text:
Wikiversity:Bans

Banning a Wikiversity participant from editing does not disable a user's ability to edit any page. Banning should not be confused with blocking.

Before proposing a ban
If you are unable to resolve a conflict with another Wikiversity participant on your own, you may request community feedback at Community Review. The Wikiversity community may as a result of reviewing your case decide that a ban is necessary to resolve the conflict.

When requesting a community review, you must provide links demonstrating the problem, links that show attempts to resolve the problem on your own, and a detailed description of how the edits or actions may violate official policies or guidelines, or harms Wikiversity. You must also notify any users that you are discussing on their talk page, and notify any participants of the learning projects that could be effected by a community decision. If anyone decides to impose a ban during a community review, then the policy on bans must be followed.

See: Community Review/Proposed policy

Bans
A ban is a community agreement that prohibits a person from editing one or more pages at Wikiversity for a specific duration of time.

How bans are imposed
Bans are rare and important decisions that require the widest possible involvement of the community. Bans are proposed by going to Colloquium and and starting a new page section of the form "Proposed ban of user:X". When proposing a ban, links must be provided to edits made by the user who you propose to ban. A detailed description must be provided of how those edits constitute a violation of official Wikiversity policy. Specific grounds for imposing the ban (as listed in the following section) must be cited as the basis in policy for imposing the ban. The pages involved in the proposed ban and the duration of the ban must be clearly stated by the person proposing the ban. After being announced at the Colloquium page, the community discussion of the proposed ban can take place on another page. If a Community Review subpage is used, the page must be correctly named to indicate that a ban is under discussion. The community then discusses the proposed ban and if consensus is reached, the ban is imposed. Bans are never an emergency matter and discussion should not be rushed.

The user who is proposed to be banned from editing must be informed on their user talk page (and by email, if active) and allowed to participate in the community discussion of the ban. If the user is blocked from editing, it might be most convenient to hold the community discussion on the user's talk page.

A list of all imposed bans is kept at List of banned users along with a complete record of the community discussion that established consensus for the ban.

Note: Custodians have no special role to play in imposing bans at Wikiversity. Deciding on bans is a community function.

A ban must not be suggested lightly, as the very act itself can be seen as violating Civility and Assume Good Faith.

Grounds for imposing a ban
Bans can only be imposed for reasons that have been discussed by the Wikiversity community, agreed upon by consensus and formalized as part of an official Wikiversity policy.

Calling for bans at Wikiversity for any reason not covered by policy may be a violation of the civility policy.

Enforcing bans
During the specified duration of a ban, if a banned user edits a page that they are banned from editing then those banned edits can be reverted.

If the community decides to impose a ban, the pages involved in the ban, the duration of the ban, and the people who are banned must be clearly stated. If the community decides that a person should be banned from editing all pages, a custodian may block the person for the duration of the ban citing "community ban" as the reason.

Bans at other Wikimedia projects
Wikiversity participants who have been banned at other projects are welcome to participate constructively at Wikiversity.

title: Wikiversity:Bans


text:
Consciousness/(ASSC)

 American Society for the Study of Consciousness

The American Society for the Study of Consciousness was formed in the Early 90's to provide a support for professionals interested in the study of consciousness, including the eventual design of an artificial consciousness. --Graeme E. Smith 04:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Consciousness/(ASSC)


text:
LaTeX

LaTeX is a markup language (as is MediaWiki!) for producing mathematical texts of the highest quality. Its use is widespread in the mathematics world. It is built on plain TeX developed by Donald Knuth. You can embed LaTeX markups in MediaWiki by the $$$$ tags, e.g. $$e = m c^2$$ is rendered as $$ e = m c^2$$.

Readings

 * LaTeX
 * LaTeX

Installation

 * If you are using Linux, you probably have it already! Just type "latex".
 * If you are using Windows, the simplest thing to do is to open Cygwin (the linux emulator) and type "latex". If you haven't installed Cygwin, do it! You will often find it useful. The installation may take less than an hour but it is usually straightforward.
 * Note that it is now fairly simple to install a linux dual boot, for example, with wubi. All you need is a number of Gigabytes in a refactored hard-drive.   You can delete it like a regular windows directory whenever you don't want it any more.

Step by step guide for beginners

 * 1) Create a file with .tex suffix, e.g. "helloworld.tex" (see /helloworld.tex).
 * 2) Go to your linux/cygwin/ whatever shell, go to the directory of your file "helloworld.tex" and type "latex helloworld".
 * 3) A .dvi file will be created - you may view it directly if you have the right tools.
 * 4) If not, type "dvips helloworld" or type "dvipdf helloworld" to convert it to a postscript or PDF file.
 * 5) Use Ghostview to view the .ps file, or the Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the .pdf file.

Choosing an editor
A good editing environment helps! A useful and free option is the LaTeX editor (LEd) (see their home page).

A LaTeX extension is also available for Open Office.

Or for a quick and easy solution, try Roger's Online Equation Editor.

Lessons

 * /helloworld.tex/
 * /Including graphics/
 * /Inserting diagrams/
 * /Two-lined-subscripts/
 * /Serial letter/

Obtain PDF from Latex
pdflatex hello.tex

Use Latex Source in Wikiversity
You can use latex sources also in Wikiversity. In general you will create a PDF file from your latex source. pdflatex converts the a tex-file hello.tex in hello.pdf. You may need sometimes a different output format. If you want to convert the tex-file into a Wiki markdown output for Wikiversity you can use PanDoc.

Pandoc
This is useful if you want to use parts from source text in LaTeX also in a Wikiversity learning resource (e.g. for a mathematical text for a lecture). Copy the source in PanDoc and When press "convert" you can use the Wiki source code in your learning resource.
 * select "Latex" as input format and
 * select "MediaWiki" as an output format.

Expand Newcommands
Sometimes it is necessary to expand latex macros because the macros in your source are not available in Wikiversity.
 * With the BracketHandler closingbracket.js a newcommand replacement into the source text is possible.
 * Use Newcommand Expander as an AppLSAC for replacing the newcommand (GitHub Repository closingbracket.js).

title: LaTeX


text:
LaTeX/helloworld.tex

The barebone document \documentclass[12pt]{article} \begin{document} Hello world! $Hello world!$ %math mode \end{document}

The barebone document using amstex \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \begin{document}

$\mathfrak{H}$ello world! \end{document}

title: LaTeX/helloworld.tex


text:
LaTeX/Inserting diagrams

 * keywords: LaTeX, diagrams, pictures, drawing

You may use the picture environment in latex and "programme" the picture with your keyboard like

%drawing a line "/" in latex %this is a compilable file! \documentclass[12pt]{article} \begin{document}

\begin{picture}{100,100} \put(20,20){\line(1,1){50}} \end{picture} \end{document}

If you have a picture which is a little more sophisticated, such programming would be a nightmare and you may wish to use your mouse to help. There is a number of free CAD tools for TeX. jPicEdt is one which is easy to install - you would need Java if you haven't got it yet, but the installation of java is straightforward, and you will find it useful in the future anyway.

You can download the .jar file, install it, and draw a picture with it, and save the file (e.g. with the title "jPic-test1.tex") in the same directory of your other .tex files. To embed the picture in your LaTeX/helloworld.tex, simply insert the following code in your helloworld.tex:

\input{jPic-test1.tex}

or, if you like \begin{center} \input{jPic-test1.tex} \end{center}

And then compile your helloworld.tex as before : type "latex helloworld".

If you get error messages, you may need to remove the offending (and redundant) lines. A typical problem is such a line as "\qbezier(80,80)(80,80)(80,80)" which tries to draw a quadratic bezier curve on the same point, which crashes the compiler.

