User talk:Dave Braunschweig

From Wikiversity
Jump to: navigation, search

I look forward to hearing from you. So that we can all follow the discussion:

  • If you post a message on this page, I will reply on this page.
  • If I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch for your response there.


Navigation Question[edit]

Hello Dave, I was admiring the navigation in one of your courses (Python Programming). I like the way users can easily navigate from one lesson, e.g., "Introduction", to the next lesson, "Variables," by clicking the hyperlink at the bottom of the page. How might I set that up in the Create a training and development plan course I'm working on? Sorry to have to ask; I haven't found the answer in Wikiversity documentation yet. Captaininfo (discusscontribs) 19:06, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

@Captaininfo: Just create a main page that has links to the subpages you want displayed, in the order you would like the navigation to work. Then include {{subpage navbar}} at the bottom of each subpage. The subpage navbar is smart enough to read the parent page live and generate the navigation itself. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Perfect, thank you Sir! Captaininfo (discusscontribs) 19:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Question about Template:Category sidebar[edit]

Hello Dave, thanks for all your amazing edits on Wikiversity! I came across your work on Template:Category sidebar. I would love to use this in my Wikiversity work. Do you happen to know how recent the "Last Additions" and "Last Edits" are? It would be so helpful to know the exact date of last edit without having to go to page history.

On an somewhat-related note - do you know how I can learn how to create templates as awesome as yours? :) Ongmianli (discusscontribs) 16:48, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ongmianli: Template:Category sidebar depends on Module:DynamicPageList, which is based on mw:Extension:DynamicPageList (Wikimedia). I don't see anything that limits the dates by default, so it could be minutes, months, or years. But there is an addfirstcategorydate option that may help. We'd have to experiment with it to see what that generates, and whether there's any way to modify it to make it meaningful for our purposes.
Creating templates is a combination of some coding skills and lots of practice (and frustration). Start small and have a goal. Think of something you'd like to have that doesn't exist yet and then pick a starting example that helps you get there. Read mw:Help:Templates and all of the See also links at the bottom of the page. Re-read them. Read them again as you practice and find that you don't yet understand what you think each part does. Did I mention the frustration part? Expect it, but don't give up because of it. Just try to work around it. Ask for help and suggestions whenever you need them.
Figuring out how to add dates to the category sidebar might be a good first project. I'd experiment with DynamicPageList first in my own sandbox so that I know exactly how it works and how to use the addfirstcategorydate option. Once you have that, look at how to add that to either the existing template or the existing module, depending on what changes are necessary to make it work. And remember, you can't really break anything, at least not permanently. We can always undo to fix it. Be bold! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
@Dave Braunschweig:: Thank you so much, Dave! Lots to learn, indeed.. I've been trying to move everything we know about evidence based assessment, and scoring information for the best and free diagnostic screeners to Wikiversity. It's been quite the challenge!!
Here's what I've done as a start, thanks to snooping around your work! :) Evidence based assessment/Preparation phase Ongmianli (discusscontribs) 20:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your appreciation[edit]

Hello, I'm happy to see your positive feedback for my message on the Colloquium. I would like to know more precisely if you appreciated the message itself, or in particular the research of programming language internationalisation. Thank you in advance for your answer. --Psychoslave (discusscontribs) 14:36, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@Psychoslave: I appreciate your willingness to ask and your recognition / acceptance of local customs and standards. It says a lot about your approach to collaboration. I've worked briefly on internationalization / localization of content, but haven't had any exposure to internationalization of programming languages themselves. It's an interesting concept, but not one I have time to contribute to right now. I look forward to seeing more as your project develops! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 15:10, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Ok, thank you very much for this clarifications. I hope my contributions will live up to this expectations. :) --Psychoslave (discusscontribs) 16:49, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Federal Writers' Project[edit]

Could you take a look at the FederalWritersProject prefix? I'm not sure how to configure my bot to rename them to Federal Writers' Project - Life Histories and fix the broken links. They should all have template:CourseCat --mikeu talk 02:10, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mu301: YesY Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:59, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

History categories[edit]

