From Wikiversity
(Redirected from Colloquium)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Please do not include wiki markup or links in section titles.
Sign your posts with   ~~~~

Do you have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That is what this page is for! Before asking a question, you can find some general information at:


var wgArticlePath = "/wiki/$1"; var wgServer = ""; var wgPageName = "Wikiversity:Colloquium"; var wgTitle = "Wikiversity Colloquium"; var wgContentLanguage = "en"; var x-feed-reverse = "true"; var x-blog-description = "You have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That's what this page is for!";

"Freedom of expression is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom." — Benjamin N. Cardozo (discuss)

TemplateScripts = Templates + JavaScript[edit source]

Hi! I'd like to propose enabling TemplateScripts on the English Wikiversity. It's not a MediaWiki extension, but a few lines of JavaScript added to MediaWiki:Common.js that basically allow to run JavaScript from templates, as long as the code is on the MediaWiki namespace and with the "TemplateScript-" prefix, which requires an authorized user and community consensus to get there.

The system is enabled on the Spanish Wikipedia where it's used for easy signing of polls and projects (see blue button here), for navigating excerpt trees (see box with tree icon here), for injecting interactive widgets on some articles (here and here) and more recently for creating interactive forms that inject content into other pages (see template here, soon to be used on admin boards).

My immediate goal on Wikiversity is to use it to develop a tool to make wikidebates more friendly. However I believe some of the existing scripts, particularly the ones for creating forms and signing pages, can be very useful on Wikiversity overall, as well as in some specific projects like Automata theory and Conway's Game of Life. So what do you think? Sophivorus (talk) 21:12, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm well, there's no support, but no objections either. If no one objects in a week or two, I may implement this since I got the necessary permission (and years of involvement in Wikiversity and other Wikimedia projects, I dare say). Cheers! Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 19:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, after a prudent amount of time with no objections, I just enabled TemplateScripts. See Template:Game of Life and Conway's Game of Life#Sandbox for a first example of a template using this feature. Cheers! Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 21:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As promised, I developed MediaWiki:TemplateScript-Wikidebate.js to make wikidebates more friendly, see for example the [add objection] buttons in Should cannabis be legal? Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 21:32, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for doing this and sharing this example @Sophivorus: -- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:36, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Notice[edit source]

The rendering of this template now gives the message:

Page Module:Message box/ambox.css has no content.

This message shows on some pages that use the template e.g., the template page itself and pages such as Motivation and emotion/Lectures/Introduction but not when tested on other pages e.g., User:Jtneill/sandbox or below


Anyone know what's happened and how to fix? @Dave Braunschweig:

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:36, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jtneill Hi! Not sure what happened but I just created an empty Module:Message box/ambox.css to at least get rid of the error message. Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 12:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think it's related to a recent Wikimedia update about how CSS pages are managed. I just noticed Module:Message box/fmbox.css causing similar messages and created that one. If anyone notices similar messages, let us know or create an empty page to (temporarily?) resolve the issue. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 15:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invitation to join the Movement Strategy Forum[edit source]

The Movement Strategy Forum (MS Forum) is a multilingual collaborative space for all conversations about Movement Strategy implementation. We are inviting all Movement participants to collaborate on the MS Forum. The goal of the forum is to build community collaboration using an inclusive multilingual platform.

The Movement Strategy is a collaborative effort to imagine and build the future of the Wikimedia Movement. Anyone can contribute to the Movement Strategy, from a comment to a full-time project.

Join this forum with your Wikimedia account, engage in conversations, and ask questions in your language.

The Movement Strategy and Governance team launched the proposal for this MS Forum in May. After a 2-month review period, we have just published the Community Review Report. It includes a summary of the discussions, metrics, and information about the next steps.

We look forward to seeing you at the MS Forum! Qgil-WMF (discusscontribs) 11:49, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The 2022 Board of Trustees election Community Voting period is now open[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hi everyone,

The Community Voting period for the 2022 Board of Trustees election is now open. Here are some helpful links to get you the information you need to vote:

If you are ready to vote, you may go to SecurePoll voting page to vote now. You may vote from August 23 at 00:00 UTC to September 6 at 23:59 UTC. To see about your voter eligibility, please visit the voter eligibility page.


