You are examining an archive of past discussions for transparent review by inquisitive participants. Please ask questions and share your thoughts on the current discussion page.
I'm not sure if this is bad news or not, but apparently the Free Software Foundation (who hold the GFDL license) are being aquired by Time-Warner. The issue is being discussed on wikipedia if you want more details, but apparently one option being discussed is that anyone who wants to release anything under the GFDL will need to register themselves with the company (apparently there are liability concerns). --SB_Johnny | talk16:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, thats crazy. We should make our own free licence. Anyway I dont understand how someone can own the free licence. Thats kind of idiocy.--Juan18:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whell, I would like to ask in here, if anyone of you is thinking about a project based on bilingual dictionary. If so the coordination page would be usefull. I think most of us will make English-something, so English is a key language. It would be usefull to paste all the databases in the future into the one. Maybe people from Sandbox Server can help. I meant if there is not a need to have in databases a speccial characters which will distinguish between languages. Dictionary projects:
If you are thinking about a huge bilingual dictionary which will contain words in different languages but have the definition in english, then that is what Wiktionary is all about. Omegawiki is another dictionary that looks promising, though it is in pre-alpha right now.-Balloonguy21:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's time for another conference call. Does anyone have any new topics, or should we stick to what we've already had proposed? When is a good time?
I'll tentatively say Sunday evening, but am flexible (it could be Saturday, Monday or Tuesday) EDT wise. Usually around 9pm EDT, so I'll throw that out as a proposed time. If you don't have a login, leave me a note and we'll get you hooked up.
Hi everyone! I'm new here and I'm not a native speaker of English, so there may be English mistakes on the following.
I have created the page War and Iran to serve the purpose of studying about... well, War and Iran. A discussion had started on the Help Desk as the result of a question (here is the link to the question). So, I thought we might as well bring the discussion to this new page out of the Help Desk. But my friend suggested (as seen there on the second link) that it would be better for me to transfer the page that I had created to my userpage. I want to know what is the best place here on Wikiversity for us to continue the discussion. I would also like to know if you think the discussion should be somewhere here on Wikiversity at all or it just doesn't belong here? a.z.04:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well i'm not really sure, but why don't you put it under history or politics? Shaheema 9 April 2007
While going through the page on airline navigation,it stuck me that it is very useful for pilots and for members of the airline crew.However,is there a specialized section devoted to the specific functions of the airline crews,such as air-hostess' training,etc...Is there such a possiblity for such a course to be put up here?
Yes. Wikiversity is a collaboration, and learning resources are what we do. Since we're still quite young, you have to be patient, but we are looking to acquire both original research and practical education, and as much in the middle as we can. Historybuff15:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How has Wikimedia Changed your Life?
This message is being crossposted around village pumps and mailing lists - apologies if you receive it more than once!
Have any of the Wikimedia projects had an effect on you in real life, or do you know of someone, or some group of people, who use our projects in real life? If so, we want to hear from you at m:Success Stories - How has Wikimedia Changed your Life?. The hope is that this page can become somewhere to which we can point members of the press so that they can immediately get an idea of the usefulness of our projects. Please, take a look, and add your stories! Martinp2316:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Where do I put my research/assignment papers? Can we even put them up?
