Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion: Difference between revisions

From Wikiversity
Latest comment: 6 days ago by Timtrent in topic Adel shirazy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
← Older edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Emesee (discuss | contribs)
4,330 edits
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{/header}}
{{shortcut|[[WV:RFD]]}}<br>
[[Category:Wikiversity deletion]]


'''<big><big><big>Deletion requests</big></big></big>'''
[[Category:Requests for Deletion|!]]
[[Category: Wikiversity administration|Requests for Deletion]]
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{{RoundBoxTop}}
This page is for the polite '''establishment of [[Wikiversity:Consensus|consensus]] through [[WV:CIVIL|civil]] discussion''' about pages which may need '''deletion or undeletion for non-obvious reasons'''. Pages where the reasons are obvious are normally ''speedily'' deleted/undeleted instead. A good attitude behind proposing pages here is "I can see a reason for (un)deleting this page, but I'm not sure - what do others think?". When responding a good attitude to have is to think of novel ways to make pages more useful to [[Wikiversity:Who are Wikiversity participants?|Wikiversity participants]]. Finding ways to improve pages is the preferred outcome of any discussion here.
{{RoundBoxBottom}}


If an article should be deleted and does not meet [[WV:SPEEDY|speedy deletion criteria]], please list it here. Include the title and reason for deletion. If it meets speedy deletion criteria, just tag the resource with {{tlx|Delete|reason}} rather than opening a deletion discussion here.
== Decision process ==
{{RoundBoxTop|theme=3}}
Please put "keep", "delete", or "neutral" at the beginning of your response. Give a reason. Try to keep your reasons brief, 1 sentence is usually enough. Keep your reasons close to the facts of the case rather than stating a political position. Don't forget to tag the actual page with <nowiki>{{dr}}</nowiki>. To prevent shorter responses from getting lost and to keep this page sufficiently organized, consider using a subpage of Request for Deletion for overly long responses, and linking to it with a short response here.


If an article has been deleted, and you would like it undeleted, please list it here. Please try to give as close to the title as possible, and list your reasons for why it should be restored. The first line after the header should be: '''Undeletion requested'''
If you have strong opinions or you are not prepared to change your position in the light of consensus, please do not edit on this page at all. Remember that consensus is not majority rule and certainly not rule-by-the-loudest-and-most-uncivil. The idea of consensus is to kindly and gently bring everyone on board (and not necessarily onto your "own" board).

Pages are listed here for a period of at least five days, but often are kept much longer. It is good to wait for clear consensus to emerge.
{{RoundBoxBottom}}
== Useful resources ==
{{RoundBoxTop|theme=7}}
* [[Special:Log/delete|Deletion Log]]
* [[Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives|request for deletion archives]]
* [[Wikiversity:Deletion policy|Proposed deletion policy]] - proposed, so not binding.
* [[Template:Deletion request]] - this is the template used on pages listed here

{{RoundBoxBottom}}

== How to list a page here ==
{{RoundBoxTop|theme=6}}
# Add '''{{tl|Deletion request}}''' or '''{{tl|dr}}''' to the image, category or article page.
# Add a <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit&section=new}} new section]</span> to the end of this page using the follow format:
#:<nowiki>== [[Page title]] ==</nowiki>
#:<nowiki>reasons why this page ought to be deleted --~~~~</nowiki>
#
{{RoundBoxBottom}}
{{Administering Wikiversity}}


__TOC__
__TOC__


== Unused files uploaded by PCano ==
=Undeletion requests=
I suggest to delete the 287 unused files listed in [[:Category:Files uploaded by PCano - unused]]. A longer discussion about unused files in general can be seen at [[Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Thousands_of_unused_files]] and a similar discussion about files uploaded by Robert Elliott was closed as delete above. Uploader have not been actice since 2011 so it is unlikely the files will ever be used. The files seems to be a part of a set of data. I do not know if the set is complete. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 19:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
If an article has been deleted, and you think it shouldn't have been, please list it here. Please try to give as close to the title as possible, and list your reasons for why it should be restored.
:I don't know the details, but sometimes the WikiJournals process the copyright differently. Has anybody checked with them about these files? If not, I would be happy to do the deed.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 02:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

:: @[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] I have not checked with WikiJournals. I was not thinking about copyright but if we are sure the files are correct and if they are of use to anyone? --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 14:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
* List articles here...
:::As I recall, files that are imbedded in pdf files are don't show up as being used. I don't know why the WikiJournal would care, the wikitext but want the pdf and raw files (wouldn't make any sense.) But the value of the Wikijournals is such that somebody needs to double check.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 14:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

:::: If the files are really embedded in a pdf (not linked), they are part of the pdf, and even if the files get deleted, the content is still in the pdf. What are examples of pdfs produced by Wikijurnals? --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 15:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
=Deletion requests=
* '''Leaning toward delete''': since the files are unused, there seems to be no harm in deleting them. If someone presents arguments why they should be kept, I may reconsider. For the record, the files seem to be in the public domain, and many of them are for "HLA allele distribution"; "Source: HumImmunol 2008". A selection of concerned file names: [[:File:2005 ASHI Poster 48 PCano.pdf]], [[:File:A-0101.gif]], [[:File:A-0102.gif]], [[:File:A-0103.gif]], [[:File:A-0201.gif]], [[:File:A-0202.gif]], [[:File:A-0203.gif]], [[:File:A-0204.gif]], [[:File:A-0205.gif]], [[:File:A-0206.gif]], [[:File:A-0207.gif]], [[:File:A-0208.gif]]. I randomly checked a couple of these files and they were uploaded in years 2010 and 2011. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 06:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

*Just to be safe, somebody needs to contact the WikiJournal. This a a dormant author. Right now my biggest problem is an active author. I need to get an active author, [[User_talk:Saltrabook#Organizing_your_contributions|Saltrabook]], to put all their work under a single subpage before they become a bigger problem.[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 15:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
== Media files with no copyright information ==
*: No hurry here, AFAICT. This RFD can be opened for weeks and that is no big problem. And there are also other admins. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 15:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

*:: I made a comment at [[Talk:WikiJournal_User_Group#Notice_about_proposed_deletion]]. Lets see if anyone join the discussion. And I agree that the discussion can be open for weeks. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 17:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
There is no licensing information for these files.
*:::''[[Talk:WikiJournal_User_Group#Notice_about_proposed_deletion]]'' has gone unnoticed for a month. What next?--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 01:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
*[[:Image:French Vocabulary - Introductions.ogg]]
*:::: Delete :-) In case anyone ever wonder which files it was they can see the files [https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:MGA73/Sandbox&oldid=2608383 in my sandbox history]. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 15:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
*[[:Image:French Grammar - The French Alphabet.ogg]]
: More for the record and about the question where these files were probably used: The uploader [[User:PCano]] (Pedro Cano, M.D., M.B.A. MD Anderson Cancer Center, HLA Typing Laboratory, Houston, TX ) created [[Genetics/Human Leukocyte Antigen]] (originally under the title [[HLA]], moved to [[Genetics/Human Leukocyte Antigen]] in April 2017), which was much later (in December 2022) deleted as per [[Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives/18#Subpages of Genetics/Human Leukocyte Antigen]]. Deleting the files used there seems to be a natural follow-up on that deletion decision. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 13:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
*[[:Image:French Vocabulary - How are you?.ogg]]
::{{re|Guy vandegrift}} Unless you still worry about the WikiJournals I think you can delete the files. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 10:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
*[[:Image:French Vocabulary - Greetings.ogg]]
:::I have a meeting with the WikJournal of Science tomorrow and I will bring it up.[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 13:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
*[[:Image:12barBlues001.ogg 1.ogg]]
::::{{ping|MGA73|Dan Polansky}} I just talked to the WikiJournal editors and they have no problem with deleting these files. Moreover, they have no problem with deleting any unused files, with one exception: They would prefer that we not delete pdf files that are marked as preprints, without first contacting them. These preprint pdf files are easily identified with the standard WikiJournal preprint headers. Apparently, they keep a record of all preprints and would need to create another depository for them if the Wikiversity community decides it doesn't want to host them. Their policy is to post the preprint pdf files only if the article is submitted for publication.[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 22:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
*[[:Image:Hanka Dublin.jpg]]<BR>--[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 17:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
:::::{{re|Guy vandegrift}} Thank you. I added [[:File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf]] to [[:Category:WikiJournal Preprints]] to remove it from deletion suggestion [[#Unused_files_(user_uploaded_2-5_free_file_only)]]. Perhaps some one can find the right category for it? Also It could be a good idea to make sure that all the WikJournal files are categorized somewhere in [[:Category:WikiJournal]]. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 05:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

::::::{{re|Mikael Häggström|Evolution and evolvability|OhanaUnited}} Have I correctly conveyed the wishes of the [[WikiJournal User Group/Editors|WJ editors]] in this regard?[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 08:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
:JW has already placed request for licensing information on the originator's discussion page with a warning that the files will be deleted if it is not forthcoming. [[User:Mirwin|Mirwin]] 22:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Sounds good to me, thanks! [[User:Mikael Häggström|Mikael Häggström]] ([[User talk:Mikael Häggström|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mikael Häggström|contribs]]) 12:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
::Some of these are candidates for [[Template:GFDL-presumed]]. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 22:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::::: Great! And as info I can tell that I made by bot add all files that seems to be related in any way to [[:Category:WikiJournal]]. For example if the word WikiJournal is used on the file page or the file is used on a page with WikiJournal in the title. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 17:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
:Unless at the time of upload, there was some sort of message contrary to "Images without proper information about their source and their license will be deleted." then delete the image. The ogg's I'm not so certain about. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 19:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::::::While this [[:File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf]] file is a preprint within WikiJournal, the author never moved the PDF onto an actual preprint page. Judging from this author's [https://guc.toolforge.org/?by=date&user=PARTHASARATHI.N global contributions], it's safe to say that the author abandoned the draft 4 years ago. [[User:OhanaUnited|<b><span style="color: #0000FF;">OhanaUnited</span></b>]][[User talk:OhanaUnited|<b><span style="color: green;"><sup>Talk page</sup></span></b>]] 03:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::: {{re|OhanaUnited}} Aha so it might be safe to delete this file even if its a preprint. However, I think the best is to discuss those files case by case and in a separate discussion. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 15:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
==[[100¢, 2]]==

Please see [[:Category:Contested_candidates_for_deletion]]. The creator of the page has contested the speedy delete. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 01:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
:You may also want to follow or participate in discussion at [[Talk:100¢]]. [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Cormaggio|talk]]</small></sup> 10:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

{{archive top}}
This article seems to be an encyclopedic dump, without any learning-related material and seemingly little prospect for being made into a learning resource. Perhaps the material could be shifted to wp, but it doesn't seem to belong on wv. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]]</small> 13:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
: It seems to be part of a larger set of resources [[:Category:United States currency]]. But I'm still not seeing how this relates to learning. Why isn't this material on WP instead? -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]]</small> 13:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
:: It also seems Cormaggio has commented about this here: [[User_talk:Km#Currency]]. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]]</small> 13:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes, what I looked at before was taken, and adapted, ''from'' Wikipedia - and with no indication of how it suited Wikiversity's aims. I would have deleted them on the spot, but I wanted to encourage the (new, and relatively young) user. I'd support their deletion now - though I wonder if all we have to point people to is [[Wikiversity:Learning resources]]? [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Cormaggio|talk]]</small></sup> 19:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
::: I think there are a bunch of pages like this related to currencies around here. Perhaps they could all be turned into a book and put on Wikibooks. If they are just duplicates of Wikipedia content, I'd lean towards delete. If they were adapted, then it seems more likely that the author may have had some intention of making this appropriate for Wikiversity and in which case they may be sort of like a handout. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 21:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
:Now, here's a topic worthy of putting in one's two cents, times 50. This is a rather weirdly named resource; if it were to be kept, then "Dollar coins of the United States" would make more sense (cents?). But recounting that information would fit better in Wikipedia than Wikiversity. U.S. numismatic history might be worthy of a Wikiversity topic or two, but they'd need to be better defined and organized than this. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 04:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

{{comment}} Original content found at [[Wikipedia:Dollar_(United_States_coin)]] and related pages, and they have been reorganized here. Despite the reasons listed above, these pages here on Wikiversity can be obviously listed for speedy delete for lack of attribution. Any improvement would need to start from scratch with proper attribution. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 17:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}

== [[Wicklow Games]] ==
{{archive top}}
* '''Reason''': poem on non-notable topic added by anonymous IP user; not linked to any other content; totally unwikified; no educational relevance. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 14:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
** Agree. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]]</small> 15:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
* Keep and move. Presuming this is the product of the energy of someone's imagination and creativity, we could adapt this person's work into an education context and allow it to be a starting point for others to further their own learning. Strong support to move this to [[Film writing/Brainstorming/Wicklow Games]] or some similar area of Wikiversity (like creative writing, perhaps). [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 21:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
:'' The page has been moved to [[Fiction writing/Wicklow Games]] and a section added [[Fiction_writing#Practice_and_generate_ideas|here]] [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 19:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}