Movement Strategy and Governance

This message was sent on behalf of the Board Selection Task Force and the Elections Committee

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 12:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The 2022 Board of Trustees election Community Voting is about to close[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.


The Community Voting period of the 2022 Board of Trustees election started on August 23, 2022, and will close on September 6, 2022 23:59 UTC. There’s still a chance to participate in this election. If you did not vote, please visit the SecurePoll voting page to vote now. To see about your voter eligibility, please visit the voter eligibility page. If you need help in making your decision, here are some helpful links:


Movement Strategy and Governance

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 18:05, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hello everyone,

The Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines Revisions committee is requesting comments regarding the Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC). This review period will be open from 8 September 2022 until 8 October 2022.

The Committee collaborated to revise these draft guidelines based on input gathered from the community discussion period from May through July, as well as the community vote that concluded in March 2022. The revisions are focused on the following four areas:

  1. To identify the type, purpose, and applicability of the UCoC training;
  2. To simplify the language for more accessible translation and comprehension by non-experts;
  3. To explore the concept of affirmation, including its pros and cons;
  4. To review the balancing of the privacy of the accuser and the accused

The Committee requests comments and suggestions about these revisions by 8 October 2022. From there, the Revisions Committee anticipates further revising the guidelines based on community input.

Find the Revised Guidelines on Meta, and a comparison page in some languages.

Everyone may share comments in a number of places. Facilitators welcome comments in any language on the Revised Enforcement Guidelines talk page. Comments can also be shared on talk pages of translations, at local discussions, or during conversation hours. There are a series of conversation hours planned about the Revised Enforcement Guidelines; please see Meta for the times and details.

The facilitation team supporting this review period hopes to reach a large number of communities. If you do not see a conversation happening in your community, please organize a discussion. Facilitators can assist you in setting up the conversations. Discussions will be summarized and presented to the drafting committee every two weeks. The summaries will be published here.

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 08:32, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Vector 2022 skin as the default in two weeks?[edit source]

The slides for our presentation at Wikimania 2022

Hello. I'm writing on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team. In two weeks, we would like to make the Vector 2022 skin the default on this wiki.

We have been working on it for the past three years. So far, it has been the default on more than 30 wikis, including sister projects, all accounting for more than 1 billion pageviews per month. On average 87% of active logged-in users of those wikis use Vector 2022.

It would become the default for all logged-out users, and also all logged-in users who currently use Vector legacy. Logged-in users can at any time switch to any other skins. No changes are expected for users of these skins.

About the skin[edit source]

[Why is a change necessary] The current default skin meets the needs of the readers and editors as these were 13 years ago. Since then, new users have begun using Wikimedia projects. The old Vector doesn't meet their needs.

[Objective] The objective for the new skin is to make the interface more welcoming and comfortable for readers and useful for advanced users. It draws inspiration from previous requests, the Community Wishlist Surveys, and gadgets and scripts. The work helped our code follow the standards and improve all other skins. We reduced PHP code in Wikimedia deployed skins by 75%. The project has also focused on making it easier to support gadgets and use APIs.

[Changes and test results] The skin introduces a series of changes that improve readability and usability. The new skin does not remove any functionality currently available on the Vector skin.

  • The sticky header makes it easier to find tools that editors use often. It decreases scrolling to the top of the page by 16%.
  • The new table of contents makes it easier to navigate to different sections. Readers and editors jumped to different sections of the page 50% more than with the old table of contents. It also looks a bit different on talk pages.
  • The new search bar is easier to find and makes it easier to find the correct search result from the list. This increased the amount of searches started by 30% on the wikis we tested on.
  • The skin does not negatively affect pageviews, edit rates, or account creation. There is evidence of increases in pageviews and account creation across partner communities.