 * LaTeX/Including graphics

title: LaTeX/Inserting diagrams


text: Category:LaTeX

title: Category:LaTeX


text:
User:CindyNunez

bio
My name is Cindy Nuñez. I am in the Photography program at The Art Institute of Seattle. I have lived in the Seattle area for about 16 years now. I am originally from California and have also lived in Mexico for a couple of years while in high school. I have been in and out of college since I graduated in 2001 and have now decided it's time I finally do something for me. I have a 5 year old son who has had the biggest influence on me to get my degree and to fufill my goals. Eventually I would like to move out of the county, although I'm not sure where yet, and open my own studio. I feel photography has a universal language and I am quite confident that wherever I go I will find my place with it.

midterm
Roy McMakin has two sculptures at the Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle, Washington. Both are very similar in style although I feel one has more creativity than the other. When I was given the assignment of walking through the park and picking a sculpture that was "not my taste" I thought that it would be a rather hard objective but to my surprise I realized it would not be so hard once I stumbled upon the "art" of Roy McMakin. To me, a sculpture should have creativity along with passion and it should reflect one's energy and love for art yet I felt Mr. McMakin mocked every artist that had ever done a sculpture. To be honest I thought it was a joke. Seriously, how can you put a bench, a box and chair together and have the audacity of calling this art? This work shows no passion or creativity, granted he did make the box out of steel and a chair out of bronze, it still showed no reflection of what I think an artist should portray when producing greatness. And while my objective in this project was to try and find motives to change my opinion of the "artist" I felt the only real thing I did by researching more into the life of Mr. McMakin was to find out that this so called artist was far from being worthy of the title. To my dismay I found out that not only has he proclaimed himself a sculpture artist but he also claims to be an architect and a furniture designer and maker. This only made me wonder more about him so I went to the Matthew Marks Gallery website, which is the representative of Mr. McMakin, and found a number of pictures of "art" that he has made and exhibited throughout the U.S. It was then that I realized that there are actually people in this world even more clueless than I that would consider a wooden toilet worthy of being exhibited as art in a Gallery. This made me dislike all his work even more. I think it is absolutely a shame to consider this guy talented enough to give land to, so that he can put his junk as exhibition pieces. Even after reading about Mr. McMakin and going through pictures I still have yet to see his reasoning behind the "art" he produces. One would think there would be a long and rather boring story as to why he came up with the idea of putting a lawn chair, a cardboard box, and a bench together. Maybe to those clueless people it makes sense but to this clueless critic, it made me rethink what my definition of art was. In conclusion, my feelings on the piece were not influenced or altered in any way shape or form. MID TERM PART TWO After carefully reviewing ads and commercials, I have found some advertising with fallacies. The one that I found that I believe was a DUBIOUS AUTHORITY was on a box of Sleep MD. This box says it’s drug- free sleep aid. However, after looking up the definition of drug on the Merriam-Webster dictionary I found the following:

Main Entry: 1drug

Pronunciation: \ˈdrəg\

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English drogge Date: 14th century

1 aobsolete : a substance used in dyeing or chemical operations b: a substance used as a medication or in the preparation of medication caccording to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (1): a substance recognized in an official pharmacopoeia or formulary (2): a substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease (3): a substance other than food intended to affect the structure or function of the body (4): a substance intended for use as a component of a medicine but not a device or a component, part, or accessory of a device2: a commodity that is not salable or for which there is no demand —used in the phrase drug on the market3: something and often an illegal substance that causes addiction, habituation, or a marked change in consciousness

Since this pill is intended to help you sleep or to cure insomnia, the box itself is already letting you know that it will not work.

My second on is from the box of BREATH RIGHT nasal strips: I found that the box states it helps open your nose so you can breathe better and therefore sleep better. This is an example of NON SEQUITUR, this makes shoppers believe that if they somehow buy this product they will be able to have a better night’s sleep. Although I think this might help it still does not guarantee better sleeping habits.

final
Name _______CINDY NUNEZ____________________   By the end of this quarter, I want to:   Be able to be a bit more healthy. I wish to lose 10-15 lbs naturally. No diet pills, no starving. Only healthy food choices and excersing along with multi vitamins, sleep, and enough water intake. This might be more difficult because I'm also quitting smoking at the same time.   and the research component of this goal is to:   Read the following books: 1. Low Cal Dieting for Dummies, Dieting for dummies, and Nutrition for Dummies, Along with some articles from Nutrionist and Dieticians. This includes Magazine articles, newspaper and alot of internet usuage.   WEEK 2:   Buy Treadmill. Reasearch the importance of walking and excersising. Find answers to How long should I excersise per day? What conditions should my excersise room be at? How much water to drink during, before and after my workout etc.   WEEK 3   Plan out meals for weeks to come. Continue with Excersise and reading.

 WEEK 4

 Listen to Brenda Jaeck, Seeds to Change, Nutrionist from NY. Take important notes from her lectures and website. Continue excersising and reading the books.

 WEEK 5 (midterm)

 Research Multivitamins and how they play a special role in weight loss and weight control. Possibly go to Dr. to see how my level are.

 WEEK 6

 Research how weight loss groups work for people. I.E. Jenny Craig and/or Weight Watchers. Continue reading and excersising.

 WEEK 7

 Research whether famous diets are good for one who wants to lose significant amount of weight. I.E. Atkins, South Beach etc.

 WEEK 8

 Continue with excersise, Start organization of report to give to class about weight loss and misconceptions. Reach goal of 10 lbs by this week.

title: User:CindyNunez


text:
User talk:Answer

 Hello Answer, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --JWSchmidt 07:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Answer


text:
Wikiversity talk:Statements of opinion regarding consensus

I do not understand the reason for having a page that makes a distinction between "statements of opinion regarding consensus" and having "a spot for discussion". Discussion is normally an important part of establishing consensus. A serious danger in the process of establishing consensus is that a few editors can claim that consensus exists and then that claim is never again examined. Is the intent of this page to provide a place where past claims of consensus can be challenged and brought to the attention of the community? --JWSchmidt 07:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I was hoping we could another place, but maybe without all the unfair skewering and accusations and arguing. We could maybe come up with a better name though. Emesee 06:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I will start one.... and we can see if this process is worth keeping, or worth scrapping...

Use of this?
What's really the whole point of this? Can't we just do this in our userspace/where these comments are needed to be? ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 02:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


text:
User talk:CindyNunez

 Hello CindyNunez, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --JWSchmidt 07:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:CindyNunez


text:
User talk:Clark89

I am seriously mentally ill. I have OCD, social anxiety, a tendency to poor train of thought, a speech impediment, mild autism, and a general mental disturbance (like a emotional instability, probably a deritive of the OCD) which leaves me mostly unable to do regular work (just out of high school, failed anyway) - so I spend a lot of time on Wikimedia/Internet/Computer. Leave new messages at the bottom, I reply on whichever user talk page to keep discussion threads together. Philosophy
 * A category everyone should see-w:Category:Cognitive biases

What I do on Wikiversity
 * I am more active on other projects. This space will change later.

__NOINDEX__

Welcome to Wikiversity
 Hello Clark89, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --JWSchmidt 07:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Clark89


text:
User talk:CamilleFunk

Hello Former Student!

I'm writing to you because you took a class from me in the past few years at the Art Institute. As of Spring, 2010, I'll not be teaching further classes at AIS for the foreseeable future. (We're parting ways on good terms!) Until now, you've been able to reach my Wikiversity educational resources from my website, but I've decided to delete that link. You can still reach all of those materials here.

If you're interested in what I'm up to in the future (which will include an album in 2010 and a novel in 2011) you can friend my facebook page or drop me an email at info@stevenarntson.info and you'll receive a periodic update about performances, classes, and publications.

If you know any current or former students of mine who might be interested in any of this, please forward this information if you have a moment.

