Wikiversity:Colloquium

Marburger-Religionsgespräch.jpg
Please do not include wiki markup or links in section titles.
Sign your posts with   ~~~~
Welcome

Do you have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That is what this page is for! Before asking a question, you can find some general information at:

Shortcut:
WV:C

var wgArticlePath = "/wiki/$1"; var wgServer = "http://en.wikiversity.org"; var wgPageName = "Wikiversity:Colloquium"; var wgTitle = "Wikiversity Colloquium"; var wgContentLanguage = "en"; var x-feed-reverse = "true"; var x-blog-description = "You have questions, comments or suggestions about Wikiversity? That's what this page is for!";

"Knowledge grows when shared." — Bhartrihari (discuss)


step by stepEdit

hello there, I'm a new member here, could you tell me step by step for a beginner like me?

--PutriAmalia1991 (discusscontribs) 04:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@PutriAmalia1991: See the welcome message on your talk page. I'm encountering the same message from you at many WMF projects and I'm wondering if there's a reason you're posting it everywhere. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:52, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
@Koavf: everytime I've joined one Wikimedia projects, I've always searching for help desks and posting the question because I wanna know the mechanism on the project --PutriAmalia1991 (discusscontribs) 06:20, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
@PutriAmalia1991: Sounds fair. Each is certainly different in its own way. I've been on all of them since 2003 or later if they were founded later and they've all gone in different directions and have different cultures and that's just in English. The nice thing about this project is that it's still very small and doesn't have much in the way of fixed rules, so you have a lot of options but that can also be a bad thing if you need structure to give you guidance. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
@Koavf: what do you mean by 'can also be a bad thing'?, I don't understand --PutriAmalia1991 (discusscontribs) 06:42, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
@PutriAmalia1991: When there isn't a lot of content or structure and only a small community of editors, it is hard to know what to do (as you yourself are asking): it can also be giving one enough rope to hang oneself. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
@Koavf: I've guess I'll starting to get it now, thanks --PutriAmalia1991 (discusscontribs) 06:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
@PutriAmalia1991: Again, happy to have you. I'm one of the very few editors who works across most WMF projects in English, so I can give my insite if it's ever helpful. If you want to dig into some simple minutiae, you can always go to Special:SpecialPages and work on the maintenance issues. —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:00, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Preprint repository hosting invite?Edit

The Center for Open Science has started charging hosting fees to preprint repositories, many of them English-language; some are unable to pay and are looking for new hosting.[1] We could invite them to move here; Wikiversity already hosts preprints. How do people feel about this? It would mean an initial burden in terms of helping new users, and of course the WMF would have to pay the hosting costs, but it could win us new users long-term. It might also help reduce cost barriers and systemic bias in academia. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 02:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

