User talk:Hillgentleman
Add topic|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|1|0|1|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|1|1|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|1|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
}}Note:We are experimenting with Threaded discussions here. Please leave your message with the "reply" or "comment" links. It is more interesting than to edit this page directly. : )
/20070519 | /20080903 |Threads Purge
This revision=20070519161809
- Argument: How can I help you?
--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- reply[2]
Test
[edit source]This revision=20070519162224
- Argument:
--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- reply[3]
- Comment:
Umm...Hillgentleman? These threads are confusing. Is this how to reply? Anyway, thanks for your messages on my talk page!! I think it would be really neat to have these mini tutorials on single concepts on Wikiversity.
--HappyCamper 03:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- reply[4]
Yes. Now can you write one for matrix multiplication?
[edit source]- Comment: Yes. Somehow the wikisyntax is rich enough to allow text editing and programming cohabitate.
This message is transcluded onto both talk pages. You can reply on the spot, if you choose to reply. --Hillgentleman|Talk 14:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- reply[5]
- Comment:
I'll have to put the matrix multiplication stuff on the back burner...but I won't forget about it! --HappyCamper 23:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- reply[6]
- Comment: Hillgentleman, I find the revert you did on Anynobody's edits to the Welcome template a bit strange - it hasn't been around for a "long time", and think we should be completely open to a few bold edits. However, I can't say I fully understand the edits, so maybe you were justified. Thanks. (Not sure if I'm using this "comments" format right either - I have to say, it's a bit intimidating.) Cormaggio talk 09:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
--Cormaggio talk 09:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[7]
The usage of <i n c ludeonly>Subst:</i n c ludeonly> has been around for a long time. It was there before I joined here.
[edit source]- Comment: Cormaggio, The usage of <i n c lu deo nly> Subst:</ i n cl ud e only> has been around for a long time. It was there before I joined here. People have always been using {{subst:welcome}}, and not {{Welcome}}.
And this is because people have found long ago that there is no simple way to use the same template to support both transclusion and substitution. What user:Anynobody did was the only way possible: type the name of the new user yourself, if you don't like leaving {{PAGENAME}} -->Hillgentleman instead of the straight "Cormaggio" on Cormaggio's talk page. If we choose to do that, fine. Then we may support both "to subst" or "not to subst".
But then we need to talk. That is because we would all need to change habbit and type a bit more every time we welcome a new wikiversiter. And at this moment I don't think it is worth it, to make everybody type {{subst:w|username|sig=~~~~}} instead of {{subst:W}}
The reason that I reverted it immediately was because, leaving it like that would cause subtle changes to the usage, e.g. leaaving {{PAGENAME}} on the page, and not Hillgentleman/20070615093323, and which is what some people don't like. --Hillgentleman|Talk 10:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[8]
Sorry; that was not quite the only way; "{{{subst|}}}" is also possible
[edit source]- Comment: There is also m:help:substitution#Optional substitution, but which may even be less intuitive. Incidentally, I have used this technique in this threaded discussion project. That is where why it the page is called "wikiversity:Threaded discussions with NavFrames with subst".
--Hillgentleman|Talk 10:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[9]
- Comment: Thanks - I can understand that now. :-) Cormaggio talk 15:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
--Cormaggio talk 15:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[10]
This system is of course experimental. Thanks. Here is an easier version,
[edit source]- Comment: Here is an easier version, where the codes are hidden in a template. You can reply right here. And the page is also transcluded in my page, so I can read it.
--Hillgentleman|Talk 10:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[11]
Re: (Btw, I can't figure out the commenting system - I tried to reply to one post and ended up replying to another.) <----- Be on Topic :-)
[edit source]- Comment: Re: (Btw, I can't figure out the commenting system - I tried to reply to one post and ended up replying to another.)
- The key is to press the reply link at the comment to which you want to reply. Even if you comment is slightly off-topic, it is lost in another branch of the tree :-)
--Hillgentleman|Talk 10:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[12]
And yes, blocking my account for two months would be helpful. I wondered here again.
[edit source]- Comment:
--Hillgentleman|Talk 10:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- reply[13]
Supages and template space
[edit source]- Comment:
Hi Hillgentleman - do you think you can follow up with your comment here about subpages in the template namespace? Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with these bug reporting things...if you get an opportunity, could you take a look into this? BTW, it's nice to see you around :-) --HappyCamper 23:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- reply[14]
Your edits on study guide: mathematical mesoscopic physics
[edit source]- Comment: Your edits on study guide: mathematical mesoscopic physics
Thank you 'Hillgentleman', for your efforts. However, you seemed to change the structure by introducing a lot of links to sub-pages. This is not how it was intended to be, so I undid your changes in this regard (sorry for the work you invested into that...). I moved your Lie group definition to the glossary, where the defined terms should go (as explained in the text). I hope you understand. The point is to have a long list of brief definitions, just the way you did it for Lie group, and to list them all alphabetically in the glossary.
