# Wikiversity:Colloquium

 Please do not include wiki markup or links in section titles. Sign your posts with   ~~~~ Welcome 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: What is Wikiversity? Who are Wikiversity participants? Wikiversity Introduction Mediawiki software questions Wikiversity: Chat | Mailing list | Twitter For general questions, use Wikiversity:Help desk Shortcut: WV:C

"Knowledge grows when shared." — Bhartrihari (discuss)

## "Filmmaking" courses

I can contact Robert Elliott to await his response, but he hasn't been active since 2008. Meanwhile, pages related to Filmmaking, like "Filmmaking Basics" and "Film editing" pages, look very dated because it tells a student to obtain a free disk after completing other courses. Also, the "Film editing" page still retains a dead external link, i.e. Template:Star Movie Shop. What to do with the pages? --George Ho (discusscontribs) 10:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC); edited, 01:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Please feel free to update these resources! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 12:00, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, but I'm not a filmmaking expert or anything like that. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 06:36, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I tried emailing Robert Elliott twice, but I received an error message saying "550 Rejected". In other words, his email is not working anymore. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 01:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

## Change of behavior of the editing tool

Since yesterday something radically changed in the behavior of the editing tool with respect to the handling of inline equations. The edit button normally calls the source editor. If this mode is switched to visual editing, then all inline formulas are put between lines. It is not possible to correct this decision. It is annoying because now it is no longer possible to put short formulas and special characters inline. I already found it annoying that I cannot select the start editing mode. The current behavior of the tool is unacceptable. Please change this faulty behavior back asap.--HansVanLeunen (discusscontribs) 08:37, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

We have no control over MediaWiki software, and only minor ability to request configuration changes. If you are having problems with the Visual Editor, you can always edit directly in Edit source mode. If you'd like, you can contact the Visual Editor development team. See mw:VisualEditor for more information. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 12:46, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Or ping me. HansVanLeunen, can you tell me more about this problem? Is the formula wrong when you save it, or only when you insert it? Whatamidoing (WMF) (discusscontribs) 00:09, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The problem only lasted a few days and then no longer occurred. So for me the problem is solved.--86.86.128.232 (discuss) 08:34, 8 June 2017 (UTC) Sorry, forgot to login. HansVanLeunen (discusscontribs) 09:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm glad to hear that it's working correctly now. Whatamidoing (WMF) (discusscontribs) 16:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

## Upgrading Quiz extension

Quiz extension is currently being upgraded while the bugs are begin fixed.Some features that were requested on Extension_talk:Quiz needs community consensus.

1.Upgrading feedback to be conditional.Currently feedback is shown for all questions in quiz and for all proposals/answer. More information at Phabricator - T166931

2.Color scheme for wrong and correct answers.Currently if a question is unanswered or incorrectly answered, the right and wrong options both are highlighted in same color(i.e red). It has been reported at Link and Help_talk:Quiz. The color scheme can be changed or the correct proposals/answers can be highlighted in green. More information at Phabricator - T165387 --Harjotsinghwiki (discusscontribs) 13:28, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Awesome, happy to hear that we are improving the Quiz extension! -Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 16:03, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

## Further interactive elements

Wondering what people think about the possibility of adding further interactive elements? Some possible examples here [1] Doc James (discusscontribs) 01:16, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

The toggle is already implemented as {{Collapsible toggle}}. Responsive Dynamic columns are already implemented using {{Columns}}. But any of these examples that can be implemented as a template or template and module would likely be used by someone. Be bold! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:42, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

## Importing equations from Wikipedia

Representation theory of the Lorentz group is recently imported from Wikipedia. It is an important chapter of quantum theory (physics), adapted for undergraduate physics students. On Wikipedia, the no-content-forking policy disallows coexistence of "...theory for physicists" with "...theory for mathematicians", "...theory for undergraduate" with "...theory for graduate" etc. Thus, the future of this, very useful, resource on Wikipedia is problematic. Here is a quote from debates there:

