Wikiversity:Request custodian action

Welcome You can create new request. Sign with --~~~~. Wikiversity support staff are trusted users who have access to technical features (such as protecting and deleting pages, blocking users, and undoing these actions) that help with maintenance of Wikiversity. Other request pages: Request deletion of a page Request import of a page (e.g., from Meta or Wikibooks): Request a CheckUser Other pages you may be looking for: Comment on custodian actions Old requests (archive) Notices for custodians

Administering Wikiversity Action required The open task template Maintenance Requests for deletion Requests for speedy deletion Requests for unblock Copyright violations Proposed deletions Pending deletions Requests for custodian action Notices for custodians Templates Introduction to templates Guide to templates Welcome templates Page flag templates Navigation templates Admin templates Template task force Development Developing Wikiversity Wikiversity logos Service community Metadata MediaWiki Project MediaWiki Technical needs Reference Policies Custodians Custodianship (policy) How to be a Wikimedia sysop Mission Managing vandalism MediaWiki Handbook Parser functions Logs Bots Consensus Statistics Events and news Announcements Wikimania

Custodian requests	Entries
Purge cache
Edit protected page	4
Speedy deletion	22
Expired prods	7
Requests for Deletion	7
Unblock requests	0
Possible copyvio	0
History merge	0

Request to add page; Circumstantial evidence of God

Here is the response I got when trying to create the page "Circumstantial evidence of God"

This action has been automatically identified as potentially 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 Exceeded New Page Limit

This action has been automatically identified as potentially 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 Created Page with External Link

I think this is an appropriate research project to add to wikiversity. Please add this page.

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence_of_God

This is a research project to investigate the theory of circumstantial evidence proving the existence of the God of the Bible. Individually, one item of circumstantial evidence doesn't amount to much, but as a tier grouped together they allow one to indirectly conclude the existence of a fact.

Please feel free to add to the discussion and review of these ideas.

discussion and review

What about plate tectonics?

There may be some subduction. But the core samples of the oceanic crust show that the Earth has expanded.

What about the uniqueness of the animals in Australia?

It's just like Galapagos island. Adaptation and environmental favorability for particular species would produce vast differences at least in some places of the Earth over 4,388 years after the flood.

theory under review

Deluge Geology, Radio Dating Inaccuracy, and Creative Days

Facts;

(1) the radioactive decay rate is NOT a constant; neutrino intensity definitely effects the radioactive decay rate; https://web.archive.org/web/20150528020329/http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html

The higher the neutrino intensity the lower the radioactive decay rate.

(2) atmospheric electrons backscatter neutrinos increasing the intensity of neutrino radiation towards the earth (the atmosphere is a converging lens to neutrinos)

An Earth with a larger atmosphere (such as one that had all the oceanic water as a gas or plasma in a gigantic ionosphere) would increase the intensity of neutrino radiation towards the earth and given fact 1, lower the radioactive decay rate of radioisotopes.

(3) the continental plates fit together completely on a smaller Earth; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnEkFofRFx0

(4) land fossils prove most of the Earth continental plates have been dry land

(5) on a smaller Earth (with all the continental plates put back together) the oceanic water would cover the entire Earth

(6) given fact 4, and 5, it follows that the oceanic water in the past was not on land (rather it must have been in the atmosphere so that it could fall to Earth).

(7) given fact 3, and 6, it follows that the Earth was smaller with a gigantic gaseous or plasma water canopy

(8) given fact 5, and 7, it follows that there was a global flood!!!

(9) but given 2, and 7, it follows that the radioactive decay rate was significantly lower before the flood

(10) given 9, the radio dating methods that assume constants in the radioactive decay rates are absolutely inaccurate (though still having good precision)

(11) the flood must be the last mass extinction event

(12) the K-T iridium aerosols [presumably from meteoroids] and any possible volcanic ash would have acted like cloud condensation nuclei, cloud seeding the deluge

(13) if God saved all the original animals in the Ark then the genera after the flood (notice blue line) matches the genera at Adam's creation (notice yellow line) proving God saved all the original animals; https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Biodiversity-2.png

(14) If we assume that Adam was 44a when Eve was born and that the creative days are 221Ma (according to the dating inaccuracy) then a creative day is 9,500 years

Eve became the Mother of Seth at 86a. Genesis 5:3 Seth became the father of Enosh at 105. Genesis 5:6 Enosh became the father of Kenan at 90. Genesis 5:9 Cainan became the father of Mahalalel at 70. Genesis 5:12 Mahalalel became the father of Jared at 65. Genesis 5:15 Jared became the father of Enoch at 162. Genesis 5:18 Enoch became the father of Methuselah at 65. Genesis 5:21 Methuselah became the father of Lamech at 187. Genesis 5:25 Lamech became the father of Noah at 182. Genesis 5:28 The Flood started when Noah was 600. Genesis 7:6

(86+105+90+70+65+162+65+187+182+600)=1612a of creative day seven [Eve's creation to the flood]

1612a*221/37.5=9500 [this is a creative day]

Fifth day

510 Ma the first fish, the jawless ostracoderms.

410 Ma the first fish with jaws, the acanthodians.

365 Ma the tetrapods.

350 Ma the dragonfly (the first flying creatures were insects).

340 Ma the amniotes.

And God went on to say: Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens. And God proceeded to create the great monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good. ... And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a fifth day. (Genesis 1:20-23)

Surprisingly enough, the flying creatures in this verse is not birds (as many may have thought), rather, it is insects!

Sixth day

285 Ma the therapsids.

230 Ma the dinosaurs.

225 Ma the first true mammals, Gondwanadon tapani or Morganucodon watsoni.

150 Ma the first bird, Archaeopteryx.

And God went on to say: Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind. And it came to be so. And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good. (Genesis 1:24, 25)

As you can see this work clarified our understanding of the bible (first flying creatures are insects) and the creation of the other animals matches the day of their biblical creation

(15) since the creation of Eve to the present it's been about 6000a

(16) Tyranusourus Rex fossils are dated between the creation of Eve and the date of the Flood; somewhere around 800a of creative day seven or ~5,200 years ago (inaccurately dated to 80Ma)

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/10/17/62/2161798/6/1200x0.jpg

https://www.science.org/cms/10.1126/science.1108397/asset/f350e639-3ffd-48d9-a488-2dfa943596dd/assets/graphic/307_1952_f2.jpeg

How old is this T. Rex blood and soft tissue? 5,200 years old or 80 MILLION years old?

I predict that the soft tissue found in T. Rex bone will Carbon 14 date to around 5,200 years old!

This will verify my theory about the Deluge Geology, Radio Dating Inaccuracy, and Creative Days.

That said, how could man, birds, and land animals have survived the deluge?

According to the bible (and over a hundred of other ancient sources), there was a great flood that destroyed the ancient world, for which, the gods spared some men and animals.

Jehovah claimed to cause the flood. In any cause we must grant at least the existence of advanced extraterrestrials (or gods exist or even that God exists) such that they could have spared some men, otherwise, mankind and all the animals on land could not have possibly survived such an event.

Ron Wyatt found at geological formation in the mountains of Ararat of petrified wood in the shape of a boat having the same length as described of the Ark in the Bible; https://i.pinimg.com/originals/55/8a/cb/558acb1d59f1dab953c3fcaa16cc2670.jpg

neutrinos warp spacetime inducing gravity

(1) I have a hunch that for sure electrons (but possibly all matter) gradients backscatter neutrinos into gradients which (increase the vacuum refractive index and) warping spacetime

(2) the atmosphere and the lithosphere are converging lenses to radiation including neutrinos

I predict that neutrinos induce something similar to the AC Kerr effect [the higher the intensity, the higher vacuum refractive index induced].

f this is true, then the vacuum refractive index is a transcendent function of neutrino radiation intensity.

In other words, the vacuum refractive index necessarily changes according to altitude.

Light travels slower in higher refractive index i.e. TIME DILATION according to altitude!

FYI, if material bodies (and their radiations and atmospheres) are a converging radiation Luneberg lens, the vacuum refractive index becomes itself stratified as a converging Luneberg lens!; i.e. curvature of light in outer space around objects such as the Sun, solar system, galaxy, galaxy clusters etc.

We will need to express the structure of matter; and to expand on Randel's orbitosphere in terms of electromagnetism, I claim the orbitosphere is a Kerr-induced self-focusing refraction curvature. One of the results being that as the vacuum refractive index increases, the Bohr radius shrinks [metaphor; imagine an electron orbiting an atom at a particular velocity and orbital frequency, if you slow the velocity (by increasing the refractive index) the orbit length would have to shrink to maintain the same orbital frequency] i.e. LENGTH CONTRACTION according to altitude (i.e. according to N radiation intensity).

https://brilliantlightpower.com/book-download-and-streaming/

as mass travels into higher vacuum refractive index, the mass of matter shrinks, but energy is conserved so the mass energy transforms into kinetic energy; in other words, there is gravity

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/gravity/index.html

thrust; artificial gravity; tractor beam; warp drive; photon torpedoes; through longitudinal radiation

I predict that longitudinal radiation can be used to create thrust, artificial gravity, tractor beams, a warp drive, and photon torpedoes.

