User talk:Dave Braunschweig/2013
Mr Dave Braunschweig, you commented on one of my photos and said that it would be removed soon due to copyright reasons, but all of the pictures I have uploaded, I have uploaded them through Wiki Media Commons, which is an open site that allows me to share them freely, even with myself. Since I did this could you please not remove this picture. I need it for a school project and I uploaded it legally. If I did something incorrect could you please be more specific on how I can amend this mistake. Thank you. -- Gknapp2779
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Wikimedia UK VLE
Hi Dave, Wikimedia UK is involved in developing a VLE. I suggested that we use Wikiversity, but for reasons I don't understand they have set up a new Wiki here: Modulewiki
with a moodle facility here: WMUK Moodle We are organising our WMUK education committee next week on the WMUK wiki (here). If you have time to look at this material and make some comments it would be mush appreciated. Leutha (talk) 15:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dave - Thanks for your contributions to Wikiversity - Are you interested in probationary custodianship? If so, I'm willing to nominate and possibly mentor. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:41, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Great - nomination here Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Dave Braunschweig -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
- Apologies for the long delay. You are now a probationary custodian (min. 4 week probabation period, then all going well nomination for full custodianship). I suggest you try out the extra rights e.g., delete, block, protect and let me know if I do anything to help. Also check out How to be a Wikimedia sysop and maybe see what could be improved there. Looking forward to having you on board. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for rolling back those deletion request template removals. As you've obviously realised, it is best to wait until the delete request discussions are closed. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:47, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Help! by Draubb
Hay Dave Braunschweig (I like the username), I need your help, I am lost in my own "perplexing world"! ---Dong! by Draubb
- What I mean is that you know when some users welcome many new users. How do they know that they are active. Do they have some system or something. Also, are you a probationary custodian - like, can you block people and delete pages Draubb (discuss • contribs) 21:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Dong! by Draubb
Also thanks for the tip and look at Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Draubb, you do not have to see it now. But, just see it later, Kippikayou Draubb (discuss • contribs) 22:06, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Is it okay to try to be nominated as a bureaucrat. You said stop with the custodian nomination. I have posted the new page Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Draubb (Bureaucrat)! --Draubb (discuss • contribs) 19:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
My request for deletion and protection!
The reason why I request Mathonius to delete page User:Draubb/Abdul-Azeez is that because it (like as you said it) proves no educational value and I requested deletion because it was part of a user's ancestory and I did not want anyone to known about it. That is why I requested deletion of the page. And I required and said it was not educational because "Hay, He do not live in a famous family and who cares about his great-grandfather!". Hay, the user allowed me to comment this comment to you!
-I am not being rude, I am explaining why my deletion request should be no problem.
And also, my protection request. I did not know that Wikiversity is not suppose to have protection to them. Wait! What about protections from unlogged users! It says that why one custodian protected that page (What is Wikiversity?) is from un-logged users. Some IP Adresses are really spreading "viruses" to wikiversity!
And last but most importantly
- I have redirected the page. I have redirected the page Wikiversity: What is Wikiversity?. I redirected the page from Wikiversity:What is Wikiversity?/En. One user on the talk page complained about the "En" part. He/She said it was funny that "En" was added. So I redirected it. I wanted it to be more serious and I did not want this page to be a joke!
- I almost did what you did, Dave Braunschweig, I saw the user's comment and it was like a 3 year old-comment. I saw no custodian reply or say something about the "En" part so I just redirected! --Draubb (discuss • contribs) 21:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Contributions and about Custodianship
Dave Braunschweig, I need your advice, please see my contributions area and can you please reply to my talk page if my contribution is helping Wikiversity? Also, If my contributions are really helping Wikiversity (and aiding it's mission), can you please tell me if I can go and resume my custodianship. I hope my custodianship pages does not slow down. Please if I resume my custodianship "journey". Can you please tell other users, custodians or better yet - bureaucrats so I can have the custodianship (if) that I earn. Thank you! --Draubb (discuss • contribs) 00:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Questions for candidate
I have asked 2 questions here: Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship/Dave_Braunschweig#Questions! Feel free to move those, if I have posted in wrong part of the CFC discussion! --Tito Dutta (Talk) 10:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
About it, (do not worry, I am not going for my custodianship. I will just be a normal user) - Jasper Deng has been giving me impudant comments. He is also running for custodianship. (down-barten) I cannot beleive he should have the advance tools of custodianship if he is acting with such rude comments!--Draubb (discuss • contribs) 17:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Draubb's custodianship opens at June 4, 2013
Hello Dave Braunschweig, I have sent emails to all the users I can to say that Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Draubb (2) will open in June 14, 2013. Thank you. --Draubb (discuss • contribs) 21:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree with your changes to the Courses category. When I checked it some weeks ago, I was thinking the same thing, but had not made a decision at that time. Thanks again for your effort! --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dave Braunschweig, haven't met in a long time. And also, I have changed, and I am not intrested in custodianship now. Well, hi! --The Gir's and Sing (discuss • contribs) 17:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Seems to be improved
