Wikiversity:Colloquium

Start your discussion here Sign your posts with   ~~~~ Welcome Do you have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That is what this page is for! Before asking, check the general information at: Welcome to Wikiversity What is Wikiversity? Who are Wikiversity participants? Wikiversity introduction Wikiversity: Chat | Mailing list Organization of Wikiversity Portal News Chat Policies Discussions Support staff

Purge Cache - Archives - RSS version

var wgArticlePath = "/wiki/$1"; var wgServer = "http://en.wikiversity.org"; 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!";

RSS

"Education [...] is a process of living and not a preparation for future living." — John Dewey (discuss)

Proposal to rehost Wikinews here

As many of you know, and mentioned here at the Colloquium, our sister project Wikinews recently closed, with all 31 active editions made read-only. User:BigKrow has asked about the prospect of writing news stories here and I suggested that since we already have School:Journalism and some resources related to the broader topic of journalism. I would like to propose that we have continued and indefinite space for citizen journalism by essentially repurposing Wikinews into a sub-project here. The only special infrastructure that Wikinews required was mw:Extension:DynamicPageList, which was deactivated and caused issues due to a lack of maintenance.

I will add this proposal to the site banner, but I recognize that that may be a conflict of interest, so if anyone requests that I remove it, I will. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:30, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I would like to see this conversation go for at least 30 days to establish a consensus. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:35, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

A few days shy of 30, it seems obvious that this is not going to pass. So I withdraw as presumptively failed. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:14, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Votes

• Support as proposer (with BK's inspiration). I think that an ongoing experiment in citizen journalism is a fit and appropriate use of this site. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:35, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
• Support, hope to seeing ideas about this, and thank you @Koavf BigKrow (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
• Support Other than perhaps inflating the total number of pages reported, I see the idea of "practicing journalism" a worthy and relevant activity within the domain of Wikiversity. IanVG (discuss • contribs) 21:41, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
• Support Conditional on development of (a) community guidelines that ensure alignment with Wikiversity's purpose, and (b) clear, nested page-naming structures for projects. More detail below. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:48, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
• Contra This proposal doesn't seem interested in expanding educational materials in journalism, but rather in providing space and protection for Wikinews contributors. But this is contrary to the goals of Wikiversity, and I'm not sure it's a good idea, even with regard to WMF. If WMF decides to close a project and another community lets it run on its domain, that's a bit of an undermining of WMF's and the community's decisions. Given that Wikiversity has had several conflicts with other communities and WMF in its history, I'm against it.--Juandev (discuss • contribs) 18:59, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
• Contra This seems like a proposal to continue the mission of WikiNews, but not a proposal specifically to improve Wikiversity. I concur with Juandev's comments. --mikeu ^talk 20:29, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 19:05, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose Wikiversity isn’t Wikinews and it also isn’t a dumping ground for anything not covered by other projects. It was already suggested, rather bafflingly, that Wikinews parasitize Wikipedia as a host. If it were allowed to freeload off of Wikiversity it would simply promote a view I and likely many others have— that Wikiversity (as it currently exists) has no standards and mostly just exists to host subpar content that wouldn’t be tolerated on any other Wikimedia site. Wikinews needs a new, non-Wikimedia host, and Wikiversity needs to get its act together by enforcing a minimum scope and standard for what it allows. --Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 01:16, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Wikiversity$\not =$ Wikinews - not a good idea to mix the scope of projects. --Bert Niehaus (discuss • contribs) 12:03, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
• Abstain I will abstain since I'm not an active Wikiversity contributor. But I just feel like Wikinews had a very clear and specific goal of providing news, and Wikiversity is just a different project with different goals. For me, it would be odd to rehost Wikinews here. But please do not count my vote, this is only a comment. --Antimundo (discuss • contribs) 13:19, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose Although I think it's a pity that Wikinews is closed. --Dick Bos (discuss • contribs) 19:06, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
• Support In 2018 I initiated Category:Videoconferences on media and democracy as a platform for disseminating public affairs events. In 2021 I officially initiated a podcast series on "Media & Democracy" syndicated for the Pacifica radio network. In 2024 I converted it from irregular to fortnightly. I think this is all educational and supports the Wikiversity education mission, and I think that "rehost Wikinews here" would be appropriate. (I had some experience with Wikinews a few years ago. I felt it was too tightly controlled: Article submissions went stale, because I could not get official permission to publish and I could not get the information needed to understand what I was supposed to do to obtain the official permission. I would be opposed to rehosting Wikinews here if the policy similarly made it unreasonably difficult for volunteer contributor to get the information needed to meet the journalistic standards imposed by the overworked editors.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMCEddy (talk • contribs)

Comments and questions

Definitely worthy of discussion, so I have no problem with the proposal in the sitenotice.