It would seem to be within the Wikiversity:Mission for English-language resources, depending on original content license. They could look to the other Wikiversities for non-English content. The biggest burden will be the limitation on new users uploading files. Someone associated with this effort will need to take the lead in either coordinating the uploads or explaining to the new users the delays involved before they have upload rights. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:29, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the heads-up; I am not familiar with this limitation. I can't seem to find anything at Wikiversity:Uploading files or Wikiversity:User access levels that would prevent new registered users from uploading files; could you possibly link to the relevant policy, Dave Braunschweig? If the content is under a suitable open-access license, most of the images should be too, so they could be uploaded to Commons, which allows uploads by new users. Images that Wikiversity allows but Commons forbids (see here) should be fairly rare; if someone from each of the repositories has upload rights, they could take responsibility for doing it for the preprints they are accepting. Most of these repositories seem to be run by volunteers, who help the academics who write the pre-prints publish them. I'm willing to help the repository volunteers figure out wiki editing, though depending on the uptake I might need help. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 20:10, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
I don't know that there is a written "policy". It's the default software settings. See Special:ListGroupRights. I think the default settings are appropriate. If users want to upload files here, they need to spend a little time and become familiar with the Wikiversity community. Think about what you would want them to read, what edits you would want them to make (such as creating their user page), editing some page that describes and links to what they upload, etc. They also need to understand how to properly indicate the license for their files, or the files will be deleted after seven days. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:30, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
The triggering of filters to prevent uploads by new users would be likely biggest barrier to uptake (considering many preprint servers handle hundreds of new uploads per week). With the rise of Wikidata and structured data on commons it'd probably possible to make the process of uploading the files and curating metadata sufficiently streamlined with a bit of effot (possibly using some of the same tools as the Wiki Loves X competitions). It's be a big task through to get the system as frictionless as current competitors then do the necessary outreach at scale (indeed, some of the same challenges that the WikiJournals are working with). It could be possible to reconfigure WikiJournal Preprints as a more generalised preprint repository (i.e. for items stored as PDFs as well as in wikimarkup). It's actually been a huge lost opportunity that Wikimedia hasn't been a key player in hosting green OA postprints and published PhD theses. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 07:25, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
I can see that a four-day delay on new users uploading some types of content could be problematic, if not insuperably problematic, in this application. Thanks for the link; Wikiversity:Autoconfirmed users is also helpful. It seems like these repositories are facing a big task anyway; they are looking at moving to new servers, changing their operating structures, or in some cases shutting down. Can you estimate the proportion of the work needed could be done by repository volunteers with little Mediawiki experience, T.Shafee? This also seems like something the WMF might be willing to put resources into, or at least a press release. I'm going to ping Trizek (WMF) here, as he may have useful comments. Agreed on missed opportunities. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 01:57, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
It depends on how rigid or flexible we want the structure to be and if files would be kept on commons or here. One of the things that all the current repositories do is force uploaders to include a certain minimal set of metadata. For example, for green OA postprints, you'd need at least the following:
  • date of publication for published version
  • doi link to published version
  • author names
  • choose from a controlled set of ~100 categories (e.g. FoR codes)
  • some tickbox to confirm that you've checked the journal's embargo policy on sherpa/romeo
Here's an example in figshare). Open theses would be similar, as would posters and presentations. For open data (supplementary datasets attached to publications or independent datasets unattached to any publication) our limited acceptable file types would be a more noticeable restriction. Indeed, things that standard repos enable but mediawiki system can yet do:
  • automatic embargoing (i.e. item only becomes visible and licensed after a set time delay) but I'd guess that a day's google hackathon could put something together
  • any file format accepted, especially for datasets (this would be an insurmountable issue and major drawback on any WMF server, where we can only host open formats)
  • mint DOIs automatically and at scale (one of the key benefits of figshare, osf etc) but that would not be impossible to get working with some APIs
Structured data on commons integration with wikidata, would be a key' 'unique selling point'. However, if files were on Commons, there could be a risk of over-zealous editors removing items if they didn't believe that the authors had copyright. I'd estimate that to make a service with 95% of OSF or figshare or Dspace functionality would only cost a few months of developer's time. Conceivably some wikiwand type visual interface could actually address many of the visual deficits of wiki displays. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 10:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Deletion from Commons is a real possibility but we can have local uploads if/when that happens. —Justin (koavf)TCM 12:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
If there anything in Wikiwand which is missing from the new Timeless skin? I'm not sure accepting any file format would be a good idea; a smaller range to which we can be sure we will retain access might be better. Some conversion tools, or perhaps at first just a guide to converting your files offline, might be an acceptable substitute; there are lots of god open-source converters for a lot of formats. Mediawiki will do us a custom upload form, complete with mandatory fields, without much work. If the WMF can't already issue DOIs, we might be able to find some organization which will issue them for us. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 03:42, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Additional note: with regards to contacting repositories, it'll be necessary to have afew screenshots and an example workflow so that they can see the process. Ideally also curate a small set of items as an exemplar. Probably figshare is the main benchmark to think about in terms of process and versatility. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 06:40, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Such a series of screenshots would be useful for a how-to, too. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 03:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Yes, please! If I can be in any way associated with promulgating open access, I'd be honored. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:39, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Consensus?Edit