This might be an illusion, but now when I click on Random, more pages seem to be relevant to Wikiversity, than a few months ago. I'm not sure, but it might be because of the pages you deleted. Seems like a good effort. - Sidelight12 Talk 18:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think they're related. When I've been clicking on Random, I haven't seen the pages I've been cleaning up. I'm just working my way through the Speedy Deletions. By the way, congratulations on your Custodianship! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Not to be picky or confrontational, but I think it's a conflict of interest for you (as a custodian) to do this when you (!)voted in that request for deletion. If anything, the consensus is clearly in favor of deletion.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- I agree that there is the potential for a conflict of interest in this case, and I considered that before making the update. However, by definition, Wiktionary:consensus means agreement, and there was no agreement on this issue. It was also clear there wasn't going to be agreement on this issue. With a lack of agreement, the appropriate result is no change, and that is the action I took. Also, the action taken in this case was not a custodian action, just a user-level change that you are free to reverse if you feel otherwise. However, as indicated at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#Aaqib_A., I believe there are appropriate solutions to this problem that do not involve deletion. Please also feel free to propose one of those solutions instead. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Huh? Consensus can involve disagreement and dissent, but a huge majority is taken as the requisite agreement. I've restored the deletion tag for now. (I took this as a custodian action because it implied the discussion was closed in favor of keeping; regardless removing deletion tags when you're involved is almost never a good thing to do, anywhere on Wikimedia).--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you deleted a non-English page. I suggest moving non-English pages to a user's namespace instead, and tell them to put it in the right Wikiversity or beta. I deleted non-English articles that were edgy after I ran it through a translator. Thanks. - Sidelight12 Talk 01:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed. I have restored the two non-English pages that were deleted. They are in user space. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:43, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your edits to our HINARI page. You removed a link which you considered "might be considered solicitations". I hope you would not mind me undoing this. HINARI is a free website but does not allow cataloging of the 18500 e-books available to students in some of the poorest countries in the world. The only way we can hope for our Wikiversity (which beautifully allows collaboration) catalogue to be spread by students in these countries is to have a link to Facebook. We make no money from any of this and only hope that we can guide more students to the wikiversity page. Kind regards. Peter --Dr Peter Thomas Cartledge (discuss • contribs) 19:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Response posted at Talk:HINARI_medical_library. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- While 'spam' is often written on deletion requests, there is no definition of spam that I have found here. It's a Wikipedia term rather than a Wikiversity term. There are guidelines for speedy deletions that prevent solicitation, and proposed guidelines for external links that discourage promotion. The proposed guidelines on external links also discourage links to blogs. But, as indicated there, there could be exceptions depending an individual's subject matter expertise. If in doubt, focus on the educational value of the resource as it might be viewed by others. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:30, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Wikiversity talk:External links#Can of worms in policy. I'd like your thoughts on this, if you care to express them. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 01:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
On the Fasten deletion request issue
Thanks for your cooperation and help on this. I am seeing strong evidence, in what you have done, for your desire to serve this community and, in particular, to serve the consensus, which none of us, as individuals, control, nor should we. Great work, Dave. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 20:56, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Help on a photo upload
I got your message about adding copyright information for the photo I uploaded. The image is one that I created from a twitter feed, the full details of the author of the account are there and the date so I'm not sure what else I need, just let me know.
Sorry Dave but you've completely lost me. I know this seems straightforward to you but its not to me. I originally uploaded this image, I did it with the wrong name so that's why there are two copies (I though that one was replacing the other and I have no idea how to delete since I can't find information anywhere on how to do it). Not sure why you think James uploaded as it was definitely me that created it and originally uploaded it, perhaps he has edited it. The "owner" of the tweet (since I created the image using it) gives a link on their feed to credit them with the authorship (which I've linked as well) and the tweet is in the public domain. I'm happy to use whichever image fulfils the requirements and delete those that don't, just point me in the right direction VanessaQ (discuss • contribs) 00:27, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Dave - I think James has edited it for me since I hadn't done uploaded it correctly. I'll try to put the template you mention into those files I uploaded (FYI - its not apparent how to do it even after reading the link so we'll see how I go!) VanessaQ (discuss • contribs) 01:52, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Motivation and Emotion - User:PatrickBateman
Hi Dave, I am quite new to Wikiversity, I am completing a university assignment and you commented that I need to add license information to my diagram. Can you confirm that I have sufficiently fixed this problem? It's very important that I don't lose the image before Mon 4/11(Nov)/13 Here is a link: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Motivation_and_emotion/Book/2013/Nicotine_and_emotion
Thanks very much
Missing Copyright Information
Thanks for bringing to my attention the missing copyright information on the Intrinsic motivation page (https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:Jacki_Ball). I have replaced the video I had under my "External links" title with a Youtube one - is this the file you were referring to, and if so have I remedied the situation? --Jacki Ball (discuss • contribs) 01:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dave. I just saw your notice. I do not really understand how that works which is why I could not do it properly. Most of it is my work and the link to the pages are always cited on my report for those I do not own (very few). I uploaded another picture today and tried something. Is that one licensed properly? what else do I need to do? Is the template to be filled under edit on the file page? if yes, I will need until the end of the week if possible to update everything. Will it work?