Sodom Brimstone

With respects to the Divine, the spirits/angels/gods are the person of the Divine. That is simply how a monism/pantheism works. Even we are part of the Divine. So in a sense, we also are gods.

Anyway, the bible says; "and the gods said, let us make man in our image"

The Divine has no image. So, we cannot be made in the image of the Divine. But we can be made in the image of the gods. Another thing to point out is; functionally speaking, there is no difference between the gods and advanced extraterrestrials.

(Ron Wyatt is the original discoverer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sodom.jpg

Locations identified on the satellite map on the west coast of the Dead Sea have millions of high purity (98% pure) sulfur balls with burn rings embedded in what looks like the ashen remains of cities. The picture on the bottom right is in the location identified on the map as Gomorrah.

Spectra Chem Analytical of New Zealand, and Galbrath Lab of Texas; Two independent laboratories have tested the sulfur balls and sulfur ash determining their composition.

At least three different groups have surveyed the sites taking samples, and two of those groups have created videos. Here is a video from one of them;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwTVFk1HK3Y

It should be noted;

(1) volcanic activity turns sulfur into a gas,

(2) meteoroids contain only small amounts of sulfur,

(3) geothermal activity creates sulfur of no more than 40% purity,

(4) a natural gas explosion wouldn't explain the purity of the sulfur balls, and

(5) bacteria wouldn't explain the burn rings on the sulfur balls nor the ashen remains.

An alternative possibility is that the pure sulfur fire balls were created and used as military munitions in warfare. However, there is no record of using such munitions in warfare. It should be noted that the cities are completely destroyed with even the structural material and stones having been turned into ash. It would take far less sulfur to simply kill the people; turning all of the structural material and stones into ash is militarily unfeasible.

Given that the pure sulfur fire balls and ashen remains are not known to be created by any volcanic, meteoric, geothermal, natural gas, or bacterial activity, and given that it is historically unprecedented to use pure sulfur fire balls as munitions and militarily unfeasible to turn all the structural material and stones of the cities into ash, and given that there are records claiming the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was by the hand of the person of the Divine, it therefore suggests the existence of the fact that this is the remains of Sodom and Gomorrah, the destruction of which was a teleological interaction of the spirits/angels/gods or person of the Divine with man.

Neanderthal violence

Correlation of evidence of Neanderthal violence with Scriptural History

http://www.donsmaps.com/images4/neanderthalsapiens.jpg

The first reconstruction of a complete Neanderthal skeleton in 2005 has revealed more accurately the similarities and differences between us (far right) and them.

The reconstruction makes clear their larger, bell-like chest cavity and wider pelvis. They are physically larger (both taller and bigger than humans), with stronger muscles, larger nose hole and eye sockets, as well as a larger brain cavity. [6] Neanderthal dental enamel hypoplasia found in 75% of individuals and all those particularly aged, suggests they suffered from nutritional deficiencies.

Neanderthal practiced cannibalism or ritual defleshing. Neanderthals seemed to suffer a high frequency of fractures, especially common on the ribs, the femur, fibulae, spine, and skull; as well as from trauma such as stab wounds and blows to the head; suggesting a high level of physical violence.

"Consequently Jehovah saw that the badness of man was abundant in the earth and every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. And Jehovah felt regrets that he had made men in the earth, and he felt hurt at his heart. So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, from man to domestic animal, to moving animal and to flying creature of the heavens, because I do regret that I have made them." (Genesis 6:1-2, 4-7)

"In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on this day all the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And the downpour upon the earth went on for forty days and forty nights." (Genesis 7:11-12) “Second month.” Following the Exodus from Egypt, when Jehovah gave the Israelites the sacred calendar, this became the eighth month, known as Bul, corresponding to the latter half of October and first half of November. - New World Translation Footnote Genesis 7:11 The global flood which killed all but eight humanoids is said to have occurred on the same dating associated with the Festival of the Dead, for which the European calendar marks the celebrations of All Hollows Eve, and All Souls' Day

Confusion after the Flood

Correlation of linguistics and Scriptural History.

After the flood a Cushite named Nimrod rebelled against Jehovah; creating cities (Jehovah commanded everyone to spread out).

He is called a "king". A king is ruler of a kin (Cushites) which has a kingdom (in this case Summeria; was the first after the flood). Akkadians called Cushites "Summerians" which translates as "black headed people".

As a punishment Jehovah confused their languages!

Africa has more than 2000 languages. Where as Europe and Asia only have less then 200 each.

Brown people (Cushites) have a hard time speaking simple English, instead they speak Ebonics.

It seems that Jehovah confused their languages.

Like the Tao Te Ching suggests; 'it seems that rural living is best for mankind'.

Exodus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqLsYonjvRY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsn_HqSxkDg

Coconut is the tree of life

The mitochondria oxidizes for energy production whereas the cell body ferments for energy production; the oxidization is 20 times more efficient than fermentation.

The mitochondria also control many crucial aspects of cell regulation, including cell death.

When the mitochondria are down regulated, or most of the energy of the cell is produced from cell body fermentation, then not only is their reduced energy, the mitochondria no longer have the ability to kill the cell.

Cancer is run away cell body fermentation where the mitochondria can't kill the cell.

Coconut has medium chain triglycerides such as lauric acid which are antibacterial, antifungal, and pro-mitochondrial.

In other words, there is considerable evidence that extended life is impossible without coconut.

Serpent hind legs

Moses claimed that the serpent was cursed to go about on it's belly... presumably instead of walking on legs.

ancient fossils prove that serpents had hind legs.

If I am not mistaken the theory of evolution claimed in the past that the serpent was first and then developed legs on land creating the lizards. But the serpent only had hind legs! (so how did Moses 'know' this???).

Request to move image files to Commons

I got this request to move files from Category:NowCommons and Category:Files from USGS. I delete lots of files, but usually let others delete image files because of my ignorance of copyright laws. I also have contributed a lot of files to Commons, but almost all of it is my own work. So I am out of my comfort zone on this. I don't even understand why these files should be moved.

@MGA73: Maybe we can find someone with more expertise on file transfers here on Request custodian action.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 22:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

In a related vein, due to my inexperience with copyright regulations, perhaps it would be better if someone else processed the following files. All are up for speedy deletion. And all seem like quality images and/or on potentially high quality WV resources.

• File:Merged fig1.png
• File:Merged matrix2.png
• File:Rps all hsa.png
• File:Selected domfams fix.png
• 
• File:Summary.svg
• File:Transtree.png
• 

My request was primary to delete files that was moved to Commons allready. But if anyone have checked files they are of course very welcome to move files to Commons too. Same with Category:Files from Flickr. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 16:32, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. My ignorance of copyright law makes me very hesitant to delete image files.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I noticed User:Koavf just deleted a file moved to Commons. So perhaps Koavf could have a look at the files in Category:NowCommons once there is a little time to spare? :-) --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 19:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

lol@"time to spare", but sure. <3 —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes dirty tricks work ;-) --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 08:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Hooglimkt (again)

Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.

Special:Contributions/NotAReetBot

According to WV:IU, this username is not acceptable (implying bot), should this account be blocked? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I already sent a welcome and {{uw-username}} (imported from enwiki). MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I think explicitly saying that you're not a bot is acceptable, but I agree that it's probably not ideal. E.g. someone could have the username "NotAReet" and run a bot under this name. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Call for rewriting WV:UNC

This agenda is suggested at Wikiversity_talk:Username#WV:UNC needs updates, since this is related to policy documentation, I would like to have the attention of our custodians. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2409:4064:810:DA39:FA73:D928:2C4D:B401

Possible vandalism (Massive enwiki copies with MOS issues), seems to be related to the recently reported IP, please consider range block. All targeted pages are semi-protected. Reverted revisions seem to be enwiki copies, please also consider revision deletion if needed. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

(Note) Currently stale, will report again if they come back. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 09:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Scope of talk page usage for blocked users

I understand that the scope of talk page usage for blocked users is aimed at unblocking requests and relevant discussions. I would like to ask if Wikiversity has more exceptions accepted by the community. I'm asking this because I recently found special:diff/2602322, and this does not seem to be related to an unblocking request. If unacceptable, custodians may need to remove talk page access from the user. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Please review recent edits at Wikiversity:Verifiability