Initial questions:

• Does this proposal include importing English Wikinews content e.g., to Wikinews subpages?
• What are "active editions"?
• How can Wikiversity navigate the concerns that lead to the closure of Wikinews?
• Are any changes to the scope of Wikinews proposed?
• How does Wikinews fit with the Wikiversity:Mission? What aligns well? Where might there be tension?
  • e.g., I'm not sure that a page like User:BigKrow/Manchester City moves two points behind Arsenal in and of itself will serve as an educational resource.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• Does this proposal include importing English Wikinews content e.g., to Wikinews subpages?

• No, not at this time.

• What are "active editions"?

• There were 30 other active editions of Wikinews in addition to English (e.g. n:es:) at the time of universal closure (2026-05-04).

• How can Wikiversity navigate the concerns that lead to the closure of Wikinews?

• One of the biggest issues was the problems with DPL, which is now irrelevant. Another was the lack of activity, which can be ameliorated by having it be part of an existing project instead of its own domain (e.g. some editions of Wikipedia host their own Wikinews already and those projects were not impacted by the closure).

• Are any changes to the scope of Wikinews proposed?

• Not at this juncture. I would also propose as far as implemention goes that we would request a new namespace and that the material be more-or-less sequestered into its own ongoing project, like Wikijournal is or like the Cookbook and Wikijunior are at our sister b:.

• How does Wikinews fit with the Wikiversity:Mission? What aligns well? Where might there be tension?
  • e.g., I'm not sure that a page like Story/Manchester City moves two points behind Arsenal in and of itself will serve as an educational resource.

• The process of citizen journalists practicing their craft in real-time and collaborating with others to do so is itself an education activity. We would essentially be hosting a real-time experiment in citizen journalism, online communities, and collaborative learning in addition to the prospect of spreading educational information from someone actually reading the news. I would propose that we could also make a more deliberate attempt to engage with learning about what does and doesn't work with collaborative news writing by experimentation (e.g. audio news, syndicating to other sites, incorporating freely-licensed news from other sources, writing hyper-local news, writing briefs versus longer-term reportage) and also seeing if the problems noted in the Task Force report that recommended closure can be overcome. Note that we have already done some local investigation about and learning about wiki-based journalism on Wikinews here at Journalism studies and Wikinews. We could continue that learning and refine the process, including incorporating journalism students from universities. As for tensions, Wikinews is the only sister project that must be done with a quick turn-around: if you take a long time to transcribe a book, that's just how long it takes, but if you take a long time to write news, it ceases to be news entirely. Wikiversity has been a very slow-growing project that has definitely had some successes but has generally come together over a long period with most learning resources being individual passion projects (or sometimes, frankly, crankery) which would not work with collaborative news that requires more than just a single editor writing whatever he feels like.

Please let me know any other questions/concerns and any other editors feel free to give your own perspective. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:13, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, Justin — it is food for thought.

In attempting to understand how we've arrived here, I've summarised some of the background on this page: Wikinews.

Perhaps it could be helpful to flesh out more of the vision / ideas / possibilities / challenges on that page? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:49, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• Having given it some thought, in principle, I support hosting citizen journalism on Wikiversity where it is clearly connected to a learning project and/or constitutes original research, both of which align strongly with Wikiversity’s educational mission.
• My chief concern is the potential for news content that is not clearly linked to the purpose of Wikiversity. To avoid this, some community-agreed guidelines would be prudent. These need not be overly restrictive; they should support boldness and experimentation while helping ensure alignment with Wikiversity's purpose.
• Given the reported low and declining activity on Wikinews, it seems unlikely that English Wikiversity would be overwhelmed by an influx of news-related editing. My impression is that English Wikinews was the most active edition, but even so, many contributors are likely to disperse to other projects or cease editing altogether. A modest migration of interested editors to Wikiversity seems manageable.
• At this stage, I do not think a dedicated namespace is necessary. Subpages under Wikinews or nested pages under relevant learning or research projects, or user-space draft pages should be suitable. I agree that Wikijournal offers a useful model, as do several existing course structures on Wikiversity.
• I support User:Koavf’s suggestions about framing Wikinews activity explicitly around learning. This would create a distinctive space for experimenting with collaborative news production in ways that are pedagogically meaningful. I agree that the journalism studies and Wikinews project developed by David and Leigh Blackall through the University of Wollongong is an excellent example of the intersection between Wikiversity and Wikinews. The Wikinews page could evolve into a hub for such projects.
• I've tidied the Wikinews category and merged some content into the Wikinews page. As part of a reinvigoration effort, please review these and related resources such as Category:Journalism and School:Journalism.
• A further argument in favour of this initiative is that Wikipedia explicitly excludes both news reporting and original research. So, there is value in maintaining spaces within the Wikimedia ecosystem where these forms of knowledge production can be openly developed and curated. Such work can, in turn, generate valuable evidence and source material that may later inform Wikipedia articles.
• The closure of WMF-hosted Wikinews does not imply that open wiki-based news curation lacks value. Indeed, the closure documentation appears supportive of experimentation with alternative news models across Wikimedia projects, including through Wikipedia and Wikidata. In that context, Wikiversity seems a natural home for a Wikinews experiment, provided it is clearly grounded in learning and/or research.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:39, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