PS: I sent this email to the wrong person on Sunday. Hopefully, I am not mistaken again.
Please take consideration
- There is no rollbacker role. The only role that has rollback capability is custodian or higher. Just use Undo. It works fine, and it's what I use most of the time when rolling back vandalism myself. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
You are right,thank you for the reminder.There's a problem, the students do not know the difference between "data" and "information".http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Data_and_information.png Hr.hanafi (discuss • contribs) 04:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
File:DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS-LINEAR, NONLINEAR.pdf
The topic name file File:DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS-LINEAR, NONLINEAR.pdf is a page for page copy in pdf of the textbook "Differential Equations Linear, Nonlinear, Ordinary, Partial" by A.C. King, J. Billingham and S. R. Otto, Cambridge University Press, without permission. Copying the whole text without permission is a clear violation of US copyright law. I've put the page up for speedy deletion. What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 20:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Frankly, I’m not familiar with the English Wikiversity’s blocking policy, but aren’t month-long blocks a bit too long for what could very well be dynamic or shared IPs? For instance, 188.8.131.52 appears to belong to a school in UK (thus not unlikely a shared computer or proxy), while 184.108.40.206 is likely a GPRS user (thus quite likely a dynamic IP.) I cannot say anything specific 220.127.116.11, but cannot assume that it’s a “single user” IPv4 address, either.
As per my experience, blocks for longer than a couple of days are typically used to prevent persistent (as in: going for days to months) vandalism or spam, which I see no evidence for in these cases. (Though perhaps the respective edits are already hidden from the public logs.)
Could this please be explained?
- The proposed blocking policy is described at Wikiversity:Blocking policy. It does not provide guidelines on length of block on IP addresses other than to say they 'should be kept short'. As I have monitored vandals and advertisers, I have found that anything less (days or weeks) results in recurrence. The hope is that a month is long enough for them to forget about Wikiversity as a potential target and move on to other opportunities.
- Regarding what it is that's being blocked (school, dynamic address, etc.), the user is welcome to post on their user page that they are inappropriately blocked and I will unblock them immediately. That hasn't happened yet for any address I've blocked.
- If you are prepared to monitor the activities of various blocked users as their blocks expire, I would be more than happy to shorten the blocking period to whatever duration you suggest. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- Well, per my experience with Russian Wikibooks, vandals and advertisers tend to switch their IPs once a day at the least, thus rendering IP blocks largerly ineffective. (Unless one blocks whole respective IP networks, which seems utterly inappropriate.)
- I’ve found, however, that at least the “advertisers” case could be more or less resolved by adjusting the abuse filter to block any contribution which happens to contain a known spammer contact, be it a host name, an email address, or otherwise. Check, for instance, the respective filter at Russian Wikibooks, and the abuse log entries its use resulted in.
- JFTR: the MediaWiki interface language can be selected by appending
?uselang=to the URI, as in:
- JFTR: the MediaWiki interface language can be selected by appending
Deletion of Unused Files
I've noticed a large number of files being deleted from Wikiversity:Unused Files Pending Deletion. Are you doing this after assessing them or have the users come forward to request their deletion? Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 00:32, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm deleting the unused files only, after confirming that there are no pages embedding the file, no pages linking to the file except Wikiversity:Unused Files Pending Deletion and the notification on the user's talk page, and no license information either in the file or the comments. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that there's no way to apply a Fair Use justification to a file that isn't being used. Once these are gone, I'll continue working on tagging the files that are in use on content pages and in academic use on user pages. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:45, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Copying from Physwiki
I just discovered Physwiki at http://physwiki.ucdavis.edu/ . The attribution is http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ . I can use in on my Wikiversity project if I attribute, right? --guyvan52 (discuss • contribs) 16:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC).
