User talk:Dionysios

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is the Talk Page of Dionysios, the Founder of the Wikiversity School of Advanced General Studies.

  • If Dionysios should leave a comment on your talk page, please post your response there.
  • If you leave a comment on this talk page, Dionysios will post his response here.
  • Please do not split up the discussions between your talk page and this one. Thank you in advance for your assistance.


how do I start a research project[edit]

Some many languages are rapidly dissapearing. But other than everything i have read i no experiance in the field, what groups offer an internship? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.156.37.34 (talkcontribs) 13:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Exchange of Messages Re: Cognition[edit]

Thank you for going to work on Thought 5501.01: Cognition. Somebody has to actually do something. (Your Servant has been too much of a Generalist.) :-) (s) Dionysios, a Participant in the Wikiversity School of Advanced General Studies, Date: 2007-07-03 (July 3, 2007) Time: 210701 UTC

I'm not sure how you wanted to develop Thought 5501.01. --JWSchmidt 21:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Your Servant has no particular plan or desire as to how Thought 5501.01 or any other Wikiendeavor should develop, but rather, he is pleased to see an organic growth as the Wikisphere does that which it does.
Your work pleases Your Servant very much.
(s) Dionysios, Date: 2007-07-04 (July 4, 2007) Time: 1400 UTC
Certainly. Let us do it. The Institute for Thought hereby undertakes Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Cognition, and Artificial Consciousness.
The flexibility of the Course Numbering System should permit a logical method of tying together the diverse areas of AI, ACog, AConscious, and Cognitive Science generally with each other and the underlying disciplines of Anthropology, Information Science, Linguistics, Neuroscience, Computer Science, Philosophy, Physics, Psychology, etc. -- (s) Dionysios, Date: 2007-07-05 (July 5, 2007) Time: 1303 UTC

Have you dropped by Artificial Consciousness Lately? Not knowing anything about your own work, I have been probably breaking old ground trying to turn Artificial Consciousness into a course. you might want to take a look at it, and give me feedback --Graeme E. Smith 21:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

School of Biology: Department of Tropical Diseases[edit]

hi!how are u? i had started a new department in School of Biology call Departament of tropical diseases!u can help me on this?

thanks very much man!well i want to know how i can started the work and is u want to eding me the page to write there the first pageand then i'll adding more thinks about tropical diseases and also links to the university where u can learn this antd to hospital!ok?i'll wait ur answer!

Your edits[edit]

FYI, the "+" button automatically adds text at the bottom—this is where most Wikiversity regulars will incline to adding comments, as well. However, because I happened to notice your request, I'm placing it here (I almost didn't notice the commet, however).

I think one of the big problems with confusion that is happening is that you have some really good ideas of what you think you're doing, and where you want to go with Wikiversity, including some very creative and original projects (and stuff). That's fine—creative and original is great for Wikiversity right now. The thing you need to remember, however, is that no one else knows what's going inside your head, and often we're confused by the seemingly erratic pattern of your edits. Your commentary often does not help: the fact that it's written entirely in the third person (and generally in the passive voice) makes it somewhat more obscure to begin with, and your use of headers in the middle of discussions and be somewhat jarring (it's somewhat better for me now that I'm used to all this, but at first it was quite disorienting), but beyond all that, you're not effectively communicating in simple, easy-to-understand terms what it is you are trying to do. I think that's one of the biggest obstacles right now in getting people to appreciate what you're doing and what's going on.

I think it's great you're here at Wikiversity, but I think you're going to really have to work at communicating what you're doing so that other people can understand and support you more effectively in your projects (rather than having us get confused and act in ways that seem to give you "red lights").

