Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives/19

= Undeletion requests =

My two edit summaries at User talk:Elominius (non-urgent)
During the cleanup of spam, my two edit summaries that read "trash" were caught in as well. Them appearing as "edit summary removed" makes the appearance that I wrote something bad, even though I did the opposite, removing the bad stuff. ☺ If someone could take a minute to restore the two edit summaries, that would be appreciated. Elominius (discuss • contribs) 10:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Elominius: Unfortunately, the way the vandalism was removed means there is no way to restore those edits without rewarding the vandal. I've deleted everything but the original welcome and the protection. You should be all set now. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I see, though I only wanted the two edit summaries and not the contents unhidden, but what you did, selective deletion, is alright too. Thanks for help, Dave. Elominius (discuss • contribs) 15:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Universal Bibliography
There has been a request to move this back into mainspace.

Discussion
If you have a lot to say, you are encouraged (but not required) to create your own heading and continuously edit it to make your strongest case for your position.

Guy Vandegrift
I personally have no strong feelings on what does and does not belong in draft space, but as a custodian with the authority to delete and move large projects, I handle several requests for speedy deletion every day. I moved it out of namespace due to a belief that this was what the community would want. So far, only one editor has expressed an opinion, which was to move it back to mainspace. I will move it back to namespace unless there is a clear consensus to keep it in draftspace.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 07:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

James500

 * See Colloquium Modify this space as you wish.--Guy

next
Replace heading with some sort of name and write your position here.

Voting
Please keep your reason for voting down as brief as possible.
 * NEUTRAL I moved it to draft space to get the conversation started --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 06:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Move to name space -- User:James500 (proxy vote entered by User:Guy vandegrift based on discussions on talk pages and Colloquium
 * Keep by default. I see no basis for deleting this or moving it to draft space. While I do feel that it's an unusual project which could use a bit more explanation of its purpose and scope, I don't see any compelling reason to delete it. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 04:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Help:Guides
This page was deleted, possibly inadvertently, by while cleaning up other outdated "guided tour" material.

This page is currently linked from the Mediawiki sidebar, so that link shouldn't go to a deleted page. Alternatively, if we don't believe this content is useful (I have no strong opinion one way or the other), the link should be removed. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 19:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I undeleted it. I am OK with keeping or deleting.  But lean towards keeping for the simple reason that this case is complicated by all the incoming links.  We have more low-quality pages than we have time to delete.  We will delete more if we focus on the quick-deletes.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 21:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

= Deletion requests =

Guy vandegrift
'''"Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system" has been moved to "Hydrogen system". I propose that it be either returned or deleted from Wikiversity.'''

The move from mainspace into a subpage of Physics was was challenged by the author, User:Fedosin, who is an extremely prolific editor. And the prolific nature of the author complicates things. It's too much for us to carefully evaluate. Consider these four pages:
 * 1) De Broglie wavelength with pageviews I haven't carefully examined each equation, but it appears to be correct. It is somewhat quirky because it follows history and begins with Debroglie's original relativistic argument, which is typically ignored in introductory textbooks because it is too advanced for the majority of readers.
 * 2) Wikipedia block log
 * 3) One of many reverted edits on WP
 * 4) WP articles covered by sanctions on Fedosin

We need to focus on Hydrogen system. I picked that page because both chemists and physicists can agree that hydrogen is a simple system that is used by both disciplines to introduce quantum mechanics at the high school or college level (United States terminology.) I have no objection to Hydrogen system being on mainspace. I don't think it should be a root page (i.e., it needs to be a subpage.) My request to User:Fedosin is that they explain what value hydrogen system has to chemistry and physics students. In particular, I would like to see a published paper or excerpt by another author on this subject.

BTW, this wiki doesn't count потому что это одна и та же статья.

--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Fedosin
For the first I repeat the situation in more details. On December 25, 2022 User:Guy_vandegrift renamed the Hydrogen system page to Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system page without leaving the redirect to new page. But in Wikiversity there are some pages with links to Hydrogen system page, such as

Stellar constants, Quantization of parameters of cosmic systems, Stellar Dirac constant, SPФ symmetry, Coupling constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Fine structure constant, Stellar Boltzmann constant, Stellar Planck constant, Substantial electron model, Strong gravitation, Strong gravitational constant, Stellar Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Selfconsistent gravitational constants, Scale dimension, Electrogravitational vacuum.