- Response at User talk:Guy vandegrift. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:51, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
- What about CC by SA 2.5 with this manner of attribution: http://www.anselm.edu/internet/physics/cbphysics/howtoAttribute.html ??? (By the way, I contacted this person by email and I am not sure he wants us to use it even if it's legal, and I would not go against author's wishes.)--guyvan52 (discuss • contribs) 18:46, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Your reverted my edits on Samenwerkingscontract pm5, since now I comprehend the reason why you reverted my edit. I decided maybe I can translate it. :) Thanks! --goldenburg111 (talk) 16:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- I've done the best I could, I don't think I did a good job at it, but the best effort was putted into it! --goldenburg111 (talk) 16:51, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
A few months ago, Marshallsumter complimented me for the books I created here on Wikiversity, and he/she asked "When will it be ready for resource space?". How is it supposed to look like when it is in resource space? --goldenburg111 (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- It depends on whether you want anyone else to edit it before you think it's 'done'. I personally don't use User space for resource creation. I just have a few notes / sandbox area in User space. Everything else is where I think it will go, at least as far as I understand the projects I'm working on. Marshallsumter and Abd have a lot of things in their User space. It just depends on what works for you, and whether you'd rather keep it to yourself for now or you're willing to have others collaborate with you on it while you develop it. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm just going by Wikiversity:Deletions#Alternatives to deletion, which says to translate it or move it rather than delete it. But a picture would be copyrighted (by default), so it really can't be altered. You could upload a replacement, but that depends on how important you think the resource is. If you think it's worth the time, go for it. If not, let it go or just tag it under Category: Pages needing to be translated, and you or someone else can get it later. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
A question about a condensed version of a wikibook
The word encyclopedic carried the negative connotation of excessive information long before Wikipedia was born. Many students who take college level Introductory Astronomy lack the scientific literacy to read the (otherwise excellent) Wikipedia articles on the subject. I want to severely reduce the size of the Wikibook General Astronomy and make a permalink for students to use as a textbook. Then I want to develop resources to help students understand the condensed wikibook. I have two questions:
- Should I put this in userspace (User:Guy vandegrift/General_Astronomy_condensed) or in (wikiversity.org/wiki/General_Astronomy_condensed)? I am happy either way, but I almost always botch the moving of resources from one space to the other.
- Is it permissible limit references to the individual pages in General Astronomy'?
Thanks for the star. I am working hard because I want a semi-finished draft of Physics Equations behind me before I start the Astronomy project. This Fall will be the first time that all my textbooks are free and open source. I am optimistic about the long-term prospects of Wikiversity and feel progress had been slow in the past because physics and astronomy articles in Wikipedia were not as good as they are now. I was able to quickly write Physics Equations thanks to prior efforts in Wikipedia, Wikibooks, and Wikiversity. I recall trying to use Wikipedia to teach Astronomy a few years ago and finding little more than a detailed list of the historical epochs of Martian geology. It looked like they just copied a silly article some professor managed to get published.--guyvan52 (discuss • contribs) 16:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- I would recommend creating the resource at General Astronomy. There's no reason to label it as condensed. You're creating a learning project. That's different from a 'book'. If it was just a book, you could create it at Wikibooks instead. And since it will be the only General Astronomy project we have at this point, there's no reason for it to not be 'the' General Astronomy project.
- Regarding user space vs. resource space, the only reason to create it in user space is if you don't want anyone else assisting with the project while you develop it. If you're open to others helping out, create it in resource space. In particular, you may find that User:Marshallsumter would be interested in helping with this project.
- Regarding references, if you let me know what you want imported, I think I can import it with page history, thus preserving the user references for you. You should still add a reference back to the original page, just so those who are interested can go in more depth if they want.
- You've been doing good work lately, and I appreciate it. However, my personal perspective is that it may be too soon to run. If you run, people will refer back to edits such as https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jasper_Deng&oldid=1062994. Based on Special:Contributions/18.104.22.168, that's almost certainly you or someone you go to school with. There's also the issue of having multiple accounts, one of which is globally blocked. You also seem to come and go here at Wikiversity every few months. I personally would prefer to see custodians with a longer consistent edit history, and fewer ruffled feathers along the way.
- I truly believe that the best way to become a custodian is to wait and be nominated by someone else, particularly someone who would be willing to mentor you after you become a candidate. Until then, just keep doing what you've been doing recently, helping others and cleaning up where you can. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you have seen that edit. We have visitors coming all the time at our house, so it may be one of them, and the globally blocked account: That account must have gotten out of hand and must have been controlled by another user, or it was me when I was younger. I cannot really tell, the popping out of nowhere. That has stopped, I am going to stay here without have anymore breaks, and yes, I am fully aware that I am retired. But the retiring may not happen again since Meta is slowing down a bit. But yet, I still will be Semi-Retired. Thank you for responding! Please, if you have anything to say about this, just comment below. --goldenburg111 (talk) 23:26, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- We all keep learning and growing. There's nothing wrong with that. But trust takes time. - You're welcome to ask others. Note that only full (confirmed) custodians can mentor. Sidelight12 isn't a full custodian yet, and neither am I. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- The IP for the edit to the Jasper Deng user page is used by Maybeury Elementary School and possibly other schools in the area . There could be many different people using this IP. Yes, some of the edits from 2012 look like Goldenburg edits. But that's much less clear for this September, 2013, edit.