== [[How to clean a toilet]] ==
{{archive top}}
* I've laughed my head off over this a few times. Perhaps this is just simply too damn stupid. It has educational value, and doubtless falls within policy - but do we really have to '''sink''' this low? I'd like to see what others think. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 12:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
** '''Well''', the '''toilet''' is generally lower than the '''sink''', but they both need cleaning from time to time. Until sinks are covered too, you'll still have to say that Wikiversity covers "everything but the kitchen sink". Or the bathroom sink, too. And we'll be '''shower'''ed with affection, if this whole thing doesn't '''tank'''. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 04:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* I don't think this guide is for deletion. Cleaning a toilet is not a ''low'', it's sth that's in our everyday life. And there may be some people that need a guide for this, because for some reasons they haven't learned that from their parents. Personally, I needed cleaning tips sometime before. If it doesn't fall in WV's scope, then maybe it could be moved to WB, but in my opinion it's not for deletion. I wonder though, would this article be nominated for deletion if it was about the cleaning of medical stations or hospitals? Yours, --[[Image:Assassingr_signature.svg]]-- ([[user:Assassingr|profile]]|[[user talk:Assassingr|chit chat]]|[http://en.wikiversity.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Emailuser&amp;target=Assassingr email]) 12:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
** As I said, it has educational value, doubtless. More than that, I'm sure it falls within WV's scope. But I think this is the kind of thing that Uncyclopedia would welcome on its pages as a parody of Wikiversity. Anyway, I'm just interested in seeing what people think. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 12:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
* I don't have a problem with this article; it is in many ways an excellent article and perhaps from another point of view could even be nominated for featured status, e.g,. its referenced, well structured, well-written, complete, illustrated, and achieves its purpose. It clearly has educational relevance for professional skills training for an important industry. I looked at the history though and was a bit suspicious that the article was pasted virtually as complete, so am guessing that it mightt have come from somewhere, but I didn't find any evidence of this on a [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22How+to+clean+a+toilet%22+There+are+two+main+parts+to+cleaning+a+toilet.+The+first+is+cleaning+the+outside+of+the+toilet.+The+second+is+cleaning+within+the+toilet+bowl quick google search]. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]]</small> 12:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
** "bit suspicious that the article was pasted virtually as complete" --> Perhaps it was moved here from Uncyclopedia? --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 12:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
*** Featured status - yes, I could imagine this as well, but please clean up the references before proposing it ;) --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 13:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
**** I had a look at uncyclopedia and the closest I found there was [http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Worst_100_New_Ways_to_Clean_the_Toilet_of_All_Time Worst 100 New Ways to Clean the Toilet of All Time]. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]]</small> 13:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
* Keep - http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fy789 - and search google "how to clean a toilet site:.edu" [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 03:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}

== [[Editors who choose to leave]] ==
{{archive top}}
* Nothing came of this effort, and I don't think it will be constructive. By definition, participants will be absent. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 12:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
{{support}}--[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 11:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
*THis is an important topic for wiki studies. The page hurts nothing and might be developed in the future. Get a life rather than try to delete people's work. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 00:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
*This inspired me to create this learning project: [[Wikiversity participants who choose to leave]], ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 11:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
* Keep [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 03:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

No concensus to delete, page has been kept. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 19:15, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

{{archive bottom}}



== [[Miley Cyrus]] ==

'''Note''' This page has since been moved to [[Creative writing/Miley Cyrus]], and the current page is a redirect. This took place on 23 August 2008. Only Jade Knight's comments have come after the redirect. If there are no complaints, I will close this and then others can refile under its new name. Since it moved, the current redirect exists. If there are no complaints or requests not to, I will remove it within 24 hours unless someone else steps in before I do. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 20:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any educational content in this. Is there any way to make a valuable entry here? (I don't think so.)--[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 08:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
: Delete. No educational content or prospect of. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 10:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

:Based on the demographics of the fan base, I assume this may have been written by someone still refining their writing skills. So if this is a good faith edit of someone practicing their writing skills, having maybe learned from that practice, I'm not certain this should be deleted. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 12:16, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
::No doubt about good faith in this case. It is about educational content... '''but''' your note was interesting... "someone practicing their writing skills..." Maybe we can make a [[Topic:Writing skills practice]], and label this entry (and similar ones) with a corresponding template? i.e. Just for writing skill practice (short stories, etc.)?--[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 12:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
:::I also would like that these are categorized. Deletion can be done anytime. Hopefully with this we can win participants. ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 18:14, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
*Keep. Rather than delete non-vandalism pages, Wikiversity should always find ways to harness the interests of editors. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 18:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
:OK then let's find a way to keep this (and also similar ones). I don't see however, how is the "Media project" part related to the article's topic... Opinions regarding the "Writing practice" idea? --[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 10:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
::The page could maybe be moved to [[Writing practice/Miley Cyrus]]. That is just one option though. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 21:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Has absolutely no relation to Wikiversity's mission. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 04:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' per McCormack. People don't need to use Wikiversity as an area for "writing practice". [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 23:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
*:People do not need to use Wikiversity for anything, however, some educators encourage kids to write about any topic that interests them. Oh, but they might learn how to participate at a wiki....we can't have that! --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 00:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
*::[[Wikiversity:Sandbox]] already exists. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 07:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
*:::"''People don't need to use Wikiversity as an area for "writing practice"''": why not ? If Wikiversity can help them to increase their learning/skills (e.g. in writing skills), then that is good. Who knows we might create (or lose) a great author in the future. ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 17:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
*::::Word processors were invented long before Wikiversity I don't see why the project should be trying to serve the same purpose. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 13:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
*:::::Adambro: you do not recognize any difference between editing a wiki and using a word processor? --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 13:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
*::::::I can certainly recognise the difference between a Wiki and a word processor and the latter seems much more appropriate for "writing practice". Now if this was intended, or you suggest it is, practice in editing a Wiki then I'd again highlight the well established concept of [[Wikiversity:Sandbox]]. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 14:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
* '''Strong Delete''' Seems to me that the article is revealing some personal information, which goes against the privacy policy including the Foundations Policy, Wikiversity isn't Wikipedia and this sort of article shouldn't be placed on the site. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 17:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
::This looks like a page made by a kid who is a fan of a public figure. Is there anything on this page that is not at [[w:Miley Cyrus|Miley Cyrus]]? It might be "personal information" but it is the kind of information that shared with the fans. I think Wikiversity has to expect a future that will bring many young editors here who need to learn about how to participate in Wikimedia projects. Do we have to use page deletion as out teaching tool? Let's be welcoming and think outside of the Wikipedia-box. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 13:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
* Wikiversity is a place for collaborative learning, and that includes writing, even fictional writing. One problem for this article is we don't know what to make of it; we don't know if it is factual or fictional. That was probably why some of us cannot find educational value of the page. It would have help if the fictional materials and writing exercises were labelled and categorised appropriately. And, in the end, even if the page is deleted, it has served it purpose, and we should welcome this use of wikiversity as a place to practise writing. [[User:Hillgentleman|Hillgentleman]]|[[User talk:hillgentleman|Talk]] 00:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
**I would suggest keep, label and categorise. It is a good example of using wikiversity to learn. [[User:Hillgentleman|Hillgentleman]]|[[User talk:hillgentleman|Talk]] 00:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
*The page is clearly only useful as a potential ''product of learning'' - ie how to gather information, edit a wiki, write an article, etc. And even then, the learning ''process'' is not clear. But it's certainly not clear what purpose it serves to keep such pages here in order to facilitate further learning - except for perhaps evaluating the quality of the work. I think we need to find a way of promoting the ''potential for learning from our content'' - and if it isn't clear, then we shouldn't be so nervous of deleting the page in question. I could really only keep this page if it was clearly labeled at the top as an individual's creative writing exercise - and probably renamed as, say, [[Creative writing/Miley Cyrus]] in order to reflect that. [[User:Cormaggio|Cormaggio]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Cormaggio|talk]]</small></sup> 14:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
**Since more people will be comfortable with a label attached, let's do this: at [[Portal:Writing Center]] exists the learning resource: [[Creative Writing]]. There also exists the [[:Category:Creative writing]]. Above are also mentioned other "labels" as: "Writing skills practice" or "Writing practice". For the moment I have moved the "Miley Cyrus" learning resource as subpage of "Creative writing". Will move/rearrange the sections a little. Feel free to move further or take other labels. I hope that is ok with you all ? ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 10:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. I could see potential usefulness in the page, but it's far from being educational now, and I see little reason to keep it around here. At the same time, I feel strongly that the page's creator should be individually contacted before it's deleted. Give them a chance, eh? [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 12:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
* Can't find where I might have said keep before, so '''keep'''... '''and maybe''' move for now... unless it is a matter of conserving server resources. [[User:Emesee mobi|Emesee mobi]] 03:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* Certainly, pop cultural phenomena could be valid subjects for study, but from looking at this particular section I don't see that happening... it looks like somebody's attempt to start a fan site using Wikiversity as a platform, which isn't really what it's for. Now, if somebody started a project on the history and culture of teen/tween idols in general, how they've changed over the years, how their fans behave, what happens to them when they grow up, and what effects (good and bad) they have on fans, the music, movie, and TV industries, society in general, and the pop stars themselves, then ''that'' might be a valid thing for this site. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 03:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)






== [[:Image:KJpic.jpg]] and [[:Image:Vreemdekikker.jpg]] ==
These are both photos of contributors uploaded years ago and not used, neither user has contributed for a substantial time period. Since they are not being used they aren't useful to the project so I would suggest should be deleted. -- [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 10:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
: Hi Adambro, I'm a pretty new custodian here on WV and I see you're an Admin on several WMF wikis. I'm curious about whether there is some precedent on other sisterprojects for deletion of the user photos of inactive users? Less than 2 years since an edit doesn't necessarily seem to me like a fatally long time? Seems to me there is more justification for deletion of [[:Image:Vreemdekikker.jpg]] because of the lack of licensing information. Have you tried contacting both contributors by talk and email (if activated)? Sincerely, -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 10:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
:I wonder which uploaded files are candidates for [[Template:GFDL-presumed]]. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 10:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
::Hi JWSchmidt. The concept of GFDL-presumed is one which I've seen labelled as "being phased out" elsewhere but I'm not familiar with this beyond that but I think it could be a little dangerous to presume that if an uploader hasn't explicitly stated that they release it under the GFDL to assume that was their intention. I would highlight that these aren't simply images of inactive users, they are images of inactive users which haven't ever being used anywhere and as such they don't benefit the project. If I were to put my Commons hat on then the policy there I understand is that userpage photos are only within the scope of that project whilst they are being used on a userpage and I can see a great deal of sense in taking that approach in this case. If these users do ever return then it would not be too difficult for them to simply upload a new image for use on their userpage so deleting this doesn't really cause any harm to them but leaving images like this lurking around when they're not being used makes it harder for the community to manage image issues. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 10:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
: Unlike on edit pages, the upload page says "Images without proper information about their source and their license will be deleted." If this was the case when these were uploaded, I would say probably delete (unless there is some caveat), but otherwise keep. If the upload page said (which I think it should) "You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL. Any copyrighted works not licensed under the GFDL will be deleted." then I would say gfdl-presume and keep. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 20:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
:Emailed [[User:KJ]] (but has a licence given anyway) + Vreemdekikker sems not to react since about 6,5 months on her [[User talk:Vreemdekikker|talk page msg]] about the licence. ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 20:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry I've been away for a while, guys... go ahead and delete the file. Thanks for checking with me! I'd delete it myself but I'm not positive how to. Have a good one. [[User:KJ|KJ]] 14:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[:Image:KJpic.jpg]] deleted per uploader request. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 23:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Horbury High School]] ==
{{archive top}}
I originally nominated this for speedily deletion, being of the opinion that it is outside the scope of the project being simply content which would be more appropriate on Wikipedia but this was contested. Today is now over a month since this was first created and I see no evidence whatsoever that this is ever going to develop into something associated with the creation of learning resources. For this reason I again nominated it for speedily deletion today and this was again contested, JWSchmidt commenting that "Wikiversity welcomes information about educational institutions" but I'm not sure that is entirely accurate. In the context of a school participating in writing learning materials then some basic information about that school might be appropriate but since this isn't the context this really is information more fit for Wikipedia. However, I would note that I am not suggesting that this should be moved to Wikipedia since I am not confident that it would be considered notable. I therefore propose it is deleted. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 14:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
: Pretty much agree with others. Based on you thinking it might not be notable for Wikpedia, speedy keep. Still, otherwise, keep because it could be used as a sort of starting point for future participants at this institution. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 20:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
:keep and suggestion to replace the deletion template with the welcome and expand template. ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 20:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

:Adambro, Please provide a link to the previous discussion. [[User:Hillgentleman|Hillgentleman]]|[[User talk:hillgentleman|Talk]] 15:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
:'''Delete''' if it has been abandoned. If there is someone out there who cares about it and can give a reasonable explanation as to why it should be on Wikiversity, then '''keep'''. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 12:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}

== [[Albanian sea port history]] ==
{{archive top}}
REASON: Article, created by anon user, contains absolutely 0 content. Including it in any Historical category is unhelpful to users (it diverts them from real content); let someone come and recreate topic if there is ever a desire -- [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
*ARGUMENTS -
** Hmmmm... this is a good example of a broader issue. Is an essentially empty page not wanted on WV - is it viewed as "empty" and therefore useless, or "nascent", a stub, a place for possible future work. On the one hand, having empty corners isn't great particularly for newcomers. On the other hand, having some somewhat dormant open spaces for future potentially connection, as 'markers' could well be beneficial. I can see good arguments on both sides, but I think the hung jury (if it turns out to be hung) must fall on the side of keep rather than delete if we are to foster an atmosphere of support, openness, and positivity. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 10:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
***I personally think this is one of the greatest hurdles for Wikiversity right now: new users think they're going to find learning content, and click on a page (found either by categories or internal links or a search), discover it has nothing, and be frustrated; especially for those clicking on content through internal lists or the Browse feature. Additionally, many users feel intimidated to "take over" a stub page; it seems that there is a preference for creating a ''new'' page rather than working on the abandonned page; that hardly fosters community. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 10:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
**** I tend to think that the hurdle is to get users to '''stop looking for content''' and start looking for ways to participate. There's already enough content out there and theres better communities developing it. [[User:Countrymike|Countrymike]] 07:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
*****My idea of getting new users to participate is to funnel them into projects with other users and getting them to contribute together in a positive, non-hostile environment. I think that when users find all these empty pages, they feel like nothing's going on at Wikiversity, and there's nothing for them to contribute ''to''. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 07:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
** '''Delete''': this title is too obscure. If an Albanian sea port historian ever turns up here, I'm sure he'll be able to create a new page. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 12:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
{{support}} '''deletion''' no posibility of becoming an effective learning resource. [[User:Salmon of Doubt|Salmon of Doubt]] 12:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