I hope all is well for you.
 * Best! Stevenarntson

 Hello CamilleFunk, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --JWSchmidt 07:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:CamilleFunk


text: Category:ERP Presales and Business Analysis


text:
User talk:Shadowwerrett

 Hello Shadowwerrett, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --JWSchmidt 07:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shadowwerrett


text:
Wikiversity talk:Bans

Identification and Confirmation of an Instance of Sarcasm
SBJ, in removing this section, you summarily characterized it as "sarcasm"...

Leaving aside the question of whether the above is (objectively speaking) a proven instance of sarcasm, would you be kind to enough to unpack for me the method or process you relied on to identify and confirm the cited section as an instance of "sarcasm" (as opposed to a sincerely proposed amendment)?

Moulton 13:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * It's rather hard to believe that he really wants "Each of these rules must be drafted at the censorship policy page and approved by a process involving community discussion and consensus. Censorship rules can take the form: "Editors can be banned from editing pages "w" for a time period of duration "x" if they use the word "y" more than "z" times" to be part of the policy. --SB_Johnny talk 12:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * If something is "hard to believe", then an expression of skepticism, followed by a request for evidence, reasoning, and supporting analysis would appear to be a better practice than summarily adjudging and dismissing it as sarcasm, nonsense, vandalism, spam, etc. If, after a reasonable opportunity to respond, a sincere response does not appear, then perhaps one is justified in labeling the material in question as insincere, disingenuous, etc.  I am disturbed by the alacrity with which so many stewards and custodians arrogantly characterize contributions of their peers as nonsense, spam, vandalism, etc, without validating their haphazard theories of mind regarding those who contributions they are attacking, criticizing, dismissing, or censoring without benefit of a fair review of their peers.  The first duty of a scientific scholar is to attempt to falsify any novel hypothesis before adopting it as an accurate theory (especially is one is planning to engage in an exercise of political power over others on the basis of that unexamined hypothesis).  —Barry Kort 12:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * What I did was find the only basis in policy for imposing a ban and include that reason in the proposed policy for bans. In order to start discussion, I made a proposal for how the Wikiversity community might impose bans according to the existing civility policy where it says: "Create and enforce a new rule — based on use of certain words — that will allow temporary blocking or banning an editor using them more than a certain number of times". Previously, a ban was imposed at Wikiversity based on claimed violation of the civility policy. I'm still confused about how that ban was engineered, so I'm interested in having a policy for bans that makes clear how violation of the civility policy can result in a ban. I agree that the language I proposed ("Editors can be banned from editing pages "w" for a time period of duration "x" if they use the word "y" more than "z" times.") is unusual...it was intended to stimulate community discussion. --JWSchmidt 16:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

How to propose a ban
I object to two important changes introduced in this edit. First, decisions for bans on editing are rare enough and important enough that they should first be announced at the Colloquium. Second, the discussion must be clearly labeled as a discussion of a proposed ban, not given a misleadingly bland title such as "Request for comments on the behaviour of user:X". For example, Community Review/Moulton's block is a complete travesty of justice since it labeled discussion of a ban as discussion of a block. This kind of false representation of a ban proposal must never be repeated at Wikiversity. --JWSchmidt 14:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I disagree. When someone believes that a person is vandalizing or doing harm to the project, they leave a comment on the custodian notice board or requests for custodian action. Similarly when more community input is requested for these sorts of problems another page should be used. Likewise people should not be encouraged to suggest that people be banned or blocked, but rather discuss issues, and allow the community to determine what the best course of action is whether that be a ban, a block or something else. I think these [ changes] make matters more complicated than things should be, and only encourages people with a vendetta to seek a ban, rather than encouraging a peaceful resolution. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 16:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * How much better it would have been if Cary Bass, Jimbo Wales, Guillom, or Mike Ingram had posted a comment on an appropriate notice board rather than sweeping into Wikiversity and summarily enacting a draconian edict without community review and discussion. —Moulton 12:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I've created Bans/Alternative for you to work on, so that the two different proposals may coincide and the community can eventually decide which they prefer or provide criticism on both. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 16:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * This policy page describes a policy for bans, not procedures for requesting custodians action.

 * Reasons for imposing bans need to be proposed, discussed and made official in policy before they are imposed on editors. I object to the idea of running more hidden tribunals at Wikiversity where bans can be imposed without adhering to policy. It is not right to hold discussions of proposed bans on pages that do not correctly inform the community that a ban is being imposed. I'm astonished that you would try to impose such unjust practices on this community and falsely claim consensus for your proposal.

 * I have no idea what you are talking about. How does clearly describing policy for bans and working to assure that the community participates in important decisions encourage people with a vendetta to seek a ban?

 * --JWSchmidt 21:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I never said this page was a procedure for requesting custodian action. I repeat: like requests for custodian action, requests for community action against other participants need to have their own page. You are making assumptions again, I also never suggested that people run a hidden tribunal, nor has there ever been a hidden tribunal. The focus of any proposal/review should be what someone sees as problematic, and not how John X must be banned. I have no idea what your responding to either, because to me it clearly has nothing to do with what I said or meant. I think [ this isn't a policy that clearly describes bans]. I think the approach to bans is also wrong like Hillgentleman said in one of his edit summaries. I think the community should decide in conclusion of having reviewed what Person A considers problematic about Person's B edits/actions whether a ban is necessary or not, rather than Person A asking the community to ban Person B. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 11:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * IOW you are taking this out of context:

 * because you ignored the next part:

 * --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 13:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * The above comes across as bickering over the shape of the conference table. What's more important here is the fact that this community utterly failed to carry out a sober community review when Jimbo and IDCab imported their corrupt practices into Wikiversity.  Moreover, there is good evidence that the community hid under the bed out of fear that Jimbo would pull the plug on Wikiversity rather than allow a scholarly review of his inane and indefensible practices.  —Moulton 13:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * John, I agree that, if a discussion is leading to or leaning in the direction of banning someone, it should be announced loud and clear, in the colloquium, community review and mediawiki:sitenotice. But it doesn't mean that wikiversians should be able to propose out of nowhere that someone be banned. Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 12:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that discussion should happen in Community Review. I just don't see any point or benefit in announcing such discussions in the colloquium or in the sitenotice. To me such an announcement would seem to only serve to encourage people to gather pitch forks and torches for a public hanging rather than a means to encourage anyone with concerns to participate in a civil discussion. I much rather see Community Review made more prominent so that more people are aware of its existence and people who want to keep up with it can, which to me would be more like announcing that a public forum to discuss an issue will be taking place in a newspaper that people can choose to read or not. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 15:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Implicit bans, direction of this policy
FWIW, most wikis tend to consider someone to be de facto banned if no-one is willing to unblock, and as pointed out in the section above, consensus to impose or maintain a permanent block could be discussed as an option on a WV:CR subpage as part of the evaluation of problematic behavior. With that in mind, we probably don't need to focus on this policy, especially since the policy in it's current state would never gain consensus support, and efforts to make it more attractive have been reverted. --SB_Johnny talk 12:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Failure of the official unilaterally imposing a block/ban to justify and defend his cause of action automatically nullifies the act. Above, others have expressed concerns about vendettas originating from other venues.  When Jimbo arrived unannounced in Wikiversity, he had previously signaled to me his intentions to act against me, based on specious complaints about a song parody posted on my personal blog.  If that isn't an instance of a misguided juvenile vendetta, I dunno what is. —Moulton 12:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * "most wikis tend to consider" <-- this is not the basis for making important decisions about Wikiversity policy. Wikiversity has a unique mission. If we were guided in our thinking by what most wikis do then Wikiversity would not exist. "the policy in it's current state would never gain consensus support" <-- Why not? Your only contribution to improving the proposal was to label part of it as sarcasm. "efforts to make it more attractive" <-- I find that a strange way to describe edits that removed the key elements of the proposal. Please explain why it is "attractive" to remove from a policy on bans the idea of using the Colloquium to notify the community that a ban has been proposed. Do you think it is "attractive" to delete from a policy on bans a list of the existing policies that discuss when a ban can be imposed? --JWSchmidt 16:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Unwelcome words
From the proposal, in Grounds for imposing a ban: According to the Civility Policy, the use of some words "a certain number of times" can result in a ban. This is a method for preventing incivility within Wikiversity and it involves the creation and enforcement of a new rule.