My understanding towards Wikinews' failure is that everything takes too long to be approved for the publish status, which means that any breaking news would have already become days-old stale news. Wikinews has a brand recognition (for right or wrong reasons) than Wikiversity and I wonder how effective Wikiversity can attract the "Wikinews refugees" to edit here. And just a quick note on the governance. Since each Wikiversity language operates independently, each language has to vote & adopt this proposal independently. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 13:47, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Your assessment about Wikinews is partially correct. I referenced it earlier, but to be explicit, there is a report by a task force on sister projects that outlines their concerns. There are a few, one of which was the nature of the staleness of news. Thanks also for clarifying that this proposal is only relevant to en.wv and is not binding or even proposed for other editions of Wikiversity. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:54, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: I am not a regular here, and just visit Wikiversity for the WikiJournal project. Challenges of Wikinews included that it required timely reporting and fact-checking processes which differed greatly from the well-established ones in Wikipedia. Here in Wikiversity, there is the WikiJournal project, and that can take some some forms of journalism, just not breaking news reporting. I am in favor of salvaging parts of Wikinews if helpful. Could it, would it be feasible to adapt Wikijournal to accept some forms of news journalism, but just not the timed news reporting? For example, WikiJournal already is doing conference proceedings, and could likely do related event reports even months after the event ended. It could probably accept long-form investigative reporting, which is a sort of news that is not breaking news. I am not sure what the possibilities are, but I would prefer to build up systems that already work rather than import systems which had problems elsewhere. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:17, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

  I agree that there are certain kinds of journalism that are perfectly valid and not time-bound like breaking news reporting, so that won't suffer from the issues noted before. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:15, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

  @Bluerasberry WikiJournal is not interested in taking on news journalism. WikiJournal is publishing conference proceedings at the request of some Wikimedian educators, and conference proceedings is what a "regular" journal publishes. News journalism is quite different from this, and if WikiJournal starts to deviate towards publishing news journalism, it will create barrier towards future initiatives like being indexed in Medline or Web of Science, and may risk being delisted from Scopus. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 22:43, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thats a good point. Juandev (discuss • contribs) 08:09, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Create an autopatrolled user group?

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T428269
Resolved

I would like to propose creating the user group autopatrolled (autopatrolled user), in which for non-curators and non-custodians, their page creations and file uploads would be automatically marked as patrolled by the MediaWiki software. Custodians may grant the user group, at their discretion, to users who create good quality pages that do not need frequent patrolling.

On a side note, the term autopatroller would be used, but because we don't have non-curator/custodian patrollers (as we rely on curators and custodians to patrol), I suggest on using the term autopatrolled user. Thoughts? Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 15:31, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Support re: the name, I don't really understand the reasoning, so I am neutral on that. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:45, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the name, this is because as we don't have the patroller user group, we rely on curators and custodians to patrol new pages and file uploads. Does that make sense? Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 16:39, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Not really, but I don't think it's the most important thing. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:42, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

We'll decide on the name later. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 01:48, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh, please don't let me stand in the way. I'm just not very smart, so don't hold up a matter on my account. I didn't want to derail the proposal, which is a fine and sensible one. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:16, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Support - sounds like a good idea

• Suggest adding a draft section about this group to Wikiversity:Patrolling. There is a statement in the Introduction of the page that I'm not sure if its correct and at least could be improved: "Wikiversity also uses an autopatrol right, meaning trusted users' contributions are automatically marked as checked so patrollers can focus on reviewing newer or anonymous editors."
• Regarding autopatroller vs autropatrolled user, what terms are used on similar WMF wiki projects?