--FlorianMarquardt 16:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
- reply[15]
I have replied on the said page.
[edit source]- Comment: In brief, Wikilinks are good.
--Hillgentleman|Talk 18:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
- reply[16]
What is the Scope of Wikiversity?
[edit source]Hillgentleman, what do you make of this?
# 13:57, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/Archive" (Beyond scope) # 13:55, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/Archive 8.9.14" (Beyond scope) # 13:54, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/Ethic Models & Resource Links" (Beyond scope) # 13:53, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/Meta-Wiki" (Beyond scope) # 13:53, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/MetaArchive" (Beyond scope) # 13:51, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/dnull1" (Beyond scope) # 13:50, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/Mu" (Beyond scope) # 13:49, 15 December 2008 Darklama (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Moulton/NewYorkBrad's Principles" (Beyond scope)
Is it within the scope and remit of a custodian to arbitrarily and summarily delete the work of another scholar here, without notice, without discussion, and without due process? It occurs to me that Jimbo and Darklama are jointly establishing a disturbing precedent that does not bode well for an authentic learning community.
—Moulton 23:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Wikiversity censorship
[edit source]- Comments: "trying to censor wikiversity" <-- I realize that people do not like to have the term "censor" applied to themselves or their actions. Maybe I just need a better vocabulary. Maybe someone could suggest better terminology. I suspect that many people feel the very existence of Wikiversity has been threatened by Jimbo. In this climate of fear and intimidation most people who care about Wikiversity remain silent or try to avoid using terms such as "censorship"....I suppose the hope is that if we are all quiet then more wrath will not pour down upon us. "thinly veiled accusations" <-- Jimbo has placed some topics off limits for community discussion and there are many other wiki editors who like that approach. I've lived through the entire history of the development of a collection of ways to silence people at Wikipedia. Those methods are now being used at Wikiversity. The general approach is that certain topics are declared to be unwelcome and anyone who dares to raise those topics can then be accused of incivility or disruption, and if they don't get the hint and conform, they feel the weight of the mighty ban hammer. "be brief" <-- I never intentionally post off-topic comments. I do believe that the human brain is a connection machine, so I let my brain bring into discussions related topics. "keeping your comments brief and to the point is a kind of respect" <-- I assure you that I understand what you are saying, but let me use an analogy to explain what is going on when I post longish comments. Think of me as a witness to a lynching. Most people just turn away from the ugliness of the situation and get on with their lives. However, I am not only disgusted by the original crime but also by the fact that the perpetrators of the crime go unpunished and the crime will certainly be repeated again in the future. I now have to balance the good advice "be brief" with the need to say, "but wait, this is not business as usual". I know that my actions (calling attention to a problem that people would rather ignore) will be unpopular and that I am therefor likely to be the next lynching victim, and I take no joy in playing this role, but my conscious does not allow me to remain silent. --User:JWSchmidt 18:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
--68.109.175.242 18:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- reply[17]
- Comments:
If you need robotic or regex help, just shout. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 16:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Hi! I'm welcome to any ideas! Thank you in advance. --Cgnk 23:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
--Cgnk 23:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[18]
Sure.
[edit source]- Comments: You are welcome.
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 02:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[19]
Hello there.
[edit source]- Comments: Hi there. Thanks for the warm welcome.
-- UntilItSleeps 04:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[20]
You are welcome!
[edit source]- Comments:
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 04:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[21]
Threaded Discussions
[edit source]- Comments:
Thank you for the link. --Thewinster 12:57, 4 January 2009 (UTC)http://upload.wikimedia.org/skins/common/images/button_sig.png
Threaded Discussions.
[edit source]Hello! This is in reference to the message you had left me on my talk page. Definitely I am interested in ThreadNav. By reading it though, all that I have come to know about the project are vague idea of this as a "precursor trace" or a "textbox within pages" etc. Can you direct me to a place where a more basic version of this is in under operation. i could work on a Laymen's introduction to the project if I understand it myself.
At the same time, can you visit this page: - http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Talk:The_Highschool_Help_Forum_-_Science_Stream ?
I want to incorporate some features in the Forum for which I require some help. Wonder if you could help.
Thanks!