I advise against this as part of the policy, since it simply leads to wiki-lawyering or some other rule stretching. (i.e. if you can't use the Carlin-7 words, you're going to use a variation.) Also, that portion of the document doesn't match up with the Civility policy, which says restricts personal attacks rather than certain sets of words.

A better suggestion is to write the banning policy so that it applies to those who show contempt to the rule in question. For example, one comment use of a stray i-word may be tolerated (and is usually followed up by a warning to the user), but continuation of personal attacks in-spite of said warnings can cause the banning policy to apply. --Sigma 7 06:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

 * I think the "bad words" wording should be nixed entirely, tbh. The only reason someone should be banned is if they have been consistently disruptive, and refuse to change their behavior. It might have something to do with using certain words, or it might not. --SB_Johnny talk 11:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Sigma, A problem we have now is that the grounds for banning someone from wikiversity are unclear. For example, the basic argument for the proposal User:Moulton being banned from editing is that he kept revealing the real-life names of wikimedians, leading to a few or half a dozen of oversights.  (By the way, this may not be the only reason why some people want him banned from editing.)  Blocking,  is technically not exactly the same thing, but it is similar enough.   John Schmidt had been blocked from editing a couple of times because some people think he was not acting in a "civil" manner, and his writings constituted "thinly veiled accusations" or "personal attacks";  however that is highly subjective (as you may know, everybody uses their words differently) and sharply contested.   We have seen situations when basically several wikimedians was denying and accusing others of incivility at the same time.  That is the problem.  Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 13:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

 * I think some of you may be confusing bans with blocking a little bit. This proposal seems to be intended to make a distinction between bans and blocks. Where bans involve "you can't edit page X, Y or Z for a week, but you are still free to edit other pages", while blocks prevent editing of almost every page. Bans would basically require that a person be willing to abide by a set of terms in order to work. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 15:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

reversion of change by TCNSV
User:TeleComNasSprVen made some extensive additions to this policy page without discussion, see my revert, which rolls back to the previous version by SBJ.

Among other problems, this edit uses the alleged "ban" of Moulton as an example. That is a proposed ban, as it stands, it has not been closed by a custodian, which I'd consider necessary, so this example would be premature. I'm not convinced that there should be any such list on the policy page, though having a list might be useful, and the standing version shows a redlink to a list of bans.

The change attempts to "legislate" one side of a recent controversy over the treatment of edits by Moulton, and the details of that should be examined before using one specific controversy to drive policy.

This, and other changes proposed by TCNSV, should be discussed and consensus found. Technically, this is a proposed policy page, not an actual policy page, but the difference can be academic. I'd propose that only small incremental changes be made with single edits, so that what's good can be immediately accepted and what isn't, then, discussed. Much of the new material simply repeats what was already stated on the page, that there is a difference between a block and a ban, and the new changes attempt to exaggerate the difference by allowing a blocked editor to edit under a rather vague and controversial set of circumstances, while totally prohibiting it with a banned editor (this is actually a radical change from standing practice). I agree with allowing a blocked editor to edit under certain circumstances, but those circumstances also apply to banned editors, and the only real difference, from Wikipedia practice, is that any admin unblocking a banned editor is considered to be acting against consensus, if it's done without a discussion showing a new consensus or, perhaps as a minimum, the non-existence of a maintained consensus to keep the user banned. A blocked editor may be unblocked by any admin, assuming that wheel-warring is avoided and that procedure for handling disagreement between administrators is followed. --Abd 20:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

 * At least please reinstate the list of banned editors. It is precisely there because there is no such thing as Special:Log/ban, because bans are instated by the community (and/or, what have you, a custodian) and are purely a social matter, whilst blocks can be recorded by MediaWiki's log functions, because they are fully integrated into the software. This simply reduces transparency on when, where, and the specifics and terms of already-instated bans. The consensus on the Colloquium page seems to be leaning in favor of the ban placed against Moulton, and whilst I admit that the addition here may have been a bit premature, it is important to demonstrate what an actual ban looks like; pending my investigation of other blocked users to see if any actual bans are currently in place actually we can simply replace Moulton's ban log with that of Emesee's ban, since that is an example of someone who is truly banned from Wikiversity. TeleComNasSprVen 22:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * There is already a link to a list of banned users, it's Imposed bans. TCNSV restored a list of banned users to the policy page (which is really inappropriate, my opinion, a policy page should not contain a list of banned users, it's inflammatory), with one user, I'm reverting that but will list the user on the provided page. The practical import of a banned user list is that custodians should exercise care in unblocking such users, for if a ban is based on community discussion, it should not be casually lifted. This is not a rigid rule, but is a guide to prudence. --Abd 00:36, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I thought that I'd do this. But when I read the CR for the user, it merely confirmed that a block of the user and alternate accounts should remain in place. There was very poor participation in the CR. The close was by what I'd consider an involved custodian, whose earlier blocks ware being confirmed. Almost all participation was by custodians, and very few. Not a community ban, I'd say, merely a confirmed block with no opposition. This is what's called a "defacto ban" on Wikipedia, but the situation could change, under some circumstances, and it's not worth the effort to either convert this defacto ban to a formal, properly-declared full-on ban, or an unban. Close, but no cigar. If a custodian does decide to unblock an account of this user, another could, indeed, reblock based on the prior history, with enough cover to prevent troutslapping for wheel-warring, I'd say, but it that's one of the custodians who confirmed the block, not so good.... and let's hope we don't go there. So far, the page listing banned users is a redlink.
 * As the page says, a ban is a very serious move, and it should not be technically flawed, and it's worth the time to do it right, if it's going to be done. I'm not convinced that we need bans at all. But maybe. Should a ban discussion go in the site message? If not, why not? --Abd 00:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * What was the point of creating a content-less page? It's supposed to document all the banned users on Wikiversity. Besides, it wastes additional space and should be on the policy page since bans have the weight of policy. We aren't going to go around looking for the right Wikiversity page for all the banned users on the site. TeleComNasSprVen 22:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Listing a user on the policy page is inflammatory. Policy pages should eventually be edited rarely; adding and removing users would create unnecessary traffic, cluttering user watchlists. Start thinking about conserving user time and eye-space (valuable!), not server space (cheap!). The page has been defined for some time, linked from the policy page, just not used. I'll note that there are no users on it at this time, so that people don't look at the page for nothing. We might have someone to list soon, in fact, though that's not what I'd prefer. Banning is bad publicity, no way around it. It smells like punishment, though a "defacto ban" (an indef block that nobody lifts) simply means that admins have stopped wasting time with the issue.... However, topic bans can have a very legitimate purpose, properly done. And that is what would, in a more mature site, my opinion, be listed on WV:Imposed bans. Mostly topic bans. --Abd 22:41, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, I also intend to discuss on Wikiversity talk:List of banned users the issue of whether or not User:Wikademia or User:Emesee, etc., is banned or merely indef blocked. The discussion that allegedly created the ban (see ) doesn't mention "ban." It simply was a confirmation to continue, for the time being, the block. Yet the guy has been sanctioned for socking. The idea that a block is just "per account," and not "per user" is mostly preposterous. It applies to bots and a few other examples, that's all. --Abd 22:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Why do you insist that the idea proposed is considered "preposterous", when that idea has been espoused by the Wikimedia community at large? Please provide evidence to back up your claims, otherwise they would be in violation of Civility policy. TeleComNasSprVen 23:29, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Let's go a bit further with my examples. There has been, on the English Wikipedia, at the very least a block of ten IP addresses a day; in any or all of the Wikimedia wikis, with each wiki handling their own problems with vandalism, spam and whatnot, that amounts to more than fifty addresses blocked on a daily basis. Considering the large amount of people accessing each set of computers per IP, or some range of IPs, there is much collateral damage to be had if the reason, and it sometimes occurs somewhat often, is in the case of "ban evasion", as you put it. Now, is the block instated against the users involved, or the IP address itself? Open proxy covers a prime example of what the difference between blocks and bans are. There are plenty of good users out there accessing the IP nodes to contribute to Wikiversity, but there are equally as many vandals accessing the same ones the others would use. So, by blocking the address, we can't possibly be banning both good and bad users at the same time; we are just blocking access to that particular proxy, and we considered it necessary to block at least one person's access in sacrificing the other's. TeleComNasSprVen 23:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