- Goldenberg did use multiple accounts, not surprising considering the times and his condition then. My advice to him is to make it so that those days are over. He now has some acknowledged socks, I'd recommend he be careful about using those. Even though it's allowed, that doesn't mean it's advisable. There was at least one of the older accounts that was globally locked (not banned) in 2011, but that could have been appealed; I decided to let it be, because it was causing no particular harm, other than a little confusion that wasn't anticipated then. (Other lock requests were denied.)
- (Normally, global bans of named accounts are not granted except through locking, an inflexible process. The use of a global lock on Goldenberg accounts was not in accord with policy, the necessary extensive cross-wiki disruption was not shown. The request was made on meta for accounts that were only active on Wikiversity, without any notice here. The user who did that, rather abusively, is no longer active.)
- The 2013 edit linked with the insult doesn't look like a Goldenburg edit, necessarily, because other cross-wiki edits around that time are anachronistically primitive. By September of this year, Goldenburg would not be experimenting with the Wikipedia sandbox in that manner,
- Goldenberg, those edits were not coming from your home, and your visitors, instead they were coming from your school. Anyone who used a computer at that school to edit one of our wikis would have an address like that. If you edit from a school computer, in fact, and if others use that same computer in a problematic way, you could get blamed for it. Checkuser, if performed, would show that the edits were likely the same computer, which will sometimes be considered as if they were the same user. If school computers on the school network have the same operating system and the same browser, this could make it seem strongly "the same."
- That does lead to a suggestion. Use your most-established account to edit only from home. Use a different account, which you would disclose, to edit from the school computer only. You would disclose this on your user pages. However, don't ever edit thinking that it won't be known who you are, as the editor, if you aren't logged in. It might be known, and it might be assumed (even if the assumption could be incorrect.)
- Edits to the wikis, including vandalism, are much more likely from a school computer than from a visitor at your home. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 20:14, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- I strongly oppose adminship at anytime on any wiki for this user. Anyone with that record of sockpuppetry and immaturity is automatically disqualified, in my opinion. He cannot be trusted to see deleted edits. On other wikis, sockpuppetry alone is an automatic disqualification for adminship, for good reason.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I appreciate that User:Goldenburg111 evokes strong opinions from many users in the Wikiversity community. However, I would ask that any additional comments be reserved until such time as there is a nomination to discuss, and then that the debate be held on the appropriate page. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 04:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know about "many users." Some. Yes, the original behavior of this user raised obvious concerns. However, when the age of the user became clear, the behavior was readily understood as normal immaturity. Wikiversity has a different purpose than other WMF wikis, and its purpose, from the beginning, includes learning by doing, and, in fact, educating very young users has been a project here. Instead of blaming and rejecting this user, and blocking him, which is what some WV users were doing, I welcomed him and invited him to channel his editing into his own learning projects, which he mostly did, occasionally erring by creating mainspace pages, which was easily addressed, and he cooperated. If we were to be judged by our behavior as children, we would all fall short. Fortunately, we don't expect children to be little adults.
- When his accounts were blocked, sometimes for "vandalism," he did what any smart kid would do: reboot the modem and create a new account. He created play roles, other accounts. He may have done this fairly recently, I'm not sure. But he is still only about ten years old. He is amazing, for his age.
- Most child-vandals don't edit Wikiversity, and are addressed in the same way as adult vandals. I sometimes wonder if we might reduce general vandalism on Wikipedia by inviting possible child-vandals -- basically scribblers -- to come and register here and create fun essays in their user space. It's quite clear to me that his welcome at Wikiversity led Goldenburg to become a budding editor, willing and increasingly able to help.
- The Goldenburg affair made clear to me that some Wikiversity users did not understand the purpose of Wikiversity, having a narrow concept of it. Some of these users were here to "help," not to, themselves, build educational resources. Nothing wrong with helping, but when the janitor or campus cop starts making decisions about what is trash and what is educational, instead of those actually involved in the educational process, something has gone south.