long discussion

Recently we had many changes to this documentation. Reverting undiscussed changes would be non-controversial, but I'm not sure about the others. What would our custodians think about these edits? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 15:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC) Each of my edit has an explanation/rationale in the edit summary. Here a summarization: I above all removed sentences that presented a contradiction within the same page. I also switched the page to policy proposal away from policy since I could not find a discussion establishing the page as a policy and since, given the contradictions before my edits, the page could not have been taken seriously as a policy, that is, a set of rigid rules contrasting to guidelines. I could have discussed the changes somewhere first, but since the changes are well documented in their edit summaries, I hoped they could remain. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC) For the record, the original version (before recent efforts) can be found at Special:Permalink/1375824. Regarding my thoughts about these edits, I think we should distinguish between top pages and subpages. If an instructor is inviting students to submit work in subspace, the instructor should have considerable flexibility regarding those subpages.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 00:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC) While I'm not sure about what type of flexibility is being mentioned, I generally believe that teachers should have enough privileges to complete their projects. If our policies (and related proposals) restrict legitimate educational activities, then we are no longer a place for education. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 12:54, 1 February 2024 (UTC) Thank you very much for the explanation and the summary, but I cannot guarantee that everyone will accept it. Removing contradictions sounds good. If the content was obvious nonsense or conflict with the entire Wikiversity, then your decision (blanking/removal) would be the most reasonable one. In this case, I think there were other options (such as rewriting to resolve contradictions), and that is why I'm calling for a review. For example, at special:diff/2602692, you said that "The obligation to use verifiable and reliable sources lies with the editors wishing to include information on Wikiversity page, not on those seeking to question it or remove it" contradicts the option of scholarly research at Wikiversity. I don't understand how this becomes a contradiction (have you already explained that?). Even if it was a contradiction, I think blanking was not the only one option. We could have restricted the obligation to non-research content (such as educational resources) or downgraded the obligation to a recommendation, and avoid potential conflict with Wikiversity research content. The summary of my question is, "Why have you decided to remove instead of suggesting a rewrite?". MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 13:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC) I see an obvious contradiction, as mentioned in the edit summary: if original research and original user-written essays are allowed, there is no "obligation to use verifiable and reliable sources". As for dropping text vs. rewrite: a rewrite creates an opportunity to introduce new mistakes and non-consensualities, a bad thing. By contrast, removal of problematic sentences removes defects. After removal of problematic sentences, we may focus on whether the text that remained after removal is really accurate and fully fit for purpose, which I do not think to be the case either; more corrective work is required. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC) Thank you for additional explanations. If somebody is going to produce their own research where anything similar was never published elsewhere, there would be no other independent secondary sources, so the Wikipedia-like verifiability is no longer reasonable at here. On the other hand, I believe that authors should work hard to avoid errors (calculation errors, uploading wrong images etc., I was talking about this type of verifiablity for research content), if they want to pass Wikijournal peer reviews then they need to do so. In addition, I expect many type of research comes out from previous research history, and I think it is reasonable to expect the Wikipedia-like verifiablity when explaining research background and related history. What would you think about this? I'm not demanding the Wikipedia-like verifiability to research itself, I'm recommending this to things before entering research. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:59, 6 February 2024 (UTC) As for "If somebody is going to produce their own research where anything similar was never published elsewhere", one may well publish result of research such that something similar was already published elsewhere; it is still original research in Wikipedia terminology. Wikiversity is great for articles that combine original research/element of originality with referenced material. For such articles, there is no duty to reference things but I would see inline referencing as recommended for consideration (not enforced) and adding great further reading/external links as recommended (not enforced). I fully agree that "authors should work hard to avoid errors". As for Wikijournals, that is a separate class of Wikiversity content, with its own rules and processes. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 07:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) About "explaining research background": I know of no duty to explain research background (or is there one?) and therefore, there is no duty to explain the background and then reference it using Wikipedia-style inline referencing. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 08:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Would somebody like to vote between keeping page as is or returning it to Special:Permalink/1375824? If so, write "I move that we foobar" as vote yes or no.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:54, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Can User:Ciphiorg/sandbox be an acceptable sandbox?

The sandbox was made by using talk page namespace so I moved it into userspace. After the page moved, I noticed that the sandbox was about physical geography but also aimed to promote a single website (physicalgeography.org) and its subpages. I checked the author's enwiki history, all edits were reverted and their enwiki sandbox was deleted per CSD U5. Could this be a xwiki spam case? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 06:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Done Deleted. He can ask for undeletion if he wants to remove self-promotion/spam links. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Recent abuse filter logs suggests that the user came back to do something similar. You may need to take action to stop them. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 05:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

(Update) Currently stale. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 09:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Concern about an IP range starting from 165.199.181

IP editors from this range (Special:Contributions/165.199.181.3, Special:Contributions/165.199.181.9, Special:Contributions/165.199.181.15) have done a lot of unhelpful actions in our project for months. I think our custodians should consider a range block for a reasonable amount of time. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

(Note) All IPs in this report are blocked in minimal range. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Please consider blacklisting of physicalgeography.org

Dear custodians, I have reported about editors trying to get physicalgeography.org to appear in Wikiversity at special:permalink/2603578#Can_User:Ciphiorg/sandbox_be_an_acceptable_sandbox?, and now we have another editor trying to get the link visible (Special:diff/2603646). Please consider the blacklisting of this URL. Thank you for your attention. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/103.150.214.192

Too many test edits at sandbox (RC flooding), possible proxy, already blocked at zhwiki. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 09:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@MathXplore: I blocked for 3 hours and then Googled {RC flooding}. I have no experience with these things. How long should I block for?----Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

When I reported the IP, they were violent, and at least a short-term block (perhaps several hours) may have been needed at that time. Currently, the IP editor is stale, so there may be no significant meaning to block them at this moment. On the other hand, GetIPIntel Prediction is 100% at IPcheck information, this means that this IP might be a proxy (and I guess that is why zhwiki blocked this IP, I don't know well about zhwiki proxy block policy), though the other parameters are negative. I think we need someone who knows more about proxies to choose the right range and terms. @Koavf: can you take a look at this IP? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 13:18, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

(Note) After my reply, another IP (Special:Contributions/103.150.214.135, close to the one above) appeared with similar behavior (targeting sandbox). This IP is blocked at zhwikivoyage as an open proxy (1 year), also blocked at enwiki as a web host. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I am not a range block pro, but doing a little range block hacking, I see that both Special:Contributions/103.150.214.192/16 and Special:Contributions/103.150.214.135/16 contain all of the edits by the above IPs and only the edits by the above IPs. Both are globally blocked for a couple of months, but 1.) I take violent threats very seriously (@MathXplore:, did you write to legal@? If not, I will.) 2.) the sandbox is one of the only pages you really don't want to have escalated protection on, and 3.) oftentimes, rangeblocking open proxies is not going to harm the project. So, I'm willing to do a 12-month range block. Great work as always. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't write to legal. I was checking the edit frequencies and their global contributions rather than the context. Please go ahead for the report to legal. Thank you for the reactions and information. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 06:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey, no worries MX. You do a lot across many wikis. It's a team effort, friend. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Wait--I actually looked at the diffs and some of them mention some weird violent content, but are not threats, so it doesn't rise to that occasion. Sorry for my ignorance. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/24.224.18.114

Vandalism from this IP, a targeted page is now semi-protected. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:22, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

(Note) Currently stale. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 06:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

special:permalink/2607000

Can this be considered as an academic profile, or should be handled as an advertisement? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 06:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Tricky. I'm inclined to call it a valid profile if this user engages in actually editing and particularly in creating resources related to these kind of topics such as SEO, but call it just spam if this person is only here to say "I am so-and-so and I have [x] marketable skills". :/ So I could be persuaded either way, but it's not obviously spam as of now, as far as I can tell. I totally respect any other custodian or curator deleting it, tho. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Portal talk:Astronomy

This talk page is currently isolated but has a lot of things in here. Where can we move this page to save it as an archive? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 13:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I created Draft:Archive without asking for a consensus. If nobody objects, we can all use it. The only open question in my mind is whether we need to nowikify the pages to avoid having titles appear on various lists and categories. I suggest the title Draft:Archive/2024/Portal talk-Astronomy. Personally, I am not very adept at undeleting pages, thought with a bit of practice I might find it more natural. With a small cleanup crew that tends to get bogged down in long discussions, it's easier if everybody can look at pages that have been removed in this fashion. Many years ago I remember an editor who annoyed administrators with frivolous requests to undelete for viewing purposes. If you want, I can move Portal talk:Astronomy right now.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

What is wrong with Portal talk:Astronomy staying where it is? --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 14:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry! Again I read quickly but without accuracy. I didn't notice that it was a Talk page. I will archive it right now.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC) Y DoneGuy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:36, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

You "archived" the page but not moved. Where should we move the talk page? That is my question. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 00:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

According to WV:CSD, isolated talk pages are subject to deletion. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 00:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I apparently just forgot to delete the talk page. Does anybody object to deleting the talk page and its archive?--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Why is this being deleted or archived? I guess it is because of WV:Deletions, "Discussion about deleted resources where context is lost and becoming an independent resource is unlikely". But the resource was not deleted, it was moved: from looking at Portal:Astronomy, one can see it was moved to Topic:Astronomy, which is now a redirect to Astronomy. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 07:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Done Taking Dan's lead, I assumed the hanging talk page Portal talk:Astronomy to have been attached to what is now Astronomy, which already had a talk page. So I made the Archive a subpage with an explanatory note at Talk:Astronomy. I'm glad this is a hobby and not a serious effort to preserve the history of this ol wiki.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Chronological order of Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action/Archive/23 and Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action/Archive/24

I generally understand that archives are numbered in chronological order but I found an exception to this rule. special:permalink/2596291 says that 23 is "January 2021 - June 2023" and 24 is "December 2021 - December 2022", this is breaking the chronological order. Should we fix this or keep it in the current state? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that while archiving a while back. I think we should leave it alone. One problem is that we have two chronological orders: One is when the request was initiated, and the other is when the request is archived. To make matters worse, many topics get "archived" twice: First when {{Archive top}}..{{Archive bottom}} turns the background blue, and second when the conversation is moved. Also, these conversations are extremely chaotic. Reading them would make good reading for chatbots if and when humans ever decide to start punishing them for transgressions.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your opinions. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Can anybody explain how this turns into a proposed deletion?