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:28, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

1. I would create a starting page about the user groups, with experienced editors expanding the page. A summarized part of that page would also be added to Wikiversity:Patrolling.
2. For a similar example, English Wikipedia uses the term Autopatrolled, just that term only.

Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 21:22, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

@Jtneill and @Koavf: the autopatroller user group has been implemented here. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 21:14, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:13, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

How much of Wikiversity’s content is LLM slop?

Because it seems like a non-trivial amount, along with AI slop images as well. Is there some kind of AI cleanup project established yet? Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 01:20, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

We have discussed AI but I don't know of any explicit initiative to find and delete AI-generated noise. Individual modules have been deleted for having been made by AI. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:50, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Recently agreed policy welcome users to tag AI generated pages. Me personally I am not against the use of AI. What is the difference in abstract schematic image created by a human and the same by an AI. If the users does not have finances to pay digital artest and you dont want to let them use AI, would you pay the artest for them? Juandev (discuss • contribs) 17:07, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikimedia has a lot of volunteer artists who can illustrate if asked. Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 08:11, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Interesting! That's good to know. Where can we find the volunteer artists for illustrating? IanVG (discuss • contribs) 20:11, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikimedia commons has commons:Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 02:18, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Draft inactivity policy

I created Wikiversity:Inactivity policy as a start. Any experienced Wikiversity user may feel free to expand it. This is also one-to-two step(s) towards opting out of the AAR process.

However, I made a bold change to reduce the response timeframe from one month to two weeks. In addition, should we reduce the inactivity timeframe to one year? For the latter, most projects use that timeframe and I suggested this for consistency. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 15:57, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

I support those suggestions. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:55, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Juandev has posted some comments on the talk page. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 16:30, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Proposed user group and/or possible policy changes

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T430416
Resolved

I want to discuss about user group and possible policy changes.

1. First, interface administrators. I don't think we should allow interface administrators to remove their permission from their own account, since we have multiple active bureaucrats and we can ask them to remove the permission when done, or for them to add a temporary grant. This is according to the current IA policy. I also left my thoughts on the relevant talk page.
2. Second, curators. Given that curators have some sensitive custodian rights (such as delete [but not undelete or similar rights that allow viewing deleted content, unless the curatorship process is RFA-like] and protect), it would probably make more sense only for bureaucrats to grant and remove it, on par with them granting (but not removing) custodian permissions.
3. Third, about probationary custodians. Wikiversity:Probationary custodians is currently marked as historical, and the process might still exist on Wikiversity:Custodianship. Therefore, to maintain consistency with Wikiversity:Curatorship#How does one become a curator?, I propose that we repeal the probationary custodianship process and change it more or less to align with the curatorship process, effectively making probationary custodians permanent ones. However, custodian mentors would still be retained.

Thoughts? Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 17:55, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

1. Yes, I agree.
2. Thats a good point, but I dont know. At least I dont think its a good idea that both groups i.e. crats and custodiants can do that, it may create chaos.
3. Another good point. It seems to me that the current situation is somewhat unclear and should be clarified. I understand the original status of Probationary custodians as a historicall and invalid, but at the same time I consider myself a probationary custodian, because on the Wikiversity:Custodianship page in the How does one become a custodian? section it says, I quote, "II ...then you will be approved as a probationary custodian for a period of at least four weeks".

Mentors should definitely be kept, but for certain applicants the probation and mentorship should be abolished. For example, if someone was an active custodian for 5 years, then loses their rights or gives them up for a year and then wants to resume their custodial activities, there is no reason for them to undergo a training period. It burdens both the mentors and the community with double voting. The only exception could be a situation where policies or tools for custodians change significantly during that year, or the candidate wants to.

Juandev (discuss • contribs) 06:08, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

New user what do I do here

I love wikipedia and the wikiversity project seems super interesting. However I know very little about wikiversity and would like to know how i can best contribute to the project. Also if there are forums or discord or reddit that would be very helpful. (One last thing is it normal that my userboxes don't work here) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AUBSTRAWBS (talk • contribs)

Hey @AUBSTRAWBS: Welcome to Wikiversity! I've left a welcome message on your talk page so that should provide you a plethora of useful links for you to look at so you can familiarize yourself with the project. Also, feel free to create the userboxes you need. Wikiversity doesn't have as many userboxes as Wikipedia. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:45, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much :) hope to contribute a lot. AUBSTRAWBS (discuss • contribs) 21:50, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Towards an Ethics policy

In connection with the discussion of Wikidebates, I said that it would be good to establish a policy on ethics, or rather a boundary between ethical and unethical content, so that we don't have to discuss individual cases. In addition, today we also have some global policies that prohibit, for example, attacks on members of the Wikimedia movement or undermining other projects.

