User:John Bessa/wikimedia in hiding

Censored but none-the-less extremely valuable

The WP, and with the wv, has had a history of fascist approaches to information; information that can be shown to deviate from the "rules" is eliminated, irrespective of truth. Use of this strategy is often to fulfill bias.

For many in the wikimedia empire, information elimination in the sense of Beck's cult protection is an activity unto itself, even though the perception of benefits for such activity is a misconception.

Missing from the WP is an essaythat can only be described as fascism that was law for the first decade of the Wikipedia's life: You have no rights on the Wikipedia.

What Wikiversity is not
Wikiversity is a space for the creation and use of free learning materials and activities. This page outlines some of the things it does not do.


 * A degree-granting institution: Wikiversity does not confer academically accredited degrees, diplomas, certificates, etc.


 * A place to confer titles: Wikiversity participants are all considered equals. Wikiversity discourages participants from using or making up their own titles. Starting or leading a learning project doesn't make you any more a "professor" than having finished participation in a learning project makes you a "scholar" or a "doctor". Titles shouldn't be used to suggest or imply importance, or that you are somehow more deserving of respect.


 * A duplication of other Wikimedia projects. While Wikiversity complements other Wikimedia projects, it will not simply duplicate their content. So, if you want to read about a topic, you may be better off visiting, say, Wikipedia or Wikibooks, but if you want to participate in learning about or researching a topic, you can do so at Wikiversity. Learning materials will be created and used on Wikiversity, but materials on other projects may also be used as learning or research materials themselves or even places to consolidate this learning or research, i.e. writing an article, manual, etc. based on what you've learned or contributed. There may be some overlapping, but each project will maintain its own focus.


 * A post-secondary institution. Wikiversity will not confine itself to "higher" or "third" level materials, but rather develop materials for all age groups. It is a university in the sense of a multilingual community of teachers, learners, and researchers ("universitas magistrorum et scholarium") dedicated to lifelong learning.


 * An advertising platform. Wikiversity makes a distinction between:
 * a) creating or linking to useful learning resources for learning about websites, products or services, and
 * b) using Wikiversity to advertise websites, products or services.
 * Please respect the need to provide educational and research material in unbiased ways that promote learning and research. Self-promotion, which includes the promotion of websites, products or services, may be deleted as unwelcome advertisements.


 * An advocacy platform. Wikiversity makes a distinction between:
 * a) creating or linking to useful learning resources for learning about different causes or advocacy groups, and
 * b) using Wikiversity to promote causes or advocacy.
 * Please respect the need to promote learning and research above any personal agenda or causes you might feel strongly about. Self-advocacy or promotion of a cause that does not promote learning and research may be deleted as being noneducational or unrelated to research.


 * A static project. Wikiversity continues to grow and evolve rapidly. Wikiversity policies, guidelines, practices, and services will be continually developed to meet the needs of the Wikiversity community.


 * Wikiversity is not a place for bias
 * Contributors must avoid saying or implying that one group of people, other organisms, or even objects, as being better than another. An primary example of bias is singling out groups or persons, such as to say "everyone is doing the right thing except you."  Another important form of bias that is seemingly unlikely is an overly-positive approach that implies social or cultural superiority (Beck, Prisoners of Hate).


 * Do not use unsupportable opinion as fact
 * All information is valid, but specific information, especially in the social sciences, has to be expanded within the scope of its context. Information can evolve into theoretical stages becoming forms of "natural law," such as evolution, giving it status within the "single phenomena" criteria of Science (as well as religion), but the criteria for the level of support for this kind of information is exceedingly high and out of the scope of opinion or perception.
 * Likewise anecdotes, such personal experiences, need to be viewed within their context in such a way as to support learning. As an example, one group of people, the blue people, may be in conflict with another, the green people.  A blue person who encounters angry green people and is abused by them will very likely be angry with green people.  This is important information within its context, as the fear or anger of the blue person are normal responses to an abnormal situation (Rogers).  But the anger of the blue person, or even the green people, does not create a valid reason to believe that green people are bad; it simply re-enforces well-understood concepts of cultural struggle.


 * Do not use derogatory language
 * While the use of derogatory langauge is not necessarily biased, as unbiased people often use negative language that may seem biased, it may lead to conflict, and hence bias, and primarily for this reason needs to be avoided.


 * Criticism has to be valid
 * Critical analysis is increasingly being replaced by more perceptive research strategies, yet it remains a tool to bring well-supported information into areas suffering from misconception: an important goal of education. As with all information, well or even moderately supported criticism is valid in that it helps re-enforce the building blocks of knowledge by attempting to locate it's weak points as areas for improvement.  The criteria for the validity of criticism is in the genuineness of the critic; the motivation has to come from a desire to improve knowledge, and hence make it educational.


 * Use common language
 * In information democracy all peoples have to be included: all languages and dialects have to be represented. Because Wikiversity functions through a colloquium, language has to be tuned for all types and levels of understanding, especially the language understandings of the under-classes, who through bias have been consistently disenfranchised throughout history: the most glaring example of bias.


 * Be supportive
 * The work here is research, learning, and teaching, and is meant to be beneficial. The Wikiversity goal is to build and share information in ways that earn the respect of the world, and especially the Wikimedia Foundation.  Supportive acts, as small as they may see--even far below the concept of collaboration, go a long way to encourage contributions.  Criticism has to be in the context of support.


 * Be constructive
 * Focus study with a sense of purpose so that your accomplishments have wide application. The criteria for knowledge construction is that the information being developed and shared benefits all peoples and the world from the perspective of a single phenomena of Science.