User talk:John Bessa

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

About contacting me: Please don't be shy about contacting me through this wikiversity email link as I may not otherwise get your message.

Middle School Science[edit source]

I remember taking a look at Middle School Science a while ago. I agree that you might want to split off the scientific method information to a subpage. Or perhaps some of the article news or preamble. In general, as a single page begins to grow in length it makes sense to me to create subpages for major sections to keep the material organized. It is also possible to create a navigation box to tie the subpages together. See Template:Recovery psychology for an example. But, decisions on page organization are really up to you. These are just suggestions. I'll take a closer look at the page, and put it on my watchlist.

One thing I'm unclear on - are the links to google docs (ie. [1]) pages that you created? Do you have plans to start similar pages here at wv? I'm not sure where I could help out if much of the material is off-site.

Let me know if there are any astonomy topics that you might be interested in collaborating on. I also have an interest in meteorology. I'll be working on some weather station pages over the next few months.

BTW, I am in Providence, RI, so we are nearly neighbors :) --mikeu talk 15:07, 24 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, I understand now. (about the copyright) We have a few pages on Moodle but they do not appear to be active. There is also a stub for Dokeos which looks like it has some interesting features. --mikeu talk 17:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

steward election[edit source]

I just now noticed your post at meta:Talk:Stewards. I replied there. Let me know if you have any more questions about the subject. --mikeu talk 01:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WV:NOT[edit source]

Hi John Bessa. I hope I'm understanding you correctly in that your main objection to WV:NOT is the advocacy clause. Would you feel comfortable supporting the policy with that clause removed? See Wikiversity_talk:What_Wikiversity_is_not#Still_no_consensus_due_advocacy_clause for details. --SB_Johnny talk 12:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trolling[edit source]

Trolling is a real phenomena. Calling people troll is offensive, but denying the phenomena of trolling exists and is a real problem is a major mistake. See meta:What is a troll?. --Piotrus 21:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A song for you...[edit source]

Hi John,

By happenstance, I've written a song about empathy.

You wrote a kind note to me, and looking at your profile and then your page on empathy...well, sometimes there are strange coincidences in this universe...

Now I have to remember that song:

Empathy[edit source]

There's empathy.

No matter where the problem's from

There's empathy. (ooh, ooh, ooh-ooh)

Turning away ugly fears

There's really no reason for

Hypocracy. (ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh)

Learning to love the others that's

Democracy. (ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh)

Learning to be free from your fears

We'd not even be hear but for empathy

Learning to learn the others that's

Democracy (ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh)

Well, you get the gist...have to rummage through my notes to find the rest of the song.

Best wishes to you, and thank you for the note,

TWFred 02:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome back[edit source]

OSI Model
Data unit Layer Function
Data 7. Application Network process to application
6. Presentation Data representation and encryption
5. Session Interhost communication
Segment 4. Transport End-to-end connections and reliability
Packet 3. Network Path determination and logical addressing
Frame 2. Data Link Physical addressing
Bit 1. Physical Media, signal and binary transmission

Good to see you back on the scene here, John. I read the Empathy paper. Nice. Especially the part about the congruency of Maslow's hierarchy of needs and the OSI model. Nice! --CQ 02:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The idea of layers, or levels[edit source]

This text is from writing about my learning from working in theraputic environments[2]

Tying together ideas so apparently different was helped by my information engineering background; I adapted the abstract concept of "network layering" that links different abstract approaches to Internet communications. The different layers describe all the various aspects of network communication abstractly ranging from the user's applications, through addressing and routing protocols to a physical layer that describes the wires and electrons. For every interaction on the Internet, each layer is utilized and they all work towards the same purpose but each layer describes, abstractly, a different aspect of the communication linking process. Empathy, as emotional communication, can likewise be described in layers as every empathic action has many facets, perhaps even more than Internet communications protocols. Immediately apparent is an idea of scale that follows each aspect of an emotional communication from birth of ideas and emotions within individuals at the neural level that are communicated through expressions, to the wider reaching effects that these communications have on social relationships, and even society.

