User talk:Guy vandegrift/Archive 3

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Questions about reorganizing and renaming subpages[edit]

Dear Dave Braunschweig: I plan to move and/or rename several subpages next week because it is between semesters. Is there anything I can or should do to minimize your effort? I am the sole author of virtually everything. All of the cleaning up involves subpages (including quizzes) of my six courses, plus physics equations. The courses are:

Common core Trig based Calc based
How things work college course (permalink) [[Trig based physics college course I]] [[Calc based physics college course I]]
[[Intro astronomy college course]] [[Trig based physics college course II]] [[Calc based physics college course II]]

I have three questions/ideas, but don't feel obligated to answer all of them. I will adopt the principle that "silence denotes consent": Anything you don't tell me not to do is assumed OK.

  1. Should I make any effort to cluster my moves and renames so that you can simultaneously "approve" in batches?
  2. Should I fix only names that I find most confusing, or is it OK for me to rename every subpage under a new naming convention that I have yet to devise?
  3. Perhaps you don't even care what I do because moves and renames cause you ZERO effort?

--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 17:39, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't have to approve anything. But it can be easier if I do the moves, because custodians can move main and subpages in a single click rather than moving each page individually. I also have a bot that can be used to move pages if the renames are more complicated. There's no advantage to not fixing everything. If you're fixing, fix it. I care, but only because I'd like the resources to be easily found in searches. The work isn't that significant either way. If you want me to do the moves, just give me a list of old title, new title with a common delimiter in between each item. I can do it in a single run, probably less than 10 minutes work for me.
It seems to me that the new names should start with Physics. A search for Physics now finds the Physics equations content, but not your courses. It's also not necessary to include either college or course in the title. Those are attributes the content can be tagged with instead. I might be inclined to try Physics I, Physics II, Physics I with Calculus and Physics II with Calculus myself, but it's not my field. Likewise, starting any title with Intro or Introduction just means no one will ever find it. Astronomy I might work and keep within the same theme. When I'm in doubt on naming, I try to look around at other things that already exist, such as Wikipedia article titles, Wikibooks titles, open source book titles, etc. People looking for your content are going to look for titles that match. If you start with Calc and Trig, you're attracting math students rather than physics students. Just my perspective, anyway. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:06, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
I won't need help moving the subpages because I plan to reorganize each resource in such a way that simplifies subpage structure. This is one of those projects where it is easiest to start from scratch, and having a new main namespace name (e.g. Physics I (Calculus)) will make this even easier. By the way, I find [[Template:physeq]]' extremely helpful. The TOC allows me to quickly find any collection of equations, and the nowiki at the end of each section allows me to copy/paste the call command. It's a lot easier than copying and pasting actual equations. The template gives the final product a somewhat amateurish look, with bullets starting each equation, and definitions of the variables always following on the same line. But the system is consistent, and people can get accustomed to it.[[Template:physeq]] allows me to put the same equation into an "essay" in Physics equations, a hint section at the start of each wikiquiz, as well as in the formula sheet students use to take the in-class exams. Students seem to like the system, and attendance is dropping at lectures because students realize they can learn the material directly from the resource. I have had no sabotage, but as a precaution students are given permalinks to each subpage.
I have had a lot of stupid ideas in my long quest to find a better way to teach, but so far this one seems to be a winner--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 23:59, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Request to move pages with subpages[edit]

I have now settled on a structure for the six courses I routinely teach, and will soon request the following moves:

