To get started, you may
You don't need to be an educator to edit. You only need to be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage. See you around Wikiversity! --Abd 04:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Can you please fix the map and the credits regarding the Pillars of Heracles and the map of Gades/Cádiz in the Atlantis Location Hypothesis that I just finished?
Thanks for your help and for your edits. Still working on this. I believe the point has been made with the hypothesis. Now, we must be concerned with the political ramifications of this. How does this go with mankind and their contribution to global warming and climate change. It's starting to look like nothing we can do will change what is already in motion and has been in motion for the last 12,000 years. What can be done by mankind to moderate this? I am beginning to think that the Hopi Indians of North America had this right all along.
- 1 Most Active Wikiversity User for January 2013
- 2 Barnstar for you!
- 3 See also
- 4 External links
- 5 Wiki.J.Sci
- 6 Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
- 7 Quadratic Equation
- 8 Mail
- 9 Hello!
- 10 Notice of upload removal
- 11 Move review to article talk page
- 12 Canvassing
- 13 Thanks and question
- 14 Becoming a student
- 15 regarding the Atlantis location hypothesis
- 16 Importing w:Light-independent reactions from Wikipedia
- 17 Resource Template Errors
- 18 Plasmas
Most Active Wikiversity User for January 2013
|The Learning Cycle Barnstar|
|Most Active Wikiversity User for January 2013|
Marshallsumter, I was reviewing the list of active users for this past month and noticed you had by far the most edits in January. Keep up the good work! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Barnstar for you!
|The astronomy barnstar|
|Thank you for the massive edits on astronomy! Goldenburg111 (talk|contribs) 18:49, 25 December 2013 (UTC)|
|The Original Barnstar|
|Thank you for your help with Research in programming Wikidata! -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (discuss • contribs) 05:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC)|
Given your interest in Wiki.J.Sci, I was wondering if you'd consider listing yourself on its editorial board and helping find peer reviewers if an article in your area is submitted? T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 22:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for the consideration! I will place a request for this on the Discuss page. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:54, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- If there is some review to become a member of the editorial board I would be happy to undergo it. I would also be willing to review manuscripts or other submissions to the journal in astrophysics and materials sciences. If there are submissions not yet reviewed, in other fields, or when an additional review is needed, I can be tasked to do so and will do so time permitting. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
- Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
I'm new to Wikiversity, so I hope I'm communicating with you in the most suitable way.
Yes, please. I hope that someone may find it useful
Many thanks for your interest and encouragement.
Concerning Line (Geometry) announced on main page: Yes, please.
Notice of upload removal
The Wikimedia Foundation (“Wikimedia”) has taken down content that you posted at File:Aurora surprise by torivarn-d6qsuny.jpg due to Wikimedia’s receipt of a validly formulated notice that your posted content was infringing an existing copyright. When someone sends us a validly formulated notice of copyright infringement, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) Section (c)(1)(C) requires Wikimedia to take the content down, and to notify you that we have removed that content. This notice, by itself, does not mean that the party requesting that the content be taken down are suing you. The party requesting the take down might only be interested in removing the content from our site.
What Can You Do?
You are not obligated to take any action. However, if you feel that your content does not infringe upon any copyrights, you may contest the take down request by submitting a ‘counter notice’ to Wikimedia. Before doing so, you should understand your legal position, and you may wish to consult with an attorney. If you choose to submit a counter notice, the alleged copyright holder can either refuse to contest the counter notice or decide to file a lawsuit against you to restrain Wikimedia from re-posting the content. Please note that Wikimedia will not be a party to any legal action that arises from you sending a counter notice, and that Wikimedia is unable to provide you with legal advice.
Filing a Counter Notice
If you choose to submit a counter notice, you must send a letter asking Wikimedia to restore your content to email@example.com, or to our service processor at the following address: Wikimedia Foundation, c/o CT Corporation System, 818 West Seventh Street, Los Angeles, California, 90017. The letter must comply with DMCA standards, set out in Section (g)(3)(A-D), and must contain the following:
- A link to where the content was before we took it down and a description of the material that was removed;
- A statement, under penalty of perjury, that you have a good faith belief that the content was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled;
- Your name, address, and phone number;
- If your address is in the United States, a statement that says “I consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the district where my address is located, and I will accept service of process from the person who complained about the content I posted”; alternatively, if your address is outside the United States, a statement that says “I agree to accept service of process in any jurisdiction where the Wikimedia Foundation can be found, and I will accept service of process from the person who complained about the content I posted”; and finally,
- Your physical or electronic signature.