--The Winster talk 16:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Here you are: Threaded discussions with NavFrames/Simple demonstration. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 02:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- The key is that you generate a page with a link which would generate the next page, and so on. The key two lines of codes
*reply[{{fullurl:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>NAMESPACE}}:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>BASEPAGENAME}}/{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}|action=edit&preload=project:Threaded_discussions_with_NavFrames_with_subst/preload§ion=new}}]
{{{{{subst|}}}{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>NAMESPACE}}:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>BASEPAGENAME}}/{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}|subst={{{subst|}}}}}
- do that. The Nav boxes are just for display. You can try to put the two lines of codes above on a subpage of your talk page, e.g. user talk:thewinster/preload, and play with it. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 02:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Page creation / preload
[edit source]- Thanks. I figured it out later. Ofcourse, replying with a preload is the idea. But for a forum with threads, we require a way to create new pages - and those pages should be named what the user wants them to [Compare this with writing the topic name in a typical phpBB forum.] There is one topic regarding creation of new resources which I have seen. It is a textbox which creates pages.
Here is the code,
{|align=left width=60%
|
<inputbox>
type=create
preload=Template:LearningResource
buttonlabel=Create Learning Resource
width=25
</inputbox>
|}
- I was unable to display the code witrhout execution. However the source has the code anyways. Sorry for the inconvenience.
- Is there anyway by which I can use the input and feed the value in a variable so that in the preload section, I can have a topic creation template like
{{{Basepage}}}/{{{Input}}}
- I searched around on wikiversity using google and normal page to page linking - none was useful. I thought pestering you would be better rather than pushing my ignorance. I guess the key to this lie here
type=create. If the type can be changed to the scanf function of C, we might be one more step ahead.
- Thanks!
--The Winster talk 07:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- "use the input and feed the value in a variable so that in the preload section, I can have a topic creation template like
{{{Basepage}}}/{{{Input}}}" - What is a topic creation template - can you provide an example? And I am not sure what "{{{Basepage}}}/{{{Input}}}" stand for. But the following may be what you are after:
{|align=left width=60%
|
<inputbox>
type=create
preload=Template:LearningResource
buttonlabel=Create Learning Resource
default = {{NAMESPACE}}:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/
width=25
</inputbox>
|}
giving
Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 09:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah. It is somewhat like that. What this textbox does is create a page with the name input by the user. However, to tell the user that we want the page to be created under the basepage (Your talk page in this case) we have a default value given to the textbox. But I am unsure whether we can expect Jr. High and other teens to comply with all this. The wiki page creation procedure is a little different than WYSIWYG editors et al. and that is exactly the reason why we have the textbox. To Simplify. Why complicate it then? Why not take the input of a pagename from the user and then append that to
{{NAMESPACE}}:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/so that without telling/depending on anyone we have a page created under a specified basepage.
--The Winster talk 11:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, That is not the way it works. (You may consider the MediaWiki engine basic and "low-tech" in this sense.) It would be great if there were one function which combines a page creation box and the page creation link http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=YOUR_TITLE&action=edit&autosummary=YOUR_SUMMARY$preload=YOUR_PRELOAD_PAGE&editintro=YOUR_EDITINTRO_PAGE, but right now we can only use what we have. For reference, see meta:help:inputbox. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 11:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- One thing you can do is to make the buttonlabel a better hint, like Create a resource subpage. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 11:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
An alternate method of starting threads
[edit source]We have discussed above the possibilities of using the textbox as a page creation tool. Making the users append their topic names to the default value inside the textbox is one option.
There is another option. It is albeit, a little more chaotic. We can let the users create a base page for every discussion that they want to do. The preload statement can be used to designate a template to the page so that it is known that the particular page is a part of another project. What is the feasibility of this?
--The Winster talk 05:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Page creation is not a problem. But if you want threads, you need forward and backward linking. How do you plan to do that? Note also that you can only change one page every time you press the save button. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 05:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Preload templates and the DPL assisted forum watchlist template -
{{Project watchlist-dpl|
| watched category 1 = Stubs
| watched category 2 = Science
| watched category 3 = Freshly started resources
}}
- Backward linking would be made possible by the other preload templates, which will automatically include a link to the parent forum. Forward linking and branching would be done by the above watchlist. The category addition template can be used to maintain an exhaustive list of topics, unlike the watchlist which shows only the recent edits.
- So, again, the question is, whether the custodians will like the stray pages marked with templates or not? ofcourse pages like wikiversitydotord/wiki/Help me on quadratic equations plz! are not aesthetically cool per se.