If you wish to respond, please do so (per normal Wikiversity convention) at my talk page, at the bottom, with a new section header (== title ==), and please do not break the discussion there with additional subheaders. The Jade Knight 11:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

A few more comments: If you just happen to really like the passive voice and third person, that's fine. There's nothing wrong with personal idiosyncrasies—just be aware that they may cause mild disorientation for others at first.
In your response, I actually ignored most of your subheaders. IMO, they serve simply to break up what is otherwise a continuous and (somewhat) fluid response, and get in the way more than anything. On rare occasions, on talk pages, they can be warranted—such as when a new comment is being added to a previous discussion that is not a) a response to another specific comment, and b) departs in a significant direction from what has already been discussed. I am not using one in this discussion, despite it having multiple topics, because it is all a single response, because they would interrupt the unity of the response, etc. I am not saying that my way (albeit the "normal" way) is the correct way. But it is what I prefer, and when you leave messages on my talk page, I would prefer it if you would not break them with subheaders unless there is a particularly compelling reason to do so (say you wanted to add a comment relating to a header, but not a response to any current discussion). (Another problem with subheaders is they can quickly make a table of contents huge, making it, in essence, harder to find major topics, rather than easier.)
Finally, I'd like to encourage you to link to wiktionary at times, instead of just Wikipedia; several of your links to Wikipedia do not actually contain entries, and so are unhelpful in that regard, particularly as it seems you intend rather to provide definitions of words. Generally, though, you only need to link to things that people would find helpful—when commenting on my own talk page, providing a link to my user page is rather unnecessary, though it may be helpful if you were referring to me in a discussion somewhere else where I was absent. The Jade Knight 22:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Topic:CommunicationBeta[edit]

so, what do you think? should communicationß replace the actual broken communication page? if you agree/disagree, please place your comments at Topic_talk:CommunicationBeta instead of moving by yourself.

by the way, nice rurouni syntax.
capi talk 15:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

2007[edit]

"Archived Discussions for 2007, not 2006" <-- thanks for noticing!

On a more interesting topic, what are you thinking/learning/writing about lately? --JWSchmidt 16:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

"what among your many Thoughts, Discoveries, and Writings are you finding most Compelling just Now?" <-- I saw "Guiding Students with Multimedia Content focused on helping the Student take the Next Right Step" at Wikisphere and I have been thinking lately about support at Wikiversity for video content. Hopefully by the end of this year we will have a way to play video right inside Wikiversity pages. I've been learning how to render 3D animations and thinking about collaborative video creation. --JWSchmidt 22:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Capitalizations[edit]

Hi Dionysios - I am finding many of your posts on Wikiversity either hard to understand or read, and my feeling is that I'm not alone in sensing this. Would you consider posting a little differently in the future, say, with less capitalizations? I know it would help me very much in understanding your posts better. Thanks. --HappyCamper 15:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser discussions[edit]

Hi Dionysios. If you can spare the time, your opinion would be greatly appreciated in the discussion currently going on about getting local Checkuser permissions here on Wikiversity. As an active user here, you're probably familiar with the "quiet, behind the scenes" way that we introduce new Custodians, but requesting Checkuser actually requires a "show of support" for the foundation stewards to give us this tool.

If you're not familiar with Checkuser, it's a tool we can use to find the source IP address (and/or alternate accounts) of vandals and others who mean harm to the project. This allows us to both "stop the problem at the source", or in some cases lets us know we can't stop something at the source if an IP is shared by one or more constructive contributors. --SB_Johnny | talk 11:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you...[edit]

Thank you for the links re Communicationsβ and reading materials. Will go back when I've read at least some of them. Shir-El too 22:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

requests[edit]

These requests for custodian action do not seem to require custodian action. I suggest that you take the action that you feel is justified. --JWSchmidt 18:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion template[edit]

You asked why I did not remove the template myself. The answer is this: there is a small consensus in favour of deletion, but not a large consensus yet. If there is consensus against deletion, the template goes. If there is a clear consensus for deletion, the page will be deleted. If there is a neutral result or only a small consensus, the template remains so that more people can state their opinion. It makes no difference how strongly you oppose deletion - you can only vote once. Please respect the opinions of others and wait for more votes. It is quite possible the voting may last for months. -- McCormack 04:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well... Just to point out (if necessary) that it's not strictly a vote - evaluating consensus is a more complex process than counting votes. But I'm pretty sure McCormack knows that... Cormaggio talk 16:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC) (By the way, I'll monitor talk pages for responses - there's no need to copy them to my talk page - thanks! Cormaggio talk 17:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC))


It's pretentious wank, but funny and entertaining and self referential pretentious wank...let it lay there...isn't doing any harm.