- Absolutely, comments opposing adminship for Goldberg, other than the kinds that were already expressed there, i.e., "not ready," -- nobody here disagrees with this --, are quite inappropriate, and could be considered gratuitously uncivil. Had we been encouraging Goldenberg to apply, the matter would be different. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 13:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Goldenburg is still a child, and everyone was immature at some point in their lives. The meatpuppets could have really been people he really knew, who were asked to give a good word for him. Goldenburg's edits have become better, and I do not see the behavior that was complained about anymore. The editor may not be ready, but he is a lot closer. Goldenburg is capable of one day becoming an admin on any wiki. - Sidelight12 Talk 12:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have seven children, five are fully grown and I have six grandchildren. I thank Sidelight for this comment, which assumes good faith at a deep level that can encompass "inappropriate behavior." If a parent fixes a child in his or her mind as "bad," because they do something considered inappropriate, the child may go on to model that. When WMF users and administrators do this, we create "bad users." We have created, through dramatic response, "disruptive editors," far beyond what might have happened with a more balanced response. The Scibaby sock farm (it was about a thousand socks several years ago) was created through administrative abuse, which Wikipedia never addressed. (Never look back, has been claimed to be a policy. Ancient history. I've seen quite recent events, part of a long-term pattern, called that.) Some people do not take it well, being blocked while others with worse behavior, but merely a more popular point of view, are tolerated or even encouraged. So these people create a hobby: poking Wikipedia. It's obvious that they have great fun doing it. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 13:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Again, I appreciate that this conversation stirs passions all around, and I believe I understand both perspectives. I have been personally offended by some of Goldenburg's comments and also quite impressed with his progress. But my talk page is not the place for this discussion. Please use your own pages for this, or his. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Dave. Goldenburg, just drop it. I will write a little more on your Talk page. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 19:08, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dave, can you please review https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Goldenburg111/Custodianship_Folder/Faults and give feedback? Thanks! --goldenburg111 (talk) 22:35, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- It provides an interesting historical perspective. I'll be honest with you. The thing that scares me the most about you being a custodian is how much you seem to want it. To me, that means you either don't understand how much work it is to do it well, or you have an ulterior motive that you intend to focus on once you are a custodian, rather than focusing on what is best for Wikiversity. What is it you want to do as a custodian that you can't do now? Or are you just seeking the recognition and perceived power of the position for bragging rights with your peers? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for reviewing the page Dave! I seriously, to be honest. The custodian powers are pretty dull, I have admin rights all around Wikia, like 6-10 wikis, so I know how to use the powers. It's not really a lot actually, and I have been focusing a little to much on the custodian powers, but I have been helping Wikiversity to its potential. Some examples are States and Capitals of the USA/Southeast, The alphabets, and my books.
What is it you want to do as a custodian that you can't do now? - Well, for once is to delete pages without putting an annoying speedy deletion requests, second, I can delete pages in my trash box. If I add speedy deletion request all around the pages I want deleted, it's going to take your whole time here. So this part has been covered.
Second, so I can have some respect. I have been running into people who have been lately barking at me, Jasper Deng. Other, so I can do much more for Wikiversity, such as block vandals and spammers. Usually, you guys aren't here from 3:00pm ETC to 4:45pm ETC. You guys appear here like at night and early morning. Some spammers may find out this pattern and start creating a "vandal wave".
And, of course not. I will obviously not brag about my rights. That is very childish and immature. Summarizing this thing up, I would just like to get an early report. I can do much more with these rights. But I am not dieing to get these rights. Again, these rights are kinda dull, but I can do a lot more with these rights. So, don't think that next year at September I will request these rights. It will, as you and Sidelight12 mentioned, be a long way for me. --goldenburg111 (talk) 23:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keeping a "faults list" like that, without the permission of these users, is considered harassment of the users involved on other wikis. Focus less on what others did wrong and what you did wrong.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- If you have pages to delete, tag them. If you think other people's pages need to be deleted, consider first whether they offer any educational value, and whether or not they can be improved. If they only provide personal value to the author, consider moving them to user space. But also check to see if the author is still active and if you can work with the author on the move.
- You don't get respect from being a custodian. You start out by losing it. People will always question what you do and why you do it, and you always have to think twice before doing anything on anyone else's pages. The only way you gain respect is by long hours of hard work on behalf of the community, while offending as few people as possible along the way.
- I would also caution you on forming a timeline for future maturity. Life doesn't seem to work that way. Experience is something you gain just after realizing you didn't have enough of it.
- I agree with Jasper Deng, a faults folder could be considered harassment, and isn't likely to gain anything. It's hard to benefit from a future statement such as, 'Look, I'm just as bad as they are, so let me in.' Rather than focusing on either what others or you did wrong in the past, my advice would be to focus on how you can improve both yourself and Wikiversity going forward. Snap comments in response to Jasper Deng aren't improving either one.
