User talk:Morley

Opening gambit
I'm glad you came on over from Wikipedia. I just read what you put at Colloquium and I will respond there. --JWSchmidt 03:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Clarifying the Wikiversity proposal
Hi Morley, I actually moved your comment on w:Talk:Wikipedia to your userspace here User:Morley/Clarifying the Wikiversity proposal (linked to from your userpage). I hope it can be better used here to develop policy, as I said at Wikiversity talk:What is Wikiversity?. Thanks for your input so far - and, if you're looking for the "originators of the Wikiversity proposal", you might start with myself and/or JWSchmidt. Cheers. Cormaggio 10:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Towards improving the New User Experience
Hi Morley, and thanks for your input here. I very much welcome this - as we really need to make Wikiversity comprehensible, navigable, and usable so as we can begin to attract and retain new visitors to the site who may be as bewildered as you.


 * I attempted to build a Sandbox here, most of it trying to teach myself how you added sectional boxes and the like. Wiki coding is obviously very different from standard HTML.


 * I'm also unsure how to engage in dialogue in this environment, such as craft in-context responses to your input. Please make your recommendations.

Here are my responses to your suggestions:
 * Yes, we do need a "channel" or easily visible link from the main page that explains exactly what Wikiversity is. I don't think this can be done automatically for non-logged-in users (nor do I think this would be desirable),


 * I'd like to propose a Main Page which offers a prominent coloured box with large type bidding new users welcome. And the balance of the page designed for returning visitors offering Wikiversity announcements and quick links. I've already begun to think out the content of the new user channel. Essentially it would be a guided experience where users could drill down for further details and easily bounce back up to the main thread. Effectively it would take them through all the stuff normally contained in an extensive FAQ but in a much more palatible form.

but we can certainly make this more clearly pointed out on the Main Page. The page I was thinking of linking to (as a first stop) is What is Wikiversity?. This can have links off to info on, eg. how to browse content, or what are learning projects/communities.
 * I don't think we really need any (or, at least, many) new pages - as you point out, much of the information that needs to be there is already there in patchy or scattered form. This simply needs to be collated better in concentrated places, with interrelated links to other aspects in more detail.


 * I think of a "new user channel" as a section with "training wheels". Don't send them to links outside the new user channel where they then get lost and don't get to see the whole picture. That's exactly what happened to me on my first visit. I mistook one detail as being the complete picture.


 * You should shortly see what I have in mind.


 * As I work, I'm also going to be learning about wiki (up until now I've been primarily a reader of the Wikipedia, not a contributor or editor). So I want to provide guidance to others like me on not only how to navigate but also how to contribute.


 * Equally, there's not much point in doing this in secret/private in your sandbox or wherever - people who are interested in what Wikiversity is will be willing to help out on these pages and want to give their input, myself included.
 * Incidentally, I've created you a sandbox at User:Morley/Sandbox so you can play around with that to your heart's desire :-) I've moved there the text you had on this page under the heading "Sandbox" - I hope that's ok (generally, user talk pages are for leaving messages).


 * A good move. I have no problem with others viewing and editing from an early stage. But I'm equally wary of people piling on, ripping apart a rough work-in-progress. I often don't know exactly where I'm going until I'm nearly there.

You now have two pages in your "User space" - these are generally pages that you can do with whatever you like or which reflect your own personal views or whatever. Note that I'm not saying that the first one I made for you (ie the comment moved from Wikipedia) is not useful - I simply moved it there for the time being as it made more sense to have it in Wikiversity and it wasn't directly usable for any other page at this time. You could, for example, leave it as it is as a personal statement on Wikiversity to link to from other discussions - current, or in the future - it's up to you.


 * Excellent. I'll work here in my user space for a while, but will announce this draft project with links in the Colloquium for comment and contributions. I'd really like it to be a collective effort.


 * Overall, I feel, like you, we need a simple, comprehensible introduction with links out to further detail or clarification. I'd suggest starting with the page I mention above and see what this needs as a clear introduction to the project. Then think about what this needs further clarification on, and link to those pages and develop them. Don't worry, a lot of these pages were written in the first flush of enthusiasm or simply as placeholders for more comprehensive information, but now we need to bring all this together to make Wikiversity better for the newcomer.


 * I may have some policy recommendations to make about the execution of the Wikiversity. Because my first impression of the Wikiversity was that its form hadn't really been defined, and what there was of it, was primarily focused on individual studies, I drafted that original document you moved over here. I've since learned the people here have already been thinking along similar lines. Not sure yet what degree of convergence. It's my view the internet has now matured to the point where a well formed Wikiversity could be a very significant engine for education around the globe. To contribute to such a flowering would be awesome.