We have Category:History of the United States and Category:American History which should be merged, preferably into United States. There are also some oddities like North American History is within the category American History and vice versa. Have we adopted a convention for a history category hierarchy? --mikeu talk 17:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mu301: Hi--"American" can also be of relation to Central/South America, FYI. Prost. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:39, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
It could. But the current arrangement is ambiguous and unclear. I would avoid American and just use North American, South American, and United States. If you want to clump north and south together I would prefer History of the Americas to clarify the scope. The use of American could mean anything from US centric to the entire hemisphere. The Dewey Decimal or LoC scheme is probably something that we should emulate with our structure. See external links at Category:History. --mikeu talk 17:47, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Most viewed pages on Wikiversity?[edit]

Ever since I found out how many views my pages have been getting, I've been interested in seeing what the most viewed pages on Wikiversity are. Is there a tool for this? ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 00:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Atcovi: See Wikiversity:Statistics. There are tools available to display most popular by day and by month. I also combine the results for the top 1000 for the year. I'll do that soon. The statistics results are somewhat surprising, and suggest that users find what they are interested in using Internet search engines rather than local resources. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


I'd be interested in your opinion on User:Mu301/Learning_blog/2018-01#The_World_Wide_Wikiverse and this discussion. Have you looked into what wikidata is currently doing and what their plans for the future are? --mikeu talk 18:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I haven't. I've made a few edits at Wikidata, but hadn't noticed any automated additions from our side. Where Wikidata ultimately goes is probably augmented reality Just as a Google search now pulls up Wikipedia explanations of subjects "above the fold" (and occasionally a Wikiversity lede!), we will start to see this type of information provided as augmented reality on our mobile devices and heads-up displays. Yes, we definitely have quality issues to address before that happens. But also see Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 135#RfC: sister projects in search results. Wikiversity isn't included in search results. Maybe the Wikidata folks have taken a different view. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 22:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Not welcome at Commons.[edit]

Re: "Not welcome at Commons based on current summary information."[1] Why? --mikeu talk 03:52, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mu301: I don't remember anymore. @Green Giant: can you help? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm just curious. Public domain looks within scope there. --mikeu talk 04:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello Dave and @Mu301: Thank you for pointing this out. It seems you (Dave) tried to transfer the file to Commons in March 2016 but forgot to add a PD tag. It was deleted because it had no license for seven days. I’m pretty confident that it really is PD, so I have restored it and added a PD-anon-1923 tag, which should mean it isn’t a problem for Commons anymore. The local file can be deleted or kept if you wish but it is now on my watch list so I’ll keep an eye on it on Commons. Green Giant (discusscontribs) 13:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I’ve deleted the local copy. Green Giant (discusscontribs) 13:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Confusion on the Draft space vote/discussion[edit]

Dave, I was looking at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#All_other_options_(e.g.,_move_to_subspace_X) and have noticed that the discussion morphed into a vote on whether to create a Draft: space soon after you brought it up in a discussion. I advocated it, but don't think I have actually voted. I see a Symbol support vote.svg Support at the top just prior to what I believe is Green Giant's vote. I seemed to have caused confusion by inserting a comment into Green Giant's territory that makes it appear that was my vote. Later, I wrote "General support for the Green Giant suggestions", but there is no vote. If Green Giant supports, where is his vote? I am not rushing you to declare consensus (but won't complain if you do!)--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 19:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

This is happening too often. (It's not just you, Guy, a number of others including myself are doing the same thing.) We really need a better system going forward where we have a clearly demarcated discussion area followed by a simple voting area (with comments banned from the later, but allowing diff links to discussion above.) Otherwise these forums become quickly unreadable. I'm not sure if what I just described is the best solution, just throwing it out there. --mikeu talk 20:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I commented out some of the discussion and created an new header for the voting. The count is 5-2 but I demand a recount! Noto Emoji Oreo 1f921.svg Where is my vote?--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 04:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
@Guy vandegrift: You have a general support bullet point. If that doesn't seem sufficient to you, please edit as necessary. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
We should carefully examine the "hanging chad" on that one to determine voter intent ;) --mikeu talk 16:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Should we begin to discuss the structure of draftspace now?[edit]