Even if a prerequisite like representation theory is available, there are enough odd features about the Lorentz group (non-compactness, non-simple connectedness) that warrants the discussion (strategy, step one, step two, Group reps from Lie algebra reps respectively) because they are usually ignored even in introductory graduate level mathematics texts. These texts focus almost invariably on compact groups and never on projective representations. The latter is heavily used in applications and has undoubtedly confused several generations of students. (Feynman: If we can't explain spin to our students, do we understand it?)
The article seeks to demonstrate how the general theory applies in this particular case. As I said, I understand your point of view, but it isn't the only one. Several sections have actually been proposed to me (on this page). Among these are the non-technical introduction and the strategy section. Explicitly, the article is written "one level down". It could be written as you suggests. This would reduce accessibility to a selected few, but quite possibly it would formally become an impeccable WP article. But in my view, it would have little value. YohanN7 (talk) 08:54, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Not convinced at all by your reasoning here. Yes Lie groups requires a lot of things, that is because it is a very advanced subject in mathematics and a graduate level topic in many universities. I find the idea that there are no good texts on representations of non-compact Lie groups to be baffling (have you looked at Knapp's 800 page book??) also the Feynman quote doesn't apply here, there he is saying we really don't know what spin is, here we know all the math the problem is what is appropriate for this page. I would like to disabuse of the notion you have that assuming familiarity with the topics will lower the number of people using the page, nobody will learn about Lie groups and representation from the contents of this page alone. That is one of the points of the Wikipedia linking to its other pages.
The way you should think about it is this, your view means everything I objected to should be repeated in every Wikipedia page on a specific Lie group. That includes the exceptional Lie groups or simply SO(8) (which has its own page and it is not simply connected).

Thus, the resource should feel better here on Wikiversity. However, a number of technical troubles manifest themselves. For now I try workarounds; ugly and time consuming. If we like to import from Wikipedia content rich of equations, we should import/update a number of templates.

w:Template:Equation_box_1 types an equation in a background-colored box. I did not found such template here. Workaround: just remove the call to this template, getting equation with no box; still readable, but less nice and less emphasized. For example:

{{Equation box 1|indent=|equation=
{{NumBlk|:|$E=mc^2$|{{EquationRef|G5}}}}


turns into

{{NumBlk|:|$E=mc^2$|{{EquationRef|G5}}}}


giving

${\displaystyle E=mc^{2}}$

(G5 )

Template:EquationNote works, but sometimes strangely. Example: the code

Just look how {{EquationNote|G5|(G5)}} makes troubles.


produces

Just look how (G5)

makes troubles.


Workaround: whenever the next (after EquationNote) character is a space (rather than, say, a comma), remove the space. Example: the code

Just look how {{EquationNote|G5|(G5)}}makes troubles.


produces

Just look how (G5) makes troubles.

w:Template:sfrac types a fraction. I did not found such template here. Workarounds: sometimes, "{{sfrac|1|2}}" may be replaced with "&frac12;" giving "½"; "{{sfrac|3|2}}" with "<sup>3</sup>&frasl;<sub>2</sub>" giving "32"; "{{sfrac|''m''|''n''}}" with "$\frac m n$" giving "${\displaystyle {\frac {m}{n}}}$".

w:Template:abs types absolute value (like |x|). I did not found such template here. Workaround: "{{math|''x''<{{abs|''m''−''n''}}}}" may be replaced with "{{math|''x''< &#124;''m''−''n''&#124;}}" giving "x< |mn|".

w:Template:sqrt types square root. I did not found such template here. Workarounds: "{{math|{{sqrt|2}}}}" may be replaced with "&radic;<span style="text-decoration: overline">2</span>" giving "√2".

w:Template:supsub types a superscript and a subscript. I did not found such template here. Workaround: "{{math|''B''{{supsub|2|''j''}}}}" may be replaced with "$B_j^2$" giving "${\displaystyle B_{j}^{2}}$".