Thanks again for your help :-) Cormaggio 22:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

My 2¢: I think part of the problem of not having clear guidelines, goals, etc., is in that I don't think we're entirely figured out what Wikiversity is going to be yet. But I do think discussion needs to be more centralized. I've tried doing this for one topic by turning Creation of Free Online University into a hub discussion accreditation, etc (you can see how scattered discussion was just from looking at the links there!). But that needs to be done for many more topics. The Jade Knight 02:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Excellent contribution, Jade. I'll check out the link. One of the problems of maintaining maximum flexibility through an overly loose self-definition, IMHO, is you end up with no definition at all. Which is exactly my first impression of the Wikiversity. I've since learned that was a false first impression, that there's actually much more here than I first thought. My purpose on these pages is to do two things at once — gather together a guide to new users (help them get up to speed and on the right track) and simultaneously help tease out a clearer self-definition for the workings of the Wikiversity.


 * Last week I posted a lengthy proposal for the overall shape of the Wikiversity (while I was still labouring under the false impression there wasn't much going on here). You'll find a link here. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Morley/Clarifying_the_Wikiversity_proposal (Obviously, I'm simultaneously learning how wiki markup differs from conventional HTML and have a long way to go.) I'm also working in a sandbox to develop a new top level introduction for first time visitors (eventual access through the Wikiversity Main page). I've just started, but will be working on this over the next few days. You'll see it here. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Morley/Sandbox Contributions and critiques welcome. Morley 03:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * FYI, standard protocol is to reply on the other person's talk page under an appropriate heading. =]  The Jade Knight 05:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

examples of good learning materials
I think each Wikipersity portal should start creating a list of learning resources. For example, see Portal:Life Sciences. --JWSchmidt 04:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe we could combined them all on Featured? Wait a minute, this isn't the Colloquium page... Um, Hi Morley!--134.48.93.193 01:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Welcome newcomers
Morley - I am deeply enthused by what you're writing. I hadn't even read your talk page for weeks - and am seeing your replies to me and further discussion that's spawned. Wikiversity is such an exciting project - and you're right - it's still to be fully formed - or at least details certainly need to be hammered out. And, of course, this needs to be easily understandable to anyone who clicks on Wikiversity randomly, looking to find out what it's about. So, I'm very happy that you've taken such a keen interest in doing just this. There are still excellent questions on the Colloquium that need further discussion. This is all vital to the furthering of this project - and I'm really excited about what we can turn this project into.

But back to more the precise focus of our discussion at the moment - and I'm very relieved that you're taking it well. Believe me, I know full well what it's like to be a newcomer and have everything be so confusing - though you are navigating it like a pro. Particularly something as complex as what we are developing here. And I'm very happy to learn that you're going to stick with us. I was deeply concerned that we had lost someone fantastic. And even more so that it could have been my doing - I couldn't imagine anything worse.

When you say you need pointers to various features of a wiki, I hear you. In fact, I would very much like to help you. We all learn to a certain extent through doing and then making mistakes and learning from our mistakes. But we also need to be given helping hands from people who are a little more experienced with the technology/context etc. I would love to be able to help - here's a few tips about the things you asked.

