rely on categories and DPL.

I just created Usergroup:Temple University, Usergroup:Parents, and Usergroup:Wikipedia Review as examples pertaining to me, but this could include nearly anything.

Somewhat inspired by the "Networks" on Facebook. --SB_Johnny ^talk 18:40, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

• just a usergroup for University associates in general? --Gbaor 09:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] smartphones

Hello everyone. I'm wondering what can be done to improve the way WV displays on smart phones. I'm currently editing using the Google Android, I haven't checked the iPhone, but expect the same issues. Why does WP display better? Can the data of WV be made so that 3rd parties can easily develop sites or apps that display WV better. I have tried to use YahooPipes to reuse content but either I am too basic, or WV content is a little inaccessible. . Such as no RSS. --Leighblackall 08:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The reason Wikipedia displays better is because it has implemented the Wikimedia Mobile. I'm not sure what it takes to get the implemented on Wikiversity... Leighblackall 08:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Leigh - thanks for finding this out - curious, have you tried mobile access for the other sister projects? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

No I haven't JT, but the lead developer tells me its only on WP, and due to my enthusiasm, assures me that WV is next. He says he's very busy and might be hard pressed coming back to it soon :( He's given my this technical specification though. Do you know anyone in Wikiversity who could make sense of it and use it to make ready from Wikimobile? Leighblackall 12:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

A relevant tweet from http://twitter.com/wikimediamobile to http://twitter.com/leighblackall is http://twitter.com/WikimediaMobile/statuses/5392937313 -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, suggest we start Wikiversity:Mobile and eventually (no hurry) fork the development discussion to there. I'm a mobile neophyte, but happy to help and one day will be keen to get an android and experiment. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Policy discussion at en.wikipedia

Hey guys, a reference to Wikiversity was inserted in an en.wikipedia policy page last month at Wikipedia:Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. It didn't get support on the talk page and I just removed it, but maybe this is something you guys want, I'm here to ask. When pages are deleted or material is removed from Wikipedia, sometimes the explanation given is that it doesn't comply with this policy because it appears to be "Primary (original) research such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, et cetera." The new text recommended: "For a wiki that is a repository of original research, visit our sister project Wikiversity. Original research should be transwikied there." I've deleted a lot of material as OR, and I've never seen any that I think Wikiversity would want, but I suppose it's possible. Is this something you want us to start recommending? It would present some difficulties, but I'm open to the idea if you want to pursue it. Dank55 14:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

One of the reasons that Wikiversity split from Wikibooks, was the need for a place for original research. As an Original Researcher, I have been pleasantly surprised by the support I have received here. Judging the Quality of OR in its early stages is difficult, and often seminal work looks like the researcher is crazy or kidding, just because it IS original. I wouldn't judge the quality of an OR posting until the research begins to mature. As a result, I suggest that it might be nice to have a transfer policy between the other projects that dislike OR, and Wikiversity, but from personal experience, Transwiki, might not be the way to go, since it involves sysop agreeement, and can be quite complex to arrange when sysops are busy. --Graeme E. Smith 15:18, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, the two categories that are most likely to contain the pages we're talking about here are new promotional pages for speedy deletion and New non-notable pages for speedy deletion. We delete a lot of those every day. Original research sometimes shows up on established pages, but it's not as much and harder to find. Please let us know at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_talk:What Wikipedia is not if you see pages that you like. If you can give us a clear enough idea what it is we should be looking for, then we can take the conversation further. Dank55 15:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I left a message there. AFAIK there's no reason we can't just give the admins who watch CSD the custodian tools here as well so that they can import the material. If any of them take up the offer, let's do some community mentoring. --SB_Johnny ^talk 16:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I put a link to Wikiversity:What shall we do with Wikipedia? page there. We will see what happens. --Gbaor 14:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] What role does Wikimedia have to play in educational content? What content beyond encyclopedic content can/should Wikimedia provide?

What role does Wikimedia have to play in educational content? What content beyond encyclopedic content can/should Wikimedia provide? (strategy.wikimedia.org) --fasten 14:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

This is an important page on strategy.wikimedia.org - Emerging strategic priorities/ESP 3 key questions#Educational_Content - I've just responded to all questions - previously Wikiversity was barely mentioned. Please contribute. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 15:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Any physicists, specializing in QM out here? I need your input.

Not sure if this is a right place to put a peer review request. An article needs peer review by some physicist specializing in the quantum mechanics. Can someone give us some input, please?

See: User:Dc987#Reasonable_Deviations_Thought_Experiment. Can somebody point out the fallacy of this thought experiment? --Dc987 08:41, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Authoring groups

• Proposal:Authoring groups (strategy.wikimedia.org) --fasten 21:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

--122.167.84.174 02:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC) Hi iam chandrasekhar,new to this wikiversity i was aware of wikipedia plz tell me how i can use this in good manner

Hi cnadrasekhar, it would be a lot easier to respond to you, if you opened yourself an account, as that would automatically give you your own User area that you can experiment in, without damaging others work, and it comes complete with a talk page where you can be privately coached on how to use the system. Once you have been active for a while, one of the custodians will send you a message on that talk page that includes some beginning advice. As well you might want to take a course on the Wiki Language so as to become fluent in it. There is another wiki that offers seminars on wiki language called Wikieducator. It is not a hard language to learn, but some aspects of it are tricky. There are a couple of policies that you should know such as "Assume Good Faith" and "Edit Boldly" but these are not a license to damage others work, and there is a very active group of editors, that are working hard to improve the quality of the works here, so vandalism and other forms of self-expression at the cost of the institute will be very quickly detected and dealt with. Essentially Wikiversity is a learning resource base, for teaching from a young age up. We encourage all ages to get involved, so you are very welcome. --Graeme E. Smith 14:31, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

--Snoozebob 18:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)my key board does not have that symbol