Open main menu

Hello Marshallsumter, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon Button sig.png in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

You don't need to be an educator to edit. You only need to be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage. See you around Wikiversity! --Abd 04:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Most Active Wikiversity User for January 2013Edit

  The Learning Cycle Barnstar
Most Active Wikiversity User for January 2013

Marshallsumter, I was reviewing the list of active users for this past month and noticed you had by far the most edits in January. Keep up the good work! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 00:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!Edit

  The astronomy barnstar
Thank you for the massive edits on astronomy! Goldenburg111 (talk|contribs) 18:49, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your help with Research in programming Wikidata! -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (discusscontribs) 05:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

See alsoEdit

External linksEdit


I attempted to add the map to the Aegean Sea illustrations but I did not get it to work correctly.

Can you fix it when you get the time, please

RAYLEIGH22 (discusscontribs) 14:25, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

  This user has created a global account. Marshallsumter's main account is on Wikiversity (English).

Moving AverageEdit

Now I added the missing learning task for the learning resource Moving Average. Found a solution to store learning support files in a GitHub repository, that can download a bundle of all files as ZIP ( and created an index.html for selection of specific files from the repository wikiversity_files. Hope that is an appropriate way forward to add support files for the learning resource to an Open Source repository. This is easier for me to maintain because I check in newer versions of file and the URL remains the same and I could add files for Wikiversity learning resources for different languages (german and english) with a reference to the learning resource the files are made for. For me it is now OK to publish the learning resource with the added learning task. --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 07:27, 24 September 2019 (UTC)


I just uploaded a map into Wikmedia commons at

Please Check it out and make sure that it was done correctly


RAYLEIGH22 (discusscontribs) 14:06, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

WikiCommons ProblemEdit

Marshallsumter, Is the site that gives permission for

Pleistocene submerged landscapes and Palaeolithic archaeology in the tectonically active Aegean region D. SAKELLARIOU1* & N. GALANIDOU2 1Institute of Oceanography, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, 19013 Anavyssos, Greece 2Department of History and Archaeology, University of Crete, 74100 Rethymno, Greece

I would like to use several maps and possibly quotes out of this download that I placed in Wikimedia commons. I have the pdf file resident on my computer and I also placed in tin wikicommons.

The following permission is given at the site.

Anyone may use up to three items* (text extracts of 100 words or less, figures or tables) from GSL published material without permission or charge provided that a proper acknowledgement of source is used with the item.

It may also be of some use to you. It is a very interesting work that has been included in a book Geological Society of Great Britain has published. The file was deleted on wikicommons but is available from the society via download.


RAYLEIGH22 (discusscontribs) 02:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


I got an e-mail notification from WikiCommons.

They are stating that they are going to take the big bathometric map out of the first page of the Atlantis Location Hypothesis

Can you re-document this so that they are satisfied that it was obtained from the US Navy and it is Fair Use or the equivalent? They are stating that Fair Use is no longer acceptable, either.

Thanks, Let me know if there is a problem.

I also uploaded to WikiCommons a study I obtained online. They sent me a pdf file address to download. It is a published work on the Aegean Sea and how it is unstable geologically and shallow. It has diagrams of bottom depths and how the bottom is covered with various fault lines. It supports my story from Plato of how it sank at the same time as Atlantis. This is, by the way, at the switch from Plestocene to Holocene epoch.

Pleistocene submerged landscapes and Palaeolithic archaeology in the tectonically active Aegean region

D. SAKELLARIOU1* & N. GALANIDOU2 1Institute of Oceanography, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, 19013 Anavyssos, Greece 2Department of History and Archaeology, University of Crete, 74100 Rethymno, Greece

  • Corresponding author (e-mail:

I downloaded it from this site a couple of years ago and I am just getting around to using it. Perhaps you can download a copy from wikicommons and see what you think of it. Thanks in advance for your help.

RAYLEIGH22 (discusscontribs) 22:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I added the appropriate information to c:File:GMRTv3 1 20160102.jpg. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 23:34, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Aegean SeaEdit

I have found some research concerning the Aegean Sea that I would like to add.

