User talk:Danib93

 Hello and Welcome to Wikiversity Danib93! You can contact us with questions at the colloquium or me personally when you need help. Please remember to sign and date your finished comments when participating in discussions. The signature icon above the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy, Civility, and the Terms of Use policies while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may


 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.
 * Explore Wikiversity with the links to your left.


 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations.
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity.

You do not need to be an educator to edit. You only need to be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage. See you around Wikiversity! --—Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

—Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Babel
Would you add Babel information to your user page? It is not mandatory, just useful. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 16:17, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Radical editorializing in Wikidebates
I reverted some of your more radical editorializing in Wikidebates, and I feel I ought to explain my thinking: Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 16:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Removal of arguments that you think are invalid is problematic; since, one of the purposes of Wikidebates is to expose invalid arguments by allowing objections to them to be formulated. This purpose is harmed by removing invalid arguments. There is some line beyond which an argument is so obviously invalid that it can be removed, but it is not clear where that line is. In case of doubt, there can be a discussion about a proposed removal on the talk page of the debate. If an argument is invalid and lacks a strong objection already formulated, a good way of rendering it harmless is by adding a well formulated and convincing objection.
 * When significantly changing order of material on a Wikidebate, I feel you ought to proceed sensitively, and explain in detail what you are doing rather than on a summary level, especially on a debate into which you added nothing of substance. In general, the world has an endless reserve of meddlers who have subjective reasons to change things, and if we allow them to reflect their subjective preferences into artifacts, the result will be endless to and fro. It seems some of your changes were objective improvements and should be reinstated, but too many of them felt like rather arbitrary whim.
 * I would recommend you try to create a new debate on a subject that interests you, to get the perspective of a debate creator rather than editorializer. It also shows you have the skills required. One new debate already makes a difference in establishing skill or its lack.


 * Hi Dan,
 * Thanks for your explanation.
 * -However, somebody has to do the job of ordering the debates. Otherwhise, they can get so long and messy that no one else would ever want to participate. Talking with other members of wikidebate, I took that "ordering" job.
 * -Please accept my apologies if some of my edits seem subjective. I is not at all my intention to be so, but to be absolutely objective. As you said, "there is some line beyond which an argument is so obviously invalid that it can be removed, but it is not clear where that line is". I have a conservative position regarding that, so that if an argument does not fit in the form of a scientific argument, it is invalid. Still, I will try to be even more objective.
 * -I have created many debates I´m interested at, and participate in all the debates I can. Thank you.
 * For anything else you want to talk about, we can exchange emails. Danib93 (discuss • contribs) 18:06, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. It is very hard to be truly objective, and to even approach that takes considerable practice. I have so far usually refrained from removing content from Wikidebates, for the fear that I would thereby exercise too much of my arbitrary will. Wikidebates have so far been not excessively long, especially compared to fully developed Wikipedia articles, so I see no urgent need for pruning them. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 07:13, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Which is the best religion to follow?
Thank you for your taking the initiative to create a new wikidebate: I noticed Which is the best religion to follow?. However, I think it is so undeveloped as to be possibly deletion-worthy. It also does not have the usual yes-or-no question format, having a large scope untypical for a wikidebate. I am not sure what to do about the page; one thing you could do is try to flesh it out with the help of external sources you will find. I could do the fleshing out/expansion myself, but given the very large scope of the page, I feel hesitant about it. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 07:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)