I just deleted a lot of pages because I thought the author was confusing the prod template for speedy delete. This is the source for User:Ramosama/sandbox/Problem Analysis - Provision:

Click to view the source code that triggers the prod

{{Problem analysis - measure|name=Reusing durables|identifier=reusing_durables |definition= The reuse of durable goods in their original form. |reasons= |parents= |instances= * Design of equipment for reuse of their parts ("cradle to cradle"). * Prolonged storage of reusable goods in warehouses, such as deserted office buildings. * Second-hand warehouses. * Refund for returns of durables. * Facilitation, for example, allowing customers to reuse packaging or containers. |advantages= |disadvantages= }} Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thankfully the user has been dormant for almost 4 years. See Special:Contributions/Ramosama.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I edited "Template:Problem analysis - concept" to place its proposed deletion code into the noinclude tag. As a result, User:Ramosama/sandbox/Problem Analysis - Provision--which uses the template--no longer shows any proposed deletion tag. I hope it added some clarity and has no undesirable consequence. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 19:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Good news! I thought it was possible to accidentally make a prod. Thank's Dan.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Does anybody know how to delete all pages by a single user?

We have a serial page creator. My hunch is that the pages were created in another language, translated using an auto-translator, and placed on en.wikiversity. I am currently trying to create a list from this list. If nobody knows how to do this, I will use a list under construction at Pre-diabetes diagnosis and remission.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 16:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Special:Nuke can mass-delete, with some caveats. Oddly, it is only available to bureaucrats here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't know the answer. But let me list the pages created in 2024 (there are more from 2023):

• INVITATIONS TO SEAFARERS AND THE MARITIME MEDICAL CLINICS
• CONTENTS OF THE 16 WEEKS COACHING
• VIDEO PRESENTATION AND INVITATIONS
• '''CONTENTS OF THE 16 WEEKS COACHING'''
• DRAFT ARTICLE
• Maritime Diabetes-type 2 Intervention study/DRAFT PAHO PROTOCOL/CONTENTS OF THE 16 WEEKS COACHING
• Maritime Diabetes-type 2 Intervention study/DRAFT PAHO PROTOCOL/DRAFT PAHO PROTOCOLO EN ESPAÑOL
• Maritime Diabetes-type 2 Intervention study/DRAFT PAHO PROTOCOL/ESPAÑOL

--Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 16:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Done I deleted all the maritime health and diabetes pages made in the past several months. If more is needed, let me know. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Justin. You might want to change the parameters of my block of Saltrabook. I know little about blocking protocols. I will change my expiration date from one week to indefinite. I didn't know you could pagenuke. We need an active pagenuker on this wiki now that Dave is less active.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 17:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I have no perspective on an indefinite block, but it may be a good idea until/unless he can explain on his talk page what he's trying to do and where he is getting this information, etc. Note also that he has lots of pages going back to at least 2019. If we had consensus that Special:Nuke were available to admins (curators), then we could make the request on phab: to change the local settings. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you know whether Saltrabook can use his talk page? If so, there is no need to change the indefinite block.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The latest block (special:redirect/logid/3389142) does not include edits, so I think they can. Generally, most blocked users can edit their own talk pages for unblock requests and related statements (unless revoked). MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Currently, curators cannot restore pages. I think allowing mass-delete without restoration permissions can be risky. Allowing mass-delete to our custodians should be enough. Why have we limited mass-delete to our bureaucrats? Are there any previous discussions in the past? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

No clue. That is very bizarre and atypical. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I think we can ask to hear the community's opinion at Wikiversity:Colloquium. They may want to speak about what they think about this odd technical settings. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

(Note about this matter) I started a new thread over there. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 13:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

(Update) Per suggestion (special:diff/2610994), I started a proposal at Wikiversity_talk:Custodianship#Proposal_to_allow_custodians_to_use_mass-delete. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 07:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

If possible, I suggest clarifying the deletion criteria (RFD? off-wiki request?). I'm sorry if I have missed anything. From my viewpoint, I only requested renaming without redirects, and now I see pages being deleted. Having more explanations would be better, I think. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@MathXplore: Sorry, sometimes I act too swiftly. It turns out User:Saltrabook has been creating what looks like interesting pages for a long time, and he has created close to 100 such pages (probably much more.) He doesn't know English very well, so it is obvious that he is auto-translating the pages. I blocked his page creations, and he seems happy working on pages he already created (many of them were almost blank.) Personally, I would be happy if he works on the pages he has already created and left us alone. We get odd ones on WV. I should know; my family thinks I am one.-Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 03:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanations. As can be seen in each page history, I'm one of the few editors handling the categorizations of their creations, but I didn't notice that there were auto-translations (has anyone identified which software has been used?), apologies for being late to notice such issues. I think we should clarify how to handle auto-translations via policy/guideline or previous discussions. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Krutrimam

Lock evasion of User:Premaledu, please see special:permalink/2609661#Offensive_username. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 12:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Already Y Done, globally locked. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Explanation of edit

I was trying to link my pages and I got a notification to explain to a custodian. I hope I'm in the right place for that. An5189 (discuss • contribs) 04:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

thanks An5189 (discuss • contribs) 04:52, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

create about user page

I was trying to create about User page An5189 (discuss • contribs) 05:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll create a blank one and you can modify it. Let me know if you have more problems. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

thanks, I willAn5189 (discuss • contribs) 08:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/39.50.199.52

Making bad pages (I already deleted them) and xwiki abuse (also reported at Wikiquote). MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Precisiongroup

Spam-only account with promotional username (account named after company name). MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 06:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Kroodham

Lock evasion of Special:CentralAuth/Premaledu. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 07:45, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Y Done, already locked. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 08:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/27.55.68.138

Vandalism and xwiki abuse. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 10:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Y Done Month-long rangeblock. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Special:Log/Cbtproxyus

The user has repeated user page spam, I already deleted it and set indefinite full protection. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 05:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Y Done indef block. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:42, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

CAPTCHA Problem when creating an Account

I don't know how active Dave is at the moment, so I paste a message to Dave from User:Ireicher2:

“ Hi Dave, Isabel here from Ohlone college. We've talked a couple of times before. Some of my students emailed me to let me know that they cannot create user accounts because of a CAPTCHA problem. I verified the information by attempting to create a new account and I received the same error message. Would you let me know how this can be resolved? Thank you! ”

@Ireicher2: One thing you might try is having them create Wikipedia or Wikibooks accounts. I believe membership in one automatically creates membership on Wikiversity. Another thing to try is asking students to create the account from their homes. Does anybody else have any ideas????--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I think w:Wikipedia:Request_an_account/Help_and_troubleshooting is related to this issue. It is a different project but shares the same technical basis. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

See meta: Mass account creation. I'll try adding Account creators to User:Ireicher2 with an expiration of seven days and see if makes any difference. Yes, the suggestion that students create their accounts from home (or using their cell phones vs. school computers) should help. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig @Guy vandegrift Of course. That makes sense. Thank you!
Ireicher2 (discuss • contribs) 04:46, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I need the custodians & curators to tell a user not to be involved with deletions.

Collapse as resolved

Here are two examples: He put a speedy delete on special:permalink/2617505, saying among other things that there is "no clear explanation" of what ordinary differential equations are". This is a subpage, and the parent page at special:permalink/2483117 gives a rather coherent explanation: "Differential equations serve as mathematical models of physical processes. This course is intended to be an introduction to ordinary differential equations and their solutions. A differential equation (DE) is an equation relating a function to its derivatives. If the function is of only one variable, we call the equation an ordinary differential equation (ODE). ... There is a movement to raise the standards regarding what should and should not be in namespace, but the the parent page at special:permalink/2483117 has 13 subpages. If this resource is a problem, it has to be addressed from the top down, not one subpage at a time. As will be shown in the next example, I recently attempted to explain to him that it is inefficient to remove subpages without looking at the entire resource (via the parent page.) Days prior to the aforementioned effort to delete a subpage of Differential equations, he proposed the deletion of one of some 300 subpages of Student Projects because it was unsourced. My reason for not deleting that page should have informed him that it would have been inappropriate to delete one subpage of Differential equations, because it turns out that almost all subpages of Student Projects are unsourced, leaving us with the same issue involving the deletion of pages from the "bottom-up". For evidence that this user had been informed of the need for a "top-down" approach attempting to delete a subpage of Differential equations, see special:permalink/2617342#Student_Projects/Major_rivers_in_India. This editor is a nice person with a lot of good ideas, but his stubbornness is making it difficult to moderate Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC) I don't want this user blocked, or even banned from participating in discussions about deletion policy. He is not alone in advocating higher standard, and the community might want to do that. But there is a distinction between the nuts and bolts of deletion, and deletion as a policy. I am very conservative about deleting pages. So if the standards get tightened, there will be no need to revert anything I have done. I am asking the custodians/curators to encourage this user to go to WV:WGW2024 and create a subpage for sharing his ideas with the community.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC) 1) The "unsourced" on Student Projects/Major rivers in India was only one reason; the other reason was that this page has nothing to add what is not in Wikipedia, a rationale previously recognized. 2) Student Projects/Major rivers in India is not integrated in any way to a Student Projects "project"; its being a subpage is just an attempt to escape deletion scrutiny. 3) I am not aware of any explanation to me that I should not nominate subpages; such an explanation has my talk page as a proper venue, and I am unaware of any such explanation, neither there or elsewhere. 4) Any disagreement about deletion can be resolved via RFD and via voting-cum-discussion there, as is usual in other projects, e.g. the English Wikipedia and the English Wiktionary; if I am mistaken in a particular nomination, it can be brought to RFD and quickly voted down. Even a single person opposing can prevent a deletion in which I am the sole, mistaken, deletion supporter. 5) I have a pretty good conversion rate between deletion nominations and actual deletions/moving out of mainspace, and therefore, I do not think that my nomination algorithm is too broad and too burdensome on those who have to oppose my nominations for deletions. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 14:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC) All I am asking is that you stay out of active deletions and focus your talent on changing the policy. A great place to do that is at WV:WGW2024#Personal_subpages_(with_visual_editing) Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:51, 31 March 2024 (UTC) I invite you to my talk page to make requests concerning change of behavior on my part. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 14:52, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Resolved We have corresponded in our talk pages and the problem has been resolved to my satisfaction.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 18:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

link on page looks possibly explicit to follow?