I'm a grad English Literature student, and I've done quite a bit of research in the sphere of literature. (No applause please... :P) Well, my friends have said that my papers might inspire others, turn them into critics or at least help them. Would it be wise to put it up? And where do I put them?!?! Any ideas, suggestions or some good old advice? Shaheema 08:05, 9 April 2007
Just be aware that posting papers here is a form of publication, and you are granting others permission to recopy and post them, or use elements of them in certain licensed contexts, etc. If you're okay with this, I'd mosey on over to the department of Literature and ask them where your papers may be of most use. The Jade Knight12:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And if you aren't happy with the licence here, we can point you to some place to upload your research to and would be very happy to host the discussions on your work here. Just leave a note here, or on my talk page if you need further help. Historybuff15:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, note that the material here has the potential to be replicated all over the internet. Choose wisely the material you wish to share with others. Other than that, another rule of thumb to follow is simply enjoy the process of sharing your work with others here. Porting material over to Wikiversity is generally non-trivial (and unfortunately can be boring at times), so make sure you are doing something that keeps you going. --HappyCamper22:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shaheema, and thanks for your kind offer. I'd say, just go ahead and upload your papers and anything else that you think may be of educational value to others. Don't worry about "where to put them" - giving a page a name for now is not set in stone - it can always be changed later. And pages can be categorised and listed from various places, so waiting for a response from literary participants is not strictly necessary (though it'll help). Licensing is slightly more complex, but remember that it will always be recognised as your (initial) work - by uploading work here, you are simply allowing others more flexibility in using your work than they would be entitled to do if it was under traditional copyright. I'd be very happy to help if you're still unsure of any of this. Cormaggiotalk09:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made a report on the mailing list about a great conference I attended recently on Open Educational Resources (OERs). I won't regurgitate it all here, but instead direct people to Topic:Developing Wikiversity, where I propose we organise all pages devoted to developing Wikiversity. (If you propose a name change, or another idea, please say so here or on its talk page.) I'd also encourage people to read the report that was presented to the conference, which you can find here. This partly explains my recent absence from Wikiversity - now trying to catch up on what's been happening in the meantime. :-) Cormaggiotalk09:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Local Media/Images?
I was chatting with gmaxwell from the commons, and he suggested doing away with local WV file uploads. Comments? I don't understand the implications enough to really say anything much either way. Historybuff19:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We could start by encouraging Wikiversity participants to upload to Commons all images that might be useful to other projects. At one time, it was simple to deal with Commons uploads, but the upload link there now does not even take you to an upload page. I'm not sure I want to see new Wikiversity users have to go to another wiki and be subjected to that kind of system for image uploads. My largest problem with commons is that when I make use of their resources, they frequently delete images after I make use of them and then there is nothing but a dead image link remaining at Wikiversity and no easy way for Wikiversity participants to even figure out why there is a dead image link. Very user unfriendly. --JWSchmidt20:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I initially agree with that idea, but a few days ago I suggested adding the extension which enables the use of free mindmaps in Wikiversity. I think that interactive mind maps would be very helpful here. The problem if we stop uploading here is that so far the extension file .mm, which is used by Freemind, can not be uploaded in Commons. I would agree to stop uploading here if future Wikiversity media contents can also be uploaded there.--Javier Carro20:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is a terrible idea and precedent to attempt to force local users to depend on other communities. If other communities provide useful services to Wikiversity users then the material will naturally drift in their direction when it is appropriate. mirwin
There is definitely a benefit to having the option of deciding for ourselves what types of files we want to upload here on Wikiversity. However, uploading to Commons means that the files can be used from there on any other project - including the German, French etc Wikiversities (which would have to re-upload any material uploaded to just :en). I think that we should try to use Commons as much as possible (in order to maximize reuse) - but that it's probably overkill to force people to do so at this stage. In response to John's final point, there is a bot that flags changes made to any file that another project is using at m:User:Duesentrieb/CommonsTicker - does anyone have any feedback on how well it works? Cormaggiotalk09:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:WikiversityThe Wikimedia Commons is the glue for the Wikimediametacommunity. The commons is a great idea in theory, but it is unwieldy, difficult to browse, and grasp without a lot of digging around. I think Wikiversity needs to take a BE BOLD stance and assume some responsibility for making the commons more useful. I think it's good to have our own local repository for things that are "not ready for primetime" (under development or that have only local relevance) but things that benefit other languages and projects definitely should go to the Commons. Our Wikimedia Commons page could become a learning activity for understanding the commons as it is and working out ways to improve it. I really wish to see all the Wikimedia projects and languages coming together as a true metacommunity. CQ13:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
After reading the feedback, it sounds like there is compelling reasons to continue to have a local version of the upload function. While I do support the idea of having resources available for the community as a whole, it's also important that our contribs not "get lost" upstream or swept aside because we are small (compare Wikipedia with us, Wikiversity). Until these valid critisisms are addressed, we need to have our own bit of real estate, in my opinion.