Aptitude Test[edit]

You are invited to visit this project and explore/contribute to its parameters. Thank you, Shir-El too 15:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

If it is not impolite to ask: why do you refer to yourself as your servant?. If I offend - I sincerely appologise. Thank you, Shir-El too 03:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the question "why do you refer to yourself as your servant?". There is no apology in order for your asking; it should always be in order to seek to be informed, especially in an educational institution. No offense is taken; and your servant is pleased to answer: your servant is an Orthodox Christian evangelist who seeks to be a servant of the servants of God. -- D (talk), Date: 2007-09-18 (September 18, 2007) Time: 1746 UTC

Thank you for the reply...[edit]

which now begs the question: who are the servants of God? Though maybe I could guess. Still, it is better to ask than to ass-u-me. Have a Good Day, Shir-El too 19:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for your follow-up question "who are the servants of God?". You say maybe you could guess; your servant would be interested in knowing what you might have guessed. For his present purpose his answer is "The servants of God are just that, the servants of God. Best regards, -- D (talk), Date: 2007-09-21 (September 21, 2007) Time: 1710 UTC

My guess...[edit]

Either the Evangelists or the priesthood; which you are studying for? In any case God Bless You and have a Good Week! Shir-El too 21:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Your servant has been commissioned an Orthodox Christian evangelist; he studies to shew himself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. And God also bless you. Best regards, -- D (talk), Date: 2007-09-23 (September 23, 2007) Time: 1048 UTC

Hello again... and goodbye[edit]

In the last few weeks I've become more and more active on WP {same user name}, together with the realization that I don't learn well in this WV environment; I've been too unstructured for most of my life, so the stimulus of a buffet works better for me. But I didn't want to leave without saying goodbye - and thank you - and hope to meet you around the Wiki-verse 'sometime again.' Be Well and God Bless, Shir-El too 19:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC) PS Irish blessing: May your troubles be less,/ may your blessings be more,/ and may nothing but happiness/ come through your door.

Greetings Shir-El too! Thank you for stopping by to say "Hello; goodbye." It has been a pleasure seeing you work at WikiVersity. Please do come back when you get a chance. we need you! In the meantime we will be looking for you at WikiPedia and around the WikiVerse. Zie Gezunt;and King of the Universe bless you, D, Date: 2007-10-21 (October 21, 2007) Time: 1940 UTC

Organizational changes at the School of Theology[edit]

Please see my comments on the School of Theology talk page. Guðsþegn 00:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I undid your last edit. Reformational (i.e. Pre-Reformation, Reformation, and modern Evangelical groups) and Restorational (i.e. Campbellite, Mormon (at least the few sects that are open to Trinitarianism), and Pentecostal groups) are major tradition branches of Christianity, just as Catholic and Orthodox are. -- Guðsþegn 03:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Theology[edit]