Pleistocene submerged landscapes and Palaeolithic archaeology in the tectonically active Aegean region D. SAKELLARIOU1* & N. GALANIDOU2 1Institute of Oceanography, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, 19013 Anavyssos, Greece 2Department of History and Archaeology, University of Crete, 74100 Rethymno, Greece

  • Corresponding author (e-mail:

Downloaded from

Not sure how to go about it. There are some very interesting maps of the Aegean area, plus the research in this paper.

I have downloaded the paper and I have a copy in pdf format. I'd like to forward it to you for your inspection. Please advise

RAYLEIGH22 (discusscontribs) 14:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)


Unilaterally removing {{tl:Scope}} templates on Sciences and Fringe sciences is a serious violation of policy. The template clearly states "If the deletion is contested, then please list the page at requests for deletion for discussion instead." We have a process for contesting Scope that should be strictly adhered to. The only appropriate circumstances under which it could be removed is if replaced by {{tl:Deletion request}} along with a statement at WV:RFD contesting Scope and explaining why you think it should be kept. Involved editors of a page are especially cautioned to be careful about this type of contentious editing. I'm very concerned about your disregard for our processes. This is especially problematic for a Custodian who is expected to both act professionally and follow the same principles as every other user. Please review Wikiversity:Custodianship#How_are_custodians_expected_to_act? Being a Custodian does not excuse you from the expectations that would apply to any other contributor. Further disruptive editing will result in a block. --mikeu talk 16:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Your warning is noted. I have met and exceeded your request for "Scope", and there is no need for RFD by the resource creator. But, you also did not answer my request for you to verify your apparent understanding of the real science and physics of fringes. Am I correct that the SPIE article is you? --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 17:22, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
That paper is not mine. While I have a great deal of experience with the topic including CCD astronomy and x-ray diffraction, my background is irrelevant to wikiversity scope as Dave explained on the page talk.[1][2] Our policy mentions the concept of peer review but does not require credentials for it, as it appears you are suggesting.[3][4] Any editor may request clarification of learning objectives or scope if they question a resource. Prior publication of a paper is not a criteria for doing so and never has been. You could, however, request Wikiversity:Research guidelines#Peer review from external entities. I would be amenable to such a process and would abide by the assessment of a neutral expert in the field. An RFD remains an open option, if you wish to pursue it. Let's continue discussion of the specifics of the page at Talk:Fringe sciences to keep everything in one place. --mikeu talk 18:26, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
If you check on Talk:Fringe_sciences, we already have an additional one! Both phrases, however, refer only to the real pointless topology, not any alleged 'fringe science'. You are free to remove the {{Scope}} emplaced by Dave per consensus. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 18:37, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Re: "an additional one". An Additional what? It is way to early to judge consensus but there is clearly disagreement at the moment. If Consensus is what you are looking for you should open up a WV:RFD to get a broader range of opinions. The current state of the discussion is 4 contributors to the page talk: 1 argues within scope, 2 argue out of scope, and 1 comment of 'I suspect that the name "fringe science" for the theory of fringes is, to some extent, a joke...' The latter comment I interpret as supportive of the page name being misleading thread. Please also try to keep the discussion consolidated in one place. It is difficult to follow a discussion scattered here, there, and at the page. --mikeu talk 19:20, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Opening an RfD is a choice for one proposing deletion, not for one opposing it. A speedy tag (and the Scope tag is a speedy tag) is for action without discussion, and implemented if there is no dispute. RfD is for finding consensus though announced deliberation, to be reserved for disputes. The opinions at the Talk page are not binding, it obviously isn't a community consensus and the new page will not be on many watchlists. (I have seen RfD opened up by a custodian "to seek consensus," which then avoids having a responsible proposer. In the case I have in mind, the custodian then closed the RfD, and normally a nominator cannot close, unless consensus is obvious.) --Abd (discusscontribs) 20:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I found a discussion on {{Scope}}. It is here. It was agreed to by many, including this, "Removing the template yourself shouldn't cause a problem, but it's a good idea to link to the page from a topic or school (or two). I'd rather this template was only used on entirely non-controversial deletions of pages that really belong somewhere else (such as another wiki or the bitbucket), are not adding aything to Wikiversity, but were brobably good faith attempts at pages, and thus should not be speedy deleted. If there is anyone that still wants the page deleted, then point them at RfD. Michael Billington (talkcontribs) 06:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)" This also confirms that the person requesting deletion be pointed to RfD. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 12:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC) This is copied and presented to clarify for all concerned (1) removal of the template in the mentioned quote "shouldn't cause a problem", (2) "I'd rather this template was only used on entirely non-controversial deletions of pages that really belong somewhere else (such as another wiki or the bitbucket), are not adding aything to Wikiversity, but were brobably good faith attempts at pages, and thus should not be speedy deleted.", and (3) was approved during this Colloquium discussion by some 8 wikiversitans. They also stated assume goodfaith and if there really is a problem, fix it! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 00:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