*'''keep''' I have started to develop the Albanian sea port history learning project. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 13:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
*'''keep''' - someone wants to help build it up ? There were some more edits to make it now even more useful for more eyes. ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 17:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
**[[Talk:Albanian sea port history/Comparing with the growth of Wikiversity#moving of the learning resource]], ----[[User:Erkan_Yilmaz|Erkan Yilmaz]] <small>uses the [[Wikiversity:Chat]] ([http://java.freenode.net//index.php?channel=wikiversity-en try])</small> 20:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
***Given the fact that Erkan Yilmaz has now introduced real content (though somewhat encyclopedic) on the page, I withdraw the request that the page be deleted. That said, I am uncertain if it is appropriate to include JWSchmidt's [[Learning_from_conflict_and_incivility/Jade_Knight#Tools_in_Conflic|learning project]] at the page. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 08:46, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*'''keep''' - There's no harm in this article, why delete it while it could simply be improved. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 17:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

* {{oppose}} deletion. See comments [[Talk:Albanian_sea_port_history|here]]. [[User:Countrymike|Countrymike]] 02:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
* Keep [[User:Emesee mobi|Emesee mobi]] 02:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* Keep; it may have been empty when nominated, but somebody did give it some content since... not all that much, but a nucleus on which an educational project might be built. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 04:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

There was no clear consensus to delete, and the page has changed significantly since the request was actively discussed. The page has been kept. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 17:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

{{archive bottom}}



== [[Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Case Studies/Loud and Combative]] ==
{{archive top}}
REASON: I was asked if I wanted to speedily delete this page since I moved/forked the content, but I'm not really the author of the content. I believe the request spawned from [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship&oldid=327235#Questions_for_the_Candidate this thread]. My reply is to [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dzonatas&oldid=327712#Candidate_for_Speedy_Deletion move on] in an oversighted way. It was suggested I post this here to resolve this. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 12:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

* Arguments:

{{done}} There have been no objections, so the page was speedy deleted. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 11:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

{{archive bottom}}

== [[Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Case Studies/Controversy or disruption]] ==
{{archive top}}
REASON: I was asked if I wanted to speedily delete this page since I moved/forked the content, but I'm not really the author of the content. I believe the request spawned from [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship&oldid=327235#Questions_for_the_Candidate this thread]. My reply is to [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dzonatas&oldid=327712#Candidate_for_Speedy_Deletion move on] in an oversighted way. It was suggested I post this here to resolve this. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 12:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

* Arguments:

{{done}} There have been no objections, so the page was speedy deleted. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 11:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

{{archive bottom}}

== [[Wikipedia Ethics]] ==
{{Archive top}}
My old request was removed. --[[User:Sunstar NW XP|Sunstar NW XP]] 19:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3ARequests_for_Deletion&diff=328214&oldid=328201 Here is the diff] for future reference. I suggest any votes or comments be readded into these two subpages, or be included in consideration during discussion of these two subpages. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 22:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

''Note, this request was removed [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3ARequests_for_Deletion&diff=328214&oldid=328201 here]. It was removed in a bit of confusion, that I didn't realize at first. I mostly wanted the two entries already listed above removed from the entry here (to avoid duplication). I have since removed them per Sunstar's edit above justifying that he was accepting removing of the entry as a whole. If there is any further confusing over this, please contact me. The above were pulled out, as they deal with a blank page issue that no longer pertains to the Ethics project. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 22:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)''

Per the discussion at the Colloqiuum, and [[User:Jimbo Wales]] say on the matter, regarding {{user|Moulton}} and the ensuing discussion, I have listed it here. -- [[User:Sunstar NW XP|Sunstar NW XP]] 19:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

* '''Delete''' per nom. While the concept may one day be worthwhile, sifting out any salvageable bits from this is unlikely to be worth the time and effort for any bits thus gleaned. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]] 19:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*Nominator: Please state the reason for deletion on this page. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 19:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*:It is because of the discussion, and KillerChihuahua's reasoning. Thanks, AC --[[User:Sunstar NW XP|Sunstar NW XP]] 19:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*::Please state the reason for deletion on this page, in order to make possible a Wikiversity page deletion review discussion. Just 2 or 3 sentences. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 19:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

* {{oppose}} blanket deletion. The "inclusion" note above clearly shows that the nom did not consider the deletion cases fully from what is being requested in the previous sections. I would like to see the request respected as I made it. There also is a request to move the entire project to WAS's space, and that request should be respected as well. There is well enough evidence that not everybody has considered the intention of all the participants, and the blanket deletion appears supported as against one user. It is wrong to delete other's content because of what a few hold against one user. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 19:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*: See also [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&curid=28&diff=328333&oldid=328329]. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 02:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
*:* Hi Dzonatas. As you know this project better than some of us, perhaps you could be specific about which pages you consider to be worth keeping? That would be a great help! Thanks. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 08:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:::* McCormack, you left a [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADzonatas&diff=327609&oldid=327562 comment] on my userpage that hopefully you will review before you support this style of blanket deletion. There is no doubt that the ethics project needs clean-up, but I feel your desire to further push this blanket deletion (beyond Wales's input) beyond even the "significant amount" of 'case studies' is a too aggressive. It appears the action is more out of retaliation, and I'm sorry to say that even just to notion to gain 'consensus' about it after a block is questionable. I thought that would be obvious. There is no need to drag others through that mess. I would highly recommend: 1) to retract your/this "blanket" deletion request, and 2) to let the remaining participants of the "ethics" project clean it up. If you think the block on Mouton will help us clean-it up then let it stand at that. There is no need to disrespect the rest of the people. The 5 day notice thing only causes stress. I don't think we can notify all participants in 5 days. I'm sure there are a lot of other things to do here on Wikiversity than rush to get this cleaned-up in 5 days. You made it well obvious you haven't considered all the content. For example, do you find anything wrong with this page: [[http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Ethics/Suggested_essays]]. Do you feel those that have submitted essays to it should be categorized as "bogus" or wipe-out due to an action against "Moulton"? I feel like you are holding a gun and asking us to dance, and I don't like that feeling. This is very alienating. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 14:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

*{{neutral}}: I would support the limited deletion of certain elements, but I oppose deletion of the entire project at this time. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 01:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

*Oppose. I explained why in this thread: [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&oldid=328329#Cleaning_up_Ethical_Management_of_the_English_Language_Wikipedia]. And then Jimbo Wales has not participated a lot [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Jimbo_Wales] in wikiversity and his opinions are just his opinions. [[User:Hillgentleman|Hillgentleman]]|[[User talk:hillgentleman|Talk]] 02:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
**I am against splitting the discussion into two, and this request for deletion in premature in light of the clean-up efforts of wikiversitians like Darklama. Let us keep the discussion in the Colloquium. [[User:Hillgentleman|Hillgentleman]]|[[User talk:hillgentleman|Talk]] 02:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
*** I think we can discuss rescue options and other options on the colloquium, but I think this is a good place to gather some votes in order to see roughly where consensus lies - because the consensus has been very difficult with this project. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 08:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* I wanted to note that as an individual with one such page in the project ([[Wikipedia Ethics/BLP, Ottava Rima's investigation]]), I fall under a conflict of interest, and I will accept any community determined response to that page as necessary. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 05:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

* {{support}}. With the proviso that editors in the project should be given time (e.g. 5 days) to rescue any of their contributions which they consider to be valuable and move these temporarily to their user pages. A subsequent discussion could then determine how these rescued elements could be repurposed. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 08:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{support}}. This project itself has been causing problems here on Wikiversity, although it maybe useful by some users I'll support the deletion - however though out of respect of the founder of the project it should be moved to his/her own userpage or subpage, we should give enough time for the founder or any participants to save his/her work. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 13:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{support}}. Launched as method for attacking specific Wikipedians under the guise of "studies on Wikipedia ethics." This project contained a number of attack pages and outed several Wikipedians, and was strenuously maintained by several who had personal axes to grind with those they used as "case studies." All subpages, and there are many, need to deleted as well. [[User:Centaur of attention|Centaur of attention]] 18:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

:Someone should state the reason for deletion at the top of this page section. Write 2 or 3 English sentences giving the reason and not relying on links to other pages. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 19:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

* {{oppose}} A few bad apples should not be a reason to prevent a project from trying to blossom. Blanket deletions and deletions as a punitive punishment should not be encouraged. To delete this project would be to support punishing the innocent as collateral damage, and would be to assume bad faith on the part of all the other contributors to the project. How to proceed with this project should be left up to the remaining contributors; Wikiversity participants should [[WV:AGF|assume in good faith]] that they can improve this project, and have the desire to resolve concerns. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 20:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{oppose}} I've previously asked for someone to state the reason for deletion. I guess there is no reason to delete this page. Other sub-pages have been marked for deletion but not listed on this page. <s>Maybe someone could make a new page section here and list some of the sub-pages.<s> See [[#Attack pages]]. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 21:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{oppose}} blanket deletion. Do not beleive that this project was originally ''launched as method for attacking specific Wikipedians under the guise of "studies on Wikipedia ethics."'' as has been previously stated. [[User:Countrymike|Countrymike]] 22:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
**I believe it may have been a mix of the two. I still oppose blanket deletion. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 06:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* '''Leaning towards oppose''', a bit to my own dismay. [[User:Emesee mobi|Emesee mobi]] 03:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{oppose}} deletion. Despite its rocky history, it is a valid subject for study which will hopefully get more serious and balanced treatment in the future. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 04:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{oppose}} deletion. Getting the ethics right is fundamental to the long-term success and well-being of all our associated projects. A pity progress has been stymied and people have left for a few thoughtless words. [[User:Shojo|luke]] 18:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - I've deleted "my" page (Wikipedia Ethics/BLP, Ottava Rima's investigation). If the community wants it restored, please vote. I do not want it restored at this time. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 01:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{oppose}} blanket deletion. A number of pages within the project should be deleted, and others rewritten, but I'd like to give that a shot before deleting the whole thing. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 23:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

{{comment}} Archived discussion due its reason for nomination with a time limit of 5 days, "per discussion at Colloquium." More than 10 days have passed. Other pages have been listed here on RfD, individually, for further discussion. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 18:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
{{Archive bottom}}

== Attack pages ==
[http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&diff=327312&oldid=327308 Jimbo said], "I would recommend that a significant number of the attack pages be deleted". Please list below any pages that you view as attack pages. Start a new section for each and propose why the page should be deleted.

=== [[User:Centaur of attention]] ===
There have been challenges to the charges made by "Centaur of attention" on this page. For example, see this [http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:Centaur_of_attention#Unsupported_claims_on_your_user_page request for evidence] from "Centaur of attention" to support charges made against Moulton. See also [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:Centaur_of_attention&diff=307861&oldid=307656 this] and [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:Centaur_of_attention&diff=next&oldid=307861 this]. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 12:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

'''Note''': [[User:Centaur of attention]] is now [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Emesee&page=&year=&month=-1 blocked] and, therefore, can not edit the page to make any changes. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 02:24, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

:'''Comment''' - This page seems to fall under what Wikipedia would call "soapboxing". There is no equivalent policy here. However, I find that since this is a user page, and not a page that is standardized to allow for feed back, I don't know if I could accept it in this format. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 21:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:'''Strong Neutral''' I've switched from Strong delete to Strong Neutral, I agree with Ottava's comment - but Centaur of Attention will need to alter the entire userpage to make it more friendly, clean it up - do what other editors have done and place templates, userboxes or other texts - but don't make it like an attack page, which will cause problems for other editors and also this site as it'll give us a bad reputation like certain people think badly of wikipedia because of their problems. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 21:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

=== place link to attack page 2 here ===

== [[Topic:Moulton Vs. Centaur of attention]] ==

This was one of the earlier attempts to calm things down. I respect the original intent of its creator to facilitate a better atmosphere among editors, but as Moulton is now banned, the project is futile. In any case, I think it is uncivil to create learning projects on any user, regardless of their standing. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 08:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
: I've posted to Donek's talk page (the main author) here: [[User talk:Donek#Topic:Moulton Vs. Centaur of attention]]. If he votes delete as the main author, then I'd suggest that's pretty much a lay down misere. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 14:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:: I suggest '''keep'''ing the page and that we categorize it as part of the history of Wikiversity. There is a lesson to be learned from that page. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 21:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Please stop enabling Moulton's attacking of others, you're not helping. All subpages of Moulton's 'project' should be deleted and any content forks located and deleted. [[User:Centaur of attention|Centaur of attention]] 23:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Centaur, the first aspect of this process is supposed to be acting politely. I would ask that you refrain from using terms like "enabling" when referring to "attacks". If you have a problem with a user's conduct, please take it to the appropriate place. This is for discussion of potential deletions. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 23:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::I agree. If you would also stop accusing others of attacking people without providing a diff it would be quite appreciated. Thank you. [[User:Emesee mobi|Emesee mobi]] 03:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:'''Delete or move''' to the Wikiversity namespace. [[User:Emesee mobi|Emesee mobi]] 02:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:'''Move''' to the Wikiversity namespace, where it would be more at home; such "navel-gazing" is questionable in mainspace. Study of large, significant wiki projects like Wikipedia is a valid subject for educational resources, but study of minor controversies within this project itself is best done in its own meta-project space. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 04:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:: I am happy for it to be deleted, moved or other. I was going to nominate it for deletion myself after I saw JWSchmidt's investigation into events. The project I created would probably have just duplicated that. I am happy to see that action has been taken with regard to the unpleasantness that has lingered here for far too long. [[User:Donek|Donek]] ([[User talk:Donek|talk]]) - Go raibh mile maith agaibh 11:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:'''Neutral''' I'm not sure. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 20:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Looking at how the consensus is developing here (i.e. "keep but move"), I'd like to table a new suggestion which builds on some of the previous comments: move it to a subpage of [[Wikiversity:Request custodian action]]. Thoughts? Keep the ideas coming, guys. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 06:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
::Interesting idea, but how will other's voice his/her opinion if they don't know where the discussion is taking place - will a link be provided on the Custodian page to redirect others to the subpage instead of having to do constant searches for something like this. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 08:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
::What about moving it as a subpage of the Wikipedia Ethics project, since there appears to be no consensus to delete that project? --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 14:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

''It has been moved out of the topic namespace to Wikiversity namespace. We can continue discussion, or archive it. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 19:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