Pursuant to the DMCA, Wikimedia must inform the alleged copyright holder that you sent us a counter notice, and give the alleged copyright holder a copy of the counter notice. The alleged copyright holder will then have fourteen (14) business days to file a lawsuit against you to restrain Wikimedia from reposting the content. If Wikimedia does not receive proper notification that the alleged copyright holder has initiated such a lawsuit against you, we will repost your content within ten (10) to fourteen (14) business days.
As a matter of policy and under appropriate circumstances, Wikimedia will block the accounts of repeat infringers as provided by Section 512(i)(1)(A) of the DMCA. After speaking with Wikimedia Foundation legal counsel, this upload will not be treated as a "strike" because they believe it is likely there was a mistaken belief of compliance.
Wikimedia appreciates your support. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding this notice.
Move review to article talk page
Hi! Thanks a lot for reviewing the article Atlantis/Location Hypotheses! I know it's a lot of work and you're the first one to undertake it, so double thanks! I've been thinking about the submission process of the journal, and decided to vastly simplify it. You can see a draft of the new approach at WikiJournal of Science/Contribute. Part of the simplification will be getting rid of the "Submission pages" such as WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Location Hypothesis of Atlantis in the Azores, as they are difficult to use, maintain, understand, etc. (even for me!) Therefore, I wanted to ask if you could move your review to the talk page of the article itself, and continue there. I would have done it myself but I thought maybe you want to ask an admin for a merge, to save your review history. If you don't care much about the history in this case, a copy-paste should suffice. Thanks a lot!! --Felipe (discuss • contribs) 23:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Hi @Sophivorus:! Special:MergeHistory did not work because user RAYLEIGH22 made an entry on 24 April, right in the middle of when my entries would go. It can be done by parts but copy & paste is easier. Just FYI, I am an admin but not the best at complicated page history merges. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 and  demonstrate "discriminative notification and [are] considered inappropriate canvassing". If you want to indiscriminately bring users to the discussion, there are Wikiversity:Colloquium, Wikiversity:Notices for custodians, and MediaWiki:Sitenotice. Any approach that selectively notifies users of the discussion is inappropriate and must cease. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:47, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Requesting a comment is not canvassing or inappropriate, but I would be happy to use MediaWiki:Sitenotice. How about "Please comment on Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion#File:The same man at 18 and 80 years old.jpg"? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks and question
Hi Marshall. First of all I'd like to thank you for the phenomenal work you're doing for the WJS. Right now, if it's moving forward, it's thanks to you. I hope I'll be able to join you this week with a few reviews, so that we may approach the release of the first issue. Anyway, I have a question for you: I noticed that you left some reviews on the talk page of the "submission pages" of various articles. For example, at Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Astronomical spectroscopy. My intention was to "phase out" these pages, because they are unnecessary and difficult to maintain. I think that reviews should go in the talk page of the article itself, where it's most natural and useful to find them. Do you agree? Are you posting them on the submission pages because of your ban on Wikipedia? Kind regards. --Felipe (discuss • contribs) 20:13, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind words!
- Do you agree? In general, yes! Contrarily, I like them with the submission on Wikiversity because we have greater freedom to try to get these submissions to be a credit to the journal, although this may not be in agreement with the submitters' original purpose for the article. I also like to have each article as close to a stand-alone piece as possible so links to significant Wikipedia articles can be gotten around by including the salient points.
- Are you posting them on the submission pages because of your ban on Wikipedia? Yes! As you pointed out most or all of the so-called copyright violations were for cited quotes or sentences as part of what was perceived as original research and easily covered by fair use. But, not on Wikipedia! One way around this would be for me to email the reviews to a rep say from w:WikiProject Astronomy for posting on their talk page to see if they even want to include them. What would you like to do? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 21:32, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- In looking at contributors to w:Alpha Centauri over the past two years, five editors stand out as members of w:Wikiproject:Astronomical objects and w:Wikiproject:Astronomy: w:User:Exoplanetaryscience, w:User:Primefac who also has edited w:Astronomical spectroscopy, w:User:Maranello Prime, w:User:Praemonitus, and w:User:JorisvS. w:User:Primefac appears to be the best choice. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 04:48, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- I sent the following email to w:User:Primefac:
We at WikiJournal of Science have a problem I am hoping you can help with.