This discussion has run for over a week. Am I right in saying:
  1. No-one objects to inviting repositories to en-Wikiversity
  2. It is possible to host repositories here (and, indeed, it is already being done).
    1. There are some problems (some big, some small, most technical, some policy-based) to be dealt with in the process of moving a repository here
    2. There are some established volunteers willing to help the volunteers and/or staff of any repository moving to Wikiversity
    3. We wouldn't object to the Wikimedia Foundation putting resources into it, either
  3. We would like to extend an invitation to repositories looking for a new home.
If this is a reasonable summary of consensus, would anyone object to my relaying it, and asking the Foundation to extend Wikiversity's invitation to the repositories? HLHJ (discusscontribs) 00:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I say gopher it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 06:37, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Done; no response yet. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 03:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Still none. Any suggestions on next steps? HLHJ (discusscontribs) 03:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
@HLHJ: A classic move when someone isn't responding is to cc: that person's boss on a message. With whom exactly were you trying to communicate? —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:04, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Koavf, I tried the most relevant-looking person in the Communications Department, the WMF press-contact e-mail, and Trizek, who's been helpful on this in the past. HLHJ (discusscontribs) 02:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
@HLHJ: Oooooooooh, I thought you meant external parties weren't responding, in which case, any kind of scheme to get their preprints here would be impossible. My bad. Why are you contacting them? Just so we can get some buy-in from the WMF and we can get more resources to help us? If the papers are freely licensed, we can do this thing now. It seems kind of time-sensitive. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:36, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikiversity, or MediaWiki in general, is not a suitable place for preprint hosting. We don't even have OAI-PMH! It's a no brainer, don't use it. Use a proper open repository software like DSpace: there are several hosting services which cost one or two orders of magnitude less than what COS is proposing, see https://duraspace.org/dspace/resources/service-providers/ . You can also open a community on Zenodo, which is free and also gratis if you don't have so much content https://help.zenodo.org/features/ . Nemo bis (discusscontribs) 08:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a rude answer. Whether or not we have Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, why negotiate against ourselves? If they are willing to use us as their repository, then let them. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
There's nothing rude in pointing out what is or isn't adequately supported in our software. MediaWiki is objectively not a replacement for DSpace and friends. As for "negotating against ourselves", it's self-defeating to try to lure people into using inadequate software. Were researchers to use inadequate software to host their preprints or other green OA copies, we would only have succeeded in making open access less strong, in making it harder for Wikimedia projects to have access to sources. Let's instead continue on the proven successful path of using a real open access repository to increase green open access sources. Nemo bis (discusscontribs) 13:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
"No, just no" is rude: I don't know what to tell you. If you have a counter-proposal, that's fine but there's no reason to be so dismissive. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
(Wikiversity/Wikibook/WikiJournal) If it is a scientific-paper-like publication,
* the WikiJournal of Science could be a place to publish preprints on Wikiversity.
* If the scope of the preprints is Medicine and Health the WikiJournal of Medicine within Wikiversity would also be an option
* if the preprint is of larger size the preprint could be publish as a WikiBook
In any case it makes sense to convert the publication from the source format into Wiki Markdown. See w:en:Help:WordToWiki#Pandoc Word2MediaWiki Info or export the Word document in HTML and use the Online-PanDoc-Converter to convert the HTML-export of the Word-document into a MediaWiki markdown format, that can be used in the source editor of Wikiversity or for the chapters in a Wiki-Book.
(mathematical expressions) If the preprints contain many mathematical expressions then the source format of the document is often LaTeX. Even then if the preprint can be converted with the Online-PanDoc-Converter from the source format LaTeX in the MediaWiki syntax.
FINALLY: the power of Wiki community comes from a collaborative spirit to makes things work within the legal given framework. Maybe the licencing of the content of the preprints is important to communicate to the authors, because with the publication the content is irrevocably released under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL and others author that create derivated work should refer to the publication in a scientific way to the preprint contributions. Permanent links in Wikiversity, Wikipedia in general allow to create a reference to a specific version of the document. Take care, Bert --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 07:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Hacker News thread on distance BA/BA/MA/MS programsEdit

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22404989Justin (koavf)TCM 17:03, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Additional interface for edit conflicts on talk pagesEdit

Sorry, for writing this text in English. If you could help to translate it, it would be appreciated.

You might know the new interface for edit conflicts (currently a beta feature). Now, Wikimedia Germany is designing an additional interface to solve edit conflicts on talk pages. This interface is shown to you when you write on a discussion page and another person writes a discussion post in the same line and saves it before you do. With this additional editing conflict interface you can adjust the order of the comments and edit your comment. We are inviting everyone to have a look at the planned feature. Let us know what you think on our central feedback page! -- For the Technical Wishes Team: Max Klemm (WMDE) 14:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Figure upload difficultyEdit

I tried to upload figures for the review article I wrote for Wikiversity on Non-canonical Base Pairs, as suggested by Thomas Shafee. I could successfully upload few figures but for most of the figures when I tried to save it, the page says indicates there is already a figure on that name, which is of some other subject. As a result I am not able to complete my project for quite some time now.