 * TCNSV, this is a semantic problem. You are quite correct, blocks block specific accounts or IP (or IP range). However, when an admin blocks a named account, almost always the admin is actually banning the user, for the period of the block, and the proof of this is that "block evasion" -- which obviously involves using a different account or IP -- is routinely sanctioned, by additional blocking. A block is an objective condition, a state of the data in the machine. A ban is a social construct, a kind of agreement, and it's far more complex than a block. I've come to think that site bans are a Bad Idea, they are essentially ways in which the community binds its own future, because the only practical difference between a block and a site ban is that administrators are not permitted, without facing sanctions, to unblock a site banned user without obtaining some kind of consent from the community (or the AC on Wikipedia).
 * IP blocks are a special case: they are not blocking a user, per se, but an access mode, because it is being used by the user. If there is an IP vandal, and the IP is blocked, and we come to know that this was actually a registered user, you can bet better than even odds that the registered user will also then be blocked. It was, in fact, about the user!
 * You have a purpose in claiming what you do, that a block is not a ban, because you believe that a block does not allow user contributions to be reverted, but a ban does. That is all Wikipedia policy nuance, and it's unclear there. Many times I've seen block-evading edits reverted as such when they could be clearly identified. All that has happened is that WP policies talk about banned editor reversion, they don't mention the same thing for "blocked users." But they don't mention the contrary, either.
 * What you've done is to derive a presumed policy from what is not stated. Absolutely, the norm is that blocked editors don't edit, and if they edit, under normal circumstances, the block will be extended, with no evidence of disruptive editing, other than block evasion, being necessary.
 * There were some exceptions, lately, and I'm proposing a standard exception, self-reverted edits, because self-reverted edits, unless truly disruptive in themselves, even only sitting in history, represent self-enforced bans. They don't cause work for administrators, it's trivial to see that a revert was complete, and I've recommended that self-reverted edits by IP also self-identify, so there is no enforcement challenge. Self-reversion clearly represents good faith cooperation with the right of the community to ban. (Examples on Wikipedia have involved topic bans, which are purely a social construct, there is no block involved except as a sanction for violation.) On Wikiversity, Thekohser used self-reverted edits by IP, evading a global lock, matched by a local block, to make positive contributions, and as a result, Thekohser was unblocked (and I basically engineered that sequence, I suggested it to him in the first place, and he cooperated). I made the same suggestion to Moulton, but he was not cooperative, he tried self-reversion only, more or less, for a couple of days, to prove that it would not work, since, he believed, he'd be blocked anyway. He was, but because he'd pushed the limits, trying to find ways to be offensive in self-reverted edits -- it's possible! He could change his mind in the future, and if he did .... without establishing draconian range blocks, long term, we cannot prevent him from editing forever. What we can do is to make it easy for him to return to free editing and difficult to sustain disruptive editing, and to the extent that this has been done intelligently, his behavior improved. To the extent that it was incomplete and unenforced -- or over-enforced -- his behavior degenerated. It's not rocket science. --Abd 01:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Blocks are ad hoc bans, bans are not blocks, and "we have no consensus on consensus."
The policy here suggests that a ban does not disable editing. A block is a technical feature of the MediaWiki software that does disable editing for a named user, IP address, or IP range. There can be a ban without a block, but a block is an "ad hoc ban," generally a site ban or site ban allowing a user talk page access, and it may or may not allow email access, as distinct from a community ban. A block is always determined by a custodian or other superuser.

Contrary to what the policy states, a custodian may effectively ban a user, either from a page, set of pages, by generically warning the user about editing to those pages, that the edits may be considered disruptive, based on history. However, this does not create, for the custodian declaring this "ban," a right to block for nondisruptive edits to those pages. "Disruptive" is, however, a subjective standard, and custodians have wide latitude to apply it as to their own personal actions. This "ban" is really a kind of warning, in lieu of block, and should not be issued by a custodian if there would be no right to block for the same causes.

I have argued that a blocked editor has no right to edit, the same as a site-banned editor. As an example, a custodian who is blocked is generally considered to be violating community rules if the custodian self-unblocks himself. Blocked users are expected to follow due process, to request unblock, and to not evade the block merely because they disagree with it. There are exceptions, and there will always be exceptions to every rule.

Block evasion is its own offense, whether or not the block was justified. I have edited as IP when blocked, but only under unusual circumstances (such as a block that inadvertently cut off my Talk page access, or later during the recent Moulton flap, where IP editing by a blocked editor was being routinely tolerated. I would not have objected to the "blocked editor" reversion of any of my edits, under those conditions.)

The recent suggested change attempts to define a ban as something much deeper than a block, and, taken in conjunction with other arguments from the same editor, the apparent point was that blocked editors supposedly have the right to edit, there is no "automatic right to reversion," as is then defined as existing for banned editors. On Wikipedia, the distinction, while it can be derived from policy, doesn't actually exist. Block-evading edits are routinely reverted on sight, there, whether or not there has been a formal community ban (or ArbComm ban), the same as ban-evading edits.

Any unlifted block is, for the period, a "defacto ban," as a block which no administrator has reversed. When that condition exists for a "long time," whatever that is, it is then explicitly called a "ban." It is a distinction without a real difference, except for the process of reversal. When there has been a true community ban, or an ArbComm ban, process is required to lift it, a single administrator can be, at least, trout-slapped, or worse, for unblocking a block based on a ban.

But all this results from the fact that a site ban is functionally equivalent to a block. Both can be for defined terms. Both can be indefinite. But a ban is a community direction to not edit, to the editor, and a direction to administrators to not allow the edits. However, no administrator is obligated to enforce any specific ban, they are merely allowed to. Administrators are not slaves, they remain free agents, who can abstain from what they do not agree with.

The practical consequence: can an ordinary user or a custodian routinely revert the block-evading edits of a blocked user? This policy is actually silent on this, as would be expected, since this is WV:Bans, not WV:BLOCK. My own long-held opinion has been that yes, any user may assist in block enforcement, and such reverts are a form of block enforcement. They do not establish any specific content position; policy does not require that block-evading edits be removed (and the situation is the same for ban-evading edits.) If I reverted a Moulton edit, I or any other user could then, upon review of the edit, being personally satisfied that it was harmless at worst, or that the benefit outweighed the harm, could revert it back in, and I did this. If any other legitimate editor reverted my reversion, I could not then revert war with that editor based on "Moulton was blocked" -- or banned.

What is prevented by a block or ban is that any change originating with a blocked or banned editor has no right to be made, unless "seconded" by a legitimate editor. In the past, when I was reverting Moulton contributions, it, to some extent, prevented escalation of the block through range blocks, and almost all the contributions ended up being reverted back in. When Moulton knows that his edits are being reviewed, that someone else must take responsibility for them, he mostly behaves! The range blocks were only extended, in that history, when Moulton reverted my reversions, instead of waiting for review.

In the last sequence, Moulton was allowed to revert indefinitely and repeatedly. The result? I was blocked for (what?), Moulton continued and his edits became more and more provocative, and he was then range-blocked, massively, with collateral damage.

