From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Please do not include wiki markup or links in section titles.
Sign your posts with   ~~~~

Do you have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That is what this page is for! Before asking a question, you can find some general information at:


var wgArticlePath = "/wiki/$1"; var wgServer = ""; var wgPageName = "Wikiversity:Colloquium"; var wgTitle = "Wikiversity Colloquium"; var wgContentLanguage = "en"; var x-feed-reverse = "true"; var x-blog-description = "You have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That's what this page is for!";

"When the pupil is ready to learn, a teacher will appear." — Zen proverb (discuss)

VisualEditor default for new users?[edit]

What are out current settings on whether VisualEditor is the default? I've had a few new users tell me that they've often had source editor seem to come up as their default editor unless they specifically change it. Therefore:

  1. Is it possible to make VisualEditor the default interface for new users?
  2. Would people like to activate this?
  3. Are there other useful VE settings options to consider?

T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 11:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I guess it depends on the users. People that edit/author learning resources with much workload to create mathematical formulas in LaTeX might prefer source editor in comparison to visual editor. I would recommend, that user answer a checkbox in the registration/login process if they prefer visual or source editor. The link includes a wikiversity link to help page, that shows/explains PROs and CONs of visual and source editor, so that new users can make sound decision about editor default settings.
But my opinion is not representative in the community --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 12:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Visual editing is still a beta feature (Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures). It is not on by default (mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts), and not widely adopted (1,500+ users at present). We have to request that it be enabled. The last time I tried, it only got one vote. People need to engage if we're going to improve the Wikiversity experience. And, if there's any support for this, I also recommend that we enable the mw: UploadWizard. Most file uploads to Wikiversity are deleted due to incomplete or improper licensing. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Definitely also agree with activating mw: UploadWizard. Uploading files to wikiversity is still pretty clunky, and I've found often trips up users that are used to commons or wikipedia. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 23:17, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I've had a couple of additional new editors struggle with source editing (especially tables, example). Several have expressed frustration at the multiple steps required to find out that visualeditor exists and how to activate it. Is the request process particularly long? Does it need to be done here or over at MW? All wikijournal contributors who weren't already experienced wikipedians that I've spoken to have expressed a preference for visualeditor (especially for pages with tables and references). T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 02:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: See the item below on the Discussion Reply Tool. We have to have a discussion and vote. Once there is consensus, we submit a Phabricator ticket. How long it takes for that to be processed depends on who accepts the task and what's involved. Some things can take a week or two. Others have stalled out after months of waiting. Sometimes, we can ping someone and get it picked up again. But for now, we need a discussion and vote before we can initiate the ticket. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)


We have a proposal to make the VisualEditor the default editor. We need to determine whether this is for all users or only for all logged-in users. Please discuss and vote. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support making VisualEditor the default editor for all users. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 17:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 17:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - experienced editors are experienced enough to switch to source code, but new editors find it challenging to work out how to switch to VE. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 12:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I know people struggle with the html so anything to make things easier Rwatson1955 (discusscontribs) 12:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - What year are we in? Of course a visual editor should be the first thing anybody sees . . . we already have enough problems with attracting new editors, and having a clunky code editor as the first thing people see is not exactly welcoming. --- FULBERT (discusscontribs) 13:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for the same reasons as Shafee - significantly more welcoming to new folks and not a problem for experienced editors Zeromonk (discusscontribs) 14:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As a trainer (working mainly in Wikipedia) I've seen that VE can be really helpful in getting new editors on board, so supporting here for the same reason. Lirazelf (discusscontribs) 14:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The VE is much less intimidating and may encourage more participation. Smvital (discussSmvital) 16:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support VE easier for newbies --Alaa :)..! 10:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support mainly because selecting the right tools is hard at first. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 22:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:56, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Attracting new users would be a good result of switching to the visual editor --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 14:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others. SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 20:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Discussion Reply Tool[edit]

There is a new discussion reply tool. It automatically indents and signs replies. See Wikiversity:Newsletters/VisualEditor#Editing news 2020 #1 – Discussion tools for more information. If we want it enabled on Wikiversity, we need to request it. Please discuss and vote.


