Talk:Sources/First astronomical X-ray source

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://astronomy.sci.ege.edu.tr/~rpekunlu/GBDG/papers/XRayfromStellarCoronae.pdf
  • In First astronomical X-ray source on 2012-07-22 07:38:29, 404 Not Found
  • In First astronomical X-ray source on 2012-07-29 07:38:27, 404 Not Found
  • In First astronomical X-ray source on 2012-08-05 07:38:32, 404 Not Found

--Mu301Bot (talk) 07:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Dead link deleted. --Marshallsumter (talk) 23:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Lecture Status

@Marshallsumter: Per Help:Lecture and January's RFD discussions, lectures are not primary main page resources. If you want to move this to main space, find an appropriate main page learning project to move it under. Astronomy might be a good choice. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:29, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig:

1. Help:Lecture is in the Category:Consensus requested because it never received consensus. It is not policy nor a hard and fast rule. Also, in the template Things you can make on Wikiversity, which has received consensus: "Components / stand-alone resources: Lessons - Articles - Lesson plans - Discussions - Events - Essays - Glossaries - Lectures - Papers - Quizzes - Blogs - Media", which I bolded. Lectures are allowed as primary main page resources!
2. Regarding January's RFD discussions. Our policy on consensus is at Wikiversity:Consensus, which states right at the top: "This page documents a Wikiversity guideline [my bolding] that participants recommend you follow with occasional exceptions and common sense. Please propose and discuss before making significant changes to ensure your revisions reflect consensus." Further, "Consensus is not evaluated by any one person - evaluating consensus is also a discursive (and contestable) process - meaning that someone can propose consensus has been achieved, and someone else can disagree, meaning that the discussion continues. In certain circumstances, a particular person is given the responsibility for evaluating consensus - for example, the conferring of custodianship status, which is given to a bureaucrat. However, this decision, as with anything in Wikiversity, is up for discussion and/or debate." You closed that discussion in January. On "Wikiversity talk:Requests for Deletion", section "Draft ns discussion", user JuanDev added his opinion which is not in favor of using the Draft: ns and an earlier voter changed to voluntary moving lectures to Draft: ns. This changed the earlier totals from 7 to 3 to 6 to 5, which is not a consensus! Later, another user (Michael Ten) challenged on the Colloquium the January ruling you made bringing the numbers at 6 to 6, which follows our consensus guideline and is not a consensus for mandatory draft namespace for anything except voluntary use as on Wikipedia.
3. Your comment: "find an appropriate main page learning project to move it under". For use of subpages see: Wikiversity:Subpages "You can help develop this proposal, share your thoughts, or discuss its adoption as a Wikiversity policy, guideline, or process. References or links should describe this page as a "proposal"." Subpages are not mandatory. Mu301 moved Stars/Galaxies/Evolution to Galactic evolution per that guideline.
4. Your suggestion: "Astronomy might be a good choice." is less applicable. These "First" resources are "History of science resources". This specific resource is a keynote lecture.
5. I don't know why you are persisting in making guidelines and proposals into hard and fast rules but they are not. As Michael Ten wrote on my talk page "I think some serious changes need to be made to this wiki if it is ever going to experience exponential growth so that it might actually serve as a beacon of research, teaching, and learning on this Internet. Oh well." You have performed a major amount of beneficial clean up here for which we are all grateful. If I have offended in some way, I apologize. But, you need to follow our policies, as the guidelines or proposals they are, not as hard and fast rules. In the last month alone Wikiversity has lost many new volunteers. Here's one comment: "I wouldn't mind restarting my endeavor on Wikiversity, provided I won't be hassled by people like that professor who is far more interested showing his authority than he is in Wikiversity." What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Marshallsumter: Lectures are not primary main page resources. This is by consensus. If you don't understand the community's reasoning, please review the January RFD discussions and ask questions as needed. Then find appropriate learning projects to support these lectures. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:02, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

The archive of the discussion is here. There is a consensus to do something with no opposition. For example, let the lectures continue to be developed. Then there is a draft namespace discussion with opinions backing votes. Where are you finding any consensus for "Lectures are not primary main page resources"? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 02:53, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Keeping lectures as main space pages was opposed by consensus. I appreciate your desire to resist, rehash, relabel, misdirect, and attack the messenger, but this was closed six months ago. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 12:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I'm not discussing "to resist, rehash, relabel, misdirect, and attack the messenger". --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 22:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)