[Try it out] Try out the new skin by going to the appearance tab in your preferences and selecting Vector 2022 from the list of skins.

How can editors change and customize this skin?[edit source]

It's possible to configure and personalize our changes. We support volunteers who create new gadgets and user scripts. Check out our repository for a list of currently available customizations, or add your own.

Our plan[edit source]

If no large concerns are raised, we plan on deploying in the week of October 3, 2022. If your community would like to request more time to discuss the changes, hit the button and write to us. We can adjust the calendar.

Request for more time to discuss the change

Also, if you'd like ask our team anything, if you have questions, concerns, or additional thoughts, please ping me here or write on the talk page of the project. We will also gladly answer! See our FAQ. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (discusscontribs) 03:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Announcing the preliminary results of the 2022 Board of Trustees election Community Voting period[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hi everyone,

Thank you to everyone who participated in the 2022 Board of Trustees election process. Your participation helps seat the trustees the community seeks on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

These are the preliminary results of the 2022 Board of Trustees election:

You may see more information about the Results and Statistics of this Board election.

The Board will complete their review of the most voted candidates, including conducting background checks. The Board plans to appoint new trustees at their meeting in December.


Movement Strategy and Governance

This message was sent on behalf of the Board Selection Task Force and the Elections Committee

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 06:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikiversity on Hacker News[edit source]

In case anyone has an account there, see this discussion: (I deliberately don't have one, because I am at peak Internet). —Justin (koavf)TCM 00:03, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pervasive copyright violations by User:Marshallsumter[edit source]

@Omphalographer: Moved to Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:11, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invitation to attend “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter” Sessions[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hello all,

During the 2022 Wikimedia Summit, the Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) presented the first outline of the Movement Charter, giving a glimpse on the direction of its future work, and the Charter itself. The MCDC then integrated the initial feedback collected during the Summit. Before proceeding with writing the Charter for the whole Movement, the MCDC wants to interact with community members and gather feedback on the drafts of the three sections: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (intentions statement). The Movement Charter drafts will be available on the Meta page here on November 14, 2022. Community wide consultation period on MC will take place from November 20 to December 18, 2022. Learn more about it here.

With the goal of ensuring that people are well informed to fully participate in the conversations and are empowered to contribute their perspective on the Movement Charter, three “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter" sessions have been scheduled in different time zones. Everyone in the Wikimedia Movement is invited to attend these conversations. The aim is to learn about Movement Charter - its goal, purpose, why it matters, and how it impacts your community. MCDC members will attend these sessions to answer your questions and hear community feedback.

The “Ask Me Anything” sessions accommodate communities from different time zones. Only the presentation of the session is recorded and shared afterwards, no recording of conversations. Below is the list of planned events:

  • Asia/Pacific: November 4, 2022 at 09:00 UTC (your local time). Interpretation is available in Chinese and Japanese.
  • Europe/MENA/Sub Saharan Africa: November 12, 2022 at 15:00 UTC (your local time). Interpretation is available in Arabic, French and Russian.
  • North and South America/ Western Europe: November 12, 2022 at 15:00 UTC (your local time). Interpretation is available in Spanish and Portuguese.

On the Meta page you will find more details; Zoom links will be shared 48 hours ahead of the call.

Call for Movement Charter Ambassadors

Individuals or groups from all communities who wish to help include and start conversations in their communities on the Movement Charter are encouraged to become Movement Charter Ambassadors (MC Ambassadors). MC Ambassadors will carry out their own activities and get financial support for enabling conversations in their own languages. Regional facilitators from the Movement Strategy and Governance team are available to support applicants with MC Ambassadors grantmaking. If you are interested please sign up here. Should you have specific questions, please reach out to the MSG team via email: or on the MS forum.

We thank you for your time and participation.

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 15:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Philosophical essay on life versus technology[edit source]

I have written a philosophical essay: User:Dan Polansky/Technology as a challenger and a threat to living things and their forms and patterns.

