Albanian sea port history/Comparing with the growth of Wikiversity
Welcome to the Wikiversity learning project about Albanian sea port history. After exploring the different sea ports, we would compare these with the growth of Wikiversity.
Introduction to the project[edit | edit source]
The largest port city Durrës has a long and interesting history. Of course, a few Wikiversity deletionists and inclusionists often fail to respect the learning goals of their fellow Wikiversity participants, so they want to include garbage which deters users from creating new content, or delete pages with useful content! There are important parallels between these Wikiversity inclusionists and the Germans who tried to "include" Albania in the Axis, or the deletionists and the barbarians who often tried to destroy Durrës. This learning project allows Wikiversity participants to compare and contrast the historical attacks on Durrës with the attacks on learning resources by Wikiversity inclusionists and deletionists. This approach to the study of Albanian sea port history will make the topic come alive for closed-minded inclusionists and deletionists.
Fragile beginnings[edit | edit source]
Durrës was founded about 600 BC. The site of Durrës was apparently selected because the local geography provided both a safe harbor for a sea port and protection of the settlement from attack.
Study exercise 1: write a precis on the wikipedia entry w:Durrës. Describe the key moments, principal crises, and social and historical forces that shape the port.
Study exercise 2: understand the present port of w:Durrës in light of its history
study exercise 3: Explore the parallel between the founding of Durrës and the creation of this page.
The person who created this page may have been a first-time wiki editor who is interested in Albanian history. It is interesting that the IP address of this editor is apparently assigned to a school. The IP address was blocked from editing at Wikipedia and it is possible that Wikiversity was a "second choice" destination for the creator of the article, only coming here after being locked out of Wikipedia. This user may have intended to write a Wikipedia article which was rejected at Wikipedia, or create an entire learning project out of the concept of the history of Albania's sea ports. It is impossible for anyone but that person to truly know.
The second person who edited this page participated in the normal wiki process by building upon the existing page content. This kind of cooperative participation is encouraged at Wikiversity; many users will see a page like this and feel frustrated or annoyed. Adding useful material which fits with Wikiversity's mission is highly desireable. This provides a good example of how wiki websites function. This is exactly how Wikipedia began: stubs for page starts and slow building. This is also how Wikiversity will grow... if participants feel welcome to add content to current projects, and are not turned off by them.
In what ways are the early settlement that became Durrës and the start of this page similar? In what ways are they different? When Durrës was settled, how much thought do you think went into the creation of it, and its selection and location? How much thought do you think went into the creation of this page initially, as well as its location? How many resources were placed into the creation of Durrës? And how many resources appear to have been placed in the creation of this page? The location of Durrës was intentionally selected to protect the port. Wikiversity was intentionally created as a place that welcomes learners and helps them explore how to use wiki technology as tool to support their pursuit of learning goals. Almost certainly, inclusionists and deletionists at Wikipedia would have quickly offended or obliterated the seedling that was planted at the creation of this and many other pages. Wikiversity welcomes learners and helps them, even if they do not know how to edit and grow a wiki page, even if they are inclusionists or deletionists.
Wikiversity, Albania, and Ethics[edit | edit source]
If you came to this page at creation, and had the option to delete it, or keep it, what would you have chosen? Why? Is it better to include such content and hope that users will improve it, or clear it out so that users can find more useful resources to build on?
Should every single empty page targeted for deletion become the battleground of the inclusionists and deletionists, as this and Wikiversity:Student union have become? Does it matter if you are inclusionist or deletionist at Wikiversity? Should everything become a matter of whether you are Albanian or Serbian? Should we try to kill off those who are not inclusionists, if we are inclusionists? Or should we try to ensure that Wikiversity includes only a deletionist culture persists if we are deletionist?
Under Siege[edit | edit source]
Around 400 AD, Durrës was damaged by a powerful earthquake. In the case of this page, the original content was removed.
Durrës was re-built and survived behind strong walls during the period from roughly AD 300–700 when barbarian incursions into the region took place. This page was rebuilt after a call went out for its deletion. Will this page be able to survive?
Deletionist scholarship and philosophy[edit | edit source]
In this section of the page, you can examine the scholarly thought of Wikiversity deletionists in the context of the attempted deletion of this page.
1) good faith contributions by Wikiversity participants are garbage.
learning exercise: put this interesting idea on the Wikiversity main page as a greeting for new participants.
2) welcoming and helping new Wikiversity participants develop learning resources at Wikiversity is analogous to the occupation of Albania by the Axis Powers in World War II.
learning exercise: evaluate the logic of this claim.
3) Since we do not know why this article was created we should Assume Good Faith, which for a deletionist means imagining that the content was already deleted from Wikipedia. Of course, if it was deleted from Wikipedia, the "logical" conclusion is that Wikiversity should also delete it.
learning exercise: evaluate the benefits to Wikiversity of welcoming new editors by deleting their contributions.
4) The response of a deletionist to new editors who make good faith edits is to become frustrated or annoyed.
learning exercise: explore the hypothesis that the parents of deletionists became frustrated or annoyed every time that the baby budding-deletionist made a mistake. Could such negative parental influence explain why deletionists have no patience with new wiki editors and no interest in helping them learn how to become better editors?
5) For deletionists, the correct response to a new editor's contributions is to be "turned off by" those contributions and delete them. Bam! That will teach the new editor! Bam! Bam! Bam! Gee, I like hitting the delete button! I have the power!
6) For deletionists, Assume Good Faith means imagining that new editors don't put enough thought into editing. It could never be the case that a new editor is baffled by the mark-up language. The way to help teach them to edit is to delete their good faith contributions. This will encourage them to return to Wikiversity to have their work be deleted time and time again. Maybe some of them will even get so frustrated that they will become vandals and take revenge on Wikiversity! Then we will have more editors to block! This is how deletionists ensure long and happy careers as destroyers of good faith contributions to Wikiversity. This is how deletionsist show their skill at nurturing learners and teaching new editors how to improve and participate at Wikiversity.
study exercise: examine the logic of this deletionist claim.
study exercise. Do you think deletionists understand that wiki webpages can be edited and improved? How does the existence of a stub page prevent people from finding other resources?
study question. How did this page become empty?
study question. What other tricks do deletionists use to hide and remove good faith contributions of Wikiversity participants? Hint: see #10, below.
study question. Given your analysis of points 1-9 (above) do you think this defense of deletionism was a good faith effort to create a learning resource or an effort to disrupt an existing learning project?
11) study exercise: Evaluate the ethics of deleting good faith contributions to Wikiversity rather than helping new wiki editors learn how to be better editors.