Wikiversity:Colloquium/archives/June 2020

Running out of template allowance for references edit

We seem to be running out of template quota on WikiJournal_Preprints/Induced_stem_cells#References for including all the references. Any ideas on a fix? T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 05:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can buy a little bit of space evidently by removing display-authors = etal. But unfortunately, at some point, you will run out of templates or modules that you can load in a page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:28, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I've done some pruning and saved a few templates. I think it's only about 30 over the limit. Do you know if that limit can be changed on a per-page basis? Or raised slightly globally? Otherwise I realised that every {{cite journal}} was transcluding a {{citation}}, so converting all references to just use {{citation}} saved 300 templates. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 02:19, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Evolution and evolvability: Unfortunately, these are very deep problems of the software, not just any particular page or project's server settings. See w:en:Wikipedia:Template limits and mw:Help:Templates for more. But the short answer is no: the only way to get around the template/module limit is to remove templates/modules. (If it's any consolation, this happens on all our sister projects: scroll to the bottom of wikt:en:a, for instance and see it run out of memory.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Koavf: Yikes on the example! Useful to know, and so far seems to be workable within. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 12:54, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can't edit page: New User Blocked Edit edit

This is a student-created page that I'm trying to edit: Motivation and emotion/Book/2013/Learned optimism but am a little stumped as to why any of my attempted edits get "Error: This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: New User Blocked Edit". Could someone else try and let me know if you can edit? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jtneill: This is a filter that blocks certain types of edits for new users (e.g. ones that include an external link). This restriction expires after only a few edits, so if you continue editing elsewhere (such as the post you made here or saving a few edits to your user page), then the restriction will go away automatically. I know this feature is sometimes confusing or frustrating: I'm working with another editor to see how we can amend it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jtneill: Sorry, there was an error in the filter. Recent vandalism was targeting anything with 2013 in the title, but the filter wasn't checking for confirmed user correctly. Please try again. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dave Braunschweig: Tx-you - that did the trick

. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:29, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal affecting Wikiversity on MetaWiki edit

Hello! I've started an RFC on MetaWiki about what I see as overlap between Wikiverity and Wikibooks, specifically in the area of foreign language learning, where there are virtually identical resources (with lessons, exercises, etc.) on both platforms. I wanted to post here to get feedback from those with more experience/investment in Wikiversity.

I'm a new user here, so I can't post an external link. The page is on MetaWiki under the path:

m:Requests_for_comment/Consolidate_language_learning_resources

I'd appreciate it if some kind soul could edit that into a proper link for me.

--Chapka (discuss • contribs) 14:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chapka:, you can use the format found at m:Interwiki map to insert links. I have amended your comment above. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chapka: It might have been better to start the conversations here and at Wikibooks rather than involving meta. It might also be better to have a stronger edit history at Wikiversity to understand and appreciate the overlaps and difference between the two projects. That said, you are certainly welcome to remove any content from Wikiversity that is duplicated at Wikibooks. Just add an interwiki link in its place. See, for example, Information Systems, which uses Wikibooks as the primary reading source for those lessons.

The bigger question to me is whether any of the content in the Wikibooks you outline is beyond the scope of what Wikibooks supports. If so, the content should be moved here. If not, then it's fine there, and the Wikiversity lessons can be adjusted to focus on the "learning by doing" aspects of these subjects. But that's a question for Wikibooks, and shouldn't be addressed either here or at meta.

One other point. Very few of the Wikiversity language resources have high page-view counts. I would recommend DuoLingo instead for anyone wanting to learn a language. It's a better platform for that type of engagement. Wikiversity or Wikibooks could be an interesting alternative for someone wanting to set up a traditional semester-length course with resources that go beyond the spoken language itself. See, for example, Latin. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:16, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Truth and Method resource edit

Truth and Method by Gadamer is a notable book (on hermeneutic philosophy) I aim to read slowly over a year or so. I think it would be useful for me, and others seeking to penetrate this dense text, to do this in public, with a wiki page of notes/questions/clarifications per every couple of pages of the book. Although the book itself is still in copyright, I checked with the owner and they were ok with quotes of up to 300 words in length which may be necessary to navigate/illustrate a point. Over a while this could provide a nice resource for anyone looking to understand the book and a pretty generative activity along the way... Does this sound like something that could be done in wikiversity please? Thank you for your time. --MJ1735 (discuss • contribs) 16:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MJ1735: Absolutely. Technically, fair use would typically allow for up to 10% of a resource to be used, but if you add the 300-word limit notification at the top of the page or pages as a reminder, and specifically note author permission, that would certainly help. I'd recommend starting Truth and Method, and linking to Wikipedia: Truth and Method for background information. Think about how you want to organize this information. Would it be best to have a subpage for each chapter, each concept, etc.? It's mostly up to you, since it's your vision. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dave Braunschweig: Thank you so much for your encouraging, constructive and insightful reply. Yes, organisation. The book doesnt have paragraph numbering but the editions dont vary much. So I think a combination of sections and edition-referenced page numbers should do it. I'm new here but this has been a great start. Thank you again. --MJ1735 (discuss • contribs) 13:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dave Braunschweig: I've thrown a bit more time at this and I think we have something which will work. I created my first sub-page about the Translator's Preface. I'm hoping to dip in and out to push it along further as and when - any suggestions welcomed. --MJ1735 (discuss • contribs) 12:12, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Community open letter on renaming edit

On August 2020, the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees may decide to rename to "Wikipedia Foundation". See meta:Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/Board Update on Branding for details. There is an open letter asking the Wikimedia Foundation to pause or stop this effort. See meta:Community open letter on renaming. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:54, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Braunschweig Did I accidentally delete this post by you? See https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3AColloquium&type=revision&diff=2172918&oldid=2172275 --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 15:17, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy vandegrift: It's pretty easy to accidentally hit the revert link. I did it to Mu301 once. There is an option under Preferences where you can "Show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link". It is off by default. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:08, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks-I changed the default.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]