I have the strange feeling that this has been brought up before; however, I thought I'd bring it up again. What are our thoughts on using interactive Flash tutorials, games, etc., as part of learning projects? I just made my first flash tutorial today, Creating a HelloWorld Program in Java, and I have to say that I think these may well serve as a useful teaching/learning resource on the site. These kinds of tutorials are more tailored to visual, interactive learners rather than those who get more out of just reading a book (like myself...), and I think they would certainly help to make Wikiversity more accessible and useful to users. Would anyone perchance be interested in forming a WikiProject to help create Flash tutorials for learning projects? AmiDaniel (talk) 04:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Topic:Internet Audio and Video is a central location for Wikiversity participants who are interested in developing such resources. The problem with flash is that it is not thought to be compatible with the GFDL so you cannot upload flash files to Wikimedia Foundation projects that use the GFDL. We can use Ogg video files (example: editing tutorial). For file formats that cannot be uploaded to Wikiversity, you can upload the files to hosting sites such as Internet Archive and link to the media files (example: tutorial, QuickTime version, QuickTime info). --JWSchmidt13:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What have we learned and what problems have we encountered?
Hi all, I'm putting together a paper and a workshop for Wikimania this year and part of what I'm interested in exploring in is reflecting on our activity over the last eight months, and our feelings on this activity. With this in mind, I've set up the following pages:
Hopefully, they can act as resources for our further learning about Wikiversity, and try to improve it based on this learning. I'd really appreciate any feedback you have. Thanks. Cormaggiotalk17:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here is what the Digg summary was (Digg content is under a Creative Commons Public Domain License):
What open access research can do for Wikipedia
This study demonstrates among a sample of 100 Wikipedia entries, which included 168 sources or references, only two percent of the entries provided links to open access research and scholarship. However, it proved possible to locate, using Google Scholar and other search engines, relevant examples of open access work for 60 percent of the entries.
Hi, I cannot get rid of a duplicated reference in Topic:Learning Objects, even though there is a single <ref>. Could anyone take a look on it? (and please, then tell me how to correct this problem, so I'll be able to correct it by myself the next time). w:Rjgodoy12:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It happened again on another page, somehow I managed to learn that it may be fixed by writting ?action=purge after the article name. w:Rjgodoy11:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimania workshop
I'd like to use the upcoming Wikimania as a space to explore issues in Wikiversity, pool ideas, reach out to new people. I'm currently writing a paper, which I'll upload as soon as possible, but I'd also like to propose a workshop. Details at Wikiversity workshop at Wikimania 2007. I need people's feedback for this to really work - preferably before the 30th April (Monday week), which is the closing date for submissions. What would you like to work on/discuss - and how would you like to see such a session structured? How could such a session interface with projects, communities and/or materials here? All these ideas and more on that page please. :-) Thanks. Cormaggiotalk21:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject, Taskforce ...