  1. Move Intro astronomy college course to Astronomy college course
  2. Move Calc_based_physics_college_course_I to User:Guy vandegrift/Calc_based_physics_college_course_I
  3. Move Calc_based_physics_college_course_II to User:Guy vandegrift/Calc_based_physics_college_course_II
  4. MoveTrig based physics college course I to User:Guy vandegrift/Trig_based_physics_college_course_I
  5. MoveTrig based physics college course II to User:Guy vandegrift/Trig_based_physics_college_course_II
  • I am flexible on the first name change, but Astronomy college course is a nice match to How things work college course.
  • The other four resources will be combined into one resource called Physics equations, which links to [openstax Physics]. The latter is a first rate open source trig-based physics textbook. (Optional calculus lessons will be incorporated into Physics equations).
  • I am flexible on the name for Physics equations, but have largely sentimental reasons for choosing it. This project started about a year before I learned about Wikiversity. The original Physics equations was a first semester Latex-based document that I posted on my website. I discovered Wikiversity just as I was about to begin the Latex version second semester version of Physics equations. In fact, I was looking for a reason NOT to write Physics equations when my google search led me to Wikiversity -- I wouldn't waste my time writing a resource if it already existed.
  • One more request: I carefully read this copyright notice on openstax Physics and concluded that putting that resource on my website was 100% legal. Am I correct? --guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 19:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
I moved the Astronomy content. I'm holding off on the others for now because I don't yet understand the advantage. Why move them to user space if that's not the final destination? If you want them all under a single roof, why don't we just do that now?
Regarding CC-BY-SA reuse, yes, you can put that one on your website. I personally would just link to it, but if you want to host it, you can.
Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 22:27, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
It's OK not to move them. The ultimate fate of the other four is to be deleted, as Physics equations will serve as the single resource for both semesters of both (trig and calculus) courses. At the moment none of them (Calc...I, Calc...II, Trig...I, Trig...II)are very useful anybody but me. But I won't delete them until I am absolutely certain that everything useful on them has been moved. So if you don't mind them sitting in namespace for a couple of months, don't move them. Either way works for me. Thanks for moving Astronomy college course--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 23:39, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Double Redirects[edit]

Hi! I wanted to alert you to a situation that has arisen from the recent content moves. The MediaWiki software only supports one automatic redirect. Double redirects must be corrected manually. Please take a look at Special:DoubleRedirects. The links on the left should either be corrected to point to the pages on the right, or tagged for deletion if they are not needed. In most cases, the links in the middle should be tagged for deletion as an unused redirect once the first change is made. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 12:49, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Dave Braunschweig: I just went to Special:DoubleRedirects and the first page listed was Physics equations/Lab 01c-introduction, which was crossed out. According to Special:DoubleRedirects, this means that it "has been solved". I put a {{delete|not needed}} template on [[Physics equations/Lab 01c-introduction]] because I my understanding is that nothing links to it.
  1. Is that what you meant by manually correcting the redirect?
  2. Do you want me to speedy delete the other pages that I caused to be on Special:DoubleRedirects?

The problem occurred because I at first created the new version of Physics equations using a badly constructed naming scheme. I "changed my mind" after creating links such as [[Physics equations/Lab 01c-introduction]] because only the letter "c" in the identifies which lab is being referred to in the (first) chapter "01-Introduction".

The new scheme is much better, but requires two level of subpages. Consider for example: [[/01-Introduction/A:mathReview]]

  1. "01-Introduction" informs us that this refers to the first chapter, called Introduction
  2. "A" informs students that it is an activity, and therefore not nearly as important to students as a wikiquiz (labeled "Q")
  3. "mathReview" is a one-word description of the sub-sub page.

The conversion to the more sensible naming scheme is complete, and I have no immediate plans to create any more double redirects, and am waiting for your response to know if you want me to go to Special:DoubleRedirects and delete the other middle (redirect) links. Thanks for your efforts! --guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 21:07, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, when I posted this morning, the double-redirects had not yet been corrected. Someone ran a 'bot' that fixed them all for you. However, now when you look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Physics_equations/01-Introduction/A:mathReview as an example, you'll see there are two redirects pointing to that page, neither of which need to exist as far as I can tell. The same is likely true for the other redirects. I'll have to check them and see.
Don't worry about creating redirects. If you need to move a page, you need to move it. This is more a matter of addressing what gets left behind after the move. If you know a redirect is no longer necessary, just tag it for deletion and we can clean it up.
Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I cleaned up what I could. There are three pages remaining that I can't delete because something is pointing to them. See Special:DoubleRedirects. You should check and see if there's any other links that should be corrected regarding these three pages. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:48, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