I wonder whether its content can be used in any form in the mainspace or whether the subject and treatment are so hopelessly subjective that they are beyond saving. Given this is philosophy, the objective validity and acceptability can be questioned as usual. If there is a chance for mainspace in some form, I would try to find sources that make some of the arguments and trace to them, although the arguments should largely stand on their own; the attempt is at philosophical analysis that depends mostly on generally known empirical facts easily verifiable by anyone. I may be able to address issues raised in a possible peer review. Thank you for any effort.

--Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 09:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dan Polansky: Wikiversity's mission includes hosting a range of free-content, multilingual learning materials/resources. The essay is certainly a learning resource. Wikiversity doesn't require Wikipedia:NPOV.
I would just ask what you want others to learn from this essay. Are you only sharing your point of view, or do want readers to think through the issues and develop their own point of view? If you're just sharing your view, it's probably fine as is.
If you want others to develop their own point of view, I would consider breaking it up so that there is a main overview page, probably with a much shorter title, and then subpages for each of the different issues raised. That way, each of them can be addressed individually with their own resources, and perhaps expanded in the future by yourself or others.
Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 15:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I am not sure what my goal is. I want to share my ideas with the world (they are not so original so in a way not really my own), but do so in a possibly as objective, neutral and factual matter as possible. I hope reader to be able to use these distinctions, subtopics and arguments as a starting point for learning more and finding more sources online, and to eliminate some of the initial misconceptions. The subobjective is to draw relevant contrasts of analysis and raise key points, and provide some good relevant links for a start, e.g. to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy but also to journalistic sources. The title is indeed rather long, but its point is to make it unabiguous. I could make it shorter, though:
  • Technology as a challenger and a threat to living things and their forms
  • Technology as a harm and a threat to living things and their forms
  • Technology as a harm and a threat to life and its forms
  • Technology as a harm and a threat to life (but I wanted to emphasize forms as well)
  • Technology as a threat to life and its forms
I would probably be quite happy with "Technology as a harm and a threat to living things and their forms". I prefer "living things" to "life" as less ambiguous, and I want the word "form" or "diversity" to be there to emphasize that it is not only about continued existence of the whole but also richness of form. Maybe reducing "harm and a threat" to "threat" is okay, although "threat" suggests potentiality whereas the harm has already been done.
If you are okay with it, I would copy the content to the mainspace under the same title or one of the proposed ones, and then continue working on it there. Editors can then decide what they want to do with it and how to reshape it, but hopefully not delete it. If you have an idea for another shorter title, let's consider it. I considered "life versus technology", "man versus technology", and "man versus nature", but all those are ambiguous or much broader. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 15:55, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I went ahead and put it to "Technology as a threat or promise for life and its forms". It can be renamed if wished, and in the worst case deleted, but your comments suggest this won't be necessary. There is some inline sourcing as well, although the linked Wikipedia articles provide many more sources beyond that. Someone could wish to create a wikidebate based on the content or in that direction. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 19:27, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Opportunities open for the Ombuds commission and the Case Review Committee[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languagesPlease help translate to your language

Hi everyone! The Ombuds commission (OC) and the Case Review Committee (CRC) are looking for members. People are encouraged to nominate themselves or encourage others they feel would contribute to these groups to do so. There is more information below about the opportunity and the skills that are needed.

About the Ombuds commission

The Ombuds commission (OC) works on all Wikimedia projects to investigate complaints about violations of the privacy policy, especially in use of CheckUser and Oversight (also known as Suppression) tools. The Commission mediates between the parties of the investigation and, when violations of the policies are identified, advises the Wikimedia Foundation on best handling. They may also assist the General Counsel, the Chief Executive Officer, or the Board of Trustees of the Foundation in these investigations when legally necessary. For more on the OC's duties and roles, see Ombuds commission on Meta-Wiki.

Volunteers serving in this role should be experienced Wikimedians, active on any project, who have previously used the CheckUser/Oversight tools OR who have the technical ability to understand these tools and the willingness to learn them. They must be able to communicate in English, the common language of the commission. They are expected to be able to engage neutrally in investigating these concerns and to know when to recuse when other roles and relationships may cause conflict. Commissioners will serve two-year terms (note that this is different from past years, when the terms have been for one year).