All-or-nothing blocks and bans causes situations to escalate, rather than allowing them to naturally defuse, as editors find value in cooperation, and the revert-all-edits approach does not involve any insult to the blocked editor, it is completely silent on the actual value of the edits, which is one reason why it has worked in actual practice, when revert warring by IP editors has not been allowed. It keeps a door open, and, in fact, we cannot close that door completely without collateral damage through massive range blocks.

There is another problem in the policy as stated. It gives custodians no role in deciding bans. It imagines that the "community" decides bans, but leaves completely silent how the community decides a thing. Wikis, in general, do not have mechanisms for community decision, discussions only create advice with various levels of apparent consensus. Individuals implement and enforce these decisions, each on their own responsibility. To enforce a ban, if a user does not spontaneously follow the ban, the possibility of blocks must be present, which requires a custodian willing to enforce the ban. For this reason, I'd require a custodian close any community discussion of a ban with a conclusion, as a crucial element in the decision. And what an individual can decide, the individual can undo, based on new evidence or considerations. The actual decision is by the closer, and a closer should never close a decision with a conclusion that the closer actually disagrees with; otherwise we have "decision by vote." Rather than by convincing argument.

We have never nailed down all this stuff because it's difficult. Many of these issues have simply been avoided for years. We have no consensus on "consensus." --Abd 18:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Your reasoning is terribly flawed. There is and always has been standard practice among wikis like Wikipedia that bans are instated because blocks are just not enough to handle some editor. Blocks are a purely technical function of MediaWiki. Blocks are the walls preventing you access; bans are the signs that tell you not to enter. Otherwise, anyone can bypass the wall very easily, because the warning imposed by it is merely implied and not explicit. Blocked editors remain part of the community, and have every right to edit as any other normal volunteer on the site.
 * You again proclaim that you are right, and often refuse to read or take anybody's advice, sometimes even including your own. I've already provided an excellent rebuttal to your ideology. Just because the bot account I operate/edit under happens to be indefinitely blocked", it does not follow that I am immediately site-banned or that my main account is to be blocked and any edit I make subsequently reverted. Again, and I reiterate for clarification, policy does not require anyone to do anything, since we are all just volunteers on this wiki, and only merely prescribe (or describe) the way editors should behave while accessing the site. TeleComNasSprVen 22:20, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

title: Wikiversity talk:Bans


text:
User:Ozymandias

Me at Wikimedia
Sysop in Wikisource, Wikibooks and Wikiversity.pt. wikisource •wikibooks•wikiquote•wikitionary•wikiversidade•meta

title: User:Ozymandias


text:
User talk:Ozymandias

 Hello Ozymandias, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --AFriedman 14:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 Hello , we are the Baah and Bahh twins and we'd both like to welcome you to Wikiversity. While you sit back and explore Wikiversity, enjoy some of our fresh goat milk. You can help us learn by creating new learning resources or help us by improving the guided tours and other exploration tools. We look forward to seeing you around. Baaaahbye for now.

title: User talk:Ozymandias


text:
Talk:Conservation Entrepreneurship/Resources

I really liked the report about coffee. I sent it to my friends and relatives as it explains the issue well (and without so much judgemental language), breaks it down into digestible pieces and offers suggestions for how the consumer can deal with all of the information that floods the market. Thank you, Jay !


text:
Egyptology/Old Kingdom monuments organized by ruler

QuickLink to Main Home Page: Ancient Egyptian Monuments Project

Khasekhemwy
Horus or Throne Name: Khasekhemwy (sometimes Khasekhem) Nebty name: Khasekhemwy-Nebty Golden Falcon name: -- Personal name: Nebwyhetepimyef Reign: 27 years; 2611 - 2584 (Dodson) Predecessor: unclear (possibly Peribsen) Successor: Djoser Wife: Queen Nimaathap Children: Djoser, and possibly Hetephirnebty (Djoser's wife).

Last king of the 2nd dynasty. A longer Horus and Seth version of his name appears and looks like this The name Khasekhemwy Hotep-Netjerwi-imef means "the Two Powerful Ones Have Risen And The Two Lords Are At Peace Within Him". Inscriptions on statues of Khasekhemwy indicate that he may have reunited Ancient Egypt after a period of strife that may have started during the reign of Peribsen. The inscription on Khasekhemwy's statue claim that he killed more than 47,000 northerners in order to re-establish control over both Upper and Lower Egypt. Some Egyptologists think that Khasekhemwy's marriage to Queen Nimaathap may have been a diplomatic one and that she may have been from the North.

Eventually Khasekhemwy built large mudbrick structures at Hierakonpolis and Abydos. Those structures were undertaken on a large scale and included enclosure walls. Near Abydos, in Beit Khallaf, several large mastabas were constructed. Again some of these were on a monumental scale. It has been conjectured that the largest mastaba at Beit Khallaf may be the tomb of Queen Nimaathap, but this is not certain. The other mastabas may have belonged to courtiers or to members of the royal family.

 * Tomb and Enclosure at Abydos Also known as Shunet ez-Zebib.

Digitalegypt's page about the tomb

"The flattening operations also allowed us to examine a bit more of the free-standing structure, or chapel, within the Fort, first uncovered by Garstang and re-explored by us in 1999. The mud-brick funerary enclosures of the Early Dynastic kings at Abydos also contained similar mud-brick chapels in their interiors, which, like that in the Fort, were usually placed close to the east gateway and laid out with walls askew to the orientation of the main enclosure. Generally simple three-room structures, Khasekhemwy made his at Abydos a more complicated affair composed of more than 9 rooms. At Hierakonpolis, he also embellished his chapel, outfitting it with at least two red granite column bases[..]" The early name of "Fort" is likely a misnomer. The structure may have been a temple or even a palace.
 * "Fort" in Hierakonpolis This mudbrick structure measured approximately 47 x 57 meters and was constructed of mudbrick. Garstang discovered more than 166 predynasstic graves in the enclosure. The enclosure contains a structure near the east entrance referred to as a chapel. To quote the Hierakonpolis site:

Interactive Dig in Hierakonpolis

Digitalegypt site with a plan of the fort

 * Mastabas in Beit Khallaf This site is located near Abydos and features five mastabas, labeled K1, K2, K3, K4 and K5. Mastaba K1 is the largest and measures some 45 x 85 meters, and presently stands 8 meters high. Seal impressions of Queen Nimaathap were found at this site. For a time this mastaba was thought to be the burial site of King Khasekhemwy, but he is now thought to have been buried in Abydos.

EgyptSites Beit Khallaf page A description of the site with photographs.

 * Gisr el-Mudir in Saqqara Large enclosure in Saqqara thought to possibly date to the time or Khasekhemwy. It measures ca 350 X 650 m. The walls may have been more than 4.5 meters high.

Djoser
Horus or Throne Name: Netjerikhet Nebty name: Nebti  Netjerikhet Golden Falcon name: (Bik-)Nebu Personal name: Djoser Reign: 19 years; 2584 - 2565 (Dodson) Predecessor: Khasekhemwy Successor: Sanakht Wife: Queen Hetephirnebty Children: King's daughther Intkaes First King of the third dynasty. Famous for his pyramid complex in Saqqara.

Djoser is attested in
 * Saqqara : tomb of Hesyre and other nobles
 * Abydos : seal impressions in tomb of Khasekhemwy.
 * Heliopolis : Shrine
 * Hierakonpolis : seal impressions
 * Elephantine : seal impressions
 * Bet Khallaf : seal impressions
 * Sinai : Inscription at Maghara near the turquoise mines.

See also Djoser at Digitalegypt

Sanakht
Horus or Throne Name: Sanakht Nebty name: -- Golden Falcon name: -- Personal name: Nebka Reign: 9 years; 2565 - 2556 (Dodson) Predecessor: Djoser Successor: Sekhemkhet Wife: NN Children: NN

 * Beit Khallaf: Sanakht's (partial) cartouche was found in Mastaba K2.