Boris Tsirelson (discusscontribs) 18:07, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I've tried C&P and importing some Wikipedia templates here with mixed success! A couple of years back there was a movement to generate commons templates that every wiki project could use, but I believe that fizzled out. ${\displaystyle {\sqrt {2}}}$ still works! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 00:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
• ${\displaystyle {\sqrt {200}}}$ works! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 00:57, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tsirel: There are two options. You can post at Wikiversity:Imports and list templates that need to be imported / updated, or you can apply at Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship#Requests and Nominations for Curatorship and request curator status so you can perform imports yourself. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 02:54, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

## Edit filter

Please take a look on my filter log. Thanks!

--83.31.45.24 (discuss) 16:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Due to recent and ongoing abuse, it has become necessary to restrict anonymous page creation. Please create an account and log in for greater flexibility. This would also help others contact you regarding your recent contributions to the Internet Protocol Analysis real-world course. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 18:06, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

## New student

Hello, im a user from various wikimedia projects and now I want ti join the university as a student, Can you help me? --Neurorebel (discusscontribs) 21:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome! Wikiversity isn't a traditional university. There's nothing to join. Participate wherever you like, learn what you can, and contribute what you know. Let us know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I Want to take a course on musicology if possible, where can I start? --Neurorebel (discusscontribs) 22:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I'd suggest starting with Portal:Music and Category:Music. You might also connect with User:Jon michael swift, as he often contributes to music pages. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 22:34, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I'd be happy to help User:Neurorebel in any way I can. Jon Michael Swift (discusscontribs) 13:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
I got your email, but I can't respond directly. Can you shoot me a direct email so I can answer? User:Neurorebel Jon Michael Swift (discusscontribs) 20:50, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
It is not necessary for anyone on-wiki to release their private email address to others. Instead see Special:EmailUser/Neurorebel. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:40, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
I was right wondering about this subject, even mad about the lack of your response. I advanced a lot since then, new answers and new questions, also I was nervous aboput my mailbox being filtered, now that i know its nopt im trying to understand why cant you answer me by mail... may be you should check {U|Dave Braunschweig}} subjection, meanwhile i will also check hims in order to help. By the way have you heart this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay8vzCHkgEk --Neurorebel (discusscontribs) 02:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

## Main page learning project

What to do about Main page learning project and Talk:Main page learning project? The banner at top of Wikiversity talk:Main Page says to go there for redesigning the Main Page of Wikiversity. However, the talk page was last commented in 2010, seven years ago. Also, what to do about the banner itself? BTW, I made a comment at Wikiversity talk:Main Page#Needing language box. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 08:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinging Marshall and Dave about this. Pinging Atcovi if that user is interested. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 19:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

What are your thoughts regarding the suggestion? The whole page could use a redesign, in that most of the content doesn't appear on mobile. See [2]. I don't have any time to work on this currently, but it might be something we can do between now and the end of the year. Does anyone else have suggestions for improving the main page? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Oh dear... I initially thought about redesigning the desktop design and thought about redesigning the colors. However, I never thought that the mobile version was worse. What are reasons for features not appearing on the mobile version? If tested on WV:Sandbox, hmm.... --George Ho (discusscontribs) 20:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
I dealt with this for the portals a year and a half ago. See Portal:Agriculture for a design that works (is effectively identical) for mobile. The main page needs to be switched over to a responsive div design rather than using tables for layout. If we're redesigning anyway, we could look at what other changes we think should be made. Based on the response rate, I would condense the Community and Development boxes. They don't add sufficient value as measured by views or engagement. We need a better way to draw participants. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
• The Development box has had the same image for a long time. I'm willing to try a portal approach that at least changes images, but I don't use a cell or mobile phone so have no ready way to check effect of changes. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 01:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think changing the image by itself is going to have much impact, but for testing, try the Mobile view link at the bottom of the page. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 02:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
• Tried the Mobile view link at the bottom of the page. Wow! It only shows the Main Page top image and blue-bannered Welcome section! All the others are not shown! Bummer! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 03:23, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Hmm... How about going to either mw:Project:Support desk or wmf:Staff and contractors#Technology to contact any member about the mobile view? Would that help? --George Ho (discusscontribs) 09:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