I cleaned up more double redirects. Check [[Physics equations/Optics/Quiz]]</nowki>. I'm not sure if that's where you wanted it, or if it should have been the longer name. You can move/rename if it's not correct. -- [[User:Dave Braunschweig|Dave Braunschweig]] ([[User talk:Dave Braunschweig|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dave Braunschweig|contribs]]) 14:10, 11 May 2014 (UTC) ::Thanks. I accidentally answered at the end of the next section [[User_talk:Guy_vandegrift#Deletion_Requests]] == Deletion Requests == I deleted the pages that clearly were requested. There are others remaining that appear to be delete by inclusion (transclusion) rather than intentional. First see <nowiki>[[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Physeq]]. Then see Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion. If you do want the remaining pages deleted, remove existing content and address any incoming links first. If you don't want them deleted, clean up links to Template:Physeq before someone else deletes them. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

You should deal with what links to the template as I've wrapped the deletion request inside <noinclude></noinclude> to keep other pages from appearing in the speedy deletion category. -- darklama  14:01, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes,Template:Physeq has about a dozen links leading to it. I will clean that up right now.
Also, I noticed that Template:Physeq appears on the Colloquium. Should I "nowiki" that call for the now-defunct template, or should I leave alone on the grounds that we are not supposed to edit discussions? (My guess is that the need to "de-link" overrides, and that I should remove the link from the Colloquium, but will wait for a response first.)--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 15:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Transcludes are the problem, because they invite deleting of the content that includes the template. A link to the template just goes red. Since you do have demonstrations of the template in the Colloquium, you probably should nowiki those, with a Minor Edit comment why. Or, you could nowiki and add a follow-up post of where the content is now, just for the record. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 16:19, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
I finally cleared out all uses of the [[Template:Physeq]]. Should I remove the <noinclude></noinclude> or let one of the professionals do the deed? --guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 17:28, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. FYI, Special:WhatLinksHere is a page not a template, and anything inside a <noinclude></noinclude> still shows up on the source page, but will not be part of any page that transcludes it, this is how templates can be documented without including the documentation along with the template function for example. When proposing to delete a template, the deletion template should be placed inside a <noinclude></noinclude> so as not to nominate all other pages for deletion too. There is no need to remove <noinclude></noinclude> before deletion. -- darklama  17:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I just noticed that Special:PrefixIndex/Calc_based_physics_college_course_I displays all the subpages to the deleted [[Calc_based_physics_college_course_I]]. Is this something we should worry about?--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 18:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC) I just realized that I created this problem by 'copy/creating' these pages when I should have used a 'move', or at the very least a 'copy-old/create-new/delete-old' sequence. I would be more than willing to go back and delete them; it's my mess. --guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 18:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC) PLEASE DON'T DELETE THOSE PAGES; THEY ARE REDIRECTS TO THE CORRECT PAGES!--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 18:24, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
I didn't read in sequence. Nothing was using the redirects, so I already deleted them. Do you still need them? I can undelete, but it's unusual to have redirects that have nothing pointing to them. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