== Chinese/Japanese poetry copyvio ==

This request applies to the following pages:
{{col}}
* [[秋田商業 校歌]]
* [[キセキ]]
* [[横浜高等学校 校歌]]
* [[函館大有斗 校歌]]
{{break}}
* [[Greeeen キセキ]]
* [[グリーン キセキ]]
* [[鉄道唱歌東海道線]]
* [[りんご娘]]
* [[鉄道唱歌 東海道線]]
* [[りんご娘.]]
* [[光星学院 校歌]]
* [[平安高等学校 校歌]]
* [[北海高等学校 校歌]]
{{colend}}

See also: [[Wikiversity:Colloquium/archives/September_2008#Japan_high_school_songs]] and [[User talk:Okanosato]]. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 18:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

These pages are probably copyright violations. See [[User:Hillgentleman]]'s comments at [[Wikiversity:Colloquium#Japan_high_school_songs]]. If they were in English, we could probably check them out as part of a deletion request process, but as they are incomprehensible to most of us, I think we should play safe and delete anyway. At best, they should be transferred to a sister project in the appropriate language. --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 08:37, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:I vote '''transwiki''' to the Japanese Wikiversity and let them deal with it, unless someone here knows Japanese well enough to check on the status of these, or unless we can get a clear attestation of the author as to their origin and non copyvio-ness. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:: Technically we can't "vote" transwiki, because we can't force them to accept the materials. We can only vote "delete" with a proviso that we put a transwiki request in over there and give them a bit of time. Mind you, you could become a user on Japanese Wikiversity and help form opinion over there ;-) --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 09:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm voting it anyway; if they wont accept the materials, then they'll get lost in limbo. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 06:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

* {{support}}/transwiki. Even if we translate them and they are valid, we "en" still don't know if they are appropriate. This gives me an the idea that exercises that teach other languages should be partial to move or link their 'immersed' teachings to the related language wiki. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 13:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* {{support}}/transwiki -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 13:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
* Probably '''support transwiki'''. I wondered when I first saw these if there could ever be a learning resource only in Japanese (i.e. without context given in English) or some other language at the English Wikiversity that could be useful and purposeful. I can't think of how; can anyone? [[User:Emesee mobi|Emesee mobi]] 02:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
**I can, actually: language projects related to a language learning department which have either a) been designed with English speakers in mind, or b) are in a language which lacks its own Wikiversity. For example, Breton language materials, administered by the Breton language Department here, may be entirely appropriate. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 06:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
* If the Japanese project wants them, they should take them on, but there's no sense to keeping stuff that's not in English in the English Wikiversity. [[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] 04:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
**There is, in fact (thought not necessarily in this case). See above. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 06:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

''Noting that the author removed the <nowiki>{{dr}}</nowiki> tags before any decision was notified here and without answering the questions on his talk page. I'm reinserting the tags until we have a concrete decision about what steps to take next. For example, the tags could be replaced with a new template which says "it has been decided to transwiki and then delete this resource...".'' --[[User:McCormack|McCormack]] 05:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Is this new page related? [[携帯電話と人々]] -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 09:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

More pages from the same person (9 pages in the second column) --[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 09:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

{{comment}} I can think of good reasons to have multi-lingual resources here at en (one great example is [[Romance of the Three Kingdoms]], but even that one might be more better suited at beta multilingual hub). But in this case most of us have no idea what the content really is, and there has been a suggestion that these are copyvio. If that is true then transwiki is out of the question. We have already tried to contact them on the talk pages in english. I think the best thing to do now would be to try to find someone that speaks the language to leave a note on the user talk pages and suggest that they participate at beta or ja where there is a community of speakers of the language. We really don't have the resources to patrol for copyvios, libel or other inappropriate conent in other languages. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 00:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies1]] ==

REASON: Most of this page [Case Studies1] became redundant (split and moved to other pages), but this was still edited after attempted reorganization. The talk page was active, and the main reason it was kept. I nominate this one for deletion, and if there is wanted content then it should be split-out and moved. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 02:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

:{{comment}} I'd like to see Case Studies1 and Case Studies2 merged, or the parts of CaseStudies2 merged with the related subpages. Case Studies1 should probably be kept around as a summery of the various case studies that are taking place with links to each case study. The hypotheticals could be useful to either help summarize each case or used to help improve each case. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 14:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

::{{comment}} Most of what you suggested was already done on [[Wikipedia_Ethics/Case_Studies]]. The edit wars prevented them from being merged at least in some stable fashion. If you look through the DPL list, you'll notice the subpages they were split into. Consider [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&diff=327982&oldid=327974 this edit] and you can see the "merged" and "alternate" style you suggest has been tried. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 15:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
:::What I mean is that both their edit histories should be merged as well, rather than just incorporated both page's content and redirect pages. That way the edit histories are preserved, but the pages aren't needed. I think its worth trying again. I believe it should be possible to incorporate ideas from Case Studies 1, Case Studies 2 and Case Studies together on one page, since the focus of the page should probably now be about what rules should be followed for case studies and a brief summery of each case with a link to each case. I believe it also important to require contributors to engage in discussion and dispute resolution and discourage forking in this project, and require any conflicting views concerning the same case study to be included on the same page rather than separate pages. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 16:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

:::{{comment}} I think Privatemusings did a good job with his case study on this page, so I would recommend keeping and merging it with other useful case studies, if that hasn't already been done. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 17:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

::::I see he has moved his here: [[User:Privatemusings/EthicsSandbox/casestudy]]. I hope he votes in DR to help confirm. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 17:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies2]] ==

REASON: This [Case Studies2] is a forked version of Case Studies1. I believe this page shows the type of hypotheticals that others are concerned about, and one can only get a full picture of the situation is to review Case Studies1. The need to look back at Case Studies1 defeats the purpose of hypotheticals. Proper hypotheticals should be presented as just facts without positive or negative assertions or (obvious) use of biased words. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 02:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

* Arguments:

:'''Merge''' Since both resources are the relatively the same any material added to Case2 should in my view be merge together - since this seems to be a duplicate page. [[User:Dark Mage|<strong><font color="Black">Dark</font><font color="Red"> Mage</font></strong>]] 10:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies/Biographies of Living People]] ==

This was tagged as a result of recent events with claims of it being an attack page, but it has been improved since the events. The content may not be broad enough for its title. I feel there is a more concise version, [[User:JWSchmidt/Blog/16_September_2008]], that includes the basic presentation of this page and a few others. If someone wants to immediately save this content, feel free to move it to your userspace and subsequently remove the DR tag. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 03:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

:{{keep}} I think this page just needs expansion or alternatively could be renamed to <tt>Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies/Rosalind Picard</tt> and the minor parts not related to Rosalind Picard removed. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;">[[User:Darklama|<font color="midnightblue">dark</font>]][[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]][[User_talk:Darklama|<font color="green">lama</font>]]</span> 14:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

{{comment}} Moulton has placed an older version on his userspace. [[User:Dzonatas|Dzonatas]] 01:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

== Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies/Concordances, Dossiers, Scathing Indictments, and Ethics ==

The [[Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies/Concordances, Dossiers, Scathing Indictments, and Ethics]] page was originally split off from the [[Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies1‎]] page. I removed the duplicate text from that, but this really should just be deleted. It has none of the features of a case study, and instead is just Moulton arguing his position regarding old disputes. Even if we wanted to use those conflicts as case studies, they would need to be completely rewritten. As it stands, the page is completely outside the scope of Wikiversity. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 07:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


==User:Moulton's didactic character subpages (deleted) ==
{{archive top}}
* [[User:Moulton/Montana Mouse|Montana Mouse]]
* [[User:Moulton/Barsoom Tork|Barsoom Tork]]
* [[User:Moulton/Gastrin Bombesin|Gastrin Bombesin]]
* [[User:Moulton/Caprice|Caprice]]
* [[User:Moulton/Albatross|Albatross]]

He has been using these in fake sig lines on Wikiversity and now Wikipedia. I do not think it is fair for Moulton to use Wikiversity pages to make it appear as if he is an unblocked user, especially on other Wikimedia servers in which he is blocked. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 13:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

:He ''was'' signing with those names and not linking those names to "Moulton". The ''point'' of those pages is so that when he signs with other names, he links to "Moulton". Deleting those pages does not prevent him from signing with other names; it only makes thing worse by then not having a link to "Moulton". If you wish to achieve the goal of Moulton not making comments while blocked, you need a different solution than the proposed one of deleting those pages. In short, while your concern seems valid, the proposed method of dealing with that concern appears poorly thought out. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] 14:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

::Suggestions are most welcome. One thought is to blank the page, post a notice that the user account who created the page is blocked, and then protect it. I don't know if that is a course that we wish to take at this time, and I request that others comment. There are a couple of things to think about. One is that Moulton can not edit these pages while logged in as himself, and so the purpose of using the pages to respond to others is moot. He is a blocked user who has abused the right to edit his own talk page while being logged in. That page was protected to prevent personal information from being posted, which has required oversight. Another issue is that he is giving the false impression that he has an active account at wv. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 14:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

:::He is a retired Ph.D. in computer related stuff who has money and friends at MIT. He can get around any technical measure this community uses to try to block him, if he puts his mind to it. How much effort do people here really want to use in dealing with this? Some have suggested that WikiMedia needs to have some sort of useage of resources statement that would allow it to sue especially difficult cases. I don't see a solution at all as long as WikiMedia insists on "anyone can edit" combined with blocking/banning based on "consensus" as this does in fact eventually create a game where the only people willing to spend the time reverting blocked users' "contributions" are mostly motivated by the game aspectand the feeling of power. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] 15:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

::::Money and friends are not what sustains Moulton. Moulton is sustained by an unquenchable passion as a veteran (if laughably inept) science educator. —[[User:Moulton/Montana Mouse|Montana Mouse]] 14:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

(<---)WAS 4.250, you are 100% correct. However, it is insulting for Moulton to link to Wikiversity "profiles" while going around his block on Wikipedia, like he did [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rosalind_Picard&curid=5092046&diff=241515689&oldid=241108894 here]. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 16:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

:It is only "insulting" if you take seriously claims that WikiMedia sites are capable of blocking/banning intelligent adults with the money to change ISPs and travel to various libraries and such. It can not. It can effectively block children and can ban people who want to play the wiki-game under an established avatar and so will willingly not get around the ban until they are allowed to continue playing the game. Anyone with intelligence and resources is capable of playing the game wearing the robes of the adversary in the wiki-game. I do not wish to play that game as either the adversary who gets his comments deleted because "banned means banned"; nor do I wish to play the role of the banniator going around blocking and deleting banned users contributions. I think Moulton is being childish, but I certainly am not insulted. I suppose he has time to kill and this helps him fill his days. I wish he found cooperation more fun than confrontation. I know I do. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] 17:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

::Moulton is engaged in the traditional practice of Didactic Education. I am curious to discover what (if anything) anyone is learning, and what emotions (if any) are surfacing in the course of the [http://knol.google.com/k/barry-kort/cognition-affect-and-learning/3iyoslgwsp412/2# discovery learning process]. —[[User:Moulton/Barsoom Tork|Barsoom Tork]] 13:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I can quickly and efficiently ban Moulton from this project if it is requested. [[User:Salmon of Doubt|Salmon of Doubt]] 18:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

:Thanks, but I think we'd rather have humans pushing the buttons for now :-). --[[User:SB_Johnny|<font color="green">'''SB_Johnny'''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:SB_Johnny|<font color="green">talk</font>]]</sup> 19:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

::Yes, I agree. You won't get an interesting through-line on the dramaturgy if it's all mindlessly automated. So, as SBJ indicates, Moulton's cast of dramaturgical characters are required to engage with the other fluidic characters, so as to sufficiently elevate the issues above <s>radar</s> sonar to reveal the thrilling conclusion to the [http://moultonlava.blogspot.com Chronicles of Wikia]. —[[User:Moulton/Montana Mouse|Montana Mouse]] 13:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

If he were contributing constructively, it would be one thing, but, as can seen above, Moulton's alter egos are used primarily for his flat attempts at jokes, making them disruptive. The recent experiences here tell me that Moulton will continually push to see just how much he can get away with. As a result, I suggest the pages be '''Deleted''' as a step towards discouraging the behavior. If he continues, the custodians can work on the next step. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 16:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


== Archiving of Invalid fair use by User:Marshallsumter ==
:I call for a sober scholarly review of the didactic value of Moulton's use of Muppet-like character voices. How well is Moulton employing the venerated methods inspired by the famous pioneers of 20th century education such as [[w:Burr Tillstrom|Burr Tillstrom]], [[w:Jim Henson|Jim Henson]], [[w:Shari Lewis|Shari Lewis]], and [[w:Fred Rogers|Fred Rogers]]?
* ''See [[Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives/21]]''


This space is for any unfinished business from that discussion.[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 07:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
:The use of puppet characters in educational sketches is a time-honored tradition. Burr Tilstrom pioneered it on children's educational television with [[w:Kukla, Fran and Ollie|''Kukla, Fran and Ollie'']], quickly followed by "Buffalo" Bob Smith with [[w:Howdy Doody|''Howdy Doody'']]. Shari Lewis, Bob Keeshan ([[w:Captain Kangaroo|''Captain Kangaroo'']]), Fred Rogers, and (especially) Jim Henson used puppetry in a creative and appropriate manner to craft high-quality edutainment aimed at children of the late 20th Century. I expect that some of our academically dry material can be usefully presented through Aesopian sketches populated by such Muppet-like players.
: Can be closed and archived, I guess. If anyone figures out a new task in the area of "Invalid fair use by User:Marshallsumter", they can open a new RFD nomination as and when they do so. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 13:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
:: The problem is that the task (as mentioned in [[Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Pervasive copyright violations by User%3AMarshallsumter]]) is to check all the files uploaded by User:Marshallsumter and check if they meet the criteria for fair use. Sadly it is 1,151 files so I doubt anyone will spend the time on that. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 14:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
::: I tend to support preemptively deleting all files (not pages) uploaded by User:Marshallsumter. The fact that many of the files uploaded by him were determined not to meet Wikiversity criteria for fair use should be grounds enough. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 14:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
::::I thought we deleted all his files and userfied all his pages. Apparently I was wrong: [[:File:Earth Shells to Scale.png]] // [[Earth/Geognosy/Quiz]] // [[Earth/Geognosy]]. When I deleted his images, I went to a page (category?) that someone else created. ... [https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&end=&namespace=6&start=&tagfilter=&target=Marshallsumter&offset=&limit=500 See also: This List]. Apparently this user spend all day long uploading files and putting them into pages he/she created. ... {{Ping|AP295}} This is why I don't bother with a couple of nutcase articles in [[Physics/Essays]]--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 16:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
::::: For anyone's interest, the upload list is visible at [[Special:ListFiles/Marshallsumter]]; a single-page view is at https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles&limit=1160&user=Marshallsumter. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 18:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
{{outdent}} The abuse of the fair use doctrine by this former participant is so egregious that I fully support nuking all image uploads. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 04:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)


:And I presume all pages by same participant that contain these images?--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 08:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
:[http://wc5.musenet.org/webx?224@@11f34988@.1ddf0c7c/ Moulton, the Schmeggegy Scientist] has long used well-known character voices like [http://www.musenet.org/utnebury/MontanaMouse.html Montana Mouse], [http://wc3.musenet.org/webx?ownerInfo@@.1de35bac Barsoom Tork], [http://wc5.musenet.org/webx/?224@@11f34976@.1ddf84b5/40 Gastrin Bombesin], and myself (among many others) to voice different perspectives in dramatized presentations of fundamental educational ideas.