Watching/navigating a page's history: This is probably the most useful part of a wiki - to be able to scroll through every single change that's happened to it and to see what changes were made between each version. This is through the "history" tab at the top of the page (beside the "edit" button). Clicking on the history tab of any page will give you the history of that specific page - both content pages and talk pages have an edit history. Here's the history of the Welcome, newcomers page. You can see every change that was made to the page, when, by whom, and what edit summary they provided. Then (and what's really nifty) you can go to any version of the page at any stage in its history - ie this is how it looked on the first day it was created, the 20th August, 2006 (you can do this by clicking on the date and timestamp - ie "22:40 20 August 2006" - in the specific line of the history that you're interested in). Also (and this is very useful), you can see what's changed between two versions by virtue of what's known as a "diff" (a difference between versions). For example with that version i just linked to (you may want to do this with two windows open at the same time so you can read this message and also see what I'm referring to), you might notice, in small text, under the page name, some details about what revision this is, at what time/date, as well as the name of the person who created it etc. Below this there is a line saying "Older revision, current revision, Newer revision". Clicking on the "older" or "newer" revisions will bring you to the version of the page as it was before or after - much as you would have done by clicking on one of these versions in the original page history. But beside these newer and older revisions, you will see (in brackets), the word "diff". Clicking on the "newer revision" diff will give you this - where you will see green and yellow coloured boxes at the top of the page with lots of red text in them. The text in red, or text in a green coloured box where there is no text on the other side means that this is text that was either moved, edited, created ar deleted. This was quite a substantial change to the page; however not all changes are that significant - here's the following diff (which I got by choosing the "next diff") and which shows Rob changing the link to the Colloquium to make it appear as "Colloquium" and not "Colloquium". (I'll help you with this too if you like - or you could go into edit mode here and look at what I've done - in fact, this is generally a very helpful way of learning - going into edit mode, seeing how something was done in wiki syntax, canceling the edit, and then replicating that wiki syntax elsewhere.) However, there are other ways of looking at diffs - you can see them directly from the page history. Go back into the main history page (you can always simply click on the "history" tab at the top of the page - regardless of what mode you are in), and you will see - on the left - two links in blue labelled "(cur)" and "(last)". These will give you the diff between one version and either the previous version or the following version (I generally just use "last" - as it tells me what that edit did to the page, ie the difference between the version as it was edited and the previous version).

There are other really handy ways of keeping track of changes - the most obvious other one is the ability to "watch" pages. You might have seen the "Recent changes" page - which is always in the left hand sidebar of every Wikimedia page (in Wikiversity it's the third link, under "Main Page" and "Browse"). This will give you all the edits that are happening throughout Wikiversity - over the last few hours/minutes, depending on how busy Wikiversity currently is. But if you don't want to scroll through everything that's happening, you can have a personalised recent changes page - which is known as a "watchlist". You can build a watchlist by going to every page you're interested (eg. Colloquium and Welcome, newcomers) and clicking on the watch tab in the top of the page - to the right of the "edit" and "history" tabs. Clicking "watch", means that that page (and its talk page) are added to your watchlist. Then, when you have built up a watchlist (and you need to be logged in to do this), you can go to where it says your name at the very top of the browser window (ie "Morley, my talk, my preferences.."), and you will see a "my watchlist" link. Click on this link, and you will be brought to a list of your watched pages with details of the last edit to each page (providing it is within the time specified by you - you can do this in preferences, but I won't get bogged down in such detail). I can't show you an exampe of this through a link - watchlists are completely personal pages that allow you to track changes to the pages only of interest to you (though it will not necessarily tell you about interesting new pages that are created - this is what the recent changes page is often good for).

There's so much to learn in editing wikis that sometimes it seems overwhelming. It seems like you never stop making mistakes. This is always the case. I've been around for over two years and I still feel like a newbie (honestly!). But making these mistakes and gradually learning from them and persisting with it - will eventually pay off. Little things that you find along the way (like watchlists and diffs) become your way of finding out quickly what's been happening. Other wiki syntax things are - for me - a constant path of discovery. There are some good help pages here for now in Wikiversity (through the "Help" link in the top left sidebar), eg Help:Editing, but maybe, if you really want to find out more about linking, editing, watching etc, you might be better following the help pages in Wikipedia (which have pretty much everything).

Anyway, I've been rambling on here long enough. Hopefully some of it might be useful. And I'm thinking (partly inspired by your comment) that we could even be creative about all of this and start an actual learning project/activity about editing/navigating wikis. There is a page on Learning to learn a wiki way (and others) but I think we could do something that's a little more exciting that our introduction and our help pages put together to get people started. What do you think? Is that what you were suggesting yourself?

Ok, well, I hope I've done enough to reassure you that I'm working in good faith. Turf wars couldn't be further from what I want to do. I want to turn Wikiversity into a real, positive force for good in this world - and to encourage anyone, the world over, to get involved and have their say. I admit, on reflection, that my edit was slightly brutal - and potentially hurtful. There's a fine line between "being bold" (a Wikimedia motto) and being rude (and/or destructive). I should have - at least - told you that this is what I was doing. I was in a bit of a rush - i didn't take the time to explain myself - and we could have had a terrible misunderstanding if you hadn't been so magnanimous. I thank you for that - and i think I've learned something from this - not to assume that another person will know or appreciate what you're doing, particularly a newcomer. It sounds so obvious to say - but we're always learning.