This adaption of network layering helps me conceive of how every emotional communication event "hits" on every level. In the education of children, for instance, happy emotions "hit" their surrounding world through positively constructive activities because they spring forth from healthy neurons. It is entirely misleading to think of any empathic event in isolation. Empathy is what the world needs more of, and on a worldly scale, empathy is the most profoundly human concept.

Apologies[edit source]

My apologies for accidentally undoing your edit. I accidentally clicked "rollback" on Recent Changes. Warmest regards, Maximillion Pegasus 02:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HiFi[edit source]

Now that is something I can discuss. I have two tube amps, a Sherwood stereo receiver with lots of noise coming from old (and rare) tubes; and an AMI jukebox amp from the 40s that uses generic 6L6 tubes, but has hanging wires.

Hifi discussion moved here.

I am a photographer, so much of today was spent setting up a printer. I will upload pictures of my two, actually four, and soon to be five, amps--like rabbits! Then I think I will make a HiFi class/article/page for tubes, which I think is fair because the "golden age" of sound preceded solid state, just as the automotive Renaissance preceded fuel injection, and even safety glass! Then I will have to order books for my counseling classes. On that topic, I have a friend who wants to make a movie in an abandoned but accessable mental hospital, read tub-fulla-blud! Do I have material for him! Mengle was not the only sick bastard, not by a long shot. Watson is well-known and the present day psych-types rationalize is sadism with children in terms of zeitgeist.--JohnBessa66.pngBessatalk 20:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Intuition on the Collowuium[edit source]

Thank you for your reply. If you looked some through my talk-page then you might have gotten an idea where my stand in my statement on the colloquium came from. I would like to go through my statement with you because as I have seen on the 'google docs' my wording seems to be important to understand what I am saying. You left some important parts out, which changed the meaning. I also would like to find out what collaboration means on Wv. All my attemps to find an satifactory answer failed. So please don't worry about to pollute my talk page. We can carry on there if you will find the time. I would also like to find somebody to which I can talk to. Everybody (2 so far) simply stopped replying. So be warned.Martin Lenoar 06:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seminar[edit source]

I suggested converting the intellectual property (IP) argument into a seminar. The immediate reason is that I was apparently trashing the discussion process by preventing other edits, so I thought about my ideas about having editors work in separate sections to keep from stepping on each other's POV, or "world-views" as we use in psych. Then I realized how easy it would be to create a seminar where each participant puts his or her topic view into a sub-section, and then new sections are created by evaluating the input to that point.

Here is the section I started to create: Intellectual_property#Sampling_at_the_Wikiversity

Just to look at WP's reasons for success for a moment, I think its power is in that it introduced a unique concept: wiki mono-diet of encyclopedia pages where everything is an article, even discussion. What I think the WV needs is something similar: a mono-diet of learning -- every article (within reason) is lesson--a teachable moment.

This would work for IP, because IP is so subjective; we would not only come to consensus, everyone would get evaluated, and we could actually give grades. We could also require supporting material: citations. This would make us respected by the brick and mortar educators, which is something we desperately need. --JohnBessa66.pngBessatalk 18:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See above[edit source]

If you are looking at my discussion page (for what ever reason), seriously, please the OSI stack / Hierarchy of needs comparison above made by CQ after he read my CV. It is probably the most important thing in the social sciences today, and it originated right here on this talk page.--JohnBessa66.pngBessatalk 15:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:6K6 pentode power amplifier.JPG[edit source]

We appreciate your effort to contribute to Wikiversity. This work appears to be a copy of If you have permission or can get permission from the copyright owner soon to release the work freely under CC-BY-SA 3.0, please comment to that effect at File talk:6K6 pentode power amplifier.JPG, and we may be able to accept the work. Otherwise you may need to consider rewriting the content in your own words. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page or the Wikiversity community at the Colloquium. Thank you.