- --The Winster talk 06:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Great! Why don't you try it out and see how it goes? As we say, wikiversity is for learning by doing. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 06:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- OK. But then again, are the stray pages allowed? --The Winster talk 06:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, especially if you are doing genuine work. Wiki has unlimited space. In the unlikely situation when somebody has a problem with your test pages, they can run a script (e.g. m:delete.py) to delete them. You may put (most) of your test pages in a category (category:test pages?) to make it even easier. So don't worry about it. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 06:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[22]
Checking where the new headline takes me to
[edit source]- Comments:
I have clicked on adding a new reply to the page. It will create a new section in the page with the 2007 section. But what is gonna be it's final appearance? --Dharav talk 09:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[23]
A click creates a new section of the subpage, with the timestamp of the previous comment as subpagename
[edit source]- Comments: I.e. the page /20090221095033 consists of all the replies to the actual comment written at the time 20090221095033.
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 17:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[24]
You may reply on your own talk page. I can read it on mine.
[edit source]- Comments:
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 17:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[25]
Bouncing over my head...
[edit source]- Comments:
Although I am aware of how the threadNav works in principle, I have never been able to fathom it in it's operation in the last two weeks (in whatever sparse time I could spend on it). I want to make some modifications to it so that it is more simple to use for students.
Now, this may sound very stupid coming from an engineering student, I am almost stuck on porting this little code in operation to http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Thewinster/Sandbox/Forum-Watch. Would you mind editing the page and put the bare minimum code on the sandbox? That would be a BIG help! --Dharav talk 12:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[26]
let me try - just give me some time
[edit source]- Comments:
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 16:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[27]
How is it now?
[edit source]- Comments:
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 03:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[28]
If I reply in reply button 2, where does it go?
[edit source]- Comments:
Just checking the hierarchy of the messages. Thank you. --Dharav talk 14:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[29]
A request for a some assistance...
[edit source]- Comments:
I have posted this message earlier, but I assume you did not get to read it or the new messages alarm did not come on the Talk Page. I am a little stuck with the ThreadNav setting up, primarily because of Magicwords and pasting codes from a lot of sources. Can you help me by setting up the primitive code on http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Thewinster/Sandbox/Forum-Watch? That would be a lot of help. Thank You :)
--Dharav talk 13:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[30]
let me try - just give me some time
[edit source]- Comments:
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 16:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[31]
How is it now?
[edit source]- Comments:
--Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 03:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- reply[32]
- Comments:
Hi! I saw that you've made some edits to the Wikiversity:Mentors page a while back. I've been working on bringing the Mentorship program up to the next level. I'm hoping to model it, to a certain extent, on the Learning4Content program over at WikiEducator. I would appreciate your feedback.
--AFriedman 17:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- reply[33]
- Comments:
R
[edit source]Hi Hillgentleman, Unfortunately my expertise with R is almost 0 :( - although I hope to learn. Maybe try one of the R support groups/fora?
Jtneill - Talk - c 05:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- reply[34]
Project incubator
[edit source]- Comments:
Please check Wikiversity:Project_incubator for an update on HHF --Dharav talk 11:51, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- reply[35]
Threads
[edit source]This was very inappropriate, please stop.
[edit source][36] While this wasn't exactly "vandalism," it was very close to it, and is clearly inappropriate, as inappropriate as, say, using any example of an admin "getting away with murder," so to speak (i.e., violating a policy), on a WP policy page as if the policy was unclear and had an admin exception.
Policies exist to guide general behavior, not to determine that there are no exceptions, and the alleged exception of, say, a putatively abusive admin, provides no guidance to those who need it, for they are not such admins and the exception will not protect them.
It is possible to add to a page that exceptions exist, so that new editors don't become outraged because "someone broke the rules." But that would never assign the exception to a specific person, and it's clear that in doing this, you were creating disruption in order to make a point. Please do not repeat that. --Abd 20:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- "It is possible to add to a page that exceptions exist ... But that would never assign the exception to a specific person, ". This is the second time I am making a simple request: make up your mind before you pass down another judgement. Let me remind you that we are talking about a set of one person, the one in the "founder" group. I don't remember the Wikiversity community electing you to be our judge. Regards, Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 22:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hillgentleman, it seems to me that you might benefit from asking some other people what I mean, because it's pretty clear to me, but apparently it's not getting through to you. Are you claiming that I have an inferior right to comment here, that I would need to be "elected" as a "judge"? If that is the case, can you point to your own election? I have warned you, effectively, about disruptive behavior, as I see it. I am not your judge, because I have no power to sentence you to anything. I am simply doing what you, paradoxically, are claiming any Wikiversitan should be able to do, express their opinion. You can take it or leave it, but, under the present circumstances, it is possible that if you "leave it," you might be unable to continue here, not because of any special powers of mine, but because it is likely to be a natural consequence of your behavior. It remains up to you.