The problem is solved now. Everything was complicated by the fact that I didn't properly plan the move, and because I had never heard of the special pages for viewing prefixes and such. I learned a lot about Wikiversity though. And, I now have everything configured properly. Thanks! (forgot to sign) --66.209.136.140 (discuss) 02:09, 11 May 2014 (UTC) And for some reason automatic login just decided to expire. --guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 02:12, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I will now delete that quiz, after verifying that there are no links to it. The quiz already appears in the "new" part of Physics equations. The "old" part of Physics equations contains a lot of subpages, including [[Physics equations/Optics]], now all in an appendix called Physics_equations#Wikiversity_appendix_for_editors. This "old" part represents work before I realized that Physics equations should not be a textbook, but instead a supplement to the opensource textbook openstax Physics. There are, unfortunately, few opensource textbooks out there. College textbooks are too complicated and demand too much centralized editorial control to be easily made as wikis. All the subpages in Physics_equations#Wikiversity_appendix_for_editors (i.e. the "old" part) will eventually be merged into A:xxx "activity files" such as Special:PrefixIndex/Physics_equations/06-Uniform_Circular_Motion_and_Gravitation/A:, or Q:xxx "quiz files", such as Special:PrefixIndex/Physics_equations/06-Uniform_Circular_Motion_and_Gravitation/Q:.
(1) By arranging for EVERY equation to appear on one page (with almost nothing else visible), students and teachers can copy the document and paste it into a word or pdf file that can be printed out for students (they don't need to learn wikitext to do this). (2) By hiding chapters, students can "unhide" only what they need for a given test. (3) By keeping the "Q:xxx" and "A:xx" links highly abbreviated, these links can reside on the formula sheet with minor intrusion. (4) By making this resource a wiki, instructors can join Wikiversity and modify it to suit their needs. (5) By posting a "zillion" versions of each wikiquiz, instructors can randomly copy a question and paste it into an exam, either with or without multiple choice answers. (They don't need to use wikitext for this). There is "method to my madness" as they say.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 15:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I do not know whether college textbooks are too complicated or demanding to be easily made as a wiki, but I thought I should point out Wikibooks:Subject:University level mathematics books and Wikibooks:Subject:Mathematical physics. -- darklama  00:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I will check it now and then to see if anybody starts a college physics book. Of all the books on those links, the only Linear Algebra is currently in a "complete" state. We are all rooting for wikibooks to replace the store-bought textbooks, and think that will happen in a couple of decades. One thing that would help if educational grants were to encourage the production of wikis, but such reforms are way out of my control--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 00:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
You can always start a college physics book yourself or contribute to any of the existing books, along with your participation here. You are already registered there because Wikibooks and Wikiversity are both part of the Wikimedia family of projects. -- darklama  16:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
I moved a page and think I removed all links to the original address, but it appears on Special:DoubleRedirects. As far as I can tell, no page contains the link [[Wikipedia astronomy article questions]]. Yet it appears as a double redirect that has not been crossed out. Should I just wait a couple of days?--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 15:55, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
The DoubleRedirects report is run by the system occasionally rather than being a real-time reference. If the pages are deleted, that appears immediately. If you know a redirect is no longer needed, you can tag it for deletion. I look at those more often than I do the DoubleRedirect report. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 18:52, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Also,  darklama , none of those wikibooks people have started resemble a late 20th century college textbook the way openstax Phyiscs does. openstax Phyiscs is not a bad book, but I believe the "big-college-textbook" style is obsolete. One of the most successful online resources is the Kahn academy, which is not a textbook, but a collection of videos that students find through Google. The combination of Google and resources like the Kahn acaddemy take the student exactly where he/she needs to go. I am only listing openstax Phyiscs as a textbook to avoid trouble with administrators. I am also using it to organize the order of how the topics of Physics equations are presented.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 16:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
You can freely link to Kahn Academy videos that you think participants in the physics math resource would benefit from watching. Wikiversity has different needs than say Wikipedia, if you were thinking about Wikipedia's policy on external links, because of Wikiversity's mission to teach, learn, study, research, etc. -- darklama  22:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Files Missing License Information[edit]