With regards to the source you've indicated at Calvert indicates at the bottom of the page that it is Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic which is not the same as the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic tag that you've initially applied. I know from personal experience that copyright law can be very confusing and frustrating, but Wikimedia Foundation asks that commercial use of image also be allowed, so this is incompatible with Wikiversity's license. We can specify a fair use exemption for the image to stay on Wikiversity, but as I'm not familiar with exactly how the image would be educationally useful for the linked pages, I'm afraid the burden of creating a fair use rationale lies on the uploader - in this case, namely you. TeleComNasSprVen (discusscontribs) 00:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suppose it should go without saying that the following files are affected:

I want to give you some more time to develop the fair use rationales necessary for each one, however this is an urgent matter according to the Wikimedia Foundation's Licensing Policy. TeleComNasSprVen (discusscontribs) 00:35, 23 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • John, I see that you have not been active here since 2012. The user above is not authorized to represent or speak for the Wikiversity community, nor for the Wikimedia Foundation, nor does he have the authority to remove the files. He may request that.
  • He is pointing to a genuine WMF policy. The matter is important, but not necessarily "urgent," which is obvious from how long it takes to handle these issues.
  • The uploader is not the only person who may claim fair use. This is an interesting case, because we clearly have permission to use the files here, this is a noncommercial use. (We also do not necessarily know the licensing at the time you uploaded, it may have changed, that might take some research.) However, a commercial re-user of the material would want to have all files that are not usable in this way tagged as such, so they may readily remove them, negotiate for usage, or themselves, possibly, claim fair use.
  • The files are all in use, and the usage appears educational to me, and replacing them is not necessarily easy. Hence these files may, under our WV:EDP, be retained for Fair Use. Strictly speaking, this is not Fair Use, but is permitted use (i.e, more permitted than Fair Use.)
  • I will be consulting with the community on how to handle this situation. I do not want to see the educational resources that you developed damaged, unnecessarily. --Abd (discusscontribs) 15:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Ignoring the above, I've tried to give you a head start by attempting to write up a fair use rationale for the first image. It's not perfect because I cannot discern the educational value you intend to derive by uploading the image, so I gave a generic rationale. But I think, as you understand your own intentions best, you are most qualified to put together a rationale yourself, as far as judging educational merit of images goes. If you supply some similar acceptable fair use rationale for each of them, it would be much appreciated. TeleComNasSprVen (discusscontribs) 08:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files Missing Information[edit source]

Thanks for uploading files to Wikiversity. All files must have source and license information to stay at Wikiversity. The following files are missing {{Information}} and/or Wikiversity:License tags, and will be deleted if the missing information is not added. See Wikiversity:Uploading files for more information.

MaintenanceBot (discusscontribs) 15:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File for deletion[edit source]

Hello. The following file has been tagged for proposed deletion. If you wish to retain it on Wikiversity, please remove the {{prod}} tag but note the file may be nominated for deletion.

-Green Giant (discusscontribs) 11:19, 6 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suggestions for the Empathy Model[edit source]


I would like to suggest a few things  to improve the wikivesity page 'Empathy Model'. 
The 'Empathy Model' features an extensively worked on theory regarding empathy and its relation to many aspects of life. The shortcoming of this model, concerning mental illnesses, is that the number of people it is based on is too small to be able to accurately represent the entire group.
Thus, deleting the unverifiable parts or adding statistics to it will help enhance the overall quality.
Thank you!


'Empathy Model' will be nominated for deletion[edit source]

Dear John Bessa

It is with regret that I inform you that 'Empathy model' will be nominated for speedy deletion.
As its claims concerning mental disorders lack supporting evidence, it is difficult to say that it is anything but prejudice against those with mental disorders.

Thank you. Template:Delete Template:Hangon

//1ab23c 1ab23c (discusscontribs) 11:53, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]