However, at the very beginning, I would start by collecting your opinions. What content or what research should not be allowed on Wikiversity? Juandev (discuss • contribs) 05:52, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

One ethical issue that I think should be non-controversial is related to good faith in the learning modules. So, learning materials should not be hoaxes or encourage behavior or methods that don't work or that misrepresent the facts or the likelihood of something occurring, etc. and authors should also not plagiarize or misrepresent authorship, etc. That was quite a run-on, but I hope that others can tease out what I mean here. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:39, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I look at it from a practical perspective. We can give that to the policy, but I see the problem in that we are not able to check it except plagiarism.

Plagiarism can be partially detected during patrolling. I see a new text, I put part of it in Google and I check if it is copied from the web. It is a problem with copying from books or other offline sources, but sometimes it happens that someone finds out that something is copied from somewhere and it can be deleted.

The biggest issue we have here is that we are missing Wikipedia's control mechanism: references. Only some types of resources on Wikiversity require references. In-line references are not often used in courses, exercises, lectures, etc. We are thus deprived of one of the excellent control mechanisms and the only option is for the increase in the number of members with various qualifications to check it for their colleagues. Juandev (discuss • contribs) 07:59, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Having a policy and enforcing that policy are indeed two different things. If we are only concerned with issues that we can definitively enforce, then that will definitely change this conversation. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:06, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

ok Juandev (discuss • contribs) 15:55, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

AI generated content should not be allowed as it is inherently plagiarism. Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 08:14, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

And if the user mention it was generated by an AI? Note that there is something called as public domain, that is the author wave its rights. Juandev (discuss • contribs) 09:53, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Plagiarism isn’t copyright violation. Crediting the AI is not crediting the authors the AI stole from without credit. Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 10:18, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I see, now I understand your point. Juandev (discuss • contribs) 15:56, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Deployment of Legal and Safety Contacts Link in the Footer of Your Wiki

Hello community,

The Wikimedia Foundation has provided a single legal and safety contact page, to be linked in the footer of your wiki, to ensure access to accurate legal information. This is a regulatory requirement.

We have already rolled out links to English, German, Italian, Spanish Wikipedias and other wikis and we will deploy to your wiki soon.

Please read more on the project page and leave any comments in this thread or on the talk page. –– STei (WMF) (discuss • contribs) 18:12, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. In case anyone is not clear, we cannot locally change the text at the footer, as it requires access to the server settings. If we locally needed to change it, we would have to file a ticket at phab:. Since the above was sent by someone from the WMF, I think they are on it and it will be updated without any action from anyone here. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:24, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Image not displaying

Can anyone work out why this image isn't displaying?
Educational Media Awareness Campaign/Physics/POTD 10 -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:45, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Not sure, but it was an issue with the file itself and either way, it should be (and I have since done this) replaced with the SVG File:Telescope-schematic.svg. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:59, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

New nomination template(s)

I created {{Nomination}} when someone requests curator or custodian permissions, which often at least require mentorship. On the other hand, I might create {{Nomination 2}}, in which the latter does not have a section about mentorship (often used for bureaucrat or interface administrator nominations). Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 16:29, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026 Wikimedia Café meetups regarding the English Wikipedia Editor Reflections project

Hello! There will be two Wikimedia Café discussion opportunities during the last weekend of June. Both sessions will focus on the English Wikipedia Editor Reflections project. The featured guest in the Café will be User:Clovermoss. Participants may attend either or both sessions.

1. 27 June 2026 15:00 UTC (timestamp converter), at a time friendly to the Americas, Africa, and Europe
2. 28 June 2026 03:00 UTC (timestamp converter), at a time friendly to Asia and the Pacific

Please see the Café page for more information, including how to register!