  • CC User:Whatamidoing (WMF) --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 21:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • I filed phab:T249785 to enable it here; I've stalled that task until this discussion is officially closed --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 01:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
  • How would the average contributor revert vandalism or an admin do revision delete on these talk pages? --mikeu talk 18:53, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
    • You can test the user interface at [1]. The reply tool only engages when you click on Reply. Everything else appears to be standard (Edit, etc.). -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 19:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Given that there hasn't been any input in a while, and no opposition, unstalling and moving to deploy the change (i.e. active the tool) --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 21:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
    Update: it is not being deployed to new wikis for now --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 06:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
    I've got the English Wikiversity on my "short list". I still don't know when the next group will be officially chosen, but I will recommend you for the next group. Whatamidoing (WMF) (discusscontribs) 22:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)


  • Support enabling as a beta feature. I've tried it out a bit, and it would be helpful to have, even while its still being developed --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 21:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, easy and user-friendly. Looks better than Structured Discussions extension. See mw:Talk pages project/replying#What did we find?. —Hasley talk 21:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak support I've never had a problem with talk pages (at least since the introduction of {{ping}}) but it seems like others want it so if nothing else, I'm willing to support the fact that others want to opt-in. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Support For sure! —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 00:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Support The reported tests seem promising. I'd be keen to see it implemented here, even if we reassess in 12 months based on how it affects new users. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 09:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support --Alaa :)..! 10:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support --Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 05:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Keen to join in the Wikiversity[edit]

Dear team,

May I join in the Wikiversity?. Please guide me.

Thank you

Tamil -- (discuss) 08:40, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

We're happy to have you. Do you want to participate in English on this project or are you trying to work in Tamil on educational resources? —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

WikidataLab XXIII: Wiki-Education and Data Literacy[edit]

Wikidata Lab XXIII - en.pdf

Hi! Next Thursday (May 21st - 1pm - 7pm UTC) we'll have a WikidataLab, an online event that may interest you. This is the 23rd edition of this technical training that intends to explore the potentialities of Wikipedia and Wikidata integration. This time, the theme will be wiki-education and data literacy. The event is organized by Wiki Movement Brazil User Group and will be hosted by Shani Evenstein, in English. It consists on a webinar followed by a practical activity online. Join us! Here's the event page in which we'll provide the link for the live broadcast on YouTube and upload the resources for the activity. --EAzzellini (WMB) (discusscontribs) 13:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Running out of template allowance for references[edit]

We seem to be running out of template quota on WikiJournal_Preprints/Induced_stem_cells#References for including all the references. Any ideas on a fix? T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 05:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

You can buy a little bit of space evidently by removing display-authors = etal. But unfortunately, at some point, you will run out of templates or modules that you can load in a page. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:28, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks I've done some pruning and saved a few templates. I think it's only about 30 over the limit. Do you know if that limit can be changed on a per-page basis? Or raised slightly globally? Otherwise I realised that every {{cite journal}} was transcluding a {{citation}}, so converting all references to just use {{citation}} saved 300 templates. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 02:19, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
@Evolution and evolvability: Unfortunately, these are very deep problems of the software, not just any particular page or project's server settings. See w:en:Wikipedia:Template limits and mw:Help:Templates for more. But the short answer is no: the only way to get around the template/module limit is to remove templates/modules. (If it's any consolation, this happens on all our sister projects: scroll to the bottom of wikt:en:a, for instance and see it run out of memory.) —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
@Koavf: Yikes on the example! Useful to know, and so far seems to be workable within. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 12:54, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Can't edit page: New User Blocked Edit[edit]

This is a student-created page that I'm trying to edit: Motivation and emotion/Book/2013/Learned optimism but am a little stumped as to why any of my attempted edits get "Error: This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: New User Blocked Edit". Could someone else try and let me know if you can edit? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jtneill: This is a filter that blocks certain types of edits for new users (e.g. ones that include an external link). This restriction expires after only a few edits, so if you continue editing elsewhere (such as the post you made here or saving a few edits to your user page), then the restriction will go away automatically. I know this feature is sometimes confusing or frustrating: I'm working with another editor to see how we can amend it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
@Jtneill: Sorry, there was an error in the filter. Recent vandalism was targeting anything with 2013 in the title, but the filter wasn't checking for confirmed user correctly. Please try again. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 02:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dave Braunschweig: Tx-you - that did the trick Smiley.svg. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:29, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposal affecting Wikiversity on MetaWiki[edit]

Hello! I've started an RFC on MetaWiki about what I see as overlap between Wikiverity and Wikibooks, specifically in the area of foreign language learning, where there are virtually identical resources (with lessons, exercises, etc.) on both platforms. I wanted to post here to get feedback from those with more experience/investment in Wikiversity.