::Any pages that have copious copyvio images should be deleted, along with the images. If there are pages without image violation they should be userfied. I doubt there are very many resources that have relevant learning content without copyvio. So, that leaves the resource pages open to deletion - which I support. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 01:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
:[[User:Moulton/Caprice|Caprice the Flying Goat]] 17:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


=== Mixed discussion related to User:Marshallsumter and other topics ===
::Moulton has claimed he's using characters as a sketch/show. However, that's not what he's doing, so that excuse is worthless. He's doing the equivalent of pulling out hand-puppets in board meetings. It might be considered funny once or twice (if there's an obvious purpose), but doing it constantly would be intentionally disruptive (or just nuts). [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 17:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
(Moved from [[Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/22#User pages created as part of Computer Essentials (ICNS 141)]] --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 16:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC))
::{{ping|MGA73}} While I have your attention, I am confused about two lists that I compiled from various requests on RFD:
::#[https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&end=&namespace=6&start=&tagfilter=&target=Marshallsumter&offset=&limit=500 >1500 Marshallsumter files]: ''Why we deleting Marshallsumter images?''
::#[[Draft:Original research/Literature]] & [[Dominant group/Literature]] ''Marshallsumter sometimes delves into the "soft" (unscientific) subjects like literature where personal taste becomes important. I see no reason to delete or even read them.''
::#{{Permalink|2608383|287 PCano files}} ''I believe these are being deleted because they are unused, yes?''
::#I am not very skilled at uploading files to commons that I did not create (most of my contributions need only attribution to other files on commons.) I uploaded three files from the [[w:Library of Congress|loc]], and it was a time-consuming learning experience. Is there someone else who can do it? Perhaps I could watch till I got the hang of it.
::#After writing this I found {{Permalink|2497946#Exemption_Doctrine_Policy}}, which answers a lot of my questions.
::#I find this page a bit cluttered, but can live with it. If you want a general archiving and cleanup-just ask.
::--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 14:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
{{ping|Guy vandegrift}} Hello!
# Many of the files uploaded by Marshallsumter did not meet the requirements of fair use (violating the Exemption Doctrine Policy). I think all "the easy files" are deleted now. So to clean up the rest we either need hard work or a brute descision to delete everything just to be safe.
# I do not think I suggested to delete those 2 pages?
# Yes because they are unused.
# If you mean move files from here to Commons it is very easy: just click the tab "Export to Wikimedia Commons". If you mean files you found on the Internet it is more tricky. You need to add the relevant information manually and more important add a source. If you found a website with hundreds or thousands of good files it may be possible to do with a bot (see [[:c:Commons:Batch uploading]]).
# Great :-)
# I can live with it too.
--[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 15:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)


:On #1, I am happy with the brute decision if you are. It's the uploader's responsibility to document the copyright. Recently Mu301 and I "rescued" some high-quality photos on a high-quality resource. But that was an exceptional case. Regarding #4, is (or should it be) our policy to move all Wikiversity files to Commons that are not fair use? My problem with that is we sponsor some pretty low-quality stuff. For example, instructors sometimes use Wikiversity for student submissions, and we can't delete those files until the course is over (in fact, we have no policy on deleting course-affiliated student submissions.) What do we do if the main page is a high-quality course, but some of the student submissions have no educational value?--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 01:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::If you are going to posit theses like that, then you have an ethical obligation to support your thesis with evidence, analysis, and reasoning, and submit your thesis to scholarly peer review, in accordance with the academic principles of scholarly ethics. What evidence do you have to posit the thesis that we are not engaged in an educational discourse among Muppet-like characters arguing in the manner of Bert and Ernie? —[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 13:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


::{{ping|Guy vandegrift}} I have no problem if everything is deleted in #1. And I also have no problems if course-affiliated student submissions are deleted after some time (#4). But I think both should be discussed on separate topics (perhaps just move the content to [[#Archiving_of_Invalid_fair_use_by_User:Marshallsumter]]). --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 14:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Keep''' unless he keeps defying the ban, in which case, delete. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 19:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:::I have been on Wikiversity for more than 10 years, most of the time not paying attention to such things, but I am unaware of any policy that calls for the routine deletion of student efforts that were created as part of an established course. If no decision has ever been made to routinely delete student efforts, we need to make sure the entire community is on board with any change in policy.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 17:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::Yes I agree. Deleting student efforts that were created as part of an established course needs a new discussion and concensus.
::::Except if it is a copyvio then it should be deleted. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 16:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)


=== Deleting ALL non-free uploads by User:Marshallsumter ===
*Sxeptomaniac, The present problem is that Moulton is using different ip addresses to go around a block, not whether these pages are appropriate. That doing it constantly is disruptive is your opinion and is not a fact. I feel unease at your mention of "board meeting" (which makes me think of power, struggle and formality); for what we have on wikiversity is a Colloquium and what we do in a Colloquium is to talk and to listen to as many voices as possible. Wikiversity is experimental and exploratory and using clearly defined alter-egos to represent different voices is an interesting thing to try, so long as the attribution ("who said what") is clear. It may be funny to you sometimes but, as I have seen it, the point of any humour is not to be funny but to get a message across. Before these pages on wikiversity these characters were on external sites and it was much more difficult to track "who did what" in any discussion. Deleting these pages will not solve your problem; it would only make it worse, for Moulton will continue to go around the block, linking his alter-egos to external sites. [[User:Hillgentleman|Hillgentleman]]|[[User talk:hillgentleman|Talk]] 01:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay so it seems everyone agree that files that violates Wikiversity criteria for fair use should be deleted - not a big surprise :-D


The big question is if files should be checked one by one or if they should all be deleted. I noticed that some users more or less support to delete all non-free files.
::I appreciate your sober, sane, and insightful commentary, Hillgentleman. I sincerly hope that, going forward, your scholarly example becomes the norm here. —[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 13:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


I therefore have 2 questions:
:::I think you misunderstand my point. I never claimed that deleting the pages would magically solve any problems. It's just a step in discouraging disruptive behavior.
# Do you agree to delete all non-free files?
# Would you like to try to save any of the files and if yes should all the files be put on a list or in a category or how do you propose to make that possible?


Ping [[User:Guy vandegrift]], [[User:Dan Polansky]], [[User:Mu301]], [[User:Koavf]], [[User:Omphalographer]], [[User:Dave Braunschweig]], [[User:AP295]] and [[User:MathXplore]] that was involved in discussions recently. Sorry if I missed anyone and if you do not want to join this time thats of course okay. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 14:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Perhaps you've not been to many board meetings for small organizations. I've been to good ones and bad ones. A certain level of formality is absolutely necessary, or all you have is chaos, and nothing ever gets done. Process is necessary (as long as it's balanced with flexibility and not process for the sake of process).


:#Yes
:::The point of humor is not to be funny? That's got to be one of the saddest things I've heard in a long time. Nevertheless, Moulton has frequently not been making any relevant points to the topic at hand, either. The edit war we have going on now on this page isn't much better, unfortunately. I suggest that only the off-topic material get deleted from this page for now. Encourage him to stay on-topic and discourage disruption. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 16:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:#No
:—[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 15:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
::Also yes to 1 and no to 2, with the understanding that this policy only applies to MS because of the large volume of images involved.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 03:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
::: Correct and also because MS had a lot of bad files. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 05:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)


:#yes, all non-free files should be deleted, prejudiced.
*'''Note''' - I just wanted to note that I put these up here just so that he won't be using our servers to link to other projects like Wikipedia. I would prefer that other Wikimedia projects know that we are not hosting his content so he can simply link back to it. If some other website hosts his content and he links to it constantly, I'm sure that they could be asked to remove it as it is part of his constant avoiding blocks and possibly harassing. That is all. The community can decide if they agree with my belief or not. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 18:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:#no, I don't believe that there is anything worth saving, in this batch from MS.
::--[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 21:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
:: Same as Justin, Guy and mikeu: delete all Marshall Sumter-uploaded non-free files/uploads. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 17:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


It seems that there is concensus to delete. I am now adding the files to [[:Category:Files uploaded by Marshallsumter - non-free]]. I have created [[:Category:Files uploaded by Marshallsumter - non-free - do not delete]] where anyone can add files if they think some files should be kept (permanent or temporary). I hope it will make it easier to delete the files.--[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 11:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
::I, for one, take issue with your system of belief. —[[User:Moulton/Caprice|Caprice]] 20:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
: Just as info. Marshallsumter wrote to me on Commons ([[User_talk:MGA73#Wikiversity_fair_use_files_of_Marshallsumter]]) saying we should not delete. I do not see how it will change the result here. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 17:32, 7 June 2024 (UTC)


==[[Facilitation]]==
===A Novel Approach to Feelings: Using Literary Characters to Teach Emotional Intelligence===
Trivial questions don't save what is a page with learning outcomes that are scarce ([[WV:Deletions]]]). I don't care whether this gets deleted, moved to userspace or moved to [[Draft:Archive]]. This was proposed for deletion in 2016 by Dave Braunschweig and was "saved" by adding questions that in my view are trivial and do not save the article. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 17:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
: '''Delete'''. I don't think the page achieves anything. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 04:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
:'''Draftify, pending vote to rescind the 6-month draftspace deletion rule''' (latest vote change)--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 11:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
:'''Archive, Delete, or Userspace''' (roughly in that order: vote cast on behalf of [[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] by [[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 17:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)<small>That's accurate. I guess I prefer Archive. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 17:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)</small>
:'''Draftify''' ('''Move to Draft namespace''') - I [https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Facilitation&oldid=1633015 contributed to this page in good faith]. Deleting this page rather than preserving it somewhere will further decrease my motivations to contribute Creative Commons content to the Commons on this wiki, with the understanding that it is OK and considered a "best practice" to delete some good faith Creative Commons contributions on this wiki. A relevant rational may also be found [https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&diff=prev&oldid=2611560 here]. Limitless peace. [[User:Michael Ten|Michael Ten]] ([[User talk:Michael Ten|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Michael Ten|contribs]]) 04:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
:: The "good faith" talk is, in my view, entirely beside the point. Faith is not in question in deletion discussion, merely the aptness of the material for inclusion on a project, or inclusion in a specific namespace. For example, Wikiversity is not a repository of good-faith small children's creations or their analogues, or at least its mainspace is not. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 09:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
:: As an aside, the word you are looking for is "rationale", not "rational". --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 10:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Dan Polansky}} I do not accept your premise that "''Wikiversity is not a repository of (small children's creations)''". ... Also, there is a parallel discussion at [[Wikiversity_talk:Deletions#Proposed_modifications]], and it may remove most of the need for [[Draft:Archive]]. Michael Ten has pointed out that pages in draftspace could remain permanently. Looking back into the history, I discovered that I voted for the 180 limit. I had forgotten all about that vote, but my own choice of wording jogged my memory: I voted for a 180 day limit because the decision to delete old drafts seemed like a foregone conclusion (Groupthink - who needs it!)--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 13:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
:::: Well, then, from what does it follow that Wikiversity is such a repository? Which guideline, policy or scope statement? By small children I mean, say 0-6 years olds. Should e.g. scans of all pictures drawn by such children be uploadable as "educational content"? And if not pictures, should their first writings be uploadable? Why do they need publishing; does their local harddrive storage not serve the creative purpose enough? --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 13:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::I overstated my remark about children's work: For the most part, it belongs in userspace or draftspace. And, we need the parent's permission. But colleges teach courses in elementary education. I once walked into such a course and somebody was reading a children's book to the entire class. But we have no entrance requirements for Wikiversity, no minimum IQ is needed. Keep in mind that our differences are matters of personal taste (not factual reality.) The question at hand at [[Wikiversity_talk:Deletions#Proposed_modifications]] is what requirements we wish to have for a page to reside indefinitely in draftspace.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 14:27, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
::::::I propose that we close this discussion with decision to delete, as author voted for that option.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 08:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)


== [[Decadic numbers]] ==
From [http://www.edutopia.org/ ''Edutopia''], published by the [[w:George_Lucas_Educational_Foundation|George Lucas Educational Foundation]]...
Arguably, this is not good enough for the mainspace; I have no objections to this being in the draft space or the userspace. Issues: 1) The page appears to be an original research but is not marked as such; 2) it introduces the term "decadic number" as an original terminological invention, as far as I can tell, but does not disclose this to be the case; 3) the term "decadic number" is unfortunate since what is meant is something like "infinite decadic number"; 4) even the term "number" is questionable since it is not clear how these so-called numbers can have anything to do with quantity (but then, complex numbers arguably also do not express quantity, or a single quantity); 5) no attempt to formally define what a decadic number is made; this so-called decadic number appears to be a mapping from positive integers to the set of digits 0-9, to be interpreted from right to left; 6) e.g. "Addition of the decadic numbers is the same as that of the integers" is clearly untrue: integers are finite discrete quantities; ditto for "Multiplication works the same way in the decadic numbers as in the integers".