Other Free Learning Resources the univeristy of reddit link has a lot of very adult explicit words as links . I did not view other links from this page. Thanks

U - X

• University of Reddit

2001:8003:B120:8900:4D5:4E7A:36B2:58F3 (discuss) 12:50, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, it's now spam, so I removed it. :/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Special:contribs/206.110.193.204

Vandalism Seawolf35 (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Induced stem cells copyright issues

Induced stem cells got imported to here from enWiki- which is fine, attribution was done correctly and everything- except for the fact that I'm just wrapping up a copyright investigation on the original contributor & his alternative account. Due to the fact that this contributor repeated and blatantly infringed on the copyright of multiple sources despite multiple warnings an even a block, I tagged the original page over on enWiki for presumptive deletion. I don't know what Wikiversity's process is for suspected copyright infringements without a clear source, but I figured you guys would want to know about the problems with this page anyways. -- ~~~~ GreenLipstickLesbian (discuss • contribs) 20:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Very helpful, thanks. Do you have any relevant links to en.wp about the investigation or where he typically ripped off material? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay- everthing I've gathered so far is going to be in this investigation page. ( tried to link it in the original post, but I failed spectacularly as you can see). They almost exclusively copied from scientific papers/ reviews, and news/blog reports. This user typically copied from the source they cited- or, at least, *a* source they cited. They'd regularly copy a paragraph of text from one source, then a cite a different source for each sentence. If a source was paywalled, they often would cite the source, but copy from a news report/blog report analyzing the source. One of the other investigators found a few instances where they copied another article in Wikipedia without attribution- but that was their rarest type of violation. They occasionally wrote their own material, but it was normally easily identifiable because English is not their first language.

Sorry for not being more helpful on this article in particular-I saw they(and their alt) were essentially the sole author of this page, cited 300+ sources, made a noise somewhat akin to that of a distressed animal, and decided I was going to take advantage of enWiki's rule allowing us to delete articles written by serial copyright violators without any more evidence. --GreenLipstickLesbian (discuss • contribs) 00:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

That’s plenty to convince me that this should be assumed to be a copy II until proven otherwise. Merci. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the responses, I think having a short intro, soft redirect to the CCI page, further readings section, and categories would be OK, what would you think about this? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Sure. Do you want me to undelete and then redelete selected diffs? Or you’ll just create the redirect yourself? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I will create a soft redirect afterward. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, do you think WikiJournal Preprints/Induced stem cells needs deletion? It is another page where the same editor has substantial involvement. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 01:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I did a brief check, and I found that this source (cited in the article) appears to have been partially copied. Specifically, the stuff about zebrafish has been copied word for word. It's not a promising sign. If this was on the English Wiki, I would ask for it to be presumptively deleted soley on the basis of the author and that confirmed instance of a copyright violation. I worked on the investigation for several days (and I was the one who asked for it to be opened), and I could confirm over half their writing to be blatant copy-and-paste jobs. GreenLipstickLesbian (discuss • contribs) 03:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your service, hermana. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, I have contacted an active Wikijournal contributor to learn about how this preprint should be handled. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 02:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you to GreenLipstickLesbian for informing us about the copyright violations and reference false attribution in this article, and Koavf & MathXplore in participating in this conversation. Normally we would keep rejected articles in the preprint with the stated reason in the talk page for record purpose. However, since the induced stem cell contains copyright violation and may cause future accidental copyright violation by future text re-users under the assumption that the text is under Creative Commons license, I will request that the preprint be deleted while talk page remains undeleted to note the rationale. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 20:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Good point. In addition to not deleting the talk page, I am redirecting the main page to the talk page and protecting it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

@Koavf Can you also delete WikiJournal Preprints/Induced stem cells, redirecting it to talk page please? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Creating a section of my own talk page with a link to Wikipedia

I'm trying to set up my own talk page here at Wikiversity with my own example of trying separate the essence and accident of programming, as per [[w:No Silver Bullet|No Silver Bullet]] at Wikipedia, but it's rejected because of the external link (i.e. to Wikipedia). I'm doing this because most example code I see buries the essence in the accident and I wanted to show an example that there are better ways to write code. Philh-591 (discuss • contribs) 10:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

That's very weird: you can't create interwiki links? And to be clear, you're trying to put said links on your talk page at User talk:Philh-591, not your userpage User:Philh-591? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, your creation of the page with a welcome message has got it past that restriction, although I don't think it was the Wikipedia link. I'd not noticed that there are URL's in my example source referring to public information at the European Central Bank. However, it now insistently applies "nowiki" to what I insert. I guess I don't understand the formatting rules at Wikiversity; I'd assumed it was just like Wikipedia. I'll see if I can understand it more playing in the sandbox. Philh-591 (discuss • contribs) 13:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I figured that would fix the problem: sometimes, creating a new page (even your own user or user talk page) has restrictions. I forget the exact limitations per wiki, but they are usually very modest, like make at least five edits across two weeks or something. Re: formatting rules, they should be the same as Wikipedia, so I'm confused as to what you're trying to do again. :/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Won't let me publish "my about" page due to "New User Exceeded New Page Limit"

Unsure how to publish my about me page, is someone able to help me be able to publish it without it being disallowed? Lucywilson 546 (discuss • contribs) 03:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Jtneill: Can you grant confirmed status for this user? MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 03:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I made a blank page, which you can now edit. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@MathXplore: Thankyou, I've confirmed the user. @Koavf: Thankyou, a neat, instant solution :). @Lucywilson 546: Thanks for letting us know. You should be good to go. Let us know if any other problems. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Delete revission

Could you delete this revision, which is revealing my personal information, please? Juandev (discuss • contribs) 09:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Username is hidden, I have contacted the m:stewards. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 11:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Y Done MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Spam filter exception request

I am prevented from creating Template:Vandal because a previous example in Template:Vandal/doc used an IP address, which is blocked by a spam filter. I removed that example, but am still blocked from creating that page. I have put the source code in Template:Vandal/sandbox in the interim. Perhaps allowing just 10.0.0.1 to avoid other IP spam? Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 04:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Y Done I created a blank template, which you can now edit. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Y Done again: I moved your sandbox to the template. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

It seems I still can't include the IP-user example (see an old version with the offending string) - Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 23:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand the problem. What text are you trying to put where? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

See this diff which shows the text and location — Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 00:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Y Done. Longer-term issues with including IP addresses may still exist, but this particular edit at least is fixed. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Special:Log/Tule-hog

As seen in the link above, User:Tule-hog has made various manual imports from WP to WV. Some may be OK, but others may be questionable. Despite various messages on their talk page (User talk:Tule-hog) from user:Dan Polansky, the user continues manual imports. Should we let this continue, keep talking with the user, or should we stop them? What would be the best option? (@Jtneill: As Dan's mentor, your feedback is welcome here, and @Koavf: since you previously communicated with the user in Special:Diff/2659041, we would like to hear about your thoughts) MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 06:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog: From what I see on your talk, you are at least not doing this anymore. While copyright-wise, we can of course copy anything from en.wp to here, it is best to use Special:Import because it preserves edit histories, provides attribution, and can also import dependencies like another modules or templates. Can you explain what your goal is with this copying and what in general you want copied? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I am motivated by updating Wikiversity template/module infrastructure in places where appropriate. Note I do not have the importer role. I perform what I've been calling Wikiversification on docs and templates themselves, where much of the time the pages I come across are rough imports with raw Wikipedia links without modification, incorrect language for the project, bad category mapping, or are dependent on other undefined modules/templates.