Thanks,

Dhananjay Bhattacharyya

--Bhattasinp (discusscontribs) 09:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

@Bhattasinp: There's no record of you uploading files to Wikiversity, so I'm not sure what files you've tried to upload. The figures that have been uploaded to support the WikiJournal article you created were all uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. You would need to follow up with Wikimedia Commons regarding any error messages received there. Please check with one of the WikiJournal editors for further assistance. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:00, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Minor disruption forewarningEdit

A user is proposing to create "WikiJournal of Terrorism, WikiJournal of Pseudoscience and WikiJournal of Flat Earth". I'm hoping that he doesn't follow though on it, but I wanted to give the community a heads up just in case. Apologies in advance for any disruption. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 09:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: These would be actions that have a net negative effect on Wikiversity and would result in the user being blocked. Based on previous activity from this user, I'd be comfortable in blocking now, as the disruption and net negative effect are ongoing rather than simply proposed. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Blocked. Do not tolerate this sort of egregious trolling and ping me if you encounter this going forward. --mikeu talk 01:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
@Mikeu: Thank you - I was being overly-cautious of excalation or retibution actions by them, but you're correct that it just ends up giving leeway to disruption which isn't fair on the rest of the community. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 02:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

remote learningEdit

Today we had our first positive test of COVID-19 on campus. My institution had been in the process of transitioning to distance learning for the rest of the semester. That plan is now accelerating. All in person classes have been canceled and students have been directed to return home for spring break and to continue course work remotely. I'll be working from home to create content for remote education. My city and state have declared a state of emergency. All public schools in Rhode Island are closed and some are considering online learning through the spring. Wikiversity can fill a critical role in providing educational resources for educators and students of all ages throughout affected areas and we should consider coordinating activity to meet these needs. --mikeu talk 01:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

100% agreed. We need to develop best practices and pre-made space ready for other institutions to use this platform. Unfortunately, that is a lot easier said than done. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:46, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Let me know if any scripts would be helpful --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 07:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
With no classes meeting this week we've been told to use this time to develop our remote learning plan for the rest of the semester. The following week is spring break. We need to be ready to start by March 30.
I'm going to reach out to science teachers that are local to figure out what they need. I'm also going to try to pool the resources of astronomy and other science experts to cooperate on developing resources that can be freely shared here. I expect a great deal of disruption through the end of the month. I suspect that few educators even know we exist. We should spread the word cross-wiki and through our circles of colleagues. We might want to identify the best resources that are already ready to go and promote them. I also plan on reaching out to the wiki education team. --mikeu talk 20:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
@Mu301: Scripts and tools are definitely helpful. What I had in mind was more of a community and some best practices but all of them are useful. —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd recommend adding a banner section near the top of the Wikiversity:Main Page welcoming teachers who want to use Wikiversity for their classes. Does anyone have suggestions for how this should be worded? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 03:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Potential contributorEdit

Copied from User:Scogdill.

I'm a Victorianist and a Digital Humanist, and I'm moving a resource I have worked on for many years off the university server where it has sat and onto a site that others can see. I'm experimenting with using Wikiversity for this. The site I am moving is my copyright, so although I am moving pages wholesale (as soon as I can figure out how), they're mine.

I've done a few things on Wikipedia, same username, and even have a badge. :)


Just notifying potentially interested parties. Maybe someone (not me) could have a chat with Scogdill and help them out. GUYWAN (t · c) 20:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@Scogdill: Welcome. Can you tell me more about what you need and how we can help? —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this friendly and very helpful welcome to Wikiversity! A couple of people have reached out to me, thank you so much! I'll post here and on my Talk page when I need things. Thanks again! :) Sharon --Scogdill (discusscontribs) 04:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Sharon. Just type out {{ping|Koavf}} and I'll come running. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Forking built in?Edit

What if Wikiversity had forking built in? What if Wikimedia foundation has a network of educational wikis that all have competing content in the main namespace? Different groups could organize content differently. hmmm? What do you think? Cheers and limitless peace. Michael Ten (discusscontribs) 01:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Michael Ten: Interesting. Did you have in mind what these "competing resources" would look like? —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Sure, certainly. Suppose one group thinks common main namespace resources should be built one way, and another group thinks it should be done another way, instead of having conflict on one Wikiversity, groups could avoid conflict by splintering off to a different English Language Wikiversity. California State University has MANY campuses w:California_State_University#Campuses. There are MANY English speaking Universities in USA. Why not have MANY digital online wiki learning/research/teaching environments? (Wikiversity and Wikieduator are the only two that I know of, and Wikieducator is not as open as Wikiversity). Competition can be good. Perhaps en2.wikiversity.org could be a domain, or some variation of this. Groups could copy resources from Wikiversity, edit them, and so forth. Competition can encourage creativity and best versions of resources metaphorically floating to the top. Reddit has many sub-Reddits. Why shouldn't Wikiversity have multiple sub-wikis (or whatever language you want to label them with)? I do no contribute to this Wikiversity much because it seems like I am often effectively told I am "contributing wrong" or that my contributions are not appreciated. That is what it feels like, even if that is not the users intentions here. I hope that changes. Cheers and Limitless Peace. Michael Ten (discusscontribs) 23:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Swarm Intelligence comes from interaction of different scientific and educational approaches, scientific and educational negotionations, testing a hypothesis, comparing approaches, proposing a new study from the joint discussion. The design of learning resources may follow different theories and thererfore different forked approaches allow the learner to choose, which approach is appropriate for him/her. Nevertherless letting the different forked approaches stand side by side does not make sense to me. Guide the learners to compare these approaches and support them to find their way through the different options - this is again a learning objective, that could be supported by a learning resource on Wikiversity. I think, it is important, that authors should discuss forking before doing it. Maybe competing resources may find a way to merge directly. The discussion itself to merge or fork is valuable part of the community health within Wikiversity, Cheers, Bert --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 07:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