Perhaps this can be salvaged rather than moved out of mainspace. The first thing to do is add external sources dealing with the concept or state that this is original invention; and then, address the issues. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 07:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
{{cquote|[http://www.edutopia.org/social-emotional-learning-literary-characters '''A Novel Approach to Feelings: Using Literary Characters to Teach Emotional Intelligence''']<P>
''When it comes to learning real-life lessons, fictional characters offer a strategy all their own.''<P>
By [http://www.edutopia.org/traci-vogel Traci Vogel]<P>
"I've picked you to accompany me on the greatest adventure of our mutual lives," the character Claudia tells her younger brother Jamie in E.L. Konigsburg's Newbery Medal-winning young-adult novel, ''From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler''. The adventure Claudia is referring to is running away from home to take up residence at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, but the invitation addresses young readers as well. Reading is an adventure, full of discoveries: new lands, new words, and new emotions.
<P>
That last subject, emotions, hasn't traditionally been addressed in language arts curricula. But in the past decade, spurred on by growing scholarly evidence of the impact social-and-emotional-learning (SEL) initiatives can have on classroom productivity and academic performance, teachers have begun to weave such lessons into their literature segments. Books like ''From the Mixed-Up Files'' provide a starting point for discussions about community building, handling anger, listening, assertiveness, cooperation, mediation, celebrating differences, and countering bias.
<P>
--[http://www.edutopia.org/social-emotional-learning-literary-characters More at the link]--}}
Moulton's use of didactic characters to enhance discussions about [http://knol.google.com/k/barry-kort/building-community/3iyoslgwsp412/20 community building], fairness, [http://ultra.musenet.org:8020/motet/resolution.html conflict resolution], and related topics in [[w:Emotional Intelligence|Emotional Intelligence]] is all part of the mix of modern educational thinking. —[[User:Moulton/Montana Mouse|Montana Mouse]] 20:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
:You're making up excuses after-the-fact, Moulton. The article describes a specific lesson plan, in which characters from a story are discussed separately from the reading. It has absolutely nothing to do with what you've been doing. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 21:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


:As with [[Surreal numbers]] the choice is between userspace and a subspace where users could be encouraged to cooperate. Unlike Surreal numbers, I am unaware of any application in physics for this topic. The ideal place would be [[Discrete mathematics/Number theory]] because the Olympiads is a high school thing. I will contact the author about both pages--[[Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 09:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
::See below. —[[User:Moulton/Montana Mouse|Montana Mouse]] 23:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
:: If the page should stay in mainspace, I see no reason why it could not stay at [[Decadic numbers]]; I don't see moving it around in mainspace as an improvement. But my position as explained above is that it is not fit for mainspace. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 10:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:::Decadic numbers and Surreal numbers have enough that they should be parallel subpages of the same page. I have suggested to the author that they should either create a top page, or find a top page and group these resources together.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 16:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)


== [[Rational numbers/Introduction]] ==
===Stage Craft: Taking Cues from Theater Class to Help Make Math and Science Fun===
The page does not do anything that Wikipedia does not do better: [[Wikipedia: Rational number]]. The page contains unfilled tables that seemed to be intended to explain something, but since they are empty, explain nothing. The page has no further reading, revealing no attempt to find best complementary sources online, probably of much higher quality. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 10:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:Now I see why you were kicked off Wiktionary. Wikiversity has a long and established tradition of allowing student efforts. This page is no worse that [[Student Projects/Major rivers in India]], a page which I randomly selected from [[Student Projects]]. I am trying to recruit students to contribute to Wikiversity. Until the Wikiversity community changes its mind about allowing student projects, I will continue with that quest. I will change the template so as to not discourage a person clearly interested in teaching mathematics, and I want you to refrain from placing rfd templates on student efforts. Use {{tl|subpagify}} instead.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 12:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:: I was blocked in the English Wiktionary for "racism" and more. In the English Wiktionary, I often defended pages nominated for deletion and rather rarely nominated anything for deletion. The English Wiktionary has almost no useless pages and is the 2nd most often visited project after Wikipedia. By contrast, the English Wikiversity has very few useful pages, a state of affairs that I am trying to turn around, step by step, following processes and guidelines that I did nothing to establish: [[WV:RFD]] and [[WV:Deletions]]. That is as far as persons go (ad hominem); as far as process, I hoped here to have a discussion with editors about whether this nearly useless page ([[Rational numbers/Introduction]]) should be moved out of the mainspace, and unless consensus developed for my position, I stand no chance to prevail. [[Rational numbers/Introduction]] is not a "student project" in any sense of "project" but rather example of all-too-typical junk. Again, I do not decide, others do with me being only a single voice/input. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 12:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:::Now you are on the right track! Wikiversity might be in a transition period between allowing all sorts of pages, to morphing into a selective institution. But the process has to change from the top-down, not from the bottom by deleting one page at a time. When I say "top", I am referring not to the administrators, but to the community at large. At present, RFD has nothing near the quorum required to implement the changes you (and others) are seeking. [[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 13:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:::: The only reasonable way going forward, to my mind anyway, is to follow [[WV:Deletions]] and not worry about the precedent of its countless violations. Since, should we take e.g. [[Relation between Electricity And Magnetism]], existing since 2011‎, as an example of a page to be kept, then we must keep nearly everything. There are too many pages like that, and therefore, if we take their aggregate as a binding precedent to follow, we end up in trouble, unable to delete junk. It seems only fair to proceed according [[WV:Deletions]], especially when using RFD process which gives potential opposition enough time to object. Such a procedure violates neither established guidelines nor processes; if it "violates" anything, then preexisting extreme lenience/tolerance toward junk, lenience that, as far as I know, was never codified into a guideline. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 13:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::No. Please don't use this page as an agenda for reforming Wikiversity. Go to the Colloquium or write an essay. Having said that, I did delete [[Creating Relation between Electricity And Magnetism]] because that follows both guidelines and established practice.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 13:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::Actually, lenience is given an advantage when pages are up for deletion (See [[Special:Permalink/2615245#Wikipedia's_deletion_policy]] for evidence that deletion requires somewhat of a super-majority.) But you are not calling for deletion of low quality pages. Instead you want them out of mainspace. We have room for compromise. But, as I said before: RFD is not the place to discuss this. If you want, I could take "Wikiversity:What-goes-where 2024" out of my user-space and we could discuss it there.[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 14:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


More from [http://www.edutopia.org/ ''Edutopia''], published by the [[w:George_Lucas_Educational_Foundation|George Lucas Educational Foundation]]...


{{cquote|[http://www.edutopia.org/math-science-emotional-impact '''Stage Craft: Taking Cues from Theater Class to Help Make Math and Science Fun''']<P>
''Why can't a classroom have the passion of drama or sports?''
<P>
By [http://www.edutopia.org/carl-engvall Carl Engvall]
<P>
I recently had a chance to read an article by Herb Childress called "[http://www.vanislehighschoolfootball.com/SEVENTEEN_REASONS.html Seventeen Reasons Why Football Is Better Than High School]." The ethnographer spent a year observing students in a high school, noting the contrast between their boredom and discontent in the classroom and their joy and success on the playing field. Quite a few of the reasons he lists resonated with me as a high school teacher and drama director.
<P>
--[http://www.edutopia.org/math-science-emotional-impact More at the link]--}}


== [[Portal:Complex Systems Digital Campus/E-Laboratory on complex computational ecosystems/Members of the ECCE e-lab]] ==
I'm not making this up, Sxeptomaniac. I've been a member of the [[w:George_Lucas_Educational_Foundation|George Lucas Educational Foundation]] since its inception. I've long worked with other GLEF pioneers like [[w:Bonnie Bracey|Bonnie Bracey]]. —[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 23:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


I noticed a recent edit in the archives and stumbled upon an unanswered question by [[user:MGA73]].--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 16:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
:So what? Does founding the organization make George Lucas an expert on education, too? If you're going to pretend authority, you should pick at least pick an example that demonstrates some level of expertise. You didn't.
: The linked page shows a list of laboratory members and their photo portraits (photos of faces). Such a thing does not seem to be particularly educational, and no big loss ensues by deletion. On the other hand, if this group of people wants to use Wikiversity to contribute research or educational material, this kind of page could be kindly tolerated. I do not really know what to do here. What is the precedent or similar previous RFD cases? --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 13:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
::There is also a copyright problem and possibly a privacy issue.--[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 14:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
::: The page was created by [[User:Collet]] = Pierre Collet, who, believing the page, is one of three representatives of the group. Presumably, if these people did not want to be so published, they would not have agreed to Pierre's creating the page? Therefore, as for ''privacy'', should we assume a problem unless some of the members depicted contacts us, or should we rather assume Pierre Collet knew what he was doing? Pierre Collet's last edit was on 5 July 2021. Many of the images were uploaded by [[User:Pallamidessi]] in 2014, per [[Special:Contributions/Pallamidessi]]. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 14:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:::: I am OK with '''keeping it as is'''.[[User:Guy vandegrift|Guy vandegrift]] ([[User talk:Guy vandegrift|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Guy vandegrift|contribs]]) 14:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
::::: Just for the record. The copyright belong to the photographer and not the person on the photo (unless photographer transferred the rights to the person). So the person have no right to allow other to use the photo. The person can ofcourse say that they do not mind that a photo of them is used somewhere. But there is a good chance that the photographer allowed the persons to use the photo. So I do not think there is a big risk using the photos. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 17:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)


== Unused files (user uploaded 1 file only) ==
:Not to mention, this article doesn't describe the kind of thing you've been doing any more than the last one. It describes a structured lesson plan, and structure is the opposite of your actions. [[User:Sxeptomaniac|Sχeptomaniac]]<sup>[[User talk:Sxeptomaniac|χαιρετε]]</sup> 05:58, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I suggest to delete the unused files in [[:Category:Unused files (user uploaded 1 file only)]]. There are 115 files but a few are also in [[:Category:NowCommons]] and could be speedy deleted for that reason.


A longer discussion about unused files in general can be seen at [[Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Thousands_of_unused_files]] and a similar discussion about unused files uploaded by Robert Elliott and Katluvdogs was closed as delete. Currently there is an open discussion for [[#Unused_files_uploaded_by_PCano]].
::I see one fundamental problem with your approach, Moulton: You're not ''the teacher'' teaching ''the students''. We are all peers discussing an important issue to the community. It may be perfectly appropriate to use "puppets" to teach in a classroom setting (or even the Wikiversity equivalent), but it strikes me as terribly condescending to use a similar tack with one's peers. [[user:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] <sup>[[User talk:Jade Knight|(d'viser)]]</sup> 07:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


These files were uploaded by users that only uploaded 1 file. So it is most likely not users that were very active on Wikiversity.
:::I agree that we are all co-equal learners here, each working at our own idiosyncratic frontiers of discovery learning. By the way, all the characters in the [http://wc5.musenet.org/webx?14@@.1ddf34e6/25 Muppet Factory] are my own peers as well. I learn as much from them as they learn from me, since we are all learning together, each of us at our respective frontiers. —[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 14:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
::::Disrespect can certainly get in the way of learning, I think we're finding. [[user:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] <sup>[[User talk:Jade Knight|(d'viser)]]</sup> 02:05, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


I made a comment at [[Wikiversity:Colloquium#Moving_free_files_to_Commons]] about moving files to Commons but I do not think these files look useful. If anyone think that one or more of the files should be kept they are welcome to move them to Commons so they can be put in relevant categories and hopefully be used for something in the future. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 14:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
deleted per discussion
[[User:sebmol|sebmol]] [[User talk:sebmol|<sup>?</sup>]] 04:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


:Many of them are not useful for any real purpose. I'll chip away at some of these. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 21:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
I've deleted them all as they serve no redeeming value other than allowing this user to keep coming back, circumvent his block, and playing his sort of contraproductive games. [[User:sebmol|sebmol]] [[User talk:sebmol|<sup>?</sup>]] 04:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
::It was actually pretty easy to go thru most of these as they are 1.) clearly not useful, 2.) unused, or 3.) already exported to Commons. A substantial majority has been deleted. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 22:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}
:::Did them all. Mostly lo-rez selfies, images of text, and diagrams or equations that related to nothing, plus a few screenplays. None of them were in use locally, a handf
::: were already on Commons and I exported some as well.l —[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 22:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


== Unused files (user uploaded 2-5 free file only) ==
== [[Tom Herrell (motivational speaker)]] ==
I suggest to delete the unused files in [[:Category:Unused files (user uploaded 2-5 free file only)]]. There are 81 files but a few are also in [[:Category:NowCommons]] and could be speedy deleted for that reason.