As the above consensus approved policy indicates, the following statement is not true: "Unilaterally removing {{tl:Scope}} templates on Sciences and Fringe sciences is a serious violation of policy." --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 04:37, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Python ConceptsEdit

Hi Marshallsumter

Do you think it would benefit from being announced on our Main Page News?

Yes, please.

--ThaniosAkro (discusscontribs) 18:54, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Parkland and the American RevolutionEdit

Hi, Marshallsumter:

Since you've previously featured multiple articles of mine on "Main Page News", I thought I'd bring my latest addition to your attention: Parkland and the American Revolution leverages some of my previous contributions to Wikiversity into the on-going debate on arming school teachers. I'd be pleased to get your thoughts on this. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 02:56, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I like it! I'll probably be looking for more likely contributions about Sunday. While this one already appears well-developed and ready for learners, let me know if you consider it ready and I'll be happy to announce it, or like several others who enjoy announcing what they've found or prepared, or published like the WikiJournals, you are also free to do so. Brevity works well! We have a small space. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 04:49, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)


Oh dear! What have you been up to Marshall? Questionable language indeed! 😀 Green Giant (discusscontribs) 19:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure why these changes are triggering this filter. The current Lua program version we use does not recognize "cite web" so I've been changing "cite web" to "cite book". --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 19:10, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
I've checked the most recent change to the filter from August 2017. None of these additions are occurring! The previous changes are from 2015 which are before the recent editor change. This is coming indirectly from the new editor. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 19:22, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
There's nothing obvious in all the changes to this filter since the first change on 1 October 2013 to indicate this filter would trip over changing "cite web" to "cite book", or any change I made! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 19:34, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, it's quite bizarre because I didn't see any obvious triggers either. I wondered whether it might be matching "book" with something like "poo" but then it should have triggered earlier? Pinging @Dave Braunschweig: to impart wisdom on the matter. Green Giant (discusscontribs) 10:21, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
@Green Giant: Whirlpool triggers it. Filter 4 doesn't block the edit. It just puts it in the log to be checked later. If it's generating too many false positives, we can adjust the filter. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:06, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
@Dave Braunschweig: Cheers for the information. There are not too many false positives, so no adjustment necessary yet. That particular one just stood out because it was Marshall. Green Giant (discusscontribs) 02:36, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 00:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Font TagEdit

The font tag is obsolete. If you prefer not to have the bot to update your user page, you'll need to update it manually. If you would prefer not to perform the update, I can do it for you, but refusing to update the page isn't an option. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 00:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by! The bot changed the font tags and messed up the top parts. Still haven't determined what to change it to. Check the history! Suggestions welcome! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 01:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, the {{font}} template has advantages where it works, but apparently doesn't work inside user boxes. Now corrected using spans. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 01:45, 3 June 2018 (UTC)


Got your email. Thanks.

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. Michael Ten (discusscontribs) 21:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

What is the current consensus for the organisational nomenclature of Wikiversity?Edit

So I've been browsing Wikiversity:Namespaces and I can't figure what the current consensus is for academic resources on Wikiversity. Is this outline an accurate representation of the current consensus?

