User talk:OhanaUnited/Sister Projects Interview
- Don't criticize yourself too fast :-) That page is is thin and does not represent the current state of play. It's true that a few of your questions are a little superficial, but some are good, and there is a lot of thinking and action over here that isn't reflected in the site yet. So interviews would be good. --McCormack 05:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I filled in a bunch of answers... hope I wasn't jumping the gun! Apologies about the referencing of the bloom clock twice, but it is a good example for the Wikiversity/Wikibooks distinction. Feel free to edit, of course! --SB_Johnny | talk 11:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
can this page be licensed like that? "Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works" --Remi 04:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't want derivative works because that would mean some stranger can change the contents of this interview without the need to identify the change. Would you like to see the following happens?
What is Wikiversity?
Wikiversity is the foundation's youngest branch project, aimed both at creating educational materials and at providing a forum to learn interactively in a wiki environment. Originally part of Wikibooks, it was split off officially in 2006, with the English Wikiversity, Beta, and three other language Wikiversities established in August, 2006.
- and changed it to
What is Wikiversity?
Wikiversity is the foundation's youngest branch project, aimed at replacing schools and universities (OMGHAXOR!) and at providing a forum to learn interactively in a wiki environment. Originally part of Wikipedia, it was split off officially in 2010, with the English Wikiversity, Beta, and three other language Wikiversities established in August, CE 74.
- Ok, I admit that kind of change was dramatic. But we all know kids have too much time staying in front of their computers. Such license stops them from mutating the interview. OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I think the best way to do this is not with an ND-clause but with page protection. --McCormack 17:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Page protection doesn't prevent someone from copying it (and then pasting it somewhere outside of WMF and mutate it) since it's licensed with creative-commons. OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I have a question: why the fear ? I hope you are not too much negatively influenced from other Wikimedia projects.
- If someone wants to copy and mutate it somewhere else, let them have their fun. If someone wants to do something "bad" (s)he will probably ignore any info written on that page.
- On the page here at WV we have a version history to see e.g. IP edits. That "trusted" users also could manipulate is true, but probability is probably less. If you didn't know, there are plans to merge the page later on anyways in a text without signatures (to make it look as one WV voice). We are brainstorming right now.
- Believe me that page is probably watched (by a few custodians) :-) ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 20:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to mention all editors who took part in answer the question in the actual page, so you guys need to merge your ideas together. There's no license information regarding Signpost articles. And I'm not talking about WV, I'm talking about what could happen after the interview is published to public. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I decided to scrap the CC-nc-nd license and replace it with GFDL to allow copyedit and other various editing. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for this, I think its a good move. I'll now be more inclined to flesh out some of the link outs. To keep moving in this direction of openness, I wonder whether the interview could be moved (e.g.,) to something like Wikiversity:Sister projects interview 2008 and then we could also help contribute via Wikiversity:Vision 2009, Wikiversity:Publicity, and continue to work with the content after you've made a copy for signpost. -- Jtneill - Talk 00:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think that will be unnecessary. It is intended for en.wp Signpost readers. Let's wait until the interview is finalized. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for this initiative, OhanaUnited! However, after reading info here and on Wikipedia, I am still confused as to a number of things:
- whether the interview is for many people or individual people;
- if for "many", whether the interview is to be edited before publication to give a single 'voice' (is this what you mean by "merged" above?);
- if the transcript here is to be published in its entirety (or edited), or whether it is to give material that can be quoted (attributed to a particular person) in a written piece
I'll happily contribute, but I want to clarify these things first. Being as clear about the end product of this interview will allow us to give most useful responses (and, btw, I don't see how conflicting responses are a bad thing - what about saying something like: "there is still debate about whether NPOV is relevant to Wikiversity.."?). Cormaggio talk 13:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Originally, the interview is intended to be completed individually. However, some admins in WV decided to combine the opinions from the community instead of individuals. Yes, the interview needs to be edited to "merge" it into a single voice. Sorry, I don't understand your question in the 3rd point. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. My third point asks whether this interview will be published as a whole (or slightly edited) piece, or whether you intended to take quotes from individual interviews and use them to illustrate an article which you would write. Cormaggio talk 16:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I've done a bit of editing, which has involved writing overviews and introductions to some of these sections. But in doing so, I have been moving towards a voiceless (or, at least, a unified voice) text, whereas it had been a collection of signed comments. I'm still slightly confused about how OhanaUnited wants this formatted. But I'm also curious about what everyone thinks about how this could/should be best managed... Cormaggio talk 19:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'll clarify this into a question: do we want an, essentially, "NPOV" view of what Wikiversity is; or an article with many "POV"s; or a combination of NPOV and POV? And to further clarify this question, I would see a POV approach having individual contributions clearly stated as individual (signed) perspectives - which, in the "combination" option, would have an opening narrative for each section, and then allowing individuals to fork off from or add nuances to that narrative. Cormaggio talk 12:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- I haven't have the time to take a look at it due to exams. I'll get back to you by coming Tuesday. OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
My 3 cents (originally 2 cents, but now 3 due to inflation) is that some sections like "What is Wikiversity's vision?" requires fine tuning. Simply pointing out links to read more isn't attractive. Give at least a small description and THEN lead your audience to click on the link to read more. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could sort or tag the Q&As based on what your opinion as to whether the responses you've received are (say) satisfactory or incomplete for the intended audience. That way we can get some feedback about where to put effort. Just a thought. -- Jtneill - Talk 00:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Every project is pushed back by a week (at least). So the earliest publication date is April 21. OhanaUnitedTalk page 22:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
: Just a friendly reminder. The interview will be submitted on tomorrow. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Issues that might come up
Here are few issues that we need to address:
- Merge everyone's idea into one single response (please try not to ask me to do it myself, I still have exam on Apr. 29, which is the day of publication)
- How are we going to announce who took part in the interview? Just say "a collaboration of Wikiversity users" or list out every editor that took part?
- Switch internal links to transwiki links (i.e. no more [[Wikiversity:blah blah blah]], but switch to [[:v:Wikiversity:blah blah blah]])
- Be prepared to update Wikiversity article in Wikipedia, sometimes people may resolve to read that article
- Expand your answers instead of merely pointing out links. For example, the 2nd answer on this question is not a good one. If I use this picture, Image:Schooldivdeptstructure.png, along with text, the effect will be much clearer and stronger than just "see this..."
- Carry from previous point, add pictures as necessary. The first interview, Wikisource interview kind of failed because lack of pictures. Pictures generate interest. You guys heard of "a picture can speak for a thousand words", eh?
- And finally, be ready to answer questions from new editors once the publication is live. My Wikisource interviewee told me they received a few new editors as a result of the interview. If all goes well, you guys will have quite a number of new editors arriving.
The "polished" version is transferred to User:OhanaUnited/Sister Projects Interview/Wikiversity. There are some "dead" images and templates that needs to be fixed. OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)