I want to try to improve the whole entry points to Wikiversity for the newcomer, from the Main page, to definitions of Wikiversity, to help pages - I think our whole presentation to the newcomer needs to be improved. Ideas have been mooted in various places, but I want to really get into these issues on a project page - create a project around it. I propose we have something like a Wikiversity:Introduction Overhaul Taskforce - any better ideas for names? Ideas are most welcome. Thanks. Cormaggiotalk17:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the main page is in a dire state, and the introductions seem to be a mess. For example, in one place I read that the "course" concept was rejected by the board last year, but when I try to find information about how to structure connected pages, I get back to a page which tells me how to set up a "course" on Wikiversity. The project boilerplate is pedagogically inadequate - multiple examples, tailored to different purposes, are needed for newcomers. I assume there's been a lot of discussion of this, but it's not obvious to me where the discussion is centered. McCormack17:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On courses, the board's directive was never clear nor clarified, and I honestly think you'd be better off ignoring it - bearing in mind that we're experimenting with what kind of learning model fits best in this wiki format. As for pedagogical templates, I'm with you there - it'd be great to be able to "templatise" (or at least give examples of) how people could go about developing materials. Cormaggiotalk12:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia changed the way people think about encyclopedias. Wikiversity is dealing with the challenge of changing the way people think about courses. Conventional online courses often involve certified teachers who give grades to students who get credit towards completion of degrees in accredited degree programs. Wikiversity is free to experiment with online "wiki-courses" that do not involve teacher certification and conferral of degrees. We need to be careful NOT to use the term "course" in such a way that we make visitors think that Wikiversity has conventional courses (we do not have a way to certify teachers and we do not have accredited degree programs). One approach is to avoid using the term "course". "Courses" are just one type of "learning resource". I like to use the term "learning project" rather than "course". --JWSchmidt13:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but "course" does not necessary imply an accredited course, nor certified teachers. I think it's fine for people to think in terms of a course - it's what people are used to - and even if we are trying to rethink education in a sense, we need to give people the ability to build on their prior experiences. Otherwise, we will continue to leave the majority of people dangling in the dark. "Courses" and "projects" do represent different pedagogies/epistemologies, but we are trying to figure out what works here - asking: "what parts of traditional and what parts of novel education are most appropriate to this space?" Cormaggiotalk14:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like this discussion, but am slightly surprised that it hasn't occurred before - or has it? I agree the word "course" is not so good, as it suggests a rather established teacher-centered format. "Project" is perhaps a good overall word, as it is more open to experimentation. On the other hand, novices need very concerete direction and guidance. One needs to combine both a strong guiding hand for newcomers, and methodological openness for the experienced. Just thinking off the top of my head about possible different types of project (templates for newbies): (a) lesson plan, (b) reading list, (c) quiz or interactive learning journey, (d) moderated discussion, possibly tagged with a time limit for deletion, (e) collaborative student project (overall project consists of a number of these), possibly tagged with a time limit for deletion, (f) research paper tagged with a request for peer review, (g) hybrid types consisting of any combination of the previous. If one allows spaces for experimental student projects, such as learning to write wiki-markup, these are going to be very sandbox-like, so a template should perhaps come ready-made with a deletion tag that kicks in after a few months (or user-defined time period). I also think that if we prepare multiple templates for newcomers, it needs to stay away from turning Wikiversity into Just-Another-VLE - in other words, the templates need to be constructed to guide newcomers towards the uniqueness of Wikiversity, which is its integration into the resources of all the Wikimedia projects. McCormack06:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was extensive discussion about the word "courses" after the board's cryptic directive of November 2005 - mostly on the revised proposal's talk page, which was reified to some extent in Wikiversity:Online Course, and which has now become Wikiversity:Courses. Looking at that chain, I don't think it's very clear what the overall flavour of discussion has really been. I personally think there is an unnecessary taboo around courses - the boards directive was unquestionably confusing and ultimately negative. However, I don't want to open a can of worms - I'd rather continue to experiment and invent, as we have been intending to do since we began our discussions. I very much welcome your ideas above - perhaps you could help develop further ideas on Wikiversity:Templates? Cormaggiotalk12:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Classroom coordination at Wikipedia.en