- Posted. Note that if you don't ask any questions, others may not see a need to respond. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Wikiversity as an Alternative to Wikipedia for Class Edits
Thank you for the suggestion to consider Wikiversity editing as a course assignment instead of Wikipedia editing. I just took a quick look and saw that there is plenty of room there for change and updating. And there is a learning-how-to-edit-a-Wiki page, although I didn't yet find out whether or not current science is acceptable.Sanetti (discuss • contribs) 19:35, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
- The Wikiversity mission is available at Wikiversity:Mission. If it's free content and legitimately supports education, it's welcome here. If you let me know what it is you want your students to accomplish (learning outcomes, etc.) I can help you locate the resources or set up the pages you need. We can even import content from Wikipedia as a starting point if that's what your lessons require. Let me know what you need to get started. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:06, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the offer of help
Semiprotecting talk pages
Yeah, I get the temptation to do this. However, if a particular empty talk page is a target for vandalism or spam, and it's a page we are watching, that spam or vandalism is relatively likely to be noticed, whereas if it is some other similar talk page, we might miss it. Further, we don't want to discourage people from commenting, and anything that inhibits such comments, requiring time and a set of edits, i.e., "autoconfirmed," can do just that. The level of problem with what you just protected was not high, and it was easily seen (I have that Plutarch page on my watchlist.)
I'm not going to describe the strategies a spammer might use to increase the likelihood of failure to detect, but we should be aware that the efforts we make to prevent spam and vandalism can sometimes make it more difficult to detect. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 20:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- 22 deletions seems like a lot to me, but I understand your point. Now unprotected. Note that I am getting better at creating abuse filters, so there's a lot less solicitation getting through than there was a month ago. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, the abuse filter can work wonders, properly used. Based on my Wikipedia experience, watch out for collateral damage. I can't read the filters, I think, that's privileged information. I haven't paid any attention to the abuse filter here. There were two deletions of Talk:Plutarch quote, so I don't know what the 22 were. Anyway, I created the Talk page and moved the discussion that should probably have been there in the first place to it. Thanks for all your work. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 00:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
There is a draft policy at Wikiversity:External links. It seems to have been largely taken from Wikipedia practice, but even on Wikipedia, users are generally allowed to place an external link to a site of their own on their user page. I have an external link on my own user page, as part of a formal declaration of potential conflict of interest.
The proposed policy page is far from clear. In particular, it does not reflect the broad allowance of original research on Wikiversity, nor, adequately, our fundamental purpose: education. It is unclear why Wikiversity should necessarily duplicate resources found elsewhere, if they can be incorporated by reference. The practical difficulty is considered, i.e., external links, it is suggested, may be used pending bringing content here. Long term, that's desirable, because external resources can and do disappear. However, it's not always practical. I see that we discussed this, I had not recalled this: .
There, you point out that "most of the requests I see for speedy deletion are based on a perceived abuse of external links." If deletion is involved, Dave, this is a page to be deleted, and most commonly it is, indeed, linkspam. That is, the link is the apparent purpose of the page, and most commonly this is some commercial spam, such as essay spam. No custodian action is required to remove an ordinary external link from a page that is not to be deleted. It's a content decision, and custodians should avoid making content decisions qua custodians.
We definitely do not want Wikiversity to be filled with spam. However, if a user can be seen as attempting to create an actual educational resource, we may allow some level of external linking.
This case could be marginal. Researching the matter, I saw that the user has added links to his blog in many places, but all seemed to be relevant to his subject, in some way. There is educational possibility here. Hence I reverted this particular removal. I would encourage this user to bring his content here, and probably in subpages; as I think you know, I have explored how to maintain WMF neutrality policy while allowing original research and essay writing, including the expression of opinion. Generally, my stand is that top level mainspace pages should be neutral, by consensus (or at least toleration). Subpages may be original research, opinion, etc., if attributed and not presented as verifiable and confirmed fact.
I suggested that the user not again add a link to his blog on the educational resource, but that he might have a link on his user page. We generally allow that. If a user is apparently here only to spam the site, that would be different, and we typically delete such user pages. I do have a concern about the neutrality of 7_Seals_-_beyond_Einstein_theories, created in mainspace, when this is, more correctly, a subtopic of the article that Brad had edited. (And he incorrectly created it as a subpage of a nonexistent top level page.) So I'll see what I can do to fix that. It's a fringe POV (that doesn't mean "wrong") and properly should be linked as opinion or original research. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 15:18, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed. I would have rather seen the 7 Seals content added as a See Also kind of link, with a link from his article back to the one he edited. But I was waiting to see if Brad would engage, signifying an interest in the educational value of his content, or if he would disengage, indicating to me that it was more drive-by spamming than having an educational purpose. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:29, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have moved the resource to a Commentary subpage, Biblical Studies (NT)/III. THE SEVEN SEALS/Commentary/Beyond Einstein theories, and created a Commentary subpage, and linked to it, as an example of how to briefly and with minimum disruption link to his "essay" or whatever it is. The redirects left probably are not needed. He'll engage or not, no harm either way. If anyone wants to contact him, he has email enabled, and his user page is linked from the Commentary and Einstein page.