Thanks --Luke Isham (discusscontribs) 12:25, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Wikiversity:Policies lists within its contents the few consensus approved policies there likely are. Unlike Wiktionary which specifically references the discussions that confirmed a consensus, Wikiversity has some such discussions but many are not specifically referenced. For example, an Exemption Doctrine Policy is required by WMF but finding such a specific discussion or sequence of discussions where consensus was reached has been illusive so we have guidance discussions and Wikiversity:Uploading files#Exemption Doctrine Policy is yet the result of another guidance discussion. Another is Consensus (accidentally tagged as official; now proposed). All of the Help series are guidelines, none ever received a consensus. So in answer to the question: "Is this outline an accurate representation of the current consensus?" No - some prefer resources, others courses with lectures, quizzes, laboratories, and/or lessons. Original research and/or synthesis are allowed! We are the principal education, teaching and research project of the WMF! Free free to ask questions! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 20:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the response Marshallsumter. From looking around it seems Portals are the most popular way of organising Wikiversity is Portals, Learning Projects and then everything else. Categories, templates and userboxes seem to be the way everything is tied to together.--Luke Isham (discusscontribs) 22:11, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Help with Kansas City Nonprofit News?Edit

I've just created a Wikiversity article on "Kansas City Nonprofit News", as an initial step in an action research project to create a regular news department for a listener-sponsored radio station, KKFI.

  • Is it reasonable to host this on Wikiversity? Or do I need to bring it up completely outside the Wikimedia system?
  • If it's reasonable to use Wikiversity for this, I could use your help in organizing this to make future edits and additions as easy and as compatible with the Wikiversity system as possible -- maximizing its utility to others who might like to copy this if it is as successful as I hope.
Countering the Balkanization of the Body Politic

I gave a "lightning talk" on this July 18 at Wikimania 2018 in Cape Town. Someone there suggested I submit a proposal to expand on this at WikiConference North America, October 18-21 in Columbus, OH. Their deadline for proposals is this coming Wednesday, August 15. I will meet that deadline, but it would be easier if I can refer my Kansas City collaborators to the Wikiversity article on Kansas City Nonprofit News rather than, e.g., a Google doc or something on [] (a domain name I own but have not yet activated).

(I initially thought that Wikinews might be a better home for this, and I initiated a discussion about this there five days ago. A few hours ago I posted a version of Kansas City Nonprofit News there. It was immediately deleted by User:Pi zero, who was responsible for over half the edits in a study I did a few months ago of all their then-current stories.)

Thanks for your support for my efforts in the past. DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 03:36, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Your proposal reads like a great laboratory for teaching and practicing Journalism in a real-time setting: listener-sponsored radio station KKFI! Just what Wikiversity needs! We have the WikiJournals! And, we need radio station KKFI! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 04:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
FYI - User:Pi zero deleted "Kansas City Nonprofit News" because it directly competes with WikiNews! Which is why Wikiversity can host it as a real-time, journalism training and performing classroom! It would be beautiful! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 04:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I've added an announcement to Main Page News! What do you think? --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 04:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Magnificent! Thanks for your support. I'm working on a proposal for a workshop on Everyone's favorite news site, including KKFI Nonprofit News at WikiConference North America, October 18-21, in Columbus, OH. The deadline for proposals is Wednesday. No time to waste.
Will I see you in Columbus? DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 23:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Featuring my research projectEdit

Hi Marshallsumter,

You proposed to feature Automatic transformation of XML namespaces on the main page in the past. Then it was too early.

We probably may feature it now.

However, there should be this note:

This is a research project. It is not finished and its description is a draft. It is featured not to be studied, but to gain your help with the research. Note that there is some alpha-quality (but probably already useful) software implementing some of this specification.

--VictorPorton (discusscontribs) 18:35, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Lightning NetworkEdit

Hello, you asked me what Lightning Network is.