Hello, I'd like to inform the folks at Wikiversity about a new project to facilitate classroom assignments where students edit Wikipedia. The project is located here and has gained 21 volunteers since it launched April 12. We're already coordinating with an instructor from the University of Minnesota for a freshman composition course. I hope there's an appropriate place at Wikiversity where you can inform people about this service. Wikiversitians are welcome to join us! Cheers, Durova04:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. Actually, sometimes these minor annoyances can bring interesting results - I just found these references to Wikiversity through Google scholar (I knew about the first one but not the rest): [2], [3], [4], [5]Cormaggiotalk12:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of questions: (1) How do I find out which version of a MediaWiki extension is actually live on this site? (2) When a new version appears on SVN, what is the procedure/timescale for implementing it on this site? Background: version 0.8x of the quiz extension has a lot of new features (e.g. typed responses, gapfill exercises, numerical responses) and bugfixes (e.g. the points system apparently works now) and I'd like to continue writing my documentation and examples at Help:Quiz. But I need 0.8x installed to continue. McCormack04:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC) (PS: I'm aware of Special:Version but this doesn't seem to be definitive or informative as regards versions and procedures.)[reply]
So far as I know, the only way to find out what version of an extension is installed is to contact a dev (they can often be found in #mediawiki-tech on irc.freenode.net). Again, replication time from SVN to the live wikis is quite variable. Some times it takes weeks, some times minutes. Nagging the devs often tends to get that process speeded up a bit :). AmiDaniel (talk) 23:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! In this case, it actually went very fast - like remarkably quickly after I left this post here ;) So thanks to whoever saw this and took action :) McCormack06:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We're getting a lot of serial vandal accounts lately, and without checkuser we're badly vulnerable to sockpuppets (two might have been created today, we'll see). We've been very successful at dampening this sort of thing down using CU on wikibooks, and I think it's time to get it here. --SB_Johnny | talk11:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was around at the time, but dreaming. Historybuff got him. A vandal alert system with a ringing bell might make better use of existing resources. Is there such a thing? I'm not sure IRC counts, unless ordinary users who spot this kind of thing have easy access to it. McCormack16:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently it was a good faith effort (see). It might make us think about ways to promote the creation of more language-specific Wikiversity websites. --JWSchmidt17:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not according to some previous thoughts I have seen written here. Might want to drop a note to the authors on the history page in case it is under active development. 70.110.61.2604:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you ever use flash card s when you went to university? I did. I had a big stack of Biology cards and soon divided them into ones I knew, and ones I didn't. Because they were hard copies the stacks stayed put until the next day when I went through my ever dwindling "don't know" pile. That way I could focus on the ones I don't know. It sounds trivial but all the virtual flash card applications don't do this. They may have a temporary hide, but if you ever leave the webpage or logout, it's all back to one pile.
Well I think it would be SWELL if we could do the same thing virtually here in the Merry Ole Wikivesity. Except it would have to be tied to a login somehow so that that person's cards would stay in the piles they set.
I like the idea very much. Maybe those at Help:Quiz would have ideas on how to do this? I'm certain I've come across flashcards somewhere here, but I just can't recall where at the moment. *moments later...* Ah, check this out: Test and Quiz. --HappyCamper03:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The flashcard ("memorize") extension which Ryan Lane started to develop doesn't store any cross-session data. It's just a single session flashcard system. McCormack03:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes, we NEED a memorize extension, or some way to keep "know" and "don't know" categories for one person even after they log out. Andrew19:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think your experience suggests that we need to do more to pull together the various interactive projects going on around the place. Although these projects tend to have similar names, they actually have quite different (and complementary) functionality. If we start pulling them together, it will give more people a wider stake in preserving and using all of them. McCormack05:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Latest on the memorize extension
Ryan Lane's memorize extension is really just a very short implementation of Craig D. Muth's memorize javascript. The latter is released under an "X11 open source licence" and needs some small changes (in my opinion) before it can be used on Wikiversity. After reading the licence header for the javascript, it requires a backlink to Craig Muth's website to be included in the interface. On the other hand, it's possible that he didn't envisage it being used by Wikiversity and might be flexible on this point. The biggest question at the moment is licencing. Does anyone know about "X11 open source licence" and WikiMedia compatibility? Can someone say more about the licencing required for a WikiMedia project? Is it GPL only, or are there other things which are compatible? McCormack05:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another success for VoIP/ Wiki Campus Radio
User:Chrismo hosted a discussion with Leigh Blackall, after our scheduled interview was postponed. (The wonders of live radio!)
I'd like to thank all of those that participated, and ask for comments on what worked well, and what you'd like to see improved. (One thing I'm hoping to work on is allowing the moderator to have finer control over the conference).