I'm a new user here, so I can't post an external link. The page is on MetaWiki under the path:


I'd appreciate it if some kind soul could edit that into a proper link for me.

--Chapka (discusscontribs) 14:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chapka:, you can use the format found at m:Interwiki map to insert links. I have amended your comment above. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Chapka: It might have been better to start the conversations here and at Wikibooks rather than involving meta. It might also be better to have a stronger edit history at Wikiversity to understand and appreciate the overlaps and difference between the two projects. That said, you are certainly welcome to remove any content from Wikiversity that is duplicated at Wikibooks. Just add an interwiki link in its place. See, for example, Information Systems, which uses Wikibooks as the primary reading source for those lessons.
The bigger question to me is whether any of the content in the Wikibooks you outline is beyond the scope of what Wikibooks supports. If so, the content should be moved here. If not, then it's fine there, and the Wikiversity lessons can be adjusted to focus on the "learning by doing" aspects of these subjects. But that's a question for Wikibooks, and shouldn't be addressed either here or at meta.
One other point. Very few of the Wikiversity language resources have high page-view counts. I would recommend DuoLingo instead for anyone wanting to learn a language. It's a better platform for that type of engagement. Wikiversity or Wikibooks could be an interesting alternative for someone wanting to set up a traditional semester-length course with resources that go beyond the spoken language itself. See, for example, Latin. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:16, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Truth and Method resource[edit]

Truth and Method by Gadamer is a notable book (on hermeneutic philosophy) I aim to read slowly over a year or so. I think it would be useful for me, and others seeking to penetrate this dense text, to do this in public, with a wiki page of notes/questions/clarifications per every couple of pages of the book. Although the book itself is still in copyright, I checked with the owner and they were ok with quotes of up to 300 words in length which may be necessary to navigate/illustrate a point. Over a while this could provide a nice resource for anyone looking to understand the book and a pretty generative activity along the way... Does this sound like something that could be done in wikiversity please? Thank you for your time. --MJ1735 (discusscontribs) 16:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@MJ1735: Absolutely. Technically, fair use would typically allow for up to 10% of a resource to be used, but if you add the 300-word limit notification at the top of the page or pages as a reminder, and specifically note author permission, that would certainly help. I'd recommend starting Truth and Method, and linking to Wikipedia: Truth and Method for background information. Think about how you want to organize this information. Would it be best to have a subpage for each chapter, each concept, etc.? It's mostly up to you, since it's your vision. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dave Braunschweig: Thank you so much for your encouraging, constructive and insightful reply. Yes, organisation. The book doesnt have paragraph numbering but the editions dont vary much. So I think a combination of sections and edition-referenced page numbers should do it. I'm new here but this has been a great start. Thank you again. --MJ1735 (discusscontribs) 13:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dave Braunschweig: I've thrown a bit more time at this and I think we have something which will work. I created my first sub-page about the Translator's Preface. I'm hoping to dip in and out to push it along further as and when - any suggestions welcomed. --MJ1735 (discusscontribs) 12:12, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Community open letter on renaming[edit]

On August 2020, the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees may decide to rename to "Wikipedia Foundation". See meta:Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/Board Update on Branding for details. There is an open letter asking the Wikimedia Foundation to pause or stop this effort. See meta:Community open letter on renaming. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:54, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Dave Braunschweig Did I accidentally delete this post by you? See --Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 15:17, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
@Guy vandegrift: It's pretty easy to accidentally hit the revert link. I did it to Mu301 once. There is an option under Preferences where you can "Show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link". It is off by default. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 18:08, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks-I changed the default.--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 18:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on movement names[edit]

Hello. Apologies if you are not reading this message in your native language. Please help translate to your language if necessary. Thank you!

There are a lot of conversations happening about the future of our movement names. We hope that you are part of these discussions and that your community is represented.

Since 16 June, the Foundation Brand Team has been running a survey in 7 languages about 3 naming options. There are also community members sharing concerns about renaming in a Community Open Letter.

Our goal in this call for feedback is to hear from across the community, so we encourage you to participate in the survey, the open letter, or both. The survey will go through 7 July in all timezones. Input from the survey and discussions will be analyzed and published on Meta-Wiki.

Thanks for thinking about the future of the movement, --The Brand Project team, 19:52, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Note: The survey is conducted via a third-party service, which may subject it to additional terms. For more information on privacy and data-handling, see the survey privacy statement.

I signed the letter and made a comment at Wikivoyage. Thanks to those who took the time to write this letter and sign it. SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 14:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)