About the Case Review Committee

The Case Review Committee (CRC) reviews appeals of eligible Trust & Safety office actions. The CRC is a critical layer of oversight to ensure that Wikimedia Foundation office actions are fair and unbiased. They also make sure the Wikimedia Foundation doesn’t overstep established practices or boundaries. For more about the role, see Case Review Committee on Meta-Wiki.

We are looking for current or former functionaries and experienced volunteers with an interest in joining this group. Applicants must be fluent in English (additional languages are a strong plus) and willing to abide by the terms of the Committee charter. If the work resonates and you qualify, please apply. Committee members will serve two-year terms (note that this is different from past years, when the terms have been for one year).

Applying to join either of these groups

Members are required to sign the Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information and must be willing to comply with the appropriate Wikimedia Foundation board policies (such as the access to non-public information policy and the Foundation privacy policy). These positions requires a high degree of discretion and trust. Members must also be over 18 years of age.

If you are interested in serving in either capacity listed above, please write in English to the Trust and Safety team at ca(_AT_) (to apply to the OC) or to the Legal Team at legal(_AT_) (to apply to the CRC) with information about:

  • Your primary projects
  • Languages you speak/write
  • Any experience you have serving on committees, whether movement or non-movement
  • Your thoughts on what you could bring to the OC or CRC if appointed
  • Any experience you have with the Checkuser or Oversight tools (OC only)
  • Any other information you think is relevant

There will be two conversation hours to answer any questions that potential applicants may have:

The deadline for applications is 31 December 2022 in any timezone.

Please feel free to pass this invitation along to any users who you think may be qualified and interested. Thank you!

On behalf of the Committee Support team,

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 11:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're all invited to a Zoom workshop tonight![edit source]

Hi all!

I'm Greg Stanton, and I'm running a Zoom workshop tonight with my collaborator Brendan Sullivan. With grant support from the Wikimedia Foundation, we're building an exciting new Wikiversity project to promote mathematical literacy. By attending tonight's workshop, you'll be making a huge difference, since we're expecting an education reporter from a major news outlet! Your comments could be featured in the story.

Our goal is to help students wield math as a tool for understanding their world. Since our project combines current events and math, we call it Eventmath. Basically, it's a Wikiversity learning project where math educators can share math lesson plans based on current events. Each lesson plan is based on a news article or social media post.

During the introductory talk, we'll explain that this approach to building mathematical literacy has special advantages. There will be an interactive portion afterward, where you'll have a chance to ask questions or make a small contribution to the project. The workshop runs over Zoom from 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM Eastern Time. You can register for the event through a short online form. No preparation is required to attend. You just need to show up! And of course, like everything on Wikiversity, the workshop is free.


If you cannot attend but are interested to know about future events, you're welcome to join the Eventmath mailing list. If you fill out the workshop form, we'll add you to the mailing list automatically.

Thank you so much! --Greg at Higher Math Help (discusscontribs) 18:32, 16 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Intent to deprecate RoundBox templates[edit source]

A number of pages on this wiki use these templates to apply background colors to sections of the page. While this adds a pleasant splash of color, it comes with a nasty drawback: it makes those pages incompatible with the visual editor. Any text or other content present between these two templates is treated as a single block of "template content" by the visual editor and cannot be edited normally. Users must either open the page in the source editor and edit the wikitext directly (which inexperienced users may be uncomfortable doing), or open the block in the template editor and edit the wikitext content there (which is even more cumbersome). Since the visual editor is used by default for most pages on Wikiversity, this has the effect of making it much more difficult for users to edit resources which use these templates, which may discourage them from contributing.

For an example of this behavior, view the article Ruby, then open the visual editor and try to modify any of the text on the page.