Sorry Cormaggio, you are correct, and thanks for adding the links. We'll have an OGG up fairly soon, and following that we'll have some OGGs of other shows. Links to come soon. Historybuff01:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all - there's currently a proposal to incorporate this project, LiteratePrograms into the Wikimedia family. It's a site which compiles information about source code, as well as the code itself - it could be useful for the programming section on Wikiversity. What does anyone think? Cormaggiotalk11:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I saw that proposal I thought, "What is special about that wiki?" Wikia has been incorporating other wikis for quite a while, and maybe it is time for the Wikimedia Foundation to start assimilating small wikis. Maybe Wikiversity could have a similar agenda. There are many small but interesting education-oriented wikis out there now. When I go and visit them and it is sad to see them limping along in isolation with a small number of contributors. Some of these small wikis might gladly join with Wikiversity if we asked them. --JWSchmidt13:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The teacher's burden (validating user names)
We need a better way to validate user names. When I am posting a homework assignment, I need to check if the student has given me his own name, his user name or if he mistyped his user name. To do this, I need to:
Access the "Special Pages.
Access User Names
Do a search on the User's name.
On a dial up telephone line, this is too slow.
If I simply test the name by using the user name on a page, I get a red sign for:
Bad user names
Good user names which do not have a user page yet.
Example [[User: Stewart|Stewart]] give me a red name Stewart.
As far as I know, there is absolutely no way that I can find out of the red is for a good user name or a bad user name. Tell me, can you see from this if he has an account or not?
Previously, I recommended that when a user signs on, his or her user page should be started automatically for the user. I recommended that something like "Tell us about yourself. Erase this and begin."
I recommend that you start this.
Note: My alternative is to find another way for me to identify my students. One alternative is to bypass the Wikiversity User Names and start a "FilmStudent" naming system as in [[FilmStudent: Stewart|Stewart]] which shows up as Stewart.
It sounds like maybe you want to associate an email you have received with a specific Wikiversity participant so that you can provide feedback on a Wikiversity page while being sure that you are targeting the feedback to the correct participant. Maybe you could require that people send you emails using the Wikiversity "email this user" feature. I think that email feature always provides you with the Wikiversity username of the person sending you the email. --JWSchmidt17:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sumitting assignments via attachments?
I do not know how students can attach assignments to the Wikiversity User Mail. I don't find any "attach files" feature. Therefore students must contact me via personal email outside of Wikiversity Robert Elliott22:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then maybe they could just use the "email this user" feature the first time they contact you, just to say, "this is the email account I will use to contact you: foo@bar.mail. Then you can add them to your email client's records of past contacts along with their Wikiversity username. Then in the future they can send you regular emails with attachments and you can easily lookup their Wikiversity user account name in your own list of contacts. --JWSchmidt23:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One way of cutting down the number of steps you need to find a user is to copy the following link: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:Listusers?username=rob somewhere accessible to you - perhaps your userpage. This is a shortcut to finding users beginning with certain letters (in this case "rob") - and of course you can customise these default letters to whatever you like. You can then copy and paste the url into a browser (or follow the link) and replace these letters with whatever you want to search for.
I'm not sure about adding some content to people's userpages by default - on the one hand it makes things like you're doing easier, and perhaps makes people that bit more aware that this is their userpage; on the other hand red userpages are often handy in spotting new waves of vandalism in Recent Changes. Also, if we implemented this system, would we then have to mass-edit every uncreated userpage in the database?
Using my own namespace pages (in the main namespace) does not do much but it does help me identify my students. Any way that that would be possible would be helpful. Robert Elliott22:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, is this purely to help you keep track of and locate your students? How about simply keeping a list on a single wiki page of all the students? This can be done simply by creating a subpage, eg. [[Filmmaking/Students]]. Creating many of these 'pseudo-namespace' pages strikes me as potentially complicated... Cormaggiotalk17:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Let me clarify!
I think we are getting sidetracked. Therefore, I will try to be clearer.
I have two needs. These are separate:
I need an easy way of identifying which user names are registered student names. The current method is too slow.
