User:Dan Polansky/About Wikiversity

Requests for comments
Wikipedia has requests for comments. Wiktionary has votes, codified for closure based on numerical consensus.

Wikiversity's analogue seems to be this: This is governed by a policy:
 * Community Review
 * Community Review Policy

Policies and guideliness
Here: User:Dan Polansky/Policies and guidelines

Administrators
These are named "curators" and "custodians", the former denoting something like quasi-admins who can still delete pages but not block users.

Example vote:
 * Candidates for Custodianship/Koavf 2

Recently active administrators using their deletion tools: User:koavf, User:MathXplore. See also recent deletions log.

Other relevant links:
 * Curators (quasi-adminship) -- delete, rollback, import from other wikis, and protect pages
 * Custodianship (adminship) -- as above, plus block
 * Request custodian action -- often request for block
 * Special:ListUsers/curator
 * Special:ListUsers/sysop ("custodian")

Deletion
Links:
 * User:Dan Polansky/Policies and guidelines
 * WV:Deletion (a guideline)
 * Speedy deletion
 * "Speedy delete for pages you authored, as well as for pages that clearly don't belong in mainspace." (italics mine)
 * "A non-exhaustive list of possible reasons custodians may speedy delete resources include [...]" (italics mine)
 * Proposed deletion
 * "Proposed deletions for pages that perhaps should be deleted (or moved to draft or user space) unless they are improved."
 * "Resources may be eligible for proposed deletion when education objectives and learning outcomes are scarce, and objections to deletion are unlikely."
 * I don't fully understand the sentence and it raises doubts. Where should I look to observe "learning outcomes" to see whether they are scarce (in supply not meeting the demand?) How should I know whether objections to deletion are unlikely?
 * Template:Delete
 * Template:Proposed deletion
 * recent deletions log

WikiJournals
There are "WikiJournals" as something of a separate project within Wikiversity (Category:WikiJournal):
 * WikiJournal of Medicine: established in 2014; Category:Articles included in WikiJournal of Medicine
 * WikiJournal of Science: established in 2018; Category:Articles included in WikiJournal of Science
 * WikiJournal of Humanities: established in 2018; Category:Articles included in WikiJournal of Humanities
 * WikiJournal of PPB (Psychology, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences): established in 2023

A vote running from 2016, with votes still coming in as of December 2023:
 * Meta:Proposal: WikiJournal as a sister project

Requirements on reviewers:
 * WikiJournal of Medicine/Peer reviewers
 * WikiJournal of Science/Peer reviewers
 * WikiJournal of Humanities/Peer reviewers

Journal editors:
 * WikiJournal of Medicine/Editors
 * WikiJournal of Science/Editors
 * WikiJournal of Humanities/Editors

Navel gazing
There is a concern that Wikiversity becomes a place where people will make pages about Wikipedia and other wiki projects. It is not clear to what extent this has become a problem or will become a problem. If Wikiversity gets dominated by such quasi-introspective content, it may look like a failed project. The term "navel gazing" was used disparagingly in Requests for comment/Shut down Wikiversity. It is possible that the user name Omphalographer is a reference to this possible problem of navel gazing.

The value of Wikiversity
See Is Wikiversity a project worth having?.

Draft space
Regulated via Drafts. Editors voted to delete pages from there after 180 days (about 6 months), as per Wikiversity talk:Drafts, April 2019. The draft deletion policy was approved by Dave Braunschweig, mikeu, Guy vandegrift, Bert Niehaus and Marshallsumter.

Tolerance of junk
There are conflicting signals in the English Wiktiversity concerning tolerance of "junk": nearly worthless material. On one hand, there has historically been a lot of junk in the mainspace that did not face deletion. Often, when new junk is added, some admin sees it, adds a category or the like, and leaves it alone. On the other hand, if there really were a desire to tolerate junk indefinitely, there was no need to institute deletion of junk from the Draft space after 180 days (ca. 6 months) as per above, which took place unanimously via votes of Dave Braunschweig, mikeu, Guy vandegrift, Bert Niehaus and Marshallsumter. This 2019 vote signaled a desire to delete junk.

Another sign of intolerance of junk is the moving of many pages created by Marshallsumter to his userspace: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Marshallsumter%2F&namespace=2, e.g. User:Marshallsumter/Radiation astronomy/Absorptions. The trigger for this move seems to have been the nomination Requests for Deletion/Archives/17 (opened on 8 December, closed on 9 December), which was followed up with Requests for Deletion/Archives/18.