Take care Morley, looking forward to continuing this work/discussion, and anything else you're unsure of or need help/guidance with, please don't hesitate to contact me. But also, don't be afraid to make mistakes - everything on a wiki is undoable - even a whole edit (more on that later perhaps..). All the best. Cormaggio 08:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

jumpstart participation instructions for teachers and students in real-world courses
Maybe Wikiversity should have something simlar to w:Wikipedia:School and university projects/Piotrus educational boilerplate. --JWSchmidt 15:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to help with that. What would be great is to have make such boilerplates more user friendly with interface like our tutorials have (Tutorial, w:Wikipedia:Tutorial).--Piotrus 16:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Learning Projects
"I'm unclear on the intent or functionality of the "Learning Projects" page. Would it be fair to say it's intended to be a "cross discipline" compendium of online courses? Such a cross discipline page would be very useful in helping would-be learners to select something they might be interested in." <-- Notice that the Wikiversity project proposal established two major parts for the project: In order to start discussing these two parts of the project I created m:Wikiversity:Communities and Hunter-gatherers. When the Wikiversity website was started, these pages from the meta-wiki were imported and their content went into new pages such as Portal:Learning Projects and Portal:Learning Materials.
 * 1) learning materials - in my mind, these are "static resources" that could be downloaded for use in bricks-and-mortar schools
 * 2) learning projects - in my thinking, this means activities that are built around wiki editing and that take place at Wikiversity

"is there a mechanism in place to keep this page relatively current?" <-- the only mechanism I know of is called "editing". I think it is safe to say that most people gravitate towards a conventional academic area and to not pay much attention to pages such as Portal:Learning Projects.

"It would be useful to give this page some prominence, especially for newcomers. And find some way to raise it to the awareness of those introducing a 'Learning Project'. Prime the pump, as it were." <-- I think when new visitors are introduced to Wikiversity, a key point to be made is that visitors are invited to become Wikiversity participants who can create and develop learning activities, discussion groups, learning collaborations, in general, "learning projects". The idea of editing wiki pages as a form of collaborative learning is unknown to most people. I think it would be useful for the learning projects portal to have tutorials about active learning by wiki editing and featured examples of learning projects, particularly one related to "current events" and other topics that would give new visitors a quick peek at the potential of using Wikiversity as a tool for exploring their personal learning goals.--JWSchmidt 02:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

"Learning Materials/Learning Projects terminology" <-- I guess many people who publish in the education field use the term "Learning Objects". I find it hard to use the term "object" in this context. I prefer the general term "learning resources".

"worthwhile pointers to the Learning Projects and Learning Materials pages" <-- I think that the portals for academic areas such as Life Sciences should feature their best learning projects and materials. Eventually we will have featured content on the Main Page. I think content development projects should encourage people to think in terms of creating learning projects, so we have a link to Portal:Learning Materials from Template:Department boilerplate. Of course, one type of "learning resource" is a conventional course. Since this is a wiki, we need to encourage people to make "courses" that are learning projects that encourage participation in the form of wiki editing. Really, the whole lesson to be learned from Wikipedia is that it is learners who will add most of the wiki content, not expert teachers.

"objectives on the Education page" <-- It is all to easy for people to ignore the Wikiversity project proposal, not think about what it means, and just remain trapped in thinking that Wikiversity should make conventional courses like everyone else. The only thing I have against conventional courses it that they do not make use of the power of the wiki interface. I think Wikiversity could benefit by prominent discussion of these issues. One idea is to have a "wiki journal" that would feature meta-discussions about the Wikiversity earning model.--JWSchmidt 18:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

courses
"the content comes across as actively discouraging the creation of online Learning Projects" <-- I assume you mean that you have concerns over the wording and use of this template: Template:Courses. I believe that this template in in use on a total of 8 Wikiversity pages. Most of these 8 pages were created at Wikibooks before the Wikiversity project was ever approved and the pages were built around a list of courses. Such pages that portray Wikiversity as a place for lists of courses are a problems for Wikiversity because the original Wikiversity project proposal's model for "E-learning" was: "A framework within which members of the community can actually take courses online." The Board of Trustees rejected that original project proposal and requested that the WIkiversity community construct a new project proposal that would "exclude credentials, exclude online-courses".

My best guess is that the Board was thinking about conventional courses: "In U.S. education, a course is a unit of teaching that typically lasts one academic term, is led by one or more instructors (teachers or professors), has a fixed roster of students, and gives each student a grade and academic credit." (source)

I think that most people who create or see a list of courses are thinking about conventional courses. I think it is important for such people to think about what a wiki website is and to be aware of the contents of the approved Wikiversity project proposal. The purpose of Template:Courses is to get people to think about these issues and to provide links to pages where they are discussed.