I need a way to identify my students. Eventually, I will need a mailing list so I can send out bulk emails (i.e., "What's new today at Wikiversity Film School.")
Some people have a list on their userpage (or a subpage) of "useful links" (ie useful to you, not necessarily to visitors to your userpage). I'm suggesting you could keep that shortcut link I gave above in such a list (or in a textfile on your desktop) for easy user account checking. As for bulk emails, I think this would be also easier to organise from a single page - it sounds like the kind of thing that might be able to be done by a bot, but from a search of Wikipedia, I don't think such a bot exists... Cormaggiotalk22:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You don't necessarily need to spend money on a website; There are a slew of free services on the worldwide web which will offer you free hosting of your files. Streamload's MediaMax service comes to mind, as it will let your students upload their files to your account without having to know your password. Search around. Taeke07:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bureaucrat is a pejorative and semi-humorous term and not positive enough to be part of a serious project such as this. Bureaucratship is not a word in wide use, if in use at all beyond this article. (The preceding unsigned comment was added by80.189.79.242 (talk • contribs) )
If we could think of another name that is equally demeaning and polite we would gladly switch. As it is, we love our bureaucrats. They do what we ask them to do and it only costs us a few electrons. --JWSchmidt00:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Courses
Hi! I've noticed in some of the schools that there are names corresponding to the education system in specific country, eg NSW HSC etc. but this can be confusing for someone who doesn't know or work from that system. I was wondering if a sort of "wikiversity" classification system could be used that could be explained on a special page or something, and then applied to the whole project, just for clarity's sake. What are people's ideas on this? Storeye05:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Page names should be descriptive, not codes. If code designations are used, they should be explained on the pages where they are used. If specialized jargon and name conventions are used, in addition to explaining them where they are used, please make use of Wikiversity:Glossary and Wikiversity:Naming conventions. --JWSchmidt06:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At least some pages read like encyclopedia-entries. I can see little point in such material's being published on this site. Should not each entry be part of a course which, ideally, should not just involve the student's reading material but also his or her doing something with that material and receiving feedback on their work from tutors? One could carry on typing text, but that wouldn't make this a university. There could well be parts of the site where actual study and teaching are happening and I should be most interested to see them. Courses could involve reading material, but that is surely better stored on Wikipedia. Is there a research-area where that other vital function of a university is taking place? (The preceding unsigned comment was added by80.189.79.242 (talk • contribs) )
Thanks. I agree with giving feedback to individual contributions to an article-type resource - feedback and interaction are vital to learning. As for research, perhaps start with Portal:Research, and for courses, see Portal:Learning Projects, or Filmmaking for a particularly well-developed example of one pedagogical style. However, please bear in mind that much of the work you see here is very young and unformed - there remains plenty of work just to make Wikiversity understandable to the newcomer. Cormaggiotalk23:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And my thanks to Cormaggio for his/her kind response. I do appreciate that these are early days and think this a great project. Filmmaking is super, isn't it? It has very nicely-presented material and projects for students.
I've recently had a lot of success with a few promotional business cards at the local brick-and-mortar university and library. I thought others might like to try something similar, so I thought I'd post here with the design I used...
For anyone who is interested, I used Vista Print [I'm sure there are plenty of others], who send you the cards very cheaply indeed.
Feel free to use/edit the designs, zey are in ze public domain. Aidan 22:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Nice work - thanks! I desperately need a bunch of cards, so I'll see what I can do myself based on this design. I'm also curious: what exactly have you "had success" with? Promoting Wikiversity? What kind of success have you had - and how do you know? :-) Cormaggiotalk17:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! By success, I meant people showing an interest and asking for more info. I was suprised, actually. Clearly this sort of service [wikiversity] is in demand! Aidan 11:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikiversity should be promoted and this looks nice. If any work of similar proportion is needed I am becoming quite skilled with multiple programs to create promotional material. --Topcount34503:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Troldhaugen.ogg (help·info). --JWSchmidt 19:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