It's not a software problem, per se. It's a content design issue. The combination of the code used to manage the layout (tables) and the (unnecessary) depth of transclusions prevents proper display of this content. Tables have been discouraged in layout design for at least a decade now. We just need to replace the design. If we're going to go to that effort, the question is what to replace it with. Do we want something more modern, like the portal templates, or do we want something more traditional, like the Wikipedia look? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 15:25, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I figure, Dave, that some (X)HTML coding like <div></div> and <table></table> should help make the Wikiversity Main Page more mobile-friendly. Well... not full transclusion. How about merging Wikiversity:Main Page/Layout into the Main Page? Ooh, I found Main Page/Concept/2006/August and others. Maybe we can create Wikiversity:Main Page/sandbox and do some good testing, or create our own personal sandboxes. Thoughts? --George Ho (discusscontribs) 22:47, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

See Wikiversity:Main Page/Sandbox and let me know what you think. So far, all I have cleaned up is the top banner. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:04, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

• The content of the Main Page is also here and the Mobile view link at the bottom of the page shows everything. It may have to do with the exec file running the Main Page rather than the page's content. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 21:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
• mw:Project:Support desk user AhmadF.Cheema pointed out: "When you take a look at the source code for the Main Page/Layout, you will find the tag ids "mf-" being used. These tags allow Wikis to serve entirely different main pages to mobile users. This is done by marking certain elements for display with id attributes "mf-" or "mp-". When an element is marked in this way it will be shown and all other elements will be hidden. [...] Note that the use of these tags is deprecated (T32405). Alternate ways should be used for mobile versions of the main page. Take the example of how this is done on Wikidata [Main Page]." I believe Dave intends to change Wikiversity:Main Page/Layout, which, hopefully, will solve the problem. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 23:27, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

## Edit filter

--83.31.75.204 (discuss) 20:10, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

See Wikiversity:Why create an account. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

## Good and bad news about cross-wiki search results in English Wikipedia

Good news: The cross-wiki search results from other projects are now live in English Wikipedia. Bad news: The search results from English Wikiversity are suppressed via RfC discussion in English Wikipedia, meaning users won't see those results there. Feel free to share your thoughts here. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 20:24, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

The end of that discussion indicates that searches for Wikiversity would be title-only rather than full-text. I'd be okay with that, but I don't see title-only working at this time. Was there more discussion elsewhere or am I not understanding what a title-only search is? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:17, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi again, Dave. Another discussion indicated that the developers planned to include search results from all projects, but the RfC discussion concluded as not to include all. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 00:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
When I search, for example, "X-rays" a, the results are only from Wikiversity with files from commons which have proven very helpful for adding to lectures. Have these RfCs prevented crossWiki searches from being included here? --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 03:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I apologize for being unclear, Marshallsumter and Dave. I meant search results at English Wikipedia, not at Wikiversity. One example is "X-ray", like you said. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 03:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Cross-wiki results into other projects are considered. Currently, only Wikipedia does that. Thoughts? --George Ho (discusscontribs) 03:34, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
It would be great to have that here! While a popular subject on Wikipedia could yield too many results to be useful, I'm pretty good at adding a second word or quotes to get a focused search! How do we specify it and get it here? --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 03:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Before doing that, Marshall, besides Wikipedia, we should discuss as the community which other projects should be included in the search results. Should Commons, Wikispecies, Wikibooks, etc. be included? --George Ho (discusscontribs) 08:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Pinging Chris Koerner about this. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 00:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Uh, Hi? I'm not 100% sure what is being asked of me in this discussion. Apologies if this answer is off the mark. The search team is looking to expand the sister search results feature to other Wikimedia projects, including Wikiversity. By default the search results include all Wikimedia projects (expect for Wikidata at the moment). When we're ready to expand the feature to Wikiversites, we'll mention it here and ask for feedback. That will, assumedly, include a discussion if projects should be excluded. Hope that helps! CKoerner (WMF) (discusscontribs) 15:07, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