What is Lightning Network? It is a potential scaling solution (allowing for more transactions per second) for Bitcoin. It may or may not work. Bitcoin Cash (a fork and/or upgrade of Bitcoin) attempts to scale by increasing block size. It is controversial. Once one or more cryptocurrencies can scale to handle as many transactions per seconds as the card/finance company Visa, then one or more cryptocurrencies have the potential to be a single world-wide currency effectively. is arguably heavily censored. is not censored much as far as I understand.

You can ask the same question you asked me on both those sub-Reddits if you want. You will probably get quite different answers.

Lightning Network is not gambling, although there are locations online that you can gamble with cryptocurrencies. I think Lightning Network can be a legitimate educational resource. Bitcoin has the potential to have significant economic implications, this is worth learning, researching, and teaching about, IMO.

Cheers. Michael Ten (discusscontribs) 20:22, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Fake news in CanadaEdit

Please join the discussion at Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#Fake_news_in_Canada --Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 18:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

crowdsourcing research with Wikimedia and Jupyter notebooks?Edit

What are your thoughts about the possibilities for crowdsourcing research on Wikimedia projects like Wikipedia, Wikiversity, Wikidata, and maybe also Wikimedia Commons and Wikinews?

I just wrote to Erica Chenoweth, Wikidata Q5387865, asking about the circumstances under which she might support such an effort, presumably to extend her NAVCO Data Project, and I'm thinking of doing something like that to extend the 2008 RAND report on "How terrorist groups end".

Also, what are your thoughts about somehow integrating Jupyter notebooks with Wikiversity somehow? Paul Romer, who just won the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, raved about Juypter notebooks, in a response to an Atlantic article claiming that Jupyter notebooks could replace publication in scientific research journals, because they make it so easy to check the results and test alternative models and methods of analysis.

I'm scheduled to attend WikiConference North America next week, and I hope to find people there interested in these questions.

DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 15:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

regular radio & TV on "Kansas City Political Roundtable"?Edit

@Marshallsumter: What do you think about creating a series crudely like Communication’s Challenge to Democracy that present primarily videos of roundtable discussions with transcripts, where the transcripts may begin as mediocre-to-terrible computer transcript produced by speech recognition software, with a standard disclaimer regarding quality and an invitation for all to improve that discussion with the following rules:

  • Relevant material can be added in "Comments" after the transcript, subject to the standard Wikimedia rules of writing from a neutral point of view citing credible sources and treating others with respect.
  • Changes to the transcript must either (a) make the transcript conform more to what was said in the video, or (b) add a note, or (c) link to something relevant, possibly with a parenthetical comment, "See also" a section in the "Comments".

The title to this suggestion is 'regular radio & TV on "Kansas City Political Roundtable"?', because I'd like to create such in conjunction with KKFI radio in Kansas City, an affiliate of the Pacifica network of listener sponsored community radio stations, and I'm thinking of officially proposing that KKFI invite the public to suggest topics and guests and inviting community organizations to co-host such events with us.

These roundtables could be much more useful if videos and maybe podcasts were made available someplace with transcripts. However, good transcripts currently exceed our budget. Something like Wikiversity can help solve that problem by starting with a mediocre-to-terrible transcript and inviting interested persons to improve it. And it could be made vastly more powerful by inviting people to add "Comments" at the end.

I'm also thinking of suggesting this to WikiTribune: This could be the "Killer app" that transforms WikiTribune from a struggling concept that may not yet have a critical mass into a news platform with millions of local editions.

That could further be facilitated with software that makes it easy for individuals and groups to suggest topics, guests, organizers, and venues and then converge on actually making such happen, identifying people to actually produce the video and / or audio recordings and ensure that they are made available for post-production processing. The post-production processing could be facilitated with a special web portal that would do something like the following:

  1. Convert standard commercial formats like MP4 to an open format like WebM.
  2. Process with some voice recognition software to produce a transcript.
  3. Post to a platform like Wikiversity or WikiTribune with standard disclaimers and invitations to improve the discussion.