Unless there is any objection, I'd like to modify these templates to make them no longer transclude any content onto the page. This will remove the formatting they applied to pages and make it possible to use the visual editor on those pages. Once this is done, the templates can safely be removed at a later date. I realize this will make these pages less visually appealing, but usability for editors (especially ones who are new to the site!) feels like it should be a higher priority than appearance. Omphalographer (discusscontribs) 00:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I'd rather just remove the templates from pages in main space and leave the templates themselves as is. If a user wants to have round boxes in user pages, for example, it's up to them. Once the templates are removed from main space pages, we can look at any templates that include them to see if they need to be cleaned up as well. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 04:44, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Having just looked at the templates involved, I want to redouble this recommendation. Altering the base templates is not the way to go. Too many pages will be negatively impacted unnecessarily. The correct solution is to not include these templates in pages typical users would edit. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 04:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My initial concern was the sheer number of pages involved. There are 1000+ transclusions of RoundBoxTop in the main namespace alone. That's why my initial recommendation would be to disable the template at the source. That way, not only are all the pages fixed at once, but the styling can be restored if we come up with a way to make it compatible with the visual editor - doing a batch edit is slower and more intrusive, and would be harder to revert.
If you're concerned about allowing these templates to be used in userspace, it should be possible to implement that in template logic using the {{NAMESPACE}} macro. I have a bit of experience doing crazy things with templates. :) Omphalographer (discusscontribs) 05:19, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suspect the right way to do this is with mw:Help:TemplateStyles. I don't have time to work on it right now, though. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 02:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unfortunately, I don't think that's going to be sufficient here. TemplateStyles would allow the CSS in the RoundBox templates to be extracted to a separate page, but the visual editor problems are caused by the HTML elements those templates create to apply their styles to, not by the styles themselves. In this case, those element are a table, but EDIT: I've now confirmed that any other HTML element would have the same problem. Omphalographer (discusscontribs) 03:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think it should be up to the project or the primary editor whether or not to use this. For example, this is a primary design choice in all of the Motivation and emotion chapters. That's 10+ years of work by real-world students with a professor who is still active and using this resource. Likewise, any use in user space should be preserved as a choice by the user, which it was.
On the other hand, I am happy to see it removed from resources like Introduction to Computer Science. So far, I'm not sure this can or should be automated, though. Many of the resources using this are 15 years old and need more attention than just hiding the boxes. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol support vote.svg Support for your comment, Dave Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 10:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CAS4Wiki[edit source]

Pilot for using of web-based Computer Algebra in Wikiversity (CAS4Wiki) learning resources started for Mathematics with tailored predefined set of commands.--Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 10:10, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interesting! I'm looking forward to looking into this in more detail. Thanks for sharing. (By the way, your project Wiki2Reveal also looks interesting. I'm in the process of learning reveal.js myself.)--Greg at Higher Math Help (discusscontribs) 04:29, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep in mind that neither Wiki2Reveal nor CAS4Wiki is development based on scientific evidence published as articles in peer-reviewed journals. It is just a basic proof of concept and provides just an option to test a prototype in educational settings. --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 10:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikiversity featured in an article published by the Canadian Mathematical Society![edit source]

Hi all!

I wrote an article about Eventmath, a Wikiversity project, for a publication of the Canadian Mathematical Society. It was just published! The title is "An Invitation to Eventmath," and you're all invited to have a look! The article introduces Wikiversity along with Eventmath, which is a project that promotes mathematical literacy.

This is an open-access online publication, so you can read the article in this month's issue.

--Greg at Higher Math Help (discusscontribs) 04:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tres bon, mon frere! Merci. —Justin (koavf)TCM 10:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Join the Movement Charter Regional Conversation Hours[edit source]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hi all,

As most of you are aware, the Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) is currently collecting community feedback about three draft sections of the Movement Charter: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (intentions statement).

How can you participate and share your feedback?