Both w:Alpha Centauri and w:Astronomical spectroscopy have been submitted to the WikiJournal of Science for publication by w:User:Guy vandegrift. Each has been reviewed and these reviews can be found at v:Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Alpha Centauri and v:Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Astronomical spectroscopy, respectively.
The original plan was to have the reviews placed on their respective Talk pages.
Thank you in advance for your kind consideration of this matter!
The user's response: "If you wrote the reviews, I think it would be good for you to sign your name ;-) The talk page of the respective articles would probably be good, since those are the pages that would be directly affected."
I have modified each review so that my user name appears as follows: v:User:Marshallsumter. This should allow it to be copied or exported to their respective talk pages without being accused of editing Wikipedia. What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 18:13, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Becoming a student
How do I become a student of Wikiversity? I thought my perceptions about others would improve. However, suddenly, I realize that they have not. Also, my writing/typing skills need improvement as well. I thought that my contributions in Wikipedia have improved. However, I realized that maybe I need to know how to avoid having more disputes with others. Do you know which e-courses I can take? --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 04:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
- I believe we are all students so Welcome aboard! Feel free to concept search here for resources that may help! Dispute resolution is a tough one! If you don't find much here, feel free to create it! The San people of the Kalahari almost always walk away from disputes for two really good reasons: (1) life is precious to them and (2) everyone carries small poison tipped darts. One scratch and you're dead even before you say "ouch". It's a fast acting neurotoxin. I hope this helps! --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 01:31, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
regarding the Atlantis location hypothesis
Can you go to this site https://www.iceagenow.com/Ice-Age_Maps.htm and get a map of the Mediterranean Sea between Greece and Turkey to show it was a dry land 12,000 years ago that I can use? This would correspond with Critias. I printed up Critias and on the 3rd page it describes Greece before the floods (apparently caused by the melting of the ice). Since the Egyptian Priest describes multiple floods this would correspond with the meltwater pulses the climatologists are describing. This validates the story Critias is telling. Marshalsumter, I just need the map. Can I add this on to the part where you describe the Canary islands and the area outside the Pillars of Herecles? Or, should it be separated under a different title? http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/critias.html when I printed this out it was 9 pages.
on page 3 it says," Concerning the country the Egyptian priests said what is not only probable but manifestly true, that the boundaries were in those days fixed by the Isthmus, and that in the direction of the continent they extended as far as the heights of Cithaeron and Parnes; the boundary line came down in the direction of the sea, having the district of Oropus on the right, and with the river Asopus as the limit on the left."
Also, " How shall I establish my words? and what part of it can be truly called a remnant of the land that then was? The whole country is only a long promontory extending far into the sea away from the rest of the continent, while the surrounding basin of the sea is everywhere deep in the neighbourhood of the shore. Many great deluges have taken place during the nine thousand years, for that is the number of years which have elapsed since the time of which I am speaking; and during all this time and through so many changes, there has never been any considerable accumulation of the soil coming down from the mountains, as in other places, but the earth has fallen away all round and sunk out of sight."
This verifies sea level change in the Mediterranean Sea during that time period.
Importing w:Light-independent reactions from Wikipedia
Hello again. I could not request importation at WV:Requests for Import because I can't be the one working on the Wikiversity copy. I did ask others at Wikipedia (w:Talk:Light-independent reactions#Copy the whole article to Wikiversity?), but they seem reluctant to work on it at Wikiversity. Do you know someone else interested in the topic who does? --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 04:58, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Resource Template Errors
The various resource templates are generating hundreds of high priority errors. See Special:LintErrors/pwrap-bug-workaround and mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy/FAQ#What will editors need to do.3F. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:24, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
You inverted my edit on Plasmas without any explanation. I wrote that there were two sorts of plasmas: hot plasmas and cold plasmas. It was wrong ? Can you explain the reason of this revert ? cordialement, Geoleplubo (discuss • contribs) 08:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
- First, thanks for your interest in the Plasmas lecture! The top change you made was to a quote so I would have to rewrite it back to the quote. The definitions can go either way though there's no problem using a colon (:). You also changed another quote! I reverted your edit. Adding a section on hot or cold plasmas as a separate section is okay! Custom here is to discuss changes first to others' bold edits. Adding sections with references is great! --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 14:03, 13 July 2017 (UTC)