- Again, because you have repeated this "make up your mind theme" when I develop an issue beyond a simplistic single-valued assertion, I will state that I have no unclarity about what I wrote, and if you need more explanation, ask a question. This is your Talk page, you have the right to ask me to leave you alone, and if you request this, I will honor it, but would instead, if I have a problem, go to the appropriate place to register a complaint and possibly a request for action. What is your preference? --Abd 00:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
custodianship nominations
[edit source]Hi! I think you copied an inappropriate section to Jtneill's nomination here. It would be nice if you could correct it. Thx! --Gbaor 08:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I re-read it, and seems that you wanted to illustrate a point with that section. Can you please explain whant you meant with "call on pause on Gbaor's judgement"? --Gbaor 08:18, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Wales/Breach Postmortum
[edit source]Hi, I am here and then I am not, and this crisis (thankfully) passed me by. I am doing a postmortum, and I am trying to find out if it actually came to a vote at the WMF Board to shut us down, and if it did, what was the outcome?--John
Bessatalk 22:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- I know something about this, some of which I can disclose publicly. Summary: AFAIK, there was no proposal presented for vote. Some here mistook bluster and personal opinion for official WMF action. There was a proposal on meta to shut down Wikiversity and it went down in flames. As a result of the events of March, compounded by a later action that was similar in principle, Jimbo resigned his intrusive founder tools, facing something like an almost 4:1 !vote, with over 500 participants, to remove the tools, his voluntary request for removal leaving only the tools that allow him to see all of what is happening. Oversight is the only exception, he could theoretically oversight edits, but the intention would have been to remove the ability to do so; future revisions of MediaWiki may allow separation of the right to read oversighted edits from the right to make them.
- To be more explicit about the meta proposal, there were six who supported the proposal. Two of the names were long familiar to me as long time administrators who had abused those privileges (and had been admonished by ArbComm, in one case, and resigned checkuser, at least, facing serious questions from functionaries, in the other.) The concerns of these six should not be summarily dismissed, there is some level of truth behind them, but, for perspective, there were 51 explicit oppose !votes. Many of the user names were familiar to me as active, reputable Wikipedians.
- A. B., compiled a useful set of statistics on Wikiversity. He then closed the discussion, including the comment, Given the overwhelming opposition to closing this project, this matter can be considered closed for the foreseeable future and another proposal to close active Wikiversity projects will probably be speedily closed unless some change has occurred or a number of months have elapsed.
- It's fascinating to me to read the Oppose votes in the meta RfC, Remove Founder flag, up to the point where votes started pouring in based on later events at Commons. Even at that point, even though participation bias would lead to disproportionate voting on meta for supporting Jimbo, I'd expect, compared to general feelings among a wider community, if more awakened and informed -- as later happened --, the vote was running, as of 5 May, at 23:32 Support/Oppose, showing shockingly low support for Jimbo, it was No Consensus at that point. Yet many of the Oppose !voters treated the matter as a joke, as pure drama, one early comment read, This is absolutely silly in the extreme. At this point, Jimbo should probably have recognized that he had a Problem. I notice among the support votes at that time at least one Steward, plus a former member of the en.wikipedia Arbitration Committee. This wasn't just a few disgruntled Wikiversity participants.
- Summary: do not worry about Wikiversity being closed. Do worry about the quality of the project and of community process. If we don't clean up our own garbage, it will offend our neighbors and attract flies. This does not mean, to me, tossing out useful content or useful contributors, but setting clear boundaries and, in particular, ethical guidelines for studies that involve other WMF projects, it's a peculiar problem that Wikiversity has because original research is permitted, we can have a resource on Navel gazing -- why not? -- and there is certainly interest in the topic of wiki history and process from some people (like me, for example). --Abd 00:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- The proposal never was. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 16:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
The main open source statistical software is R - increasingly popular and very powerful. I'm a novice - just learning to use it. Is that what you're after? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- SPSS is windows/menu driven or syntax driven. R is command syntax only. So, R take-up is limited by this especially for teaching statistical analysis. But there are R packages providing front-ends - I haven't investigated them enough. I am keen to eventually switch from SPSS (there are lots of annoying aspects mostly related in one way or another to its proprietary nature) to R, but need to spent time learning R. But maybe still this is not quite an answer you're after? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)