The MCDC is looking forward to receiving all types of feedback in different languages from the community members across the Movement and Affiliates. You can participate in the following ways:

  • Attend the community conversation hours with MCDC members. Details about the regional community conversation hours are published here
  • Fill out a survey (optional and anonymous)
  • Share your thoughts and feedback on the Meta talk page
  • Share your thoughts and feedback on the MS Forum:
  • Send an email to: movementcharterAt if you have other feedback to the MCDC.

Community consultation hour for the United States and Canada will take place on Monday, 5 December 2022 on Zoom. You can check out more times here. The conversations will not be recorded, except for the section where participants are invited to share what they discussed in the breakout rooms. We will take notes and produce a summary report afterwards.

If you want to learn more about the Movement Charter, its goals, why it matters and how it impacts your community, please watch the recording of the “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter” sessions which took place earlier in November 2022.

Thank you for your participation.

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (discusscontribs) 13:51, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Marshallsumter (again)[edit source]

Radiation astronomy/Lensings uses the Commons file File:Icarus.png, which was caught up in a mass deletion request. Given that the file is in use here and the file it is derived from is in the public domain, it could theoretically be kept. But is it legitimately in use here? The page in question was created entirely by this user (and almost entirely in a ridiculous sequence of minor edits), who is now indefinitely blocked.

(By the way, this page is poorly written with excessive quotes; it needs some love from someone more familiar with Wikiversity.) Brianjd (discusscontribs) 13:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Brianjd: Thanks for tip. I opened a section on Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion and copy/pated your remark there. All further discussion on this topic belongs at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#Radiation_astronomy/Lensings.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 15:26, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On appropriate and inappropriate uses for userspace pages[edit source]

Wikiversity does not currently have a policy page discussing the appropriate and inappropriate uses for user pages and subpages. I believe this makes it an outlier among Wikimedia projects; all of the other projects I've looked at have policies setting standards for the use of these pages:

Several elements which are common to all of the userspace policies I reviewed, and which I expect to be relatively uncontroversial here, fall into the categories of:

  • Permitted content
    • User pages may be used for "basic information about yourself or your Wikimedia-related activities", as well as "limited autobiographical content", editing disclosures, and notes about a user's activity within the project
    • User subpages may additionally be used for (in no particular order) archives of user talk pages, personal writings about the project and/or its community, personal sandboxes and drafts, and technical pages like user scripts and stylesheets.
  • Disallowed content
    • Most projects start with a standard phrasing along the lines of "[Project] is not a blog, web hosting service, or social networking site". (Wikipedia adds "or memorial site".)
    • Material which is "likely to bring the project into disrepute", or which consists of "advocacy or support of grossly improper behaviors", is forbidden.
    • Advertising or "excessive self-promotional" content is forbidden.
    • Many sites disallow "polemical statements unrelated to [the project]", "statements attacking or vilifying groups of editors, persons, or other entities", and "material that can be viewed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws".
    • Pages which are used for games (like role-playing sessions) or "secret pages" are frequently forbidden.

One element which will require some careful handling will be the use of userspace for longer-term drafts and as storage for pages removed from other namespaces. Most other projects prohibit this use of user subpages - for example, Wikipedia prohibits "user pages that look like articles", and allows drafts older than six months to be deleted without discussion; Wikibooks similarly proposes that userspace "should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like textbooks, old revisions, or deleted content", and that "private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion". Since there is some substantial existing use of user pages for these purposes on Wikiversity, it would be inappropriate to impose a new policy banning that use without a transitional plan. That being said, I feel that allowing user subpages to bypass other content policies is not a sustainable approach either, especially given that Wikiversity user subpages are indexed by search engines.

So long as the community approves of my doing so, I'd like to start a draft of a userspace policy for Wikiversity, using the current Wikibooks policy as a template. If there are any serious objections to my doing so, or specific factors which should be addressed in our local policy, please let me know. Omphalographer (discusscontribs) 05:04, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I question whether Google searches user subpages. In a Google search, quotations find exact matches. The quote "assumption that the solution to Newton's second law for a mass" has been in my userspace for over 3.5 years, and Google did not find it.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 12:12, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]