To be clear, I am not just going through picking out popular templates/modules and importing them. I approach a maintenance task, and where relevant spend the (not mindless) time to transform them to fit Wikiversity. Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 06:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I find "in places where appropriate" too non-specific. I do not see any specific need addressed. I find Colloquium a good forum for a proposal to copy (or import) a large number (how large?) of Wikipedia templates and categories; the approximate volume should be stated as part of the proposal. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 07:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I undeleted and userfied to User:Tule-hog/Wikiversification. If you are thinking of making some large-scale change, then it's probably best to clarify your thoughts there, propose it (succinctly!) at the Colloquium, and then coordinate with a custodian who can import. This is kind of a death by a thousand papercuts situation: any one change is perfectly fine, but the volume may be systemic, so it's wise to get the community's input. Besides, we could help and many hands make for light lifting. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

(Question due to unfamiliarity with importer mechanism:) Do we also submit requests to update already imported templates at WV:I, or does that only happen once (and hence update requests should go to WV:RCA)? Thanks, Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 23:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, if you import a resource from another wiki and the original changes, the updates need to be imported again here manually and since WV:I is a dedicated space, it's probably best to put requests there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:05, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Category:Wikiversity policies and guidelines

Should this category finish being developed? (I could do so if desired.) Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 06:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Similarly with the list detailed at Category:Wikiversity development (i.e. finishing up + deleting the list mentioned there) —Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 06:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@Koavf: double checking is alright for Category:Wikiversity development as well (started by McCormack) —Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 02:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Can you reword this question? I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

The content of the category is "This category is being developed." so I believe it is in an unfinished state (i.e. adapting the categorization schema). Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 07:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I think if you have some rational way of organizing the pages, that's fine. I don't know what

[User:CQ]][had in mind when he put that there, but he has basically not edited here in 4.5 years, so go for it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Category:Rejected policies

Should I use the list of tagged pages found in this category to update WV:POLICY#Rejected policies? Or is WV:IAR the only truly firmly rejected proposal? Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 22:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

The category and that list should have the same items and at first glance, what is the category is in fact rejected proposals, therefore, the list should be updated. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Just noting this thread which suggests that another user made that list in the first place using tags, so it may have recursively snuck something in. Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 02:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikiversity:Research guidelines

This page is listed in {{official policies}}. Should it be updated as adopted on WV:POLICY, and if so, should it be considered a policy or guideline? Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 00:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

(Also, should it link to the top-level Wikiversity:Research instead, which uses (the confusingly named) {{research policy}} navbox?) Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 00:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Good question. From what I can tell the beta Wikiversity research page is the official policy and the en.wv local version is a copy/fork that hasn't been officially endorsed.

That leaves me wondering whether we want to pursue a local variation as an official policy or potentially remove the local variant and redirect to the beta version. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

What suggests that https://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Research_guidelines is an official policy? And if it is, does the policy match the actual practice? For instance, it says "Original research at Wikiversity is subjected to peer review in order to allow the Wikiversity research community to strive for verifiability" (italics mine): is that really true outside of Wikijournals? Moreover, the putative policy states in a box: "This page contains summaries of discussions which have taken place in various languages." But this cannot be true since the policy reads like a monologue and a proper summary of discussions cannot be a monologue. A quick skimming of the page raises some red flags.

Be it as it may, I think keeping a local copy is vital since then we have the option to amend it without thereby requiring an international cross-language input to the changes. Of course, the amends will be unable to change some core features of Wikiversity (no metamorphosis allowed), but some amends should be possible.

As for the local Wikiversity:Research guidelines, I propose to rank it as policy proposal, given the misgivings.

In any case, this discussion does not belong to "Request custodian action" but rather to "Colloquium" since the outcome of the discussion can be implemented by anyone, not only custodians, and since input from non-custodians seems welcome. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 05:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Agree with retaining local version and treating as policy proposal.

I've hidden the note about the guidelines being a copy of the beta guidelines (it confused me at least into thinking that beta version was also the policy on en.wv).

Softened the peer review requirement to being "open" to peer review rather than being "subjected" to peer review.

Agree that further work e.g., on drafting and potentially making official should be followed through on Colloquium.

Thanks @Tule-hog and @Dan Polansky. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and I was not paying attention: Wikiversity:Research states "This page provides guidelines for research in Wikiversity" so there appears to be some redundancy/overlap between Wikiversity:Research and Wikiversity:Research guidelines. Confusing. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 05:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikiversity:Policies ➝ Wikiversity:Policies and guidelines

This is a proposal to move Policies to a name matching the scope of the page, Policies and guidelines.

The more descriptive title will make identifying the location of guidelines easier for newer participants. Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 15:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

See more discussion. Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 20:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Please fully protect...

Module:Message box/fmbox.css. It is used in 29 system messages. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:DCDC:4B47:21DA:D90E (discuss) 20:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:26, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Uh Oh!

Hello. Something Went Wrong With Editing. My Dog And Me Is Editing The New Learning Resources. Dog Grooming (Learning Resources). So Help Me. Tanks. 2603:9000:7AF0:5DA0:B940:EF5A:3D27:A8F0 (discuss) 18:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like you are editing Pomeranian, which is a bit of a mess. I think that proper pet care could be a fine topic for this site or our sister site Wikibooks, but the state this is in is pretty rough. I'd recommend you take a look at Wikiversity:Welcome and some of the pages linked there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

IP block exempt request

Can a custodian grant IP block exempt flag to Silver Dovelet please? Her account got into the crosshair of a very wide IP rangeblock and that rangeblock also prevented her from making the request directly here. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 09:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Y Done for six months. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks like she's back on track. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 00:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Good deal. Let me know if it needs to be re-upped. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your fast assistance. Silver Dovelet (discuss • contribs) 22:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit MediaWiki page

Copy and paste content from w:MediaWiki:Cite-tool-definition.json to MediaWiki:Cite-tool-definition.json. This will enable quick use of citation templates in VisualEditor by the means, that user just click on an icon and can fill in Citaction template, which pops up. See related discussion in the Colloquium. Juandev (discuss • contribs) 07:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

@Koavf txh. Juandev (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I would like to add my work to my user subpage

hello, I am looking forward to developing a relationship with the philosophers here. I have my own ontology and would like to debate or develop it with them.

But every time I post it says I have reached my post limit, even though this is the first post. What should I do? Wait some time as a new user???

Here is what I would like to post to my user subpage

Content hidden for readability purposes, expand to see it

{{{2}}}

MarsSterlingTurner (discuss • contribs) 22:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

As you may know, this is a sister site of Wikipedia and a few other projects. On all of these projects, it's pretty common that new users have some limitations on what they can do after first making an account. To be honest, I can't recall the exact restrictions here, but they are something like "have an account for three days and make five edits": something usually very accessible for most users. As for what can be posted in your user space, it is pretty flexible, so what you've proposed can certainly be posted there. If you'd like, I can copy and paste it to User:MarsSterlingTurner/Ontology or some similar name and you can edit it from there. Note that Wikiversity is not purely a vanity press or free hosting and anything you post, even in your userspace is subject to being deleted it is off-topic or cannot reasonably lead to an educational resource or if you don't edit for an extended period and drafts of partially-completed work are left here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Justin, that would be fine if you could add this post to User:MarsSterlingTurner/provingDivine --MarsSterlingTurner (discuss • contribs) 22:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Done. See User:MarsSterlingTurner/ProvingDivine —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

thank you MarsSterlingTurner (discuss • contribs) 02:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

See also Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion#Wikiphilosophers/Ontology/MarsSterlingTurner. MarsSterlingTurner seems to be the same person as User:HumbleBeauty and User:Subtlevirtue. It seems to me that even very low quality material can be tolerated in user space but not in mainspace. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

I replied to you about the quality of the material. You have yet to respond back. here is what you said by number and here is my reply;

1a) The empty set is not the same thing as nothing,;

both the empty set and the word nothing have the same properties (they have no referent or content), so by virtue of the identity of indiscernibles the empty set is equivalent to the word nothing.

1b) making the 2nd line incorrect or disconnected from the first line;

I clearly mean the word nothing when I use {} in the math. so the logic follows by definition of the 'variable'.

2) the empty set is not a statement or proposition, and therefore cannot be meaningfully connected using the implication operator, ⇒.

If I am not mistaken the empty set is a zero-parity predicate. P()⇒P() is a logical tautology... and in any case every word implies the same word! It's a logical necessity that the empty set implies the empty set. MarsSterlingTurner (discuss • contribs) 23:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Vandalism on WikiDebate

Hello!

A user who goes by the name "Prototyperspective" has been repeatedly deleting arguments on the "Does God exist" debate. In particular, my own arguments were being constantly removed without an explaination on 26th and 27th of February (back then I posted these arguments from my IP address - 196.150.240.160). I would like to request you to reinstate my arguments and block Prototyperspective from deleting them without an explaination. Brent Silby (discuss • contribs) 10:19, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

I experienced the same thing for the last few days and wish the same or be given and explanation for the deletion. MarsSterlingTurner (discuss • contribs) 23:34, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

New User Exceeded New Page Limit

I am trying to post an academic article on behalf of a client and keep running into the "new user exceeded new page limit" flag no matter how much I shorten the article. Can you help me overcome this? The article is below and has a CCO 1.0 license.