I do not understand how, "Non-traditional Learning Projects that are oriented towards learning about conventional course subjects are encouraged within Wikiversity," can be interpreted as suggesting that Learning Projects are frowned on or banned by anyone. In my view, conventional courses are one type of "learning project" and the template says that even conventional courses are allowed at Wikiversity. The conclusion that should be drawn from reading the template is that participants should think about how a wiki website works. It might be wise if the Wikiversity community talked more about "Wikiversity courses" (courses at Wikiversity) and how they can differ from conventional courses. Wikiversity participants should try to take advantage of the power of the wiki user interface for collaborative webpage editing. Wikiversity does not have credentialed teachers and does not award academic credit for courses. Wikiversity participants should not expect to find conventional courses at Wikiversity. Wikiversity participants should not expect that they can create a conventional course at Wikiversity. It is a wiki, so people can do as they please, but nobody should have unrealistic expectations with respect to courses at Wikiversity.

"I'm hesitant to barge in and re-write." <-- I probably spent about 5 minutes making Template:Courses. That is not much. I have no doubt that there are better ways to word the template. Many people do not understand what Wikiversity can possibly be about if it is not for conventional courses. Many people can only think in terms of conventional courses. Some of these people get very frustrated and upset when they learn that the Board refused to approve Wikiversity as a project that would include conventional courses. It is important to try to get these upset people to think about the alternatives to conventional courses.

"From a newcomer's point of view, I'd much prefer text which points to the Learning Project and other pages, and possibly the Newcomers page as well. Give positive guidance rather than warning and 'danger' stickers." Wikiversity is very new and very small. I am an advocate of placing "featured content" on the main page and having a well-organized system for bringing the best examples of Wikiversity content to the attention of visitors. Most people seem to feel that there is still no real content at Wikiversity worth featuring. We have pages such as Wiki as a tool for learning that could be used to provide "positive guidance" and help get visitors tuned into the possibilities that exist for wiki-based learning projects. I started a list of "General Community Learning Projects" and put it at the top of the Browse page with the hope that there could be a few central projects where everyone could participate and learn what it is like to work within a collaborative learning group at Wikiversity. A serious problem we face right now is that it is hard for a small group of people to "cover" the vastness of all the various academic subject areas; chances for collaboration are few. Another problem is that most Wikiversity participants are still thinking in terms of conventional education rather than collaborative learning projects. I think this situation will continue until a few small collaborative learning groups form and real Wikiversity content starts to grow.--JWSchmidt 17:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

"points to limits but doesn't articulate what those are and is vague about their resolution" <-- I view Wikiversity as in experiment in how to make use of wiki technology to support education. It has been frustrating to try to guess exactly what the limits are because the limits were imposed by the Board and the Board has never given a clear description of the limits. My belief is that the Board would like the community to explore multiple approaches to online learning in wiki format in order to try to discover what works and what does not work. "..... the idea here is to also host learning communities, so people who are actually trying to learn, actually have a place to come and interact and help each other figure out how to learn things. We're also going to be hosting and fostering research into how these kinds of things can be used more effectively." (source)

I recognize that some people are made uncomfortable by uncertainty, but that does not mean that we should manufacture some artificial set of clearly defined limits just to make people feel better. Part of the approach to information exchange that has grown out of the Wikipedia project is the idea that people should be shown the original documents and allowed to decide what they mean. In a wiki it is easy to make use of hypertext links to connect people to original documents, often in their original context. I think that the Wikiversity community needs to continue to have discussions about why the Board rejected the first Wikiversity project proposal and approved the modified proposal. I suspect this is a topic that almost every Wikiversity participant should discuss and try to understand.

"it reads like something written by a lawyer, like a warning label" <-- I'm sure that part of that comes from my experience in having to produce and enforce contracts with students. In the old days, a course could have a short syllabus that would inform the students what the course was about and what the students would be doing in the course. Now a syllabus has to be a long legal contract anticipating every possible objection and complaint. In the year since the Board rejected the original Wikiversity project proposal there have been many people with objections and complaints. It is natural for me to try to anticipate those objections and complaints. If I crossed the line into being needlessly confrontational, it is your job to correct the situation.

"may I suggest the template speak instead about 'online learning projects' wherever one might otherwise use the word 'course'." I think the template has only been used where the term "course" was being used without any discussion of what "course" means. As long as the template functions to encourage people to think about how to make an effective course at Wikiversity, I'll be satisfied.