↠Pine (✉) 04:00, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Mobile friendly main page

Hello, I have recently been using wikiversity on mobile and unlike wikipedia some images and boxes stick out instead of all having a set width which means you can scroll a little side to side, which makes the site feel a bit unfinished. Its just a suggestion but I think it will wake the user experience much better — Preceding unsigned comment added by AUBSTRAWBS (talk • contribs)

@AUBSTRAWBS: I don't use a smartphone. Can you give me more details or even take some screenshots? You can upload them at c:Category:English Wikiversity screenshots. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:30, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi i uploaded an image of the problem. Since some of the images are larger than the screen and not adjusted to fit they stick out and makes the page larger which lets you scroll right and have a big white rectangle on the side AUBSTRAWBS (discuss • contribs) 14:03, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that this is an issue, but it's a pretty minor-to-moderate one to me and I don't think I will be able to dedicate time to fix it myself. Showing it to others here is useful in case someone else wants to tinker with the CSS to resolve it. Thanks for bringing it to the community's attention. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:42, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

I do know CSS as I like to maintain a blog online so I could try and fix it but I don't know if I have the access to do that, would i need to be a curator/ custodian. Alternatively i could edit a sandbox version of the main page and then send it to someone. AUBSTRAWBS (discuss • contribs) 20:00, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Oh great. There are a lot of draft versions of the main page like Wikiversity:Main Page/Draft version 0.2, so you can make Wikiversity:Main Page/Sandbox if you want and edit there. If you can tinker it to your liking, I can edit the main page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:14, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

thank you, i'll check it out AUBSTRAWBS (discuss • contribs) 22:16, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Main page titles

Currently, the title says "Wikiversity:Main Page", but in my opinion, it's too basic. I would like to propose changing it with the following options (you may only pick one):

1. Option 1: Set both MediaWiki:Mainpage-title and MediaWiki:Mainpage-title-loggedin to blank, giving the main page a portal-like design (as with English Wikipedia, English Wikibooks, etc.)
2. Option 2: Modify MediaWiki:Mainpage-title to Welcome to Wikiversity (for unregistered users), and MediaWiki:Mainpage-title-loggedin to Welcome to Wikiversity, $1!; the latter would display to me as Welcome to Wikiversity, Codename Noreste!

Thoughts? Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 21:34, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Pinging @Jtneill and @Koavf for input above. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 16:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I don't have strong feelings on this. Changing to either or staying with the status quo are all fine to me. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I like the option of being consistent with Wikipedia and Wikibooks -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:04, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Y Done. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 21:34, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Thankyou - looks good. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:29, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Wiki x AI preconference day @ Wikimania

There will be a preconference day at Wikimania about Wiki AI. It will be mostly offline, but there will be at least one hybrid session for demos of community-developed AI tools and workflows.

• If you've built something cool, that is a chance to show it off, list it on the gallery of tools in progress, and get feedback.

• If you could ask the people shaping AI on the wikis (WMF, tool builders, model trainers, GLAM and policy folks) a question, what would it be?

Cheers, –SJ+ 23:12, 20 June 2026 (UTC) and Alaexis
 Copied from https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMotivation_and_emotion%2FAssessment%2FUsing_generative_AI&diff=2816357&oldid=2807052

RFC about AI-generated content in Wikimedia Commons

You are invited to participate in a request for comment on Wikimedia Commons about a policy update for AI content. This may affect files that are uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for use on this project. Thank you. Codename Noreste (discuss) 17:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Deployment of Legal and Safety Contacts Link in the Footer of Your Wiki

Legal & Safety Contacts

Hello community, the Wikimedia Foundation has provided a single legal and safety contact page, to be linked in the footer of your wiki, to ensure access to accurate legal information. This is a regulatory requirement. We have already rolled out links to English, German, Italian, Spanish and other wikis and we will deploy to your wiki soon. Please read more on the project page and leave any comments in this thread or on the talk page.

-- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Preparing manuscript for submission to the WikiJournal of Humanities

I am working on preparing an article in Wikipedia for a dual goal of submitting it for a featured article candidacy in Wikipedia and submitting it to the WikiJournal of Humanities. I have an open request for pre-submission peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Rei Ayanami/archive2, and I am asking for someone experienced with submitting journals to WikiJournals. The article is not ready for submission, and I would like to know where I can get assistance from users who submitted articles to the journal, but did not necessarily review them. Furthermore, I said there that submitting to the WikiJournal of Humanities depends on whether the article attains featured article status in Wikipedia, as I would like to use the featured article as a manuscript for a journal article. Z. Patterson (discuss • contribs) 12:04, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

I could probably save many kilobytes by compressing my LLM chat history

I could probably save many kilobytes by compressing my LLM chat history. Would that be ok? I like how my new "method" looks: User:ThinkingScience/All General AI Prompt History Archive very compressed and neat. I like how to find new ways to make people using LLMs not become "secondary citizens". ThinkingScience (discuss • contribs) 05:05, 7 July 2026 (UTC)