A longer discussion about unused files in general can be seen at [[Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Thousands_of_unused_files]] and a similar discussion about unused files uploaded by Robert Elliott, Katluvdogs and [[#Unused files (user uploaded 1 file only)]] was closed as delete. Currently there is an open discussion for [[#Unused_files_uploaded_by_PCano]].
Possible attempt at advertising, or article about an individual who is non-notable. Google searches are fairly limited for this person, and nothing comes up about this individual on any search engines, so it may be a [[WV:HOAX|hoax]] article. Thanks, AC. --[[User:Sunstar NW XP|Sunstar NW XP]] 12:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


These files were uploaded by users that only uploaded a few free files so the files are most likely not a part of a bigger set of files.
*{{agree}} as per nom. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 22:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
*{{support}}--[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 09:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
*{{support}} --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 21:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
*Delete, probable advert or hoax. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]] 18:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


I made a comment at [[Wikiversity:Colloquium#Moving_free_files_to_Commons]] about moving files to Commons but I do not think these files look useful. If anyone think that one or more of the files should be kept they are welcome to move them to Commons so they can be put in relevant categories and hopefully be used for something in the future.
== [[Danielle Lloyd (motivational speaker)]] ==


There are some pdf-files among. Commons does usually not value pdf-files unless they are scans of old books for example. So I do not think we should move those files unless there is a good reason to do so.
Possible hoax page, nothing in any search engines about Danielle Lloyd being a motivational speaker. Article is not sufficient enough for speedy deletion, so listed here. --[[User:Sunstar NW XP|Sunstar NW XP]] 12:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


One of the files is called "[[:File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf]]" so that would fit in [[:Category:WikiJournal]]. However it is also called "preprint" so I'm not sure if it is the final edition. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 14:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
*{{agree}} as per nom. -- [[User:Jtneill|Jtneill]] - <small>[[User talk:Jtneill|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jtneill|c]]</small> 22:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
*{{support}}--[[User:Gbaor|Gbaor]] 09:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
*{{support}} --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 21:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
*Delete, probable advert or hoax. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]] 18:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


: I removed [[:File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf]] from category and added to [[:Category:WikiJournal Preprints]] to keep it per comment [[Special:Diff/2624512]]. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/MGA73|contribs]]) 05:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
== [[Introduction to HTML]] ==


==[[Advanced C Programming]]==
This page had been tagged for both deletion (for the reason "This information is already merged into the main article") and merge (with [[What is HTML]]). There is a discussion at [[Talk:Introduction to HTML]] and another at [[Talk:What is HTML]]. Please comment. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 11:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
'''Delete''' or move to user space or to draft space. Nothing to learn from here. I see no subpages. The page was edited in 2024 by Anonymous Agent, but it did not result in any useable content, from what I can see. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dan Polansky|contribs]]) 09:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{support}} '''merge''' then '''deletion'''. [[user:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] <sup>[[User talk:Jade Knight|(d'viser)]]</sup> 12:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:{{Disagree}} it seems to me that we could have multiple courses on the same topic. Keep. [[User:Emesee|Emesee]] 19:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


:'''Delete''' unless {{u|Anonymous Agent}} who has recently edited it has any intentions on expanding it to something useful in the short term. If you don't, AA, would you be interested in hosting it in your userspace and working on it at your own pace until it's ready to be published in the main namespace? —[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 09:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
== [[:Category:Earth Stations]] ==
::Totally agree to delete this page. I once requested to delete this page but was rejected. Happy to delete it now ! [[User:Anonymous Agent|Anonymous Agent]] ([[User talk:Anonymous Agent|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Anonymous Agent|contribs]]) 09:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


== [[Adel shirazy]] ==
[[:Category:Earth Stations]] has a deletion request with a stated reason of "The information persented here isn't verifiable and is almost certainly false." Please comment. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 20:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
:{{oppose}}; it's a part of Game Design. I would, however, support '''moving''' them to be sub-pages of that particular project. [[user:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] <sup>[[User talk:Jade Knight|(d'viser)]]</sup> 08:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
::{{comment}} The pages in this category already are subpages of [[Earth Station]]. I think this nom is for deletion of the Category only, and not the pages in it. In any case there is no template on pages like [[Earth Station/Alpha]] at this time, so I don't see them being considered for deletion. I would suggest that if we keep the cat it should be renamed to [[:Category:Fictional Earth Stations]], or something along those lines. It is only my guess, but that seems to be what the original nom was for... --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 17:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Why not just soft-redirect it, then? [[user:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] <sup>[[User talk:Jade Knight|(d'viser)]]</sup> 02:46, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


'''Delete''' as out of scope for Wikiversity. This is part of an attempt at various WMF sites to publicise ''Adel shirazy'' who lacks notability. The creating editor, [[User:Adelsoft|Adelsoft]], shares ''Adel'' with Shirazy, so this may be self promotion. Please see [[w:en:Adel Shirazy]] and [[w:en:Draft:Adel Shirazy]]. Setting aside the deletion discussion on the former, this is the correct venue for a biography. [[User:Timtrent|Timtrent]] ([[User talk:Timtrent|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Timtrent|contribs]]) 11:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
== [[Topic:Ocean engineering and naval architecture]] ==


:{{comment}} Deleted as spam since this request. Thank you. [[User:Timtrent|Timtrent]] ([[User talk:Timtrent|discuss]] • [[Special:Contributions/Timtrent|contribs]]) 17:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
[[Topic:Ocean engineering and naval architecture]] per author request. [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Topic:Ocean_engineering_and_naval_architecture&diff=294121&oldid=294120] Please review. --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 20:19, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:14, 30 June 2024

Deletion guideline | Deletion log | Archives

Shortcuts

We welcome and appreciate civil discussion of requests to delete or undelete pages when reasonable objections are made or are likely, the advice in Wikiversity:Deletions is followed, and other options have failed. A good attitude is to explain what you have tried, ask for help or advice from fellow Wikiversity participants on what to do now, keep an open mind, accept any community consensus, and focus on how pages can be improved. Finding ways to improve pages is the preferred outcome of any discussion and consensus here. Pages should always be kept when reasonable concerns are adequately addressed. Reasons and responses should be specific and relate to Wikiversity policy or scope in some way, kept brief, and stated in a positive or neutral way. Vague reasons ("out of scope", "disruptive") may be ignored.

A clear consensus should emerge before archiving a request. Often discussion takes a week or more to reach a clear consensus. Remember to add {{dr}} to the top of pages nominated for deletion. You can put "keep", "delete", or "neutral" at the beginning of your response, but consensus is established by discussion and reasoning, not mere voting.

How to begin discussion

[edit source]
  1. Add {{Deletion request}} or {{dr}} to the image, category or resource nominated for deletion.
  2. Add a new section to the end of this page using the following format:
    == [[Page title]] ==
    reasons why this page ought to be deleted --~~~~

Deletion requests

If an article should be deleted and does not meet speedy deletion criteria, please list it here. Include the title and reason for deletion. If it meets speedy deletion criteria, just tag the resource with {{Delete|reason}} rather than opening a deletion discussion here.

If an article has been deleted, and you would like it undeleted, please list it here. Please try to give as close to the title as possible, and list your reasons for why it should be restored. The first line after the header should be: Undeletion requested

Unused files uploaded by PCano

[edit source]
Latest comment: 2 months ago21 comments5 people in discussion

I suggest to delete the 287 unused files listed in Category:Files uploaded by PCano - unused. A longer discussion about unused files in general can be seen at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Thousands_of_unused_files and a similar discussion about files uploaded by Robert Elliott was closed as delete above. Uploader have not been actice since 2011 so it is unlikely the files will ever be used. The files seems to be a part of a set of data. I do not know if the set is complete. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 19:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't know the details, but sometimes the WikiJournals process the copyright differently. Has anybody checked with them about these files? If not, I would be happy to do the deed.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Guy vandegrift I have not checked with WikiJournals. I was not thinking about copyright but if we are sure the files are correct and if they are of use to anyone? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
As I recall, files that are imbedded in pdf files are don't show up as being used. I don't know why the WikiJournal would care, the wikitext but want the pdf and raw files (wouldn't make any sense.) But the value of the Wikijournals is such that somebody needs to double check.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
If the files are really embedded in a pdf (not linked), they are part of the pdf, and even if the files get deleted, the content is still in the pdf. What are examples of pdfs produced by Wikijurnals? --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 15:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
More for the record and about the question where these files were probably used: The uploader User:PCano (Pedro Cano, M.D., M.B.A. MD Anderson Cancer Center, HLA Typing Laboratory, Houston, TX ) created Genetics/Human Leukocyte Antigen (originally under the title HLA, moved to Genetics/Human Leukocyte Antigen in April 2017), which was much later (in December 2022) deleted as per Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives/18#Subpages of Genetics/Human Leukocyte Antigen. Deleting the files used there seems to be a natural follow-up on that deletion decision. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Guy vandegrift: Unless you still worry about the WikiJournals I think you can delete the files. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 10:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I have a meeting with the WikJournal of Science tomorrow and I will bring it up.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@MGA73 and Dan Polansky: I just talked to the WikiJournal editors and they have no problem with deleting these files. Moreover, they have no problem with deleting any unused files, with one exception: They would prefer that we not delete pdf files that are marked as preprints, without first contacting them. These preprint pdf files are easily identified with the standard WikiJournal preprint headers. Apparently, they keep a record of all preprints and would need to create another depository for them if the Wikiversity community decides it doesn't want to host them. Their policy is to post the preprint pdf files only if the article is submitted for publication.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 22:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Guy vandegrift: Thank you. I added File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf to Category:WikiJournal Preprints to remove it from deletion suggestion #Unused_files_(user_uploaded_2-5_free_file_only). Perhaps some one can find the right category for it? Also It could be a good idea to make sure that all the WikJournal files are categorized somewhere in Category:WikiJournal. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 05:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Mikael Häggström, Evolution and evolvability, and OhanaUnited: Have I correctly conveyed the wishes of the WJ editors in this regard?Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 08:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sounds good to me, thanks! Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 12:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Great! And as info I can tell that I made by bot add all files that seems to be related in any way to Category:WikiJournal. For example if the word WikiJournal is used on the file page or the file is used on a page with WikiJournal in the title. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 17:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
While this File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf file is a preprint within WikiJournal, the author never moved the PDF onto an actual preprint page. Judging from this author's global contributions, it's safe to say that the author abandoned the draft 4 years ago. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@OhanaUnited: Aha so it might be safe to delete this file even if its a preprint. However, I think the best is to discuss those files case by case and in a separate discussion. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 15:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Archiving of Invalid fair use by User:Marshallsumter

[edit source]
Latest comment: 29 days ago24 comments5 people in discussion

This space is for any unfinished business from that discussion.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 07:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can be closed and archived, I guess. If anyone figures out a new task in the area of "Invalid fair use by User:Marshallsumter", they can open a new RFD nomination as and when they do so. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 13:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The problem is that the task (as mentioned in Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Pervasive copyright violations by User:Marshallsumter) is to check all the files uploaded by User:Marshallsumter and check if they meet the criteria for fair use. Sadly it is 1,151 files so I doubt anyone will spend the time on that. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I tend to support preemptively deleting all files (not pages) uploaded by User:Marshallsumter. The fact that many of the files uploaded by him were determined not to meet Wikiversity criteria for fair use should be grounds enough. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 14:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I thought we deleted all his files and userfied all his pages. Apparently I was wrong: File:Earth Shells to Scale.png // Earth/Geognosy/Quiz // Earth/Geognosy. When I deleted his images, I went to a page (category?) that someone else created. ... See also: This List. Apparently this user spend all day long uploading files and putting them into pages he/she created. ... @AP295: This is why I don't bother with a couple of nutcase articles in Physics/Essays--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 16:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
For anyone's interest, the upload list is visible at Special:ListFiles/Marshallsumter; a single-page view is at https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles&limit=1160&user=Marshallsumter. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 18:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

The abuse of the fair use doctrine by this former participant is so egregious that I fully support nuking all image uploads. --mikeu talk 04:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

And I presume all pages by same participant that contain these images?--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 08:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Any pages that have copious copyvio images should be deleted, along with the images. If there are pages without image violation they should be userfied. I doubt there are very many resources that have relevant learning content without copyvio. So, that leaves the resource pages open to deletion - which I support. --mikeu talk 01:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
[edit source]

(Moved from Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/22#User pages created as part of Computer Essentials (ICNS 141) --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC))Reply

@MGA73: While I have your attention, I am confused about two lists that I compiled from various requests on RFD:
  1. >1500 Marshallsumter files: Why we deleting Marshallsumter images?
  2. Draft:Original research/Literature & Dominant group/Literature Marshallsumter sometimes delves into the "soft" (unscientific) subjects like literature where personal taste becomes important. I see no reason to delete or even read them.
  3. 287 PCano files I believe these are being deleted because they are unused, yes?
  4. I am not very skilled at uploading files to commons that I did not create (most of my contributions need only attribution to other files on commons.) I uploaded three files from the loc, and it was a time-consuming learning experience. Is there someone else who can do it? Perhaps I could watch till I got the hang of it.
  5. After writing this I found 2497946#Exemption_Doctrine_Policy, which answers a lot of my questions.
  6. I find this page a bit cluttered, but can live with it. If you want a general archiving and cleanup-just ask.
--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Guy vandegrift: Hello!

  1. Many of the files uploaded by Marshallsumter did not meet the requirements of fair use (violating the Exemption Doctrine Policy). I think all "the easy files" are deleted now. So to clean up the rest we either need hard work or a brute descision to delete everything just to be safe.
  2. I do not think I suggested to delete those 2 pages?
  3. Yes because they are unused.
  4. If you mean move files from here to Commons it is very easy: just click the tab "Export to Wikimedia Commons". If you mean files you found on the Internet it is more tricky. You need to add the relevant information manually and more important add a source. If you found a website with hundreds or thousands of good files it may be possible to do with a bot (see c:Commons:Batch uploading).
  5. Great :-)
  6. I can live with it too.

--MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 15:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

On #1, I am happy with the brute decision if you are. It's the uploader's responsibility to document the copyright. Recently Mu301 and I "rescued" some high-quality photos on a high-quality resource. But that was an exceptional case. Regarding #4, is (or should it be) our policy to move all Wikiversity files to Commons that are not fair use? My problem with that is we sponsor some pretty low-quality stuff. For example, instructors sometimes use Wikiversity for student submissions, and we can't delete those files until the course is over (in fact, we have no policy on deleting course-affiliated student submissions.) What do we do if the main page is a high-quality course, but some of the student submissions have no educational value?--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Guy vandegrift: I have no problem if everything is deleted in #1. And I also have no problems if course-affiliated student submissions are deleted after some time (#4). But I think both should be discussed on separate topics (perhaps just move the content to #Archiving_of_Invalid_fair_use_by_User:Marshallsumter). --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I have been on Wikiversity for more than 10 years, most of the time not paying attention to such things, but I am unaware of any policy that calls for the routine deletion of student efforts that were created as part of an established course. If no decision has ever been made to routinely delete student efforts, we need to make sure the entire community is on board with any change in policy.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes I agree. Deleting student efforts that were created as part of an established course needs a new discussion and concensus.
Except if it is a copyvio then it should be deleted. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Deleting ALL non-free uploads by User:Marshallsumter

[edit source]

Okay so it seems everyone agree that files that violates Wikiversity criteria for fair use should be deleted - not a big surprise :-D

The big question is if files should be checked one by one or if they should all be deleted. I noticed that some users more or less support to delete all non-free files.

I therefore have 2 questions:

  1. Do you agree to delete all non-free files?
  2. Would you like to try to save any of the files and if yes should all the files be put on a list or in a category or how do you propose to make that possible?