I was thinking of starting the conversation on how draftspace should be configured. I have a lot on my plate, and would rather postpone till later...But: I have noticed that sometimes the phrabricator request is denied or delayed. If that is the case, it might be nice to have some details I can show them. To prevent the debate from getting chaotic, I would work on a blog in my userspace. If you think this advanced draftspace planning a necessary precaution, let me know and I will begin soon. Otherwise I postpone and just contemplate.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 14:22, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Guy vandegrift: It's interesting you mention that. See phabricator:T184957. I haven't tested yet, but we're technically ready to begin drafting. My proposal would be to create a "Proposed draft" category to tag things with. It could be similar to Proposed deletion, but with a much shorter window, such as 7 days or 30 days. Anything still labeled Proposed draft after that time period would be moved to draft space by bot. The more challenging aspect will be content that is proposed draft but objected to by the primary or only contributor. That may require wider consensus. But, yes, we need to start a page somewhere, and we need to begin the process of establishing what the community considers to be draft vs. non-draft content. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Dave Braunschweig, Please Delete it first Draft:Sandbox/Jayprakash12345.--Jayprakash12345 (discusscontribs) 14:59, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
@Jayprakash12345: If we do an administrative move (move with delete vs. move with redirect), it should have the same effect, correct? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 15:07, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Personally I'd like to test drive Draft space before offering an opinion on how we use it. It is probably a good idea to leave redirects from Draft to main, but not the reverse. I'd also like to exclude Draft from robots.txt --mikeu talk 17:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I agree with mikeu about the test drive. That is why I am putting my ideas into a personal userspace blog. Also, questions about redirects and robots.txt are beyond my expertise. I will instead focus on creating an efficient decision-making board. I need help from people familiar with what the WMF foundation will and will not allow. So far, all I have is sort of a "mission statement" for my blog at User:Guy vandegrift/Blog/Draft space governance-Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs)
Why don't you move your blog entry to Draft: space? :) Really, that is what it is there for and we can then "publish" it back to your blog when it is "finished." I've created Draft:Mu301 but it is currently just an empty page. --mikeu talk 18:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I suggest we purpose Category:Draft and put those pages into something like Category:Draft essays (or a similar name like documents, etc.) to free up the Draft category for the new namespace. --mikeu talk 18:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
@Mu301: What do you think of moving the blog into Draft:Draftspace governance, with the understanding that it later goes to Wikiverity:Draftspace governance?--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 21:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I was just casually suggesting that we use any page in Draft: for our discussion as "practice" and testing. Usually, discussions like this should occur at the Wikiversity:Namespaces talk page, and then the final text gets copied to a section there. --mikeu talk 21:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
It would be fun to move my User:Guy vandegrift/Blog/Draft space governance into Draft:Governance. I would remove the fancy blog templates, and we could discuss governance in general. We need to find a way to expedite decision-making in a way that permits impartial appeals. I think the way is first, to make it comfortable for projects to reside outside mainspace, and second, to decentralize decision-making in the same fashion that WikiJournals facilitate independent assessments by different groups of people ... Alternatively, you could tinker with bots and such in Draft:Figuring out draft space...or maybe create both pages?--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 00:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: What are the numbers of the new Draft: and Draft_talk: and do we need to update pywikibot source? --mikeu talk 21:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mu301: See . I don't think Pywikibot itself would change. It should query namespaces when it needs to. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:21, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

FITS image upload[edit]

Is it possible to add a file type to image uploads? Currently we have:

Permitted file types: tiff, tif, png, gif, jpg, jpeg, webp, xcf, pdf, mid, ogg, ogv, svg, djvu, oga, flac, opus, wav, webm, mp3.

I'd like to add w:FITS which is a widely used astronomy format. I'm not even sure if wikimedia would render the image in the file page, but it would be useful to host sample data for learning projects. --mikeu talk 04:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mu301: It appears to be possible, but not under our control. See mw:Manual:$wgFileExtensions. It would require agreement and a Phabricator request. I can't find anything that suggests FITS images can be viewed directly in a browser. It looks like it either requires server configuration (an mw extension), some type of browser add-in, or a local application. Unless we can put the pieces together so that images can be rendered / visible, there may not be any advantage to hosting them with the file extension. What about linking to to provide sample files for learning projects? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 04:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Is this CC-BY from a OpenStax ancillary powerpoint presentation a copyvio?[edit]

Dave-It would be great for the reputation of WV if this can be hosted here, and it would be convenient for me any my students. Is it a copyvio? See File:OpenStax Astronomy CH01 ImageSlideshow.pdf--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 16:43, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Guy vandegrift: It's open content, CC-BY 4.0. See the last slide in the presentation. Yes, it can be hosted here. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 16:57, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Great. As a professional courtesy, my offer to OpenStax to delete will stand if they object (and I will stay out of any ensuing "undelete" discussions.) It's strange that they placed these materials on an "instructory-only" page.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 17:04, 23 January 2018 (UTC)