Why did you remove your name from the list of participants? -- Guðsþegn 18:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Greetings God's Messenger. Your servant must disagree with your reversion in which you return the "Reformational" studies and the "Restorational" studies, as you term them, to the "Traditional Christian" umbrella.
While some of these "Reformers" of Western Christendom and would be "Restorers" of a True Faith might bear allegiance to Protestant Tradition or some other Christian or Para-Christian Tradition, it should be clear to you as it is clear to your servant, that these "Reformers" and "Restorers" have no use for "the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" of which the Apostle Jude exhorts the faithful that we should "earnestly contend".
Your servant finds that the reversion creates a breach so wide that he must continue his Orthodox Christian Studies elsewhere. May you have good success with the Wikiversity School of Theology; your servant finds your work very interesting and will follow it closely.
(s) D, Date: 2007-10-25 (October 25, 2007) Time: 1917 UTC
Well, I'm sorry to hear that. As a Reformed Baptist, I am a bit disturbed by your desire to banish Protestants from the Kingdom of God. If I were to limit Christian tradition to only those that I believed were on the road to Heaven, then I would have to excise most of the Reformational branch (i.e. my own branch), 99% of the Restorational and Roman Catholic branches, and yes, 99% of your beloved Eastern Orthodox branch. However, Wikiversity is not about me. Nor is it about you. A less theologically correct and more historically generous definition is required in situations like this (i.e. doing an online public university). I hope you change your mind. -- Guðsþegn 00:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Does God's Messenger want a Dionysios to work in the School of Theology? If so, He had best be kind.
By all means, Be bold; but also please be civil. Wikiversity Collegiality ought to require that we not step on too many traditions without due care.
In the humble opinion of your servant, the Wikiversity School of Theology is no place for reversion wars.
Twice you reverted efforts by your servant to keep the Department of Orthodox Christian Studies true to an Orthodox perspective. It was easier to go elsewhere.
A department of Orthodox Christian Studies in the School of Theology was a part of Wikiversity long before your arrival; your servant welcomed and welcomes your arrival.
But the prevailing wisdom before your arrival was that multi-disciplinary and secular study of religion would take place in a interdisciplinary Division of Religious Studies.
And the prevailing wisdom before your arrival was that studies within the School of Theology could be undertaken to help participants understand more truly one's own religious tradition or could be undertaken with the goal of preservation of religious traditions, reform of particular traditions, or to apply the resources of a particular religious traditions to some present day problem, situation, or need.
It is not presently clear what direction you desire for the School of Theology; but Your servant will try again. He will restore his name to the list of School of Theology participants; he will copy the above conversation to the School of Theology discussion page and will there make his response to the points that you have raised above; and eventually he will learn whether there is room for Orthodoxy in the Wikiversity School of Theology.
(s) D, Date: 2007-10-28 (October 28, 2007) Time: 1915 UTC, updated Date: 2007-11-28 (November 28, 2007) Time: 1717 UTC

Stop that.[edit]

Sarcastically piping someone's name is a rather distasteful breach of civility. --SB_Johnny | talk 09:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Please forgive your servant for quoting your excellent thought without checking with you first; although your servant does not understand how he has been in any way sarcastic, he has replaced the quotation with roughly equivalent text of his own authorship.
Dionysios (talk), Founder of the Wikiversity School of Advanced General Studies, Date: 2007-11-28 (November 28, 2007) Time: 1717 UTC

... and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest...[edit]

Adrian Ludwig Richter 022.jpg

May you and yours have all the best of this Season's Greetings: a

Very Merry Christmas
and a
Happy New Year.

Shir-El too 01:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Curriculum[edit]

Do the active participants wish to collaborate on an overall curriculum?

Proposed improvements[edit]

I saw that you are a member of the School of Engineering. May I suggest that you have a look at this: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Improving_Technical_Topics_At_Wikiversity and try to consider these ideas as you develop content and help other to do the same? Please let me know if you have comments/feedback on these ideas! Daviddoria 16:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Controversies in Science[edit]

I'm thinking of putting my Controversies in Science (1st year University General Education course) onto Wikiversity. Can I open up a dialog with you about my ideas on how I think I should go about this, and questions that I have?Areil314 15:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

new user[edit]

I'm new at Wikipedia and find it fun and deeply smart.As some topics like Image Quality Assessment, Perception or Cognitive Science talk to me, I try to find to participate somehow. But I really don't know where to go ? To be no longer confused, I'm wondering if there will be some discussions and/or presentations around Image Quality, Quality of Experience, Human Computer Interaction, and Cognitive Sciences.

At last, as I'm French (you surely notice my accent) I'll be pleased to discuss around some departments of the "Faculté de Psychologie" and of the "Projet de Sciences Cognitives" of the French Wikipédia. (The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stefane.paris (talkcontribs) ) 08:14, 14 February 2014‎

Stephane, User:Dionysios has not edited Wikiversity since 2007, and may not see your message. The only SUL attached account is at Commons, also no edits since 2007. You could try emailing the user. There are other accounts under that name, but are not shown as attached and are probably not the same person.
This is not Wikipedia, of course, but it is possible to discuss subjects here, which is often discouraged on the Wikipedias. In any case, welcome to Wikiversity. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions. --Abd (discusscontribs) 20:20, 24 February 2014 (UTC)