Ping User:Guy vandegrift, User:Dan Polansky, User:Mu301, User:Koavf, User:Omphalographer, User:Dave Braunschweig, User:AP295 and User:MathXplore that was involved in discussions recently. Sorry if I missed anyone and if you do not want to join this time thats of course okay. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

  1. Yes
  2. No
—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Also yes to 1 and no to 2, with the understanding that this policy only applies to MS because of the large volume of images involved.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 03:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Correct and also because MS had a lot of bad files. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 05:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
  1. yes, all non-free files should be deleted, prejudiced.
  2. no, I don't believe that there is anything worth saving, in this batch from MS.
--mikeu talk 21:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Same as Justin, Guy and mikeu: delete all Marshall Sumter-uploaded non-free files/uploads. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 17:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

It seems that there is concensus to delete. I am now adding the files to Category:Files uploaded by Marshallsumter - non-free. I have created Category:Files uploaded by Marshallsumter - non-free - do not delete where anyone can add files if they think some files should be kept (permanent or temporary). I hope it will make it easier to delete the files.--MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 11:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just as info. Marshallsumter wrote to me on Commons (User_talk:MGA73#Wikiversity_fair_use_files_of_Marshallsumter) saying we should not delete. I do not see how it will change the result here. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 17:32, 7 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Facilitation

[edit source]
Latest comment: 3 months ago11 comments4 people in discussion

Trivial questions don't save what is a page with learning outcomes that are scarce (WV:Deletions]). I don't care whether this gets deleted, moved to userspace or moved to Draft:Archive. This was proposed for deletion in 2016 by Dave Braunschweig and was "saved" by adding questions that in my view are trivial and do not save the article. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 17:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Delete. I don't think the page achieves anything. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Draftify, pending vote to rescind the 6-month draftspace deletion rule (latest vote change)--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 11:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Archive, Delete, or Userspace (roughly in that order: vote cast on behalf of Dan Polansky by Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)That's accurate. I guess I prefer Archive. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 17:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Draftify (Move to Draft namespace) - I contributed to this page in good faith. Deleting this page rather than preserving it somewhere will further decrease my motivations to contribute Creative Commons content to the Commons on this wiki, with the understanding that it is OK and considered a "best practice" to delete some good faith Creative Commons contributions on this wiki. A relevant rational may also be found here. Limitless peace. Michael Ten (discuss • contribs) 04:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The "good faith" talk is, in my view, entirely beside the point. Faith is not in question in deletion discussion, merely the aptness of the material for inclusion on a project, or inclusion in a specific namespace. For example, Wikiversity is not a repository of good-faith small children's creations or their analogues, or at least its mainspace is not. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
As an aside, the word you are looking for is "rationale", not "rational". --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 10:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Dan Polansky: I do not accept your premise that "Wikiversity is not a repository of (small children's creations)". ... Also, there is a parallel discussion at Wikiversity_talk:Deletions#Proposed_modifications, and it may remove most of the need for Draft:Archive. Michael Ten has pointed out that pages in draftspace could remain permanently. Looking back into the history, I discovered that I voted for the 180 limit. I had forgotten all about that vote, but my own choice of wording jogged my memory: I voted for a 180 day limit because the decision to delete old drafts seemed like a foregone conclusion (Groupthink - who needs it!)--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Well, then, from what does it follow that Wikiversity is such a repository? Which guideline, policy or scope statement? By small children I mean, say 0-6 years olds. Should e.g. scans of all pictures drawn by such children be uploadable as "educational content"? And if not pictures, should their first writings be uploadable? Why do they need publishing; does their local harddrive storage not serve the creative purpose enough? --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 13:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I overstated my remark about children's work: For the most part, it belongs in userspace or draftspace. And, we need the parent's permission. But colleges teach courses in elementary education. I once walked into such a course and somebody was reading a children's book to the entire class. But we have no entrance requirements for Wikiversity, no minimum IQ is needed. Keep in mind that our differences are matters of personal taste (not factual reality.) The question at hand at Wikiversity_talk:Deletions#Proposed_modifications is what requirements we wish to have for a page to reside indefinitely in draftspace.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:27, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I propose that we close this discussion with decision to delete, as author voted for that option.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 08:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Decadic numbers

[edit source]
Latest comment: 3 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Arguably, this is not good enough for the mainspace; I have no objections to this being in the draft space or the userspace. Issues: 1) The page appears to be an original research but is not marked as such; 2) it introduces the term "decadic number" as an original terminological invention, as far as I can tell, but does not disclose this to be the case; 3) the term "decadic number" is unfortunate since what is meant is something like "infinite decadic number"; 4) even the term "number" is questionable since it is not clear how these so-called numbers can have anything to do with quantity (but then, complex numbers arguably also do not express quantity, or a single quantity); 5) no attempt to formally define what a decadic number is made; this so-called decadic number appears to be a mapping from positive integers to the set of digits 0-9, to be interpreted from right to left; 6) e.g. "Addition of the decadic numbers is the same as that of the integers" is clearly untrue: integers are finite discrete quantities; ditto for "Multiplication works the same way in the decadic numbers as in the integers".

Perhaps this can be salvaged rather than moved out of mainspace. The first thing to do is add external sources dealing with the concept or state that this is original invention; and then, address the issues. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 07:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

As with Surreal numbers the choice is between userspace and a subspace where users could be encouraged to cooperate. Unlike Surreal numbers, I am unaware of any application in physics for this topic. The ideal place would be Discrete mathematics/Number theory because the Olympiads is a high school thing. I will contact the author about both pages--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 09:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
If the page should stay in mainspace, I see no reason why it could not stay at Decadic numbers; I don't see moving it around in mainspace as an improvement. But my position as explained above is that it is not fit for mainspace. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 10:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Decadic numbers and Surreal numbers have enough that they should be parallel subpages of the same page. I have suggested to the author that they should either create a top page, or find a top page and group these resources together.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 16:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Rational numbers/Introduction

[edit source]
Latest comment: 3 months ago7 comments2 people in discussion

The page does not do anything that Wikipedia does not do better: Wikipedia: Rational number. The page contains unfilled tables that seemed to be intended to explain something, but since they are empty, explain nothing. The page has no further reading, revealing no attempt to find best complementary sources online, probably of much higher quality. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 10:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Now I see why you were kicked off Wiktionary. Wikiversity has a long and established tradition of allowing student efforts. This page is no worse that Student Projects/Major rivers in India, a page which I randomly selected from Student Projects. I am trying to recruit students to contribute to Wikiversity. Until the Wikiversity community changes its mind about allowing student projects, I will continue with that quest. I will change the template so as to not discourage a person clearly interested in teaching mathematics, and I want you to refrain from placing rfd templates on student efforts. Use {{subpagify}} instead.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 12:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I was blocked in the English Wiktionary for "racism" and more. In the English Wiktionary, I often defended pages nominated for deletion and rather rarely nominated anything for deletion. The English Wiktionary has almost no useless pages and is the 2nd most often visited project after Wikipedia. By contrast, the English Wikiversity has very few useful pages, a state of affairs that I am trying to turn around, step by step, following processes and guidelines that I did nothing to establish: WV:RFD and WV:Deletions. That is as far as persons go (ad hominem); as far as process, I hoped here to have a discussion with editors about whether this nearly useless page (Rational numbers/Introduction) should be moved out of the mainspace, and unless consensus developed for my position, I stand no chance to prevail. Rational numbers/Introduction is not a "student project" in any sense of "project" but rather example of all-too-typical junk. Again, I do not decide, others do with me being only a single voice/input. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 12:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Now you are on the right track! Wikiversity might be in a transition period between allowing all sorts of pages, to morphing into a selective institution. But the process has to change from the top-down, not from the bottom by deleting one page at a time. When I say "top", I am referring not to the administrators, but to the community at large. At present, RFD has nothing near the quorum required to implement the changes you (and others) are seeking. Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The only reasonable way going forward, to my mind anyway, is to follow WV:Deletions and not worry about the precedent of its countless violations. Since, should we take e.g. Relation between Electricity And Magnetism, existing since 2011‎, as an example of a page to be kept, then we must keep nearly everything. There are too many pages like that, and therefore, if we take their aggregate as a binding precedent to follow, we end up in trouble, unable to delete junk. It seems only fair to proceed according WV:Deletions, especially when using RFD process which gives potential opposition enough time to object. Such a procedure violates neither established guidelines nor processes; if it "violates" anything, then preexisting extreme lenience/tolerance toward junk, lenience that, as far as I know, was never codified into a guideline. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 13:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
No. Please don't use this page as an agenda for reforming Wikiversity. Go to the Colloquium or write an essay. Having said that, I did delete Creating Relation between Electricity And Magnetism because that follows both guidelines and established practice.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Actually, lenience is given an advantage when pages are up for deletion (See Special:Permalink/2615245#Wikipedia's_deletion_policy for evidence that deletion requires somewhat of a super-majority.) But you are not calling for deletion of low quality pages. Instead you want them out of mainspace. We have room for compromise. But, as I said before: RFD is not the place to discuss this. If you want, I could take "Wikiversity:What-goes-where 2024" out of my user-space and we could discuss it there.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply


Portal:Complex Systems Digital Campus/E-Laboratory on complex computational ecosystems/Members of the ECCE e-lab

[edit source]
Latest comment: 1 month ago6 comments3 people in discussion

I noticed a recent edit in the archives and stumbled upon an unanswered question by user:MGA73.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 16:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

The linked page shows a list of laboratory members and their photo portraits (photos of faces). Such a thing does not seem to be particularly educational, and no big loss ensues by deletion. On the other hand, if this group of people wants to use Wikiversity to contribute research or educational material, this kind of page could be kindly tolerated. I do not really know what to do here. What is the precedent or similar previous RFD cases? --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 13:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
There is also a copyright problem and possibly a privacy issue.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
The page was created by User:Collet = Pierre Collet, who, believing the page, is one of three representatives of the group. Presumably, if these people did not want to be so published, they would not have agreed to Pierre's creating the page? Therefore, as for privacy, should we assume a problem unless some of the members depicted contacts us, or should we rather assume Pierre Collet knew what he was doing? Pierre Collet's last edit was on 5 July 2021. Many of the images were uploaded by User:Pallamidessi in 2014, per Special:Contributions/Pallamidessi. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 14:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I am OK with keeping it as is.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just for the record. The copyright belong to the photographer and not the person on the photo (unless photographer transferred the rights to the person). So the person have no right to allow other to use the photo. The person can ofcourse say that they do not mind that a photo of them is used somewhere. But there is a good chance that the photographer allowed the persons to use the photo. So I do not think there is a big risk using the photos. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Unused files (user uploaded 1 file only)

[edit source]
Latest comment: 2 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I suggest to delete the unused files in Category:Unused files (user uploaded 1 file only). There are 115 files but a few are also in Category:NowCommons and could be speedy deleted for that reason.

A longer discussion about unused files in general can be seen at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Thousands_of_unused_files and a similar discussion about unused files uploaded by Robert Elliott and Katluvdogs was closed as delete. Currently there is an open discussion for #Unused_files_uploaded_by_PCano.

These files were uploaded by users that only uploaded 1 file. So it is most likely not users that were very active on Wikiversity.

I made a comment at Wikiversity:Colloquium#Moving_free_files_to_Commons about moving files to Commons but I do not think these files look useful. If anyone think that one or more of the files should be kept they are welcome to move them to Commons so they can be put in relevant categories and hopefully be used for something in the future. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Many of them are not useful for any real purpose. I'll chip away at some of these. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
It was actually pretty easy to go thru most of these as they are 1.) clearly not useful, 2.) unused, or 3.) already exported to Commons. A substantial majority has been deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Did them all. Mostly lo-rez selfies, images of text, and diagrams or equations that related to nothing, plus a few screenplays. None of them were in use locally, a handf
were already on Commons and I exported some as well.l —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Unused files (user uploaded 2-5 free file only)

[edit source]
Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I suggest to delete the unused files in Category:Unused files (user uploaded 2-5 free file only). There are 81 files but a few are also in Category:NowCommons and could be speedy deleted for that reason.

A longer discussion about unused files in general can be seen at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/20#Thousands_of_unused_files and a similar discussion about unused files uploaded by Robert Elliott, Katluvdogs and #Unused files (user uploaded 1 file only) was closed as delete. Currently there is an open discussion for #Unused_files_uploaded_by_PCano.

These files were uploaded by users that only uploaded a few free files so the files are most likely not a part of a bigger set of files.

I made a comment at Wikiversity:Colloquium#Moving_free_files_to_Commons about moving files to Commons but I do not think these files look useful. If anyone think that one or more of the files should be kept they are welcome to move them to Commons so they can be put in relevant categories and hopefully be used for something in the future.

There are some pdf-files among. Commons does usually not value pdf-files unless they are scans of old books for example. So I do not think we should move those files unless there is a good reason to do so.

One of the files is called "File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf" so that would fit in Category:WikiJournal. However it is also called "preprint" so I'm not sure if it is the final edition. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I removed File:WikiJournal Preprints COVID-19 ELIMINATION AND CELL DIFFERENTIATION - Wikiversity.pdf from category and added to Category:WikiJournal Preprints to keep it per comment Special:Diff/2624512. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 05:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Advanced C Programming

[edit source]
Latest comment: 26 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Delete or move to user space or to draft space. Nothing to learn from here. I see no subpages. The page was edited in 2024 by Anonymous Agent, but it did not result in any useable content, from what I can see. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Delete unless Anonymous Agent who has recently edited it has any intentions on expanding it to something useful in the short term. If you don't, AA, would you be interested in hosting it in your userspace and working on it at your own pace until it's ready to be published in the main namespace? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Totally agree to delete this page. I once requested to delete this page but was rejected. Happy to delete it now ! Anonymous Agent (discuss • contribs) 09:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Adel shirazy

[edit source]
Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Delete as out of scope for Wikiversity. This is part of an attempt at various WMF sites to publicise Adel shirazy who lacks notability. The creating editor, Adelsoft, shares Adel with Shirazy, so this may be self promotion. Please see w:en:Adel Shirazy and w:en:Draft:Adel Shirazy. Setting aside the deletion discussion on the former, this is the correct venue for a biography. Timtrent (discuss • contribs) 11:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Comment Deleted as spam since this request. Thank you. Timtrent (discuss • contribs) 17:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion&oldid=2634984"