Thank you for uploading files to Wikiversity. See Wikiversity:Media for copyright and license requirements for Wikiversity files. All files must have copyright and/or license information added to the file.

Instructions for adding copyright and/or license information are available at Wikiversity:License tags. Files must be updated within seven days or they may be removed without further notice. See Requests For Deletion for more information.

The following files are missing copyright and/or license information:

MaintenanceBot (discusscontribs) 02:59, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

CC_BY-NC-SA[edit]

You write, on your user page, "CC-BY-NC-SA is more restrictive than Wikiversity's CC-BY-SA license. See Wikiversity:Non-Commercial_Tag_Issues. You can link to CC-BY-NC-SA content, but you can't post it on Wikiversity."

You can post such material, under the present policies, if you provide a non-free rationale, commonly called "fair use." This can create some controversy, though, so I don't recommend it unless the value of the material to the resource is significant. The matter is complex. There is no hazard to Wikiversity or the Wikimedia Foundation from the hosting of NC material, the license permits it; however, a commercial re-user of content won't have permission, and the paradox of the Free Content policy is that it only benefits commercial users, who are saved the burden of removing restricted material. That removal will, of course, damage the content, so the policy attempts to promote users finding alternatives.

However, part of the policy requires that non-free content (which includes NC) be machine-readably tagged. The non-free use rationale process is set up to create the tagging.

Definitely, you are correct that we can link to that content. We can also link to copyrighted content, as long as we don't know that it is copyright violation. Again, there has been much controversy over this, but the general policy interpretation has been that we don't need to second-guess the copyright owners and web sites. Copyright law and the actual "violation" status of web material is often obscure. We are not expected to be copyright lawyers.

Commons, for images, has complex and arcane policies, but is very clear: they will not host NC content. So if any NC content is needed here, it should be uploaded here and proper licensing -- and fair use rationale -- asserted ASAP. Sysops and others will assist you in that.

If what you are considering is simply text for a resource, you may generally quote it under normal rules, i.e, quotation that would be allowed under normal fair use (US law) copyright rules, not requiring permission. (that can get complex in detail.) However, for a resource, linking to the content may be adequate, and you can use an archive-on-demand service if you are concerned that the content might disappear, such as http://archive.today, if it is not already archived on archive.org. --Abd (discusscontribs) 13:26, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. What you said above will be archived in the near future, but I summarized the salient points on my user page where it will remain until the policy becomes second nature to me.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 14:08, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

[[Old Quantum Mechanics]][edit]

Guy, this page is described by you as an "essay." As an essay, it should not be at the top level in mainspace, but underneath a relevant resource. You already link to this page from Quantum mechanics. I was tempted to move the page, but decided to consult you first. Do you prefer this page as an essay, in which case I might want to move it to Quantum mechanics/Essays/Vandegrift or something like that, or leave it as an open resource for anyone to edit, at, say, Quantum mechanics/History. As an attributed essay, like an invited lecture at a University, you would have default control. As an open resource, anyone can edit it and it must be neutral. What say you?

(Both could be done, that is, there could be a History subpage and an Essays subpage. In an essay, you can be almost completely free in sharing your understanding, experience, knowledge, and opinions. The History subpage would be neutral, and if push comes to shove, sourced, etc. The History subpage would, however, move toward what Wikipedia should have. It could, in fact, be a pile of links to Wikipedia articles to be read by those studying the history of quantum mechanics. And, as another possibility, there could be a History/Essays page, where opinion and original research, etc., about the history can be presented.) --Abd (discusscontribs) 17:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I think I mislabeled it as an essay. It was the first or second thing I wrote for Wikiversity, and before I did anything for Wikipedia. It was inspired by a timeline of quantum mechanics that I found on Wikipedia. Like much of Wikipedia, their timeline was far too long and encyclopedic. I took the top half dozen or so events and described them in more detail, at the same time attempting to keep the technical level as low as possible. I don't think there is a single controversial statement in this "essay". I did use a much more casual tone than would be appropriate for wikipedia. I also tried to simplify the concepts. One example of this simplification occurs with the Bohr atom. My understanding is that Bohr based his idea on quantization of angular momentum. Instead, I substituted the standing wave pattern, as is often done in textbooks.
Do you want me to re-write the introduction? The page got 135 hits in the last 30 days, so some people are reading it. I also plan to link to it as a teaching resource in How Things Work, which I will teach in the Fall. That will require that I write at least a dozen quiz questions for it.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 18:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
To answer some of your questions: I see no reason why others should be discouraged from editing it. If someone makes a quality contribution that falls outside the scope of the "essay" we can always move or split the resource, or begin to create subpages. Regarding new names:Quantum mechanics/History looks good, and in my opinion is better than Old Quantum Mechanics. I don't like Quantum mechanics/Philosophy because I don't like most articles, books, papers, etc, that attempt to discuss QM from a philosophical point of view. I also doubt scholars interested in the philosophy of science would find the article very useful or interesting. --guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 18:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

coordinate systems, mathematical physics, tensors, etc.[edit]

Just so you know, these are topics I'm extremely interested in (you might say fanatically interested in!), and I've been following the goings on here very closely. You might want to look at my "radical" tensors articles. I see all the multivariable calc / coordinate systems / div / curl / Stokes stuff as being way more complicated than it needs to be. Maybe someday I will rewrite all this stuff.