"Do I have your support for a rewording of the Template?" Of course.

"the way wiki software is currently structured, a back-and-forth dialogue such as this one isn't really comfortable. Needs a forum structure — but that's a different conversation." <-- I agree. I hope the wiki software will eventually incorporate a modern, searchable system for threaded discussions.--JWSchmidt 00:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Fresh material and new comers
Hi Morley, sorry for not getting back sooner - I've been away for the weekend.

On providing examples of Wikiversity material, you asked: "How does the Wikipedia manage this? Are there any particular mechanics used over there to keep the content current and fresh?". Well, the only "mechanics" I can think of there is to have a featured article, as well as a featured picture, which change daily on the Main page. I think, in the extract you quoted me on, I was thinking of something more like what they have in Commons, where examples are searchable through categorisation - eg. Category:Video. However, this is still quite primitive - and I'm hoping that our metadata system will help us come to a usable solution. There may be other ways of providing current content - by maintaining a box on the main page with latest (preferably exemplary) material - an idea which could equally be implemented by individual portals or schools.

On the Welcome, newcomer's page, I made some edits before, but I'll go straight there to have another look.

Thanks again, Cormaggio 20:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've made a first stab at merging the "old" and "new" content on Welcome, newcomers - see what you think. Cormaggio 23:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Learning projects
I was just commenting to someone that I had not seen a single "learning project" working like we layed it out to the board. I just did a survey a week ago, User:Rayc/School status. Hopefully this will change the next time I update it.--Rayc 23:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I did the survey by just looking through the brose school listings. There are hidden stuff appearing all the time, and I've been trying to get categories on them so at least there is one way of getting to them.  I litteraly just found Facilitating Online today.  If you really want to see everything, look at Special:Allpages, that's how I find stuff.--Rayc 01:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Have you seen this page: Featured? --Rayc 02:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

history
"how Wikiversity came to be?" <-- There is History of Wikiversity. I have also been working on a few history issues at User:JWSchmidt/history. --JWSchmidt 02:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia administrators
I'm an administrator on Wikipedia so, I was just wondering if I could automatically become one here also -- Drini 21:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

And I'm new here by the way. -- drini 21:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

From Colloquium
category:Wikiversity Essay Contests Did you mean that? By the way, I think the wikimedia convention uses Category:Wikiversity essay contests -- small letters. --Hillgentleman 02:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Links to Category pages
Hi Morley. You've probably discovered this by now, but Category links work a bit differently. To simply display a Category page use the code Category:Whatever (Note the leading colon). Otherwise MediWiki thinks it's an active category. The Welcome section on your user page now displays the category pages instead of activating them. CQ 17:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

email options in user preferences; reaching talk pages
Wikipedia has a help file for user preferences w:Help:Preferences and that page has a short description of the email options. I think many people are bothered by the fact that they click on the link that is built into a signature and they go to the person's user page rather than that person's user discussion page. Some people put an extra link from their user page to their user discussion page. Other people make a custom signature that has a direct link to their user discussion page. --JWSchmidt 21:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Where I see wikiversity going...
I'm not sure what comment you were referring to, but I what I was thinking of wikiversity as being something of a watering hole that people involved in various learning projects can meet and combine resources. In my personal view, there is already a huge amount of courseware online, but what is needed is for human beings to come together and make the skeleton come to life.

Roadrunner 01:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Automatic Link between User:UserName and User_talk:UserName

 * You said,
 * "It would be a good idea, by default, to add a link to User_talk:UserName on the User:UserName page when created. I find myself on many user pages having to edit the URL in order to get to that person's Talk page."


 * Solution
 * The "User Page" tab and the "Discussion" tab are automatic built-in links for switching between User:UserName page and User_talk:UserName page. The use of the word "Discussion" rather than "User_talk page" does create confusion. (Does that answer your question? Robert Elliott)

@home
There are screensaver out there that can run processes in the background. Alone, they are only as good as the computer they run on, but when you've got it running on 10,000 computers, you can use that processing power to run simulations that rival supercomputers. People who want to work on a problem, like a cure for aids, make a screensaver that you could download that help run simulations to cure aids. I was saying that we should put them on the school pages. --Rayc 06:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey Morley, I just stumbled on this via Rayc's talk page. I believe this is known as "Distributed computing" (see also list). Hope you're doing well. Cormaggio talk 12:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)