## Template:Footer

Hello, I've just created {{Footer}} which could replace {{Prevnext}} because it's fully automatic: no need to respecify the previous and next chapters which are already listed into the table of content. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 22:18, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

{{Prevnext}} isn't in use at Wikiversity. I like the idea, but wanted a different design, and the implementation was difficult to follow. I created an alternative set of templates as {{subpage previous}}, {{subpage next}} and {{subpage navbar}}. There's no documentation yet, but everyone can see the effect at Lua/Introduction at the bottom of the page. It's designed intentionally to match the category bar. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:21, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I can follow your Module:Navigation but it's not designed to be exported in the other languages. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 00:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

## Template:Printable

With the same Lua module as the template above, I could create Lua/Print version. It's a dynamic alternative to Special:Book which can fail during its encoding sometimes. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 22:52, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

By the way, we should import {{Print version}} from Wikibooks to link towards these pages. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 08:34, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Special:Book is being completely rewritten and should be available soon. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:26, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

## Newer proposal to merge Beta Wikiversity into Incubator

Hello again. The four-year proposal (meta:Proposals for closing projects/Move Beta Wikiversity to Incubator) was closed as "rejected". Soon, the newer proposal (meta:Proposals for closing projects/Move Beta Wikiversity to Incubator 2) is made. Please comment there. Thanks. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 19:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

## WikiJournal proposed as a sister project

The ongoing proposal to make WikiJournal the spinoff of Wikiversity, i.e. the free academic journal project is discussed at Meta-wiki. Please comment there. Thanks. --George Ho (discusscontribs) 07:11, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

## Open Collaborative World Building – Asking for go or nogo

Hello everyone,

concerning a discussion earlier this year, I think I can't do much more, than: m:Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2017-04#Opinion needed concerning licencing in Wikiversity and m:User:HirnSpuk. Additional Information here: User:HirnSpuk (though extremely rough).

I tried my best to search for the relevant information, discussed or linked in the link(s) above. I wasn't able to gather more information or to get more comments.

I'd like to ask kindly for a go/nogo (meaning you would/would not support this kind of action) for the project, under the following conditions: If information (not direct text itself or parts, just the given ideas/information) is used by an external creative to do a creative work (video/audio/comic/text/image/whatsoever) it is sufficient to adhere to the CC-BY-SA License of Wikiversity by incorporating a line into the work stating “This work is a derivative work and based upon a Collaborative World Building Project on Wikiversity, see »link« for Details. I assure that this original work is licensed with respect to the CC-BY-SA terms.” The precise wording could be changed, the main thing: A link to Wikiversity is sufficient as credit.

As more than once supposed by me, I think this is absolutly necessary for the project. I won't start the project, if you think this is to much of a compromise or even not within the license terms (which I think it is), because I'm not willing to take the risk, that anyone is so unsure about the license, that they do not start any work based on it anyway. But this would be one of my primary goals.

So in conclusion, I'd like to hear a go/nogo and/or any comment, especially pinging the initial people talking about the idea: Justin (koavf), Michael Ten, Atcovi and User:Dave Braunschweig (I would count in a veto for Dave; if, as a "head" custodian like I'm told, he would be against it, this wouldn't make any sense, even if everyone else says "do it", would it?).

