From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Following on from SB_Johnny's ideas here I'd like to propose that this page become Topic:Sustainability. Countrymike 21:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

could we also have a Topic: page? I have just rearranged things here to be more of a learning resource.

Hope I have not upset anyone by rearranging this ... and that we can co-develop something generic and useful to a wide range of courses etc. Kim 01:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Rename page[edit source]

I feel this should be moved to "Sustainability - Activities, Resources and Community" as this more acurately reflects its content.Leutha (discusscontribs) 08:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the opportunity to explain this. The organizational concept has been discussed on a few obscure pages, and mentioned here and there.
  • No, it should not be moved. All Wikiversity resources contain or are encouraged to contain or refer to "activities, resources, and community." Hence those additional words are an unnecessary and useless complication. Longer names, as well, then make subpage names even longer. Wikiversity has many ways of organizing content. Maybe too many! (It can be vastly confusing to newcomers and even old-timers). However, organizing mainspace using subpage structure (this began with Wikibooks) is straightforward and obvious. So suppose there is a sustainability community (and there is). That can be covered under Sustainability/Community. Very simple. There can be more than one community, so one of them could be Sustainability/Community/SUSTAINed.
  • This structure is easy to create and easy to maintain. I have seen the effect: it encourages participation, or, at worst, does not depress it. (Except it depresses the placing of deletion tags!) Someone might want to write a little essay on some aspect of sustainability. They may do that as a subpage. For neutrality, when I see these essays floating around in mainspace, I, and others, will move it under a resource, often as a subpage of an Essay subpage, attributing it. Those pages, if not well-written, or if stubby, were often deleted. If they are quite poor, not readily useful to others, I'll move them to user space, because they may still be useful for the user, and the user's educational process is important to us.
  • If they were created by IP, I may move them to User:Abd/Playspace for a time. (See Wikiversity:Playspace. Others, such as Dave, simply prod them. The playspace move provides no specific time limit. (But I may also prod pages in my Playspace.) Similar concepts have been used. A series of allegedly "incomprehensible physics" pages were moved under a resource by that name and tagged as fringe. (That name was POV, but, hey, this was done by a member of the WMF Board!) Later, these pages were either adopted by a user (a physicist) or tagged for proposed deletion. That has all been cleaned up now.
  • I have thought of Wikiversity mainspace as containing, at the top level, a list of "offerings," including classes, books, seminars, as might be seen in an organized index to courses in a full university. While we could have a organizing table of contents for Wikiversity, creating and maintaining this is likely impractical at this point. That is, it's ragged and unreliable. Having the pagenames reflect the content, clearly, and having them automatically place the resource in a hierarchy of knowledge, moves in this direction, doing no harm.
  • Where a topic is narrow, it is offered as a "seminar" underneath a main topic. Underneath topics are studies relating to the topic. A class may consist of a series of seminars and discussion groups on the topic of the class. Students write essays.
  • Where conflict has developed over the mainspace page content, I have forked it. That is, a university course may have sections led by different graduate students. The leader of a class may present their opinions. The catalog presents these as sections with named "teachers." (Here we are all learners and teachers.) This has completely defused conflict where, on Wikipedia, the same issues produced massive conflict, ArbComm cases, etc. The Wikipedia solution created impoverished content; if it were reliable that the content remaining was actually neutral, that's okay for an encyclopedia. Sometimes it's neutral! In a university, no. The entire field is studied in a well-developed class. Including fringe, including recent developments, primary sources, etc.
  • I've thought of adopting some standard structure of knowledge. I generally assume that if there is a Wikipedia article on the topic, we may consider a separate resource on that topic. However, that's just a guide, and Wikipedia is quite ragged in this, there are mainspace pages there that are clearly what we would use a subpage for. For example, "List of" pages are just a supporting document. I've seen raging controversies there over the inclusion or exclusions of a particular item in such lists. We would have no problem, if there are competing lists, we would have alternate subpages. Or a "consensus" list with supplemental subpages that are user opinions.
  • Leutha, I highly recommend that you study subpage structure and how it is being used. The move you suggest will not improve access for anyone, and it will make creating subpages more cumbersome (pagenames get even longer). The "content" of a page shifts, by the way.
  • In organizing, I often create a stub to contain a page with substantial content. Anyone looking at the subpage, and subpages are just as easy to find through portals, categories, etc, as top-level pages, can move up a level to the containing topic and see what closely-related resources might exist. The top-level page becomes like a table of contents in a book, which is how it's used on Wikibooks. Only better. This is hypertext, in fact, a vision I was involved with since the 1980s.
  • Many think of Wikiversity as a collection of handouts for classes, very primitive. The concept of "learning by doing" does not seem to come naturally to encyclopedists. I guarantee you, though, if you want to learn a topic deeply, create an exploration of the topic on Wikiversity. Your study will quickly overwhelm what a single page should contain. Whether the topic is top-level or not doesn't matter. Subpage structure, using subpage links, is movable. If a subpage is extensively developed and consensus appears that it should be stand-alone, it's a single button push for a custodian to move the entire structure, and the internal links will still work. --Abd (discusscontribs) 15:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)