EgyptSites page on Beit Khallaf

Sekhemkhet
Horus or Throne Name: Sekhemkhet Nebty name: -- Golden Falcon name: -- Personal name: Djoser-Ti Reign: 6 years; 2556 - 2550 (Dodson) Predecessor: Sanakht Successor: Khaba Wife: Possibly queen Djesernebty-ankh or Djeseret-nebty (Stadelman and Helck - reading of the name is uncertain) Children: NN

 * Step pyramid in Saqqara
 * Inscription in the Sinai.

Sekhemkhet page on digitalegypt

Khaba
Horus or Throne Name: Khaba Nebty name: -- Golden Falcon name: -- Personal name: Teti? or Nebkare Reign: 6 years; 2550 - 2544 (Dodson) Predecessor: Sekhemkhet Successor: Huni Wife: NN Children: NN Third dynasty king.

 * Zawiyet el-Aryan: Possibly location of Khaba's step pyramid. And a mastaba from his reign.
 * Hierakonpolis: Seal impression found within the town enclosure.
 * Elephantine: Seal impression

Khaba at Digital Egypt

Huni
Horus or Throne Name: Qahedjet? Personal name: Huni Reign: 24 years; 2544 - 2520 (Dodson) Predecessor: Khaba Successor: Snefru Wives: Possibly Queen Djefatnebti; Queen Meresankh I - the mother of Snefru - was a lesser wife of Huni Children: Princess/Queen Hetepheres I and possibly Snefru

 * Fortress at the Island of Elephantine.
 * Stepped pyramid at Meidum: It is thought that Huni started the stepped pyramid at Meidum which was later taken over by Snefru and turned into a true pyramid.
 * Small step pyramid at Elephantine. Likely ritual in nature.

Snefru
Horus or Throne Name: Nebmaet Nebty name: Neb-maat-nebty Golden Falcon name: Bik-nub Personal name: Snefru (or Seneferu) Reign: 50 years; 2520 - 2470 (Dodson) Predecessor: Huni Successor: Khufu Wife: Queen Hetepheres I Children: Khufu; Princes Ranefer, Kanefer, Akhhaf, Iynefer, Rahotep, Netjeraperef and Nefermaat; Princess Merytiotes I, Nefertnesu, and Nefertkau Snefru was the first king of the fourth dynasty.

 * Dashur: The The Bent Pyramid and  The Red Pyramid were constructed in Dashur.
 * Meidum: The Meidum Pyramid was the first structure constructed during Snefru's reign.
 * Dashur Royal necropolis: Mastabas of prince Iynefer, and prince Kanefer (named Eldest King's Son)
 * Meidum Royal necropolis: Mastabas of prince Nefermaat (Vizier), Rahotep (High Priest of Ra in Heliopolis), and prince Ranefer
 * Giza Royal necropolis: Mastaba of prince Ankhhaf (Vizier) (G7510), and King's daughter Nefertkau (G7050). These tombs may date to the reign of Khufu.
 * Hierakonpolis: Seal impression
 * Sinai: Inscription at Maghara near the turquoise mines.
 * el-Hammamiya: Rock-tombs dating to the time of Khufu show that the sphere of influence extended down to southern Egypt. The tombs include Khakhent (Chief of the Tens of Upper Egypt) and his wife Khentkaus and a King's daughter Ifi and her husband Khakhent (also Chief of the Tens of Upper Egypt)

Snefru is mentioned on the Palermo stone as having conducted a campaign against Nubia.

Snefru at digitalegypt

Khufu
Horus or throne name: Medjedu Nebty name: Nebty-r-medjed Golden Falcon name: Bikwy-nub Personal Name: (Khnum-)Khufu Reign: 23 years; 2470 - 2447 (Dodson) Predecessor: Snefru Successor: Djedefre Wife: Queen Meritites I, Queen Henutsen, Maybe Nefertkau was aQueen as well. Children: Princes Kawab, Djedefre, Khafre, Hordjedef, Minkhaf, Babaef, Bauefre, Khufukhaf I, and Horbaef. Maybe Nefermaat II; The Princesses Hetepheres II, Neferetiabet, Meritites II, and Meresankh II.

 * Pyramid complex in Giza
 * Sinai : Inscription at Maghara near the turquoise mines.
 * Ivory statuette found in store room in Abydos (this may not have been related to original activity during reignt of Khufu though).
 * El Kab: grafitti showing boats; one with the name of Khufu, the other with a hard to descipher name thought to be Sharu (Snefru?)
 * Hierakonpolis: A diorite dish with the name of Khufu was found in the temple enclosure.
 * Island of Siheil: grafitti from the time of Khufu.

Djedefre
Horus or throne name: Kheper Nebty name: Kheper-em-nebty Golden Falcon name: Biku-nub Nomen: Djedefre Reign: 8 years; 2447 - 2439 (Dodson) Predecessor: Khufu Successor: Setka? or maybe Baka? Wife: Queen Hetepheres II and Queen Khentetka Children: Princes Setka, Hornit, Baka, Nikaudjedefre and the Princesses Hetepheres and Neferhetepes.

 * Pyramid complex at Abu Roash.
 * Pyramid
 * Mortuary Temple to the east of the pyramid (but off set to the north)
 * Causeway - approaches the pyramid from the north-east (not east)
 * The Valley Temple was planned at the end of the causeway.
 * One boat pit, located next to the mortuary temple.

 * Mentioned in tomb in Giza.

Djedefre at digitalegypt

Khafre
Horus or throne name: User-ib Nebty name: User-em-nebty Golden Falcon name: Netjer-nub-sekhem Personal Name: Khafre Reign: 23 years; 2437 - 2414 (Dodson) Predecessor: Setka or Baka? Or possibly Djedefre? Successor: Menkaure Wife: Queen Meresankh III, Queen Meresankh II?, maybe Khamerernebty, Hekenuhedjet and Persenet were Queens as well. Children: Princes Nebemakhet, Du(ae)nre, Niuserre(Neuserre), Khenterka, Ankhmare (Ankhemre), Iunmin, Iunre (Yunre), Menkaure, Sekhemkare, Nikaure, Akhre, and Babaf (Khnembaf in some publications) The Princesses Shepseskau, Nubhotep, Rekhetre, Hemetre (?), and Khamernebty II.

 * Pyramid complex in Giza
 * Pyramid
 * Mortuary Temple to the east of the pyramid. This mortuary temple was larger than those previously built.
 * Causeway - approaches the pyramid from the east.
 * The Valley Temple.
 * Five boat pits.
 * Seal impressions at Buhen
 * Cylinder seal found at Byblos
 * Calcite bowl found at Ebla
 * Cylinder seal at a tomb near el-Raqaqna (near Abydos)

Khafre at digitalegypt

Menkaure
Horus or throne name: Ka-khet Nebty name: Ka-nebty Golden Falcon name: Netjeru-nub-netjery Personal Name: Menkaure Reign: 18 years; 2414 - 2396 (Dodson) Predecessor: Khafre Successor: Shepseskaf Wife: Queen Khamerernebty II and possibly Queen Rekhetre (?) Children: Princes Khuenre, Shepseskaf?, and Sekemre?; Possibly Khentkaues I?

 * Pyramid complex in Giza
 * Pyramid
 * Mortuary Temple
 * Causeway
 * The Valley Temple.
 * Boat pits.
 * Tombs of nobles in Giza (Debhen, Sekhemkare, Nisutpunetjer)
 * Tomb of Nikaankh at Tehne
 * Objects at Byblos
 * Seals at Buhen
 * Cylinder seals at El-Kab; outside north wall of town enclosure.
 * Sealings found at Abydos

Menkaure at Digitalegypt

Shepseskaf
Horus or throne name: Shepses-khet Nebty name: Shepses-nebty Golden Falcon name: -- Personal Name: Shepseskaf Reign: 4 years; 2396 - 2392 (Dodson) Predecessor: Menkaure Successor: Userkaf Wife: Unknown, maybe Khentkaues I, maybe Bunefer Children: --

 * Mastabat el-Faraun: Shepseskaf's funerary monument in Saqqara.
 * Tombs of nobles in Giza (Sekhemkare, Nisutpunetjer)
 * Tomb of Nikaankh at Tehne
 * Sealings found at Abydos

Shepseskaf at Digitalegypt


text:
Wikiversity:Bans/Alternative

Banning a Wikiversity participant from editing does not disable a user's ability to edit any page. Banning should not be confused with blocking.