So much to do, so little time.

SamHB (discusscontribs) 04:16, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks like you know GR. My current project is a primer on that. I'm trying to derive the concept of "unit vector" in polar coordinates without using flat space geometry. Look at w:Del_in_cylindrical_and_spherical_coordinates and follow the cookie trail to Coordinate systems/Derivation of formulas/Coordinate variable transformations.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 04:29, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Visit[edit]

I'll be on campus tomorrow around 12:30 to 1pm. If you're there, you're there; otherwise I studies to complete elsewhere, so it's not a problem if you're not. Clockworks (discusscontribs) 06:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

CylinderFluxProblem generator worked flawlessly. I wasn't sure which units you wanted to use. I can regenerate a quiz based on that, later. Torque problem shouldn't be a problem; I'll have that up later this week. I have to figure out a decent way to work in recalculation per version for unrelated questions pertaining to a problem. Clockworks (discusscontribs) 18:30, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Good. Meanwhile, I'm learning about cell arrays and sorting operations in Matlab conceptual multiple choice questions in which the questions and answers are randomly sorted. Should I be looking at OOPS?--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 21:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Using OOPS is usually just good design. It may be prudent for you to look into how objects can "package" different types of data together. It might be easier to handle the metadata array as a second, parallel array instead of attached to the string cell array. In fact, if you did unattach it, you could make it completely numeric by using a numbering system instead of the letters in the left most column.Clockworks (discusscontribs) 23:16, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi.[edit]

How you been? BTW, I am goldenburg111. --96.228.30.198 (discuss) 22:09, 16 July 2014 (UTC) Doing fine, busy with making testbanks. Are you editing/patrolling anything?--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 22:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Nah, retired. --96.228.30.198 (discuss) 23:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

1 + 2 + 3 + 4[edit]

Can the articles 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ⋯/Matlab code and 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ⋯ be moved to subpages of a learning project somewhere? They don't seem like main space primary articles. Perhaps there's a Matlab learning project they could move under. Also, in general I would try to avoid punctuation characters in titles. They can cause strange things to happen in macros, templates, etc.

One more trick. If you want to display source code, add <pre> and </pre>:

all the
    formatted code
you want

See the Lua project for more examples. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

You message is based on two concepts, one of which I completely grasp. Regarding the concept that I do grasp: Yes, I can and should change the title. Regarding the second concept: What is the subpage of a learning project? Or, to put it more simply: What is a learning project?
Having posed the question, I will look through Wikiversity and see if I can answer it myself. If you see my answer posted here, then your work is done. Thanks.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 17:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
It occurred to me that you just want this to be a subpage of another project. That would be a good idea. After looking around Wikiversity, I found this page: Power_series_solutions. I will look for Matlab pages now.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 17:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Correct. Learning project is a generic term for a page with subpages, something more than a one-page resource. It might be a course, or series of lesson plans, activities, essays, etc. Almost everything I've seen that you have created is a learning project of some type. The term is consistent with Wikiversity's mission. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree with your initial suggestion to put it into the MATLAB pages. I will finish the move soon, keeping the matlab code on the same page so that future moves will be easier. In naming the new resource, I tried to put the most important term first, which is Diverging series. Ordinarily I would label the page "Investigation power series" or even "Using MATLAB to investigate diverging series". But my understanding is that the first word of a title should serve to index that title on the Wikiversity search engine. Am I correct?--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 17:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, when someone starts typing a search term, the first things they see begin with the term they are typing. Only if they do a full search would they see other pages containing that term. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
One more problem and it's my fault: I moved the page to "Diverging series..." when the proper term is "Divergent series". To avoid a double re-direct I will keep the name as is. Only when the resource is fully developed will I change it. That won't happen for quite a while, I assure you. Meanwhile my contribution to MATLAB might encourage someone else to add their own subpages to MATLAB. (It turns out that our Engineering department has asked me to include more MATLAB in the physics course I am teaching, so I might contribute to that page myself.)--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 18:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Make it whatever it should be. Edit the redirects or tag them for deletion, as appropriate. Deleting a page takes maybe 30 seconds. It's not a big deal. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Guy, here is how it's done.
  1. I moved the page to the correct name.[1]
  2. A redirect is created at MATLAB/Diverging series investigations. If you click on that page name, you will go to the target page, but just under the name, there is a link to the redirect. See What links here for that redirect. It shows another page as a redirect, which was your original page before you moved it.
  3. I edited this original redirect to the new final destination.[2]
  4. "What links" also shows the MATLAB link, which I also fixed.[3] "What links," reloaded, was now empty.
  5. I then templated the useless intermediate redirect using {{delete|not needed, no incoming}}. If the link above is already red when you see this, Dave already got to it, he's usually fast.
It is much easier to clean these things up as we go, rather than later. We do find messes left behind by past generations. It can take longer to fix, when one doesn't have a guide, as I did through this discussion. --Abd (discusscontribs) 23:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wavepackets[edit]