Maybe further discussions will bring more ideas and change the idea even more, than it already did. So, please be so kind and tell me your opinion. If you have any questions, please ask, I'd be happy to talk. Thanks a lot, regards --HirnSpuk (discusscontribs) 19:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@HirnSpuk: We cannot approve or deny your request. See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ for current Wikiversity licensing requirements. Contact WMF Legal or legal@wikimedia.org regarding any legal questions you have.
Regarding what you have written on your Meta user page, you seem to have issues with both the BY and the SA parts of CC-BY-SA. Any derivative works must give appropriate credit and must be released with the same licensing. You need to decide whether you believe in and are committed to open source content, or whether you are focused on other options. Rather than trying to negotiate this, I encourage you to either accept CC-BY-SA licensing or move on to another venue. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 19:43, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm so sorry, I have the impression, that you interpret my questions as rude and not appropriate. I'm sorry, that I fail to explain. I don't want to ask for approval or denial, I don't want to negotiate, I'd liked to ask for support or no support and if we interpret the CC-BY-SA the same way. I won't contact WMF, because I don't think this is of their business.
Please let me add: I believe in open source content and I am committed! That's exactly, why I'm proposing, let's make it easy (easier) for others to reuse and build upon the content and as specified in Section 4(c) CC-BY-SA 3.0 to clearly state a “party” as requested in “…or if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties […] the name of such party or parties;…”.
That said, with your assumption I would have a problem with BY and SA (which is not the case) and with not having your support, I won't start the project.
Thanks for your time and advice, regards --HirnSpuk (discusscontribs) 22:12, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
@HirnSpuk: I must respectfully disagree with your stated position. If you believe in open source and CC-BY-SA, you can develop your project here without worrying about reuse, as reuse is already built into the published license. Whether or not someone else chooses to reuse the content is up to them, and meeting the license requirement is their problem. Because you continue to seek workarounds to a perceived licensing problem, you would seem to have an ulterior motive or intent that goes beyond supporting Wikiverity CC-BY-SA content. From that perspective, it would be best to develop the project somewhere else. Best of luck to you. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:37, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

## Accessible editing buttons

--Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

## Confirmed

Please give me the 'confirmed' right i have many constructive edits from IPs addresses Jan Paweł ll (discusscontribs)

Sorry. 1) No one here has checkuser status, so there is no way to verify that you have used any specific IP address. 2) Confirmed user isn't an assignable group at Wikiversity. 3) Your edit history on other wikis does not support your request. 4) Edits such as [3] do not support your request. You'll need to wait until you are autoconfirmed. In the mean time, please be productive and support the Wikiversity:Mission. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:39, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

## Wikiversities at Wikimania 2017

Ni! Hi folks, passing by to say, in case you're coming to Wikimania 2017, there will be a session about Wikiversity which may be useful to all of us: Wikiversities: get over the content, serve the flow. It will take place on Friday, August 11, at 11:00, in Salon 5 (2nd level). Hope to see you there! Solstag (discusscontribs) 06:10, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

## Writing a business plan?

Hello. When I was in my undergraduate studies, I took a business class. Part of the class was to design a for profit business plan and turn it in for evaluation. Would be fine to create a for profit business plan (benefit corporation structure, actually) at Business/Business plan (or some other sub-page of Business)? If it is going to be deleted, I will not even bother starting it, of course. Is this going to be fine to do? I intend to be able to learn from the endeavor. Thank you in advance. (= Michael Ten (discusscontribs) 06:42, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Whether or not a business plan would be deleted depends on the content. A generic business plan could provide learning opportunities for others. A specific business plan that promotes or generates profit for the author would not be appropriate in terms of setting learning free. I recommend using generic references (the business, the organization, the owner(s)), rather than specific names to avoid potential conflicts of interest between the learning opportunity and the profit motive. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:29, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

## Transclusion don't work...

Hello, I'm trying to insert a sub page in my research edition With the syntax {{}} but It doesn't work. Somebody could give me a hand or some explanations ? Thanks in advance. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 21:22, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

{{:The digital revolution experienced by the global South/First visit in Ghana}}. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:13, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Or {{:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/subpage}}, which continues to work when pages are renamed/moved. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 22:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Dave Braunschweig and Koavf, I was troubled because in French Wikiversity the syntax {{name of page}} works. Probably a difference in the customization of MediaWiki. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 22:54, 14 August 2017 (UTC)