Then On December 25, 2022 User:Guy_vandegrift renamed the Similarity of matter levels page to Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Similarity of matter levels page without leaving the redirect to new page. But in Wikiversity there are some pages with links to Similarity of matter levels page, such as

Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter, SPФ symmetry, Stellar Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Stellar Dirac constant, Substantial neutron model, Scale dimension, Gravitational constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Praon, Stellar Boltzmann constant, Nuon, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Discreteness of stellar parameters, Substantial electron model, Electrogravitational vacuum, Quantization of parameters of cosmic systems, Stellar constants, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system, Substantial proton model, Coupling constant, Stellar Planck constant, Strong gravitation, Model of quark quasiparticles, Characteristic speed, Substantial photon model, Strong gravitational constant, Gravitational model of strong interaction, Covariant theory of gravitation, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Monopoles, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Velocity circulation quantum, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Gravitoelectromagnetism, Field mass-energy limit, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Quantum Gravitational Resonator.

The main idea of User:Guy_vandegrift about renaming of the pages is: Hydrogen system and Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Similarity of matter levels is fringe science according to the opinion of Wikipedia.

Some years ago, at Wikiversity there was great discussion about ways of development of Wikiversity. One of the questions was the next: Is it possible to use at Wikiversity a page that was abandoned at Wikipedia? The answer was: Yes.

The reasons for such answer are: 1) Wikiversity is not the Wikipedia. 2) Wikiversity has its own internal policy. 3) All pages which useful for creative thinking and which summarize some research fields are welcome and should be developed in the best possible way. 4). Fringe science do not allow in Wikipedia, mostly due to of absence of reliable references. In Wikiversity the rules are not so strict, since Wikiversity is educational project and it is not encyclopedia. Sometimes fringe science today become advanced science in the future. The Wikiversity can help in the process of such transformation of fringe science.

I agree with the User:Dave_Braunschweig that the resources needs to be better structured with an introduction and subpages. A much greater effort must be made to inform users of which parts are standard accepted science and which parts are original research. It seems it is important and should be taken in account all the editors.

The value of Hydrogen system is mostly not for physics and chemistry. The hydrogen atom is only one example of Hydrogen system at nuclear level of matter. There are some other levels of matter and each of them has its own Hydrogen system. The Hydrogen system is a notion in cosmological picture of Universe named Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter.

I suppose add some new references to the page to support masses of the objects predicted in Hydrogen systems model, that are known now with more accuracy. Fedosin (discuss • contribs) 16:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments
First, it appears that "Hydrogen system" is named incorrectly in terms of current usage. A quick Internet search for hydrogen system describes hydrogen energy systems and hydrogen storage. There is no Wikipedia article for Hydrogen system, so the article should not remain as currently named.

Second, if kept, the resource needs to be better structured with an introduction and subpages. A much greater effort must be made to inform users of which parts are standard accepted science and which parts are original research. The original research must be labeled as such, and perhaps as fringe science, unless there is any other resource Fedosin can point to that supports this research.

I'll remain neutral for now as to move vs. restructure. But it should not remain in main space as it is currently presented.

Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)


 * You aren't finding any current usage of the term "hydrogen system" because it describes a concept which is only relevant within the scope of Fedosin's "infinite hierarchical nesting" theory of physics/cosmology. This theory is not accepted by the scientific community at large, so there is no relevant usage of the term outside his publications (such as these pages).
 * What concerns me most about this group of pages is, as w:User:Xxanthippe put it, that "they promote the impression that they are mainstream and are likely to mislead non-experts into thinking that the articles are authoritative" (source). This is a particularly pressing issue given that there are essentially no resources on Wikiversity which can counter this false impression by presenting scientifically accepted views on topics of quantum physics or cosmology, and that Fedosin's pages generally fail to mention those views. Categories like Category:Particle physics are dominated by nonstandard theories, and contain more information which could mislead a student than that which could teach them.
 * One question I might propose is whether it would be more appropriate for this content to be reviewed and (potentially) published through a WikiJournal rather than presenting it directly as a learning resource. Peer review is a critical part of the scientific process, after all; bypassing that process by publishing an unreviewed theory directly as a learning resource seems improper. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 21:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Template:Dotcom/doc
I think Wikiversity should disallow efforts to bypass the custom Creative Commons with templates like this. See the following quote from this documentation page:

To make matters worse, there are a number of such pages in both template and main space. I have concerns about unnecessary templates in general. See my note to this template's author at User_talk:Cody_naccarato --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I would be in favor of deleting the link TLD templates (dotcom, dotedu, dotgov, dotnet, dotorg, dotwiki). The top-level domain used by a web site is not a reliable indicator of the commercial nature or copyright status of the material being linked to. If authors wish to provide information about web sites they're linking to, they can and should do that in descriptive text. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 18:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * These templates will be removed. Cody has enough research credentials to be a "valued customer" if he decides to stay on Wikiversity. For that reason I am going to go easy on him.  Everything I do will be reversable. For years I have been struggling with a major flaw in our use of template space that would go away if we could have two such spaces: one an approximate mirror to Wikipedia:Template space, and the other for Wikiversity.  Since that is not likely to happen soon, I will kludge someting with Guilded template.  It will take about an hour or so. ........... My patch to this problem is an unnecessary exercise, because as Omphalographer points out, any wiki page has zero value in the commercial world because it is extremely vulnerable to vandalism. But this is a good experiment on the value of getting trivial wikiversity templates aout of template space. ....... It is reversable because the original page is at Special:Permalink/2464534--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 00:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The attempt failed!!!! I reverted my edits to Helping Give Away Psychological Science/Helpful resources for themes in Squid Game and will soon return the 6 templates and their doc subpages. We have no choice but to leave the 6 templates in template space.  This project is far to serious for Wikipedia to whimsically impose our idea of what belongs on Wikiversity mainspace.  --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Checking 1 page, 6 templates, and 6 doc subpages
All 13 pages have been returned and double checked. My mental health is restored.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There was a problem with the history of the dotwiki pages. That was fixed.


 * Helping Give Away Psychological Science/Helpful resources for themes in Squid Game ✅
 * 1) Template:dotcom✅
 * 2) Template:dotedu✅
 * 3) Template:dotgov✅
 * 4) Template:dotnet✅
 * 5) Template:dotorg✅
 * 6) Template:dotwiki✅


 * 1) Template:dotcom/doc✅
 * 2) Template:dotedu/doc✅
 * 3) Template:dotgov/doc✅
 * 4) Template:dotnet/doc✅
 * 5) Template:dotorg/doc✅
 * 6) Template:dotwiki/doc✅


 * Twelve silly templates is not a serious problem. They will be deleted only at the author's request. The discussion will stay open until we are certain everything has been restored to normal. --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hold on. You nominated this template for deletion, I seconded that, and you agreed. No one has argued that they should not be deleted. On what grounds have you determined that the "decision to keep these pages is (almost) final"? Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 04:31, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It means that I am pretty sure that we will decide not to delete without consent of the author. Our policy is to give valuable contributors more liberties.  I highlighted the statement in yellow to reassure the author that I respect his effort (look at the page -- it was a lot of work by a skillful editor.) I once learned Robert's Rules of Order.  I am certain that I am allowed to change my vote and almost certain that I won't.  If memory serves me right, I cannot withdraw a motion under Robert's Rules.  We don't follow Robert's Rules, but either way it looks like we have a 1-1 tie because I have changed my mind.  The discussion needs to stay open because we need the template's author to assure us that I reverted all the changes.  I am unlikely to change my mind on deleting and moving, unless the author wishes it.  Our template space is corrupted due to importing new versions of templates.  I think we need to disable that template importation tool.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 05:30, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Substantial photon model
Here is another Fedosin article that virtually no reader will understand, and follows from Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter. The good news is that they don't greatly harm Wikiversity because very few people can make any sense out of it. At some point a decision needs to be made. Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 21:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Given that this theoretical model is dependent upon a number of other fringe theories promulgated by Fedosin (e.g. the hierarchical nesting paradigm, praons, strong gravitation, etc), I've taken the liberty of moving it to Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Substantial photon model, as has been done for the resources discussing those theories. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 22:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Theatre/The Magic of Xanth
This resource describes the cast of a musical theatre production which, as best I can tell, never existed. There is a series of fantasy novels which is sometimes collectively called "The Magic of Xanth", but I can't find any evidence that it was ever adapted into a Broadway musical - and certainly not one which ran for multiple years and toured internationally, with numerous high-profile actors and singers in the alleged cast. (This last bit pushes this resource into the realm of a BLP concern.)

Ordinarily I'd just tag this for speedy deletion as a hoax, but this resource was created by User:Dave Braunschweig, so I'm assuming he had some source for this information. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 21:19, 7 February 2023 (UTC)


 * No idea. Deleted and closed. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:42, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Linux/linux-0.01.tar
(including its 88 subpages)

This is effectively a source document, not a learning resource. While the uploader suggested that it was "an experimental learning project to see if wikis can be used to give one a thorough understanding and comprehension of the basic Linux source code in a concise, efficient, and elegant manner", there's no indication of how that project was intended to work.

There's also a weird little copyright issue with this content. While current versions of the Linux kernel are licensed under the GPL, some very early versions, including this one, used a custom license which prohibited any form of paid distribution.

(And, just in case anyone actually wants the code, it's available at: https://mirrors.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/.)

Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 02:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ - Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)