What do you think? DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 16:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

This would be different from other similar programs in the following ways:
  • The use of a web portal for scheduling based on human input with people and organizations requesting coverage of issues and political races by public figures and researchers, and
  • Posting (draft) transcripts inviting people to improve the transcripts and add comments subject to the Wikimedia rules of writing from a neutral point of view citing credible sources and treating others with respect.
  • If this is a recurring series (monthly, weekly, daily?), each program could begin with a 3-7 minute set up announcing the current session with a summary of updates to the commentary on previous episodes.
  • Rather than just allowing different panelists to talk, they would be asked to specify what kinds of research they find relevant and what future research might resolve differences of opinion between panelists.
Similar to other panel discussions, the program might be structured as follows:
  • Following the set-up, each panelist would be being given, e.g. 1 minute for an opening statement
  • The program would end with each panelist getting 1 minute for a closing statement.
  • Responses to questions could similarly be limited in time and asked in cycles.
A structure like this would make it easier to produce a balanced presentation inside a specific time frame: If an event is being broadcasted live, this kind of structure could make it easier to give all panelists equal time within a rigid schedule. If the event is recorded for subsequent broadcast, this structure would make it easier for someone to edit, e.g, a 97 minute program to fit in a 27 or 56 minute slot, with the full event still posted online with a transcript.
Comments? DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 05:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
My thoughts while reading through the above are that it'll take a lot of initial work to get it up and running. I suggest passing the idea past WikiTribune to see if they'll help set it up. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 14:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes: I will try WikiTribune.
However, I think we could prototype the idea with zero budget: Start by inviting suggestions for topics, guests, collaborating organizations, etc. posted to a web page where anyone can view comment but only the show organizers can actually edit.
As long as you would support posting something like that to Wikiversity -- with appropriate disclaimers and invitations to improve the transcript and add comments, as mentioned above we could create a live demo here that contains the essential features.
If Jimmy Wales likes the idea, we can get smart management of software development and deployment much quicker than we could via the Wikimedia bureaucracy.
In the meantime, I can focus on producing a viable prototype in conjunction with KKFI radio and community organizations in their service area.
Thanks for your support, DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 15:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe hosting it here is a great idea! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 01:12, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Basic income cryptocurrencyEdit

Hello. I just saw your message on my talk page. If you feel that Basic income cryptocurrency is worth putting on the front page as an announcement (or whatever the term is), then please go ahead and do so. Thank you. Cheers and Limitless Peace! Michael Ten (discusscontribs) 01:04, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Inviting collaboration and documenting data analysis procedures in Wikiversity?Edit

@Marshallsumter: What can you tell me about procedures for creating something like a Jupyter notebook in Wikiversity and generating a wide ranging discussion and possible collaboration on the topic?

I'm planning to develop a companion to my "Nuclear weapons and effective defense" to estimate the probability distribution of the time to the extinction of civilization. I've estimated that within the lifetimes of half the people alive today, there's a 25 percent chance of a nuclear war that will kill 98 percent of humanity.

My ideal choice of tools for this would be a Wikiversity article that was simultaneously an RStudio RMarkdown document. I don't think that's currently possible. If it is, I'd like to know.

If I cannot do this all in Wikiversity, then I plan to create Wikiversity article that explains the methodology and results while including links to the following:

  • Google Sheet(s) containing alternative data sets with different models and instructions for how anyone can do something similar with different assumptions.
  • An RStudio RMarkdown document analyzing these data, estimating parameters with their uncertainties.

My plans for this article include the following:

  • Present the results at the Joint Statistical Meetings in Denver, July 27-August 1, 2019. The deadline to apply to speak there is February 4, 2019. I've attended and presented at maybe a third of these meetings over the past 35 years. I would expect that this presentation would raise the profile of both this particular issue and of the use of Wikiversity for collaborative work of this nature.
  • The Union of Concerned Scientists has an "International Summer Symposium on Science and World Affairs". I plan to apply there in the hopes of getting a wider group of people involved in refining this methodology and disseminating the results.
  • Inviting experts in different disciplines to contribute. This includes the following:
  1. Experts in working with subjective estimates of probability
  2. Experts like Ellsberg to help estimate the probabilities that different nuclear close calls might actually trigger a nuclear war that would lead to the end of civilization, as Ellsberg has described.
  3. Experts on nuclear winter to describe in some modest detail the latest research on nuclear winter, the uncertainties involved, what human life would likely be like as 98 percent of the survivors starved to death, and the prospects for rebuilding civilization after the war.
  4. Experts on demography, so one can simulate this cataclysm.