What's Wikiversity policy on interwiki links?Edit

I was putting such in w:Coronavirus disease 2019 before noting that you had COVID-19. I'd like to do the same in the latter (as well as creating an External link section), but first I'd like to make sure it's allowed. (This is my first edit in WV.  :)  )
DMBFFF (discusscontribs) 04:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@DMBFFF: Put the most appropriate link at the relevant item at d: and use {{Wikipedia}} for any resources here that related to an article or articles at Wikipedia, I'd say. Thanks for showing up--we hope you stick around! —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
@DMBFFF: added the interwiki link to COVID-19. Keep in mind, the Wikipedia is encyclodpedic and Wikiversity is a learning resource and guide learner in the dynamic change of knowledge about the disease. You can copy and paste from Wikiversity, it is allowed due to the license. Use the "cite his page..." in the menu to cite a specific WIkiversity version just like a scientific reference. The citation will contain a permanent link and the refered content is a specific version of the wikiversity content. Best regards and thank you for the efforts for COVID-19. --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 09:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

VisualEditor default for new users?Edit

What are out current settings on whether VisualEditor is the default? I've had a few new users tell me that they've often had source editor seem to come up as their default editor unless they specifically change it. Therefore:

  1. Is it possible to make VisualEditor the default interface for new users?
  2. Would people like to activate this?
  3. Are there other useful VE settings options to consider?

T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 11:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I guess it depends on the users. People that edit/author learning resources with much workload to create mathematical formulas in LaTeX might prefer source editor in comparison to visual editor. I would recommend, that user answer a checkbox in the registration/login process if they prefer visual or source editor. The link includes a wikiversity link to help page, that shows/explains PROs and CONs of visual and source editor, so that new users can make sound decision about editor default settings.
But my opinion is not representative in the community --Bert Niehaus (discusscontribs) 12:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Visual editing is still a beta feature (Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures). It is not on by default (mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts), and not widely adopted (1,500+ users at present). We have to request that it be enabled. The last time I tried, it only got one vote. People need to engage if we're going to improve the Wikiversity experience. And, if there's any support for this, I also recommend that we enable the mw: UploadWizard. Most file uploads to Wikiversity are deleted due to incomplete or improper licensing. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 13:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Translation from French to EnglishEdit

Hi, After a short discuss, I'm wondering about the best way and the best tool to translate this article from French to English in the frame of a wikijournal humanities preprint. If some one have an advise, or a solution, all of them are welcome ! Cheers, Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 21:46, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Given that its already here on enwikiversity, I suggest just opening up the editor and going line by line, or paragraph by paragraph, replacing the French with the English --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 22:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Ok DannyS712, it sounds like the ultimate solution. Before, I'll try to import the page on Meta-wiki and try there the translation tool. Thanks for your response. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 14:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus Tech Handbook is looking for librarians, contributors, and moreEdit

The Coronavirus Tech Handbook is a cool, free, and CC-BY-SA 4.0 peer endeavour that some people here may be interested in exploring and/or supporting? Details about how to help are on the Librarians doc. --Charles Jeffrey Danoff (discusscontribs) 05:26, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Proofreading by English native speakers requestedEdit

Hi folks, I've just finish this article translation for the WikiJournal of Humanities and I would like to see if some English native speakers and member of our Wikiversity community could proofread it. That a direct translation of a French article made with the free version of deepl.com translator. Let's see the quality of this translation tool ! Thanks in advance and all the best to everyone in this crisis time. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 19:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)