Wikiversity:Colloquium/archives/July 2017

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

New student[edit]

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)
@Jon michael swift: 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[edit]

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)

@George Ho: 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 [1]. 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)
@George Ho: 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)
@Marshallsumter: 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[edit]

--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[edit]

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[edit]

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)

@JackPotte: {{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[edit]

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)

@JackPotte: 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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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)
@Dave Braunschweig:, respectfully too, there are no ulterior motives, and I will strongly oppose that assumption. I sure know I can develop, because it's “their problem”. But if I do and don't think about the future beforehand and the time comes, hundreds of people contributed, nobody will ever use the content, because it would be too much effort to fulfil the attribution part of the license regarding “everyone who contributes is entitled to attribution”, ignoring, that the License gives a possibility to handle this case. Or, if the content is used, there will most likely mistakes be made, which is a License violation. There are examples of how licensors ensure reusers what is expected of them, see incompetech.com for example. As you said yourself “A hyperlink may be used for attribution, according to Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content. You should check for a similar link somewhere on meta: to ensure that policy applies across Wikimedia projects.” I did, and this does not seem to exist, if I'm correct. I tried to talk about the topic. Nothing happened. So I think it's up to Wikiversity not Wikimedia to handle this. That's why I asked for support. But please, I will stop arguing about the case and leave but I expect you to stop supposing even the slightest ulterior motives that I want to work around the license in some way. Best of luck to you too. --HirnSpuk (discusscontribs) 15:18, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Accessible editing buttons[edit]

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