Learning resource collapsed for readability

Non-Contact Boxing Therapy for Depression, Anxiety, and PTSD: An Evidence-Based Mental Health Treatment Modality

Dr. Barry Zabielinski

March 19, 2024

Non-contact boxing therapy is currently not offered as a mental health treatment option for veterans within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in Montana or within the VA healthcare system. The benefits of physical activity for the treatment of mental health issues are well established, and there is growing evidence for non-contact boxing therapy as a viable activity-based treatment modality for various mental health conditions. Below, I present a proposal to pilot an outpatient non-contact boxing group for veterans diagnosed with depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Please note: The focus of this proposal is individual non-contact boxing-based exercise. All exercises are performed using equipment only, and participants are never in physical contact with an opponent as part of the exercise. It is acknowledged that there are known health risks associated with contact boxing.

Evidence

Physical Activity and Mental Health

The mental health benefits of physical activity are well established. According to the VA, physical fitness is associated with reductions in depression, anxiety, stress, and the risk of relapse of depression (Veterans Health Library, 2024). Research has also shown that exercise can be as effective as antidepressants in the treatment of depression (Dinas et al., 2011) and that physical activity may even help to decrease suicidality among veterans (Davidson et al., 2013). Furthermore, exercise is associated with decreased PTSD symptoms and improved coping among combat veterans (Caddick & Smith, 2014; Whitworth & Ciccolo, 2016). In pursuit of a more holistic approach to mental health care, some have even called for a shift to a paradigm that views exercise as a medicine for veterans facing mental health challenges (Caddick & Smith, 2017).

Non-Contact Boxing Therapy for Mental Health

Non-contact boxing as a form of activity-based therapy has steadily grown in popularity over the past decade. A review by Bozdarov et al. (2022) analyzed 16 studies, each examining some form of non-contact boxing with a mental health component, and found a common theme of a “significant reduction in symptoms of anxiety, depression, PTSD, and negative symptoms of schizophrenia” (Abstract, para. 3). Additional themes across the sources that were analyzed included the efficacy of non-contact boxing for (1) creating anxiolytic effects, (2) improving mood, (3) improving sleep, and (4) improving overall quality of life. One randomized controlled trial found that a combination of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and non-contact boxing was more effective at reducing symptoms of major depressive disorder and schizophrenia than CBT combined with relaxation techniques (Oertel-Knöchel et al., 2014); similarly,  a study by Gallenberg (2020) found that, of 24 men who participated in a 6-week boxing group, the majority experienced reduced psychological distress, improved health behavior, and increased self-esteem. Though most research has thus far focused on predominantly male cohorts, non-contact boxing-based groups have been found to be effective for both males and females (e.g., Gallenberg, 2020; Gammage et al., 2022).

Commonalities among non-contact boxing interventions also extend to the delivery format: most use a group setting, high-intensity interval training methodologies, and weekly session delivery (Bozdarov et al., 2022). However, not all interventions have used such formats, with one study finding that virtual group boxing—through the use of virtual reality goggles—was effective at reducing stress among adolescents (Cioffi & Lubetzky, 2023).

Though the current project focuses specifically on mental health, there is also research supporting non-contact boxing-based interventions for diagnoses such as Parkinson’s disease and other movement disorders (e.g., Larson et al., 2022). Indeed, a 2022 U.S. House of Representatives bill proposed by former New York representative Brian Higgins called on Congress to “direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide coverage for boxing-based exercise classes for veterans diagnosed with certain movement disorders” (Boxing Therapy for Parkinson’s Access Act, 2022). Should a pilot group prove successful in the current study, future efforts could expand to include other evidence-based applications of non-contact boxing therapy, such as for Parkinson’s disease and other movement disorders.

Pilot Group Format

The pilot group will consist of a closed cohort of 6‒10 participants who will meet biweekly for 60-minute sessions for 4 weeks (eight sessions total). Each session after the first will have a focus that builds on the previous session (Table 1). Session 1 will focus primarily on orientation and fundamentals, while sessions 2‒8 will each follow a similar format (see Table 2).

{

Leavitt Eldredge Law Firm (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I can do this for you, sure. As for how to overcome the problem, this resolves itself after you've been around for x days and made y edits. Forgive me for not remembering how many days and edits are required off-hand. See Non-Contact Boxing Therapy for Depression, Anxiety, and PTSD: An Evidence-Based Mental Health Treatment Modality for your learning module (I'm pasting it now and doing some editing). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:23, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Upload new page

Hi, I just finished typing up a tutorial page for a uni course that included an external link to a Wikibase instance we're using as an example. That got flagged and blocked, so I took it out and tried again and then that got blocked because I'm a new user exceeding the page limit. Could someone manually approve the page, remove my restriction, or explain to me how I can try again to upload it myself?

OpenRefine for Wikimedia Commons & Wikibase

Mulejour (discuss • contribs) 14:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for posting and I'm sorry that you got frustrated by the process. As you probably know, Wikiversity has several sister sites like Wikipedia and it's common across all of these sites that there are some restrictions on what a new user can do. I honestly don't recall the exact formula here, but after x days and y edits, you will have the freedom to do what any other user could do and that's usually a very achievable pair of variables, like one week and 10 edits. If you want to post the content to User:Mulejour/Sandbox, then I can move it to the proper name. Just reply here and start with {{Ping|Koavf}} and I'll be sure to see it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:57, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Per Wikiversity:Autoconfirmed users, it is 4 days, with no minimum edit count. Tule-hog (discuss • contribs) 20:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Justin, thanks for your answer! I've put the site on our own Wikibase for the time being. I'll just move it over here myself once I'm autoconfirmed. I've yet to get the logic behind why Wiki considers one's accounts across the Wiki ecosystem to be the same in some ways but not in others... Anyway, thank you very much for your help! --Mulejour (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Block of MarsSterlingTurner

It would seem to me that User:MarsSterlingTurner should be indefinitely blocked. For one thing, this user account is likely a block evasion of User:HumbleBeauty and User:Subtlevirtue, indefinitely blocked by Dave Braunschweig. Moreover, he is likely to add very low quality material and discussion to Wikiversity, as is seen in his subpages; alone User:MarsSterlingTurner contains suspect statements like "I invented several stars and nuclear reactors"; I have no idea what it is to invent a star and genuine inventors of nuclear reactors are very rare.

I do not propose to delete his subpages unless these are copyright violations or plagiarisms, which for some of them is possible.

I am usually quite happy to debate even bad ideas at length and patiently explain what is wrong with them, but this case seem to be too bad to waste people's time. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 04:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

More supporting information: this seems to be the same person as https://www.linkedin.com/in/mars-sterling-turner-0009b6127/, who indicates to be associated with "Frontier Research Enterprise Ecclesia", which is mentioned at User talk:Subtlevirtue. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 04:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Y Done MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 05:26, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Pages created by user AIvolution

AIvolution (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account) creates pages like AI Psyche® & Promptilligence® Learning Portal. These appear to me to be some kind of inappropriate promotion or possibly also nonsense/reduced sense. The person being promoted would be "Krishna R. Ramamuthry" or similarly spelled. There is also Behaviouracy (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account), who created Wikiverisity:AIvolutionaries and School:AIvolutionaries/Behaviouracy, which looks similar to the pages by AIvolution.

However, I am not sure; what do you think? (As a semi-admin/curator, I have the rights to delete these pages.) --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 05:48, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

@Dan Polansky: Both accounts have been blocked and their contributions have been nuked. Biggest giveaway was the promotional text on "AIvolution"'s userpage, advertising the works of an "intelligence institute". I've left the talk pages open if they want to clarify their works but I've blocked the accounts in the meantime per the promotional contributions and usernames. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

trying to make a User Page

I was trying to make a user page, but it won't let me. It was labelled "unconstructive". Could someone please help? Kumpa-pasión (discuss • contribs) 19:01, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@Kumpa-pasión: It looks like you've been able to edit your user page? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:10, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I have. Thank you anyways. Kumpa-pasión (discuss • contribs) 13:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

User 177.44.228.42

177.44.228.42 (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account) repeatedly inserted non-English pages (I recall to have deleted some) so a block (one week?) seems to be in order. Being a curator/semiadmin, I cannot block the IP address. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 10:29, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Barriers to converting Google Doc into Wikiversity Article

I am receiving obstacles in publishing this article: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kTjCkeVs2LxEr5Vbeowh1uhHYQD_5XGksQ8vCoQ6Kqs/edit?usp=sharing

Can you please address these barriers. DEIMOCKRAZY (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

While there are some extensions to MediaWiki that allow interfacing with Google Docs (mw:Extension:GoogleDocCreator and mw:Extension:GoogleDocs4MW), I don't know of a way to seamlessly export a Google Doc into MediaWiki text. There may be a way to export it to X(HT)ML and then into MediaWiki, but I've never tried that. Since this isn't thatcomplex or long of a document, the solution may be to do it by hand.

As an aside, note that the doc you linked includes a piece of media that is licensed CC BY-NC-ND 2.0, which would not be compatible with the license for original works here and at our media repository Wikimedia Commons, so it would have to be either removed or uploaded locally under a fair use rationale, which is not necessarily a problem, but I just wanted you to be aware. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:01, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I can't create a userpage

I'm a Wikipedia editor. I recently joined the Wikiversity and tried to create a userpage. But everytime I publish my changes, it shows a notification which says that my actions were harmful. I was also directed to this page by that notice. What am I supposed to to Vinizex94 (discuss • contribs) 10:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Y Done You now have one. This is an issue with having a new account. I honestly forget the exact numbers, but it's something like once you have an account here for x days with y edits, you can create a userpage. It may even be just the days with no edit requirement. Seems like this is resolved now. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:56, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Subject: Blocked by abuse filter – Request to post creative research

Dear administrators,

I’m trying to contribute an original conceptual article titled “Kingdom of Memory Theory” to Wikiversity.