I checked the page at Quantum mechanics/Wavepackets and uncertainty in quantum mechanics and saw that you were the only author, so I am deleting it by author request. However, you mentioned two other contributors. Be aware that in order to support CC-BY-SA licensing, we can't just take content from a page and create a new page. There is a merge history option available to custodians that allows taking content from a page and moving it to another page while preserving the content attribution (page history). If you let a custodian know (best at Wikiversity:RCA, we can do this for you. At some point, you might consider applying for custodian status yourself. I think you'd be a good candidate. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. One of the novice authors can't decide whether to work in Wikipedia draftspace or Wikiversity namespace. It's his choice, but I want to make sure he's welcome on Wikiversity. I will put a link to his article in Quantum Mechanics essays.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 14:35, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey man[edit]

Wanted to spark a chat with you haha. How's your class and life been going on? --Goldenburg111 15:11, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Doing well. Am busy with lots of projects, most involve wikipedia and/or wikversity.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 16:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Same lol I got a lot of projects to finish this time. By prolly June I'll be done with all of my projects here and on Wikibooks. Wish the best for you. --Goldenburg111 14:48, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Video Link[edit]

Here is the video I uploaded

Show what fun there can be with air and a ball

Broken Link[edit]

See Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Physeq/BasicMetricPrefixes. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:25, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

YesY Done

Subpage Templates[edit]

The trick to using subpage templates isn't the page, but the inclusion. You put a : in front of the page name, such as {{:title}}. Any main space resource can be included in another page this way. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:29, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Dave Braunschweig. I was in the process of rewriting these equations, which will now appear in at least three places. The formulas must be identical so that students see the same equations when they take on-campus written exams that they see when they practice the wikiquizzes. My understanding that the "original" ("masters") should not reside in template space, but a sub-namespace that I will call Physics equations/Physeq. Expect some chaotic activity in creating and deleting files as I sort this out. Hang in there Dave -- it doesn't look like being a custodian is easy.--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 14:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
There's really nothing magic about the template namespace, other than any time you use curly braces, it looks there for the content. Any page can be a template. If the page is just content, like you're doing now, using a subpage for it makes the most sense, at least to me. True templates have replaceable parameters in them and would be used by a range of learning projects. Most of the time being a custodian isn't difficult, it just requires thinking about the bigger picture rather than individual learning projects. I think you're up to the task! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 16:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Editing your comments[edit]

It is completely okay to edit your own comments if nobody has responded to them. If they have responded already, it may be best to use strike-out and indicate what is new, so that the responses don't seem weird. Or you might add new material to a separate comment below your first one and indented to show that it was added after the comment that's below it. --Abd (discusscontribs) 19:43, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info--guyvan52 (discusscontribs) 21:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)


Paper Clip Video[edit]

Here is the link to the paper clip video.

Video of the paper clip falling in slow motion and regular speed.

13hartc (discusscontribs) 18:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


Heres is the lab photo:

Dice half-life decay

13hartc (discusscontribs) 18:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hers the other lab photo.

PHY1060 Lab

13hartc (discusscontribs) 22:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of alternate account "Guy vandegrift's student[edit]

On the advice of a couple of people at the Colloquium, I have deleted the alternate user account called "Guy vandegrift's student" -- sorry for the inconvenience --23:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)