Do you know of any other projects that have tried to use Wikiversity in any similar way? Also, what can you tell me about trying to use Wikidata with Wikiversity for something like this? And do you have other reactions to this proposal? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (discusscontribs) 17:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

While this appears somewhat similar, it Dedicated Programming Compiler may be close. The idea was to have access to dedicated compilers so that students could learn programming by actually composing programs and submitting them from files here on Wikiversity while the results would be downloaded to their user subpages for analysis. What I found out by proposing this is that toolabs provides access to such compilers such as a project like Jupyter notebook would need. But, getting access was formidable. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 00:24, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Landing Page RedirectsEdit

Your recent and ongoing creation of nearly 40 main page redirects to lectures is a deliberate violation of community consensus. They must be converted to legitimate landing pages, or they will be deleted per RFD. Lectures are not landing page resources. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 01:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

I read your Minerals and Cosmogony‎ landing pages and like them including your link to the Keynote lectures, which are more educational than landing pages per se. Now that we agree with having these pages exist, I can convert the other redirects to landing pages. Those previous broken links only made it harder for students to find resources and knowledge. There are some redirects like Airborne astronomy that may be better left as redirects as students are likely to get irritated having to keep clicking to find knowledge. Just FYI, there was no consensus as you know for deletions. I have also been testing landing-page effectiveness and many students in the sciences visit the lectures more often than landing pages. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 02:51, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

You are no longer permitted to create pages that analyse the behaviour of other contributors on this site per Wikiversity:Research_guidelines "A project that breaks or tests conventional ethical guidelines is not permitted." --mikeu talk 17:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikiversity newsEdit

I see that you often update the news section of Wikiversity's homepage. Is anyone permitted to update that section, or only are you supposed to do it? I was wondering because I've been working on a course lately, and I'd like to post it there when the course is more complete. SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 23:07, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Anyone is free to announce finished resources or ones well-developed and looking for more developers or participants. Give it a go! We have a few formatting customs but that's about it. You can also add resources to one of the completed categories and I'll compose something. Have fun! --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 23:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Okay. The Geography course isn't done yet, though (in particular the worksheet section). Also, is there a page that lists the formatting customs, that I could see? Thanks! SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 19:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Click on Main Page in the left menu then on News on the Main Page. It'll take you to the editable page which shows a few formatting customs when you click on edit. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 19:29, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
You mean the text that says, "Delete items after ~30 days to keep this list fresh. If/when Wikiversity becomes more active, then try to keep the list ~20 items"? SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 00:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
That's not a formatting custom that's a length suggestion. I've left a few into February because activity on possible entries is low at the moment. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 00:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
OK, sorry about that. As you may notice, though, the above comment suggests that I didn't find the formatting custom. Is it on the same page as the length suggestion? SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 21:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
All I'm referring to are things like this entry: * 16 March: Motion - Kinematics is ready for learners!, for Motion - Kinematics latest modification (looks ready for learners) on 16 March 2019, for example. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 21:38, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh, I see. SelfieCity (discusscontribs) 14:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Python Concepts/Using Python's Decimal moduleEdit

re: Python Concepts/Using Python's Decimal module

Hi ThaniosAkro!

Your lesson Python Concepts/Using Python's Decimal module appears to be well-developed and ready for learners! Would you like to have it announced on our Main Page News?

Yes, Please. ThaniosAkro (discusscontribs) 23:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)


Would you please block this user ASAP without talk page access while we wait for a global lock? Praxidicae (discusscontribs) 16:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

 Y Done --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 17:01, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
It's a global lta, you might want to change it to indef. :) Praxidicae (discusscontribs) 17:02, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Marshallsumter".