However, the submission has been automatically blocked—possibly due to repeated character patterns (such as listing the alphabet)—by the abuse filter.

This page is part of a creative linguistic project and does not contain any harmful or inappropriate content.

I would appreciate it if you could:

• temporarily disable the filter for this specific contribution, or
• allow me to publish the draft on a sandbox or user subpage.

Thank you very much for your support and understanding. Atozjiro (discuss • contribs) 10:34, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Dear Admin,

I am trying to contribute a personal symbolic theory project called "Kingdom of Memory Theory" to Wikiversity. However, I have encountered an automatic filter (repetition pattern) that prevents me from creating a user subpage or learning resource.

This project is educational in nature, using the alphabet as a memory landscape to explore linguistic and visual thinking. I would like to confirm if this can be posted under user namespace or as an approved learning resource.

Could you kindly assist with:

– Reviewing the appropriateness of this type of creative research

– Allowing me to publish the draft

– Clarifying if multilingual versions (e.g. in French, Spanish, German, Japanese) would also be allowed

Thank you very much for your support.

--~~~~ Atozjiro (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

I made these two threads one topic. To be clear, multilingual content should generally be posted with individual learning resources at various editions of Wikiversity, such as fr: or ja:. I've now created a blank user page for you, please let me know if you cannot edit that to post your content. Generally, these kinds of issues are only for very new accounts as a spam avoidance measure. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:56, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Request action

Dear Admin,

I'm new user on wikiversity, and I'm trying to edit my personal page. However I get publish changes denied every time I try to do it.

Could you please assist with this issue.

Thank you,

--Bazarkua (discuss • contribs) 22:12, 7 June 2025 (UTC)Bazarkua

Y Done A blank page has been created that you can now modify. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:53, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

User talk:Marciohendrik

Please review this request for an unblock, (@Jtneill: for mentor feedback). Please also note:

• Previous history of userpage issues (w:User:Marciohendrik, User:Marciohendrik)
• No non-personal Wikimedia usage (Special:CentralAuth/Marciohendrik)
• User:Marciohendrik has not mentioned anything relevant to Wikiversity/Wikimedia
• Too fast for w:Wikipedia:Standard offer
• Wikiversity:Privacy policy issues in this request

I look forward to hearing from other custodians. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 22:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps try unblock and encourage user to contribute to learning by editing related pages e.g., about music? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:42, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Jtneill,

Sounds a good idea. Marcio Hendrik (discuss • contribs) 09:14, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Seems safe enough to unblock and encourage, as JTN suggested. The fact that he wrote an email is something. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:58, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

I have given unblock per above. MathXplore (discuss • contribs) 11:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for all you do. Feel free to ask for second opinions, but also know that you have great judgement and I personally trust you entirely. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:17, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Just to weigh in because I recieved an email from Marcio regarding this block, but I think the unblock is fine. The email shows that the user is responsive and willing to improve, so a warning and a detailed welcome template should suffice. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 19:37, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Atcovi,

Thanks for the understanding. I am responsive and willing to improve, you are correct.

Marcio Marcio Hendrik (discuss • contribs) 09:21, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Marcio Hendrik (discuss • contribs) 09:15, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello MathXplore,

I now understand the rigour implied over Wiki and articles.

I wish to join not only to participate and contribute, but also to improve my writing skills and recycle my knowledge, as I know that by explaining something you also revisit and learn more.

Compared to all the contributors I got in touch, your background and experience are on another level.

I welcome all suggestions coming from you guys; please do not hesitate to contact me when you feel like.

Sincerely,

Marcio Hendrik Marcio Hendrik (discuss • contribs) 09:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

My proposal would be this: 1) keep the user account unblocked, but 2) delete User:Marciohendrik as self-promotional until the time the user delivers at least some non-self-promotional content.

The reasoning is this. If we keep the user page content as is, then we by implication affirm the following rule/principle: in the English Wikiversity, users are allowed to create self-promotional/self-presentation user pages even if they contribute no content. I am not convinced the rule/principle is desirable. On the other hand, one could argue that this moderate self-promotion creates almost no harm. In https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Terms_of_Use, I did not quickly find anything supporting a particular corrective action.

As for the internet presence/identity of the user, he is possibly this person: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marcio-hendrik.

Incidentally, my own user page in the English Wikiversity and Meta can be easily seen as self-promotional; in defense of this, I would respond that I spent years (actually over a decade) delivering content before I expanded my user pages in this way. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 08:54, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Polansky,

Yes that user is me. I'm not concerned about my user page for the moment; I am currently working on the edits on existing pages as suggested by the contributors above.

Regards,

Marcio

Marcio Hendrik (discuss • contribs) 11:10, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Request to Approve Page Edit with External Links

Dear Admin, I’m a new contributor to Wikiversity. I’m in the process of documenting original modern Chinese proverbs that I personally coined, with proper authorship declaration under my full name “Ho Siew Khui 何小驹 (Hé Xiǎojū)”.

My edit was blocked due to the “New User Exceeded New Page Limit” and “New User Created Page with External Link” rules. I understand these protections, but I assure you the content is constructive, original, and non-promotional. The external links are to my published articles on Medium that fully explain each proverb in detail.

Kindly assist to approve or whitelist this contribution. Thank you very much for your support.

Best regards, Ho Siew Khui 何小驹 (Hé Xiǎojū)

I propose to move Modern Chinese Proverbs and Sayings by Hé Xiǎojū / Kenny Ho to user space. My initial articulation of rationale is a cheap/quick one: not good enough as Wikiversity material; very little to learn from; serves mainly to promote articles by the wiki page author located outside of Wikiversity. Anyone has a better rationale articulation?

(The post I am responding to is by KennyHoProverbs (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account).) --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:29, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, Dan, and for giving me the chance to clarify my intentions.

This project documents original modern Chinese proverbs that I personally coined and published with full authorship declaration. Each proverb reflects contemporary human behaviour while drawing inspiration from traditional Chinese idioms, forming a new and educational category of linguistic expression.

Far from being promotional, the page serves as a language and cultural learning resource, offering:

– Bilingual explanations (Chinese + English)

– Detailed semantic breakdowns with Hanyu Pinyin

– Real-world application and interpretation

– Authorship transparency for academic and public referencing

The external links included point to full essays that explain each phrase in greater detail, but the core explanatory content is fully present on Wikiversity — ensuring the page stands independently as an educational entry.

I believe this aligns with Wikiversity’s purpose of supporting learning materials, especially for:

– Chinese language and cultural studies

– Modern idiom and proverb creation

– Creative linguistic expression in contemporary society

If needed, I’m open to reformatting or restructuring the page to better meet mainspace standards. I respectfully ask for your consideration in allowing it to remain within mainspace to support broader accessibility, educational referencing, and authorship traceability.

Warm regards,

Ho Siew Khui 何小驹 (Hé Xiǎojū) KennyHoProverbs (discuss • contribs) 14:10, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

User Nguyễn Khánh Tùng and his pages

FYI, I moved some pages to user space, to User:Nguyennhuhuyen/The NKTg Law on Varying Inertia and User:NKTLaw/The NKT Law on Position and Varying Inertia Interaction. Rationale: it is very likely pseudophysics, and I intend to do similarly with similar pages from the same source. It is also self-promotional, but in user space it will probably do little to no harm; NKT seems to stand for Nguyễn Khánh Tùng.

Nguyennhuhuyen (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account) was blocked for block evasion; other user accounts likely of the same person seem to include Khotramhuong (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account), NKTLaw_Nguyen_Khanh_Tung (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account), NKTLaw (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account), etc.

An aside, we cannot be perfectly certain the editor is really called "Nguyễn Khánh Tùng" or whether it is an impersonator, I think.

Admittedly, this is not really a request for custodian action but a single record to coordinate blocking and quasi-deletion relating to this person. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:11, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Subject: Request to Rename Page Title for Accurate Authorship Attribution

Dear Custodian,

I would like to kindly request a rename of the following page:

🔗 https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Modern_Chinese_Proverbs_and_Sayings_by_H%C3%A9_Xi%C7%8Eoj%C5%AB_/_Kenny_Ho

New proposed title:

Modern Chinese Proverbs and Sayings by Ho Siew Khui 何小驹 (Hé Xiǎojū)

Reason:

I am standardising the authorship name to Ho Siew Khui 何小驹 (Hé Xiǎojū) across all platforms to ensure proper attribution and avoid confusion with similarly named public figures.

This format reflects the full name in English, Hanzi, and Pinyin — and matches what I use on Medium, Xiaohongshu, and all academic references. The mention of “Kenny Ho” is deprecated.

I appreciate your help in moving this page with full history preserved. Kindly advise if any adjustment is needed.

Thank you!

— Ho Siew Khui 何小驹 (Hé Xiǎojū) KennyHoProverbs (discuss • contribs) 05:40, 28 July 2025 (UTC)