Created another Commentary subpage
and moved another user essay from Gravity Matters to Gravity/Commentary/Gravity Matters. This is an openly fringe or nonstandard science essay, talking about the "priesthood," etc. The user is User:Glimmerguard who is also User:Shadowjack, and he's either uncommunicative, or, at least, to me, incomprehensible. Moving essays like this into user space is relatively uncontroversial, but I consider that these can be in mainspace as attributed subpages. We have lots of, uh, fringe stuff and the like in mainspace already. The classic WV argument has been that we can criticize fringe views or even nonsense, and this can be educational. "Fringe", even on Wikipedia, does not mean "wrong," it merely means "not widely accepted." I'd rather not get into the judgment business of "right" and "wrong." —Abd (discuss • contribs) 16:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. I went back and found many pages that are really Glimmerguard essays, they are not placed within any educational structure other than his own. I moved all that I found to his user space. Move to user space is a way of protecting these essays, he has obviously done a lot of work on them, and it's possible that this, or some of this, could be integrated with the educational resource structure, but that would take substantial time and effort. We used to see RfD's for pages like this, wasting user time. Moves to user space readily resolved the disputes, unless nobody was around to do that, in which case RfD would often go for deletion. I've many times suggested to users that if they see an inappropriate page, move it to user space for the author, if authorship is clear. I also created User:Abd/Playspace and the Wikiversity:Playspace concept for IP or unclear attribution, pages. Basically, it worked. Once in a while a user became upset, but that was quickly resolved. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 17:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Heads up, Glimmerguard/Shadowjack blanking his pages
I think he may have done this before. The user has never responded to direct communication, as far as I recall. I'd moved many of his pages into user space before, and he continued to edit them there. This was merely somewhat systematic, this time, and it's possible that a couple of pages that could have stayed in mainspace were moved. I explicitly suggested that it might be temporary. Indeed, this time my intention was to take them back, as per "Gravity Matters." I don't know what he intends, so I asked him on Glimmerguard talk. His pages should probably not be deleted without discussion, unless nobody objects. (We have handled this before, when a user got upset and RfD'd all his content. The community position is not necessarily obvious. It has gone either way.) —Abd (discuss • contribs) 23:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
He has also blanked some pages I deliberately left in mainspace. I've reverted those. Several of the pages I moved to his user space might have been kept in mainspace, and may have been linked from other mainspace pages. We'll see what happens. He is a "fringe thinker," and usually such thinkers will understand that their thought is fringe, and are, in fact, grateful for any allowance of presentation at all, but he may be different. It doesn't help that he is consistently silent as to his intentions. He blanked Aristotle/Doctrine of Change, that I put quite a bit of work into. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 23:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Single-author blanked articles moved to user space. Remaining articles listed here for reference:
- Aristotle/Doctrine of Change
- Gravity/Commentary/Gravity Matters
- Introduction to Metaphysics: Cosmology & Ontology/Ontological Questions
- Laws of Zero
- Logic/Algebraic Deduction
- Logic/Logic patterns
Learning the abc's
Thank move pages, it was necessary. You told me if I can create the Spanish alphabet?, If so, yes I can. Just confirm the question and I will create (AM December 28 I can not).--Gray16 (discuss • contribs) 02:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, if creating a Spanish alphabet page is something that would interest you, please do so. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
(Concern) Isn't this the English Wikiversity? I think Gray should post the Spanish alphabets on the Spanish Wikiversity. Is their a Spanish Wikiversity? I can't really find it. My parents put up the K9 Web Protection thing. Ag! It's hard! --~~Goldenburg111 17:41, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
- We may have a course in the Spanish language here, for English readers. This could be part of it. Advanced modules might suggest readings on the Spanish WMF projects, among many other possibilities. The difference here from the Spanish wikis would be that instructions and discussion, outside of specific course discussion that might be in Spanish, would be supported in English. We normally speedy delete pages that are entirely not in English, but I'm sure we would tolerate subpages of a language resource that had little or no English on them, if the context is that of teaching Spanish or studying Spanish materials, for English readers. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 18:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, this is the English Wikiversity. The Spanish Wikiversity is at https://es.wikiversity.org . We have an extensive selection of foreign language studies here. See School:Language and Literature and Topic:Foreign Language Learning.
I suggested adding a Spanish alphabet because we already have a selection of foreign language alphabets at Alphabet, and because User:Gray16 was interested in adding information on the Spanish alphabet, based on edits at Learning the abc's/N. Rather than adding a discussion of ñ and other Spanish characters to the English alphabet, it might be more appropriate to set up a separate learning project for the Spanish alphabet.
As Abd has noted, the content should be primarily in in English, and should be presented from the point of view of helping English-speaking learners understand the Spanish alphabet.