Bans
A ban is a community agreement that prohibits a person from editing one or more pages at Wikiversity for a specific duration of time. If you are unable to resolve a conflict with another Wikiversity participant on your own, you may request community feedback at Community Review. The Wikiversity community may as a result of reviewing your case decide that a ban is necessary to resolve the conflict.

When requesting a community review, you must provide links demonstrating the problem, links that show attempts to resolve the problem on your own, and a detailed description of how the edits or actions may violate official policies or guidelines, or harms Wikiversity. You must also notify any users that you are discussing on their talk page, and notify any participants of the learning projects that could be effected by a community decision. If the community decides to impose a ban, the pages involved in the ban, the duration of the ban, and the people who are banned must be clearly stated. If the community decides that a person should be banned from editing all pages, a custodian may block the person for the duration of the ban citing "community ban" as the reason.

A ban must not be suggested lightly, as the very act itself can be seen as violating Civility and Assume Good Faith.

Enforcing bans
During the specified duration of a ban, if a banned user edits a page that they are banned from editing then those banned edits can be reverted.

Bans at other Wikimedia projects
Wikiversity participants who have been banned at other projects are welcome to participate constructively at Wikiversity.

title: Wikiversity:Bans/Alternative


text:
User talk:Sticky Parkin

 Hello Sticky Parkin, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --mikeu talk 18:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sticky Parkin


text:
User talk:Stevenarntson/group spaces/english composition/group 3

 * Hi Garden Gnome Group!
 * This is getting off to a good start. There is a considerable amount of information already in your research piece, which is great; a couple of suggestions, though:

 * 1) The piece should be clearly organized into topics--you should choose a few, such as "Origin," "Development," and "Controversies," or something like that. Then place all of the information into those three topics, and make sure the layout is clear, visually.
 * 2) Be careful about quotes--if you've pasted some information directly in from another source, you must cite that source, and put the pasted information in quotes to avoid plagiarism.
 * Best, Stevenarntson 19:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Hi Garden Gnome Group,
 * Great poem, Helena--thought-provoking and interesting content. Keep careful track of articles (the/a) and prepositions (for) as you're writing--much of this is idiomatic to English, unfortunately, but I think some of the members of this group were raised in this idiom! :)
 * Best Stevenarntson

 * Hi G.G. Group,
 * This is shaping up nicely; thanks for your consistent work here.
 * Stevenarntson 14:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Hi Garden Gnome Group,
 * I saw you last week, so we won't be meeting today--just a note to let you know I remembered. Also, I contributed a couple of lines to your Renga #1 ...hope you don't mind; it is a wiki after all!
 * Best, Stevenarntson 14:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Stevenarntson/group spaces/english composition/group 4

 * Hello The Possibly Legendary,
 * There's some considerable information here now, which is a good raw resource. Be careful though not to overwhelm yourselves with too much data--in the end, it must all be gone through and shaped into a paper. Let your own inclinations guide you--what seems most interesting to include?
 * Good luck! Stevenarntson 19:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Hello Group 4,
 * I haven't seen any activity here for awhile ... how is it coming along?
 * Stevenarntson

 * Hello Group 4,
 * I'm getting more worried; for the last few weeks, only one of your members has been a contributor in class, and this page has stagnated. Let me know what's happening.
 * Stevenarntson 15:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Hello Group 4,
 * Good additions this week, Amber; let's talk in class today about what scope you're imagining for this overall project. I'm considering letting the research component slide, since this group has just 1 or 2 people in it right now. Beyond that, some proofing changes to the poems, and formatting issues in the overall page.
 * Best, Stevenarntson 14:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


text:
File talk:Learning bongos.jpg

These are djembes, not bongos. --Opus88888 21:07, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * It's true - though I was simply using the original title of the photo on Flickr (which incidentally has now been changed!). Cormaggio talk 17:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

title: File talk:Learning bongos.jpg


text:
User talk:Opus88888

 Hello Opus88888, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --JWSchmidt 21:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Opus88888


text:
Wikiversity:Community Review Policy

Community Review is a tool used by the Wikiversity community to discuss particular issues of contention on a case-by-case basis, which are either not covered by official policy or where the application of policy is unclear. If a consensus is reached on a community review, the result will have the same weight as policy, and can overrule other policies where consensus contradicts policy.

User conflicts
If you are unable to resolve a conflict with another Wikiversity participant on your own, you may request community feedback at Community Review. The ideal outcome is that the Wikiversity community can resolve the conflict without incident. However as a last resort the Wikiversity community may decide as a result of reviewing the situation that sanctions are necessary to resolve the conflict.

When requesting a user conflict-related community review, you must provide links demonstrating the problem, links that show attempts to resolve the problem on your own, and a detailed description of how the edits or actions may violate official policies or guidelines, or otherwise harms Wikiversity. You must also notify any users that you are discussing on their talk page, and notify any participants of the learning projects that could be effected by a community decision.

Questions of scope or appropriateness
If there are questions about whether a class or category of learning resources or other pages falls outside of Wikiversity's scope or may otherwise be inappropriate, you should request community feedback at Community Review.

When requesting a scope-related community review, efforts must be made to list the resources within this class or category, and notify the participants in these projects. An announcement should also be made on the Colloquium, and in cases where a large class is being discussed the discussion should also be linked from the sitenotice and/or the mailinglist.

For more limited cases that do not involve a whole class of projects, Requests for Deletion should be used instead.

Requests for clarifications
In cases where a Custodian, Bureaucrat, or Checkuser is unclear about how to use their tools, or when a questions arises about how those tools are being used, a request for community feedback may be opened at Community Review. Such requests should always be announced on the Colloquium.

Requests for community statements
On occasions where a statement of the community's opinion may help clarify things, a request may be put forward for a community statement. Such requests should be announced on the Colloquium.

Closing a community review
Community reviews should be closed when it is clear that there is a consensus, or when it becomes clear that a consensus will not be reached.

After a community review is closed
In cases where a community review was found necessary because current policies were insufficient to address the issue, efforts should be made to update the policies in order to take the decision into account so that it may be applied to similar cases in the future, should the need arise.

Recent amendments to this policy
The following resolutions have been provisionally adopted as a result of the discussion at Community Review/CR process discussion/Resolutions, and should be integrated into the policy when that review is closed:

 * The main page of a community review will:
 * Begin with a brief statement which explains the purpose of the review.
 * Have a list of questions with yes/no answers. Questions can be added as indicated by the statements of the participants.
 * Have statements by individual contributors about the topic, under their own headings, not to exceed 700 words. Threaded and long-form discussions should take place on the talk page. Statements may contain links to other discussions or longer statements on another page.

 * Resolutions approved using community review will be noted on the policy pages affected by the resolution under a new heading, to be later incorporated into the policy's main text through the normal editing process. In cases where a resolution modifies a proposed policy, the resolution heading should be left in place until the policy is approved.

 * Individual resolutions should not be seen as "written in stone", and should be revisited if they are thought to have unintended negative effects that harm Wikiversity's mission.

title: Wikiversity:Community Review Policy


text: Category:Artificial consciousness

title: Category:Artificial consciousness


text:
User:The myoclonic jerk

This is my page I'll add more later

title: User:The myoclonic jerk


text:
User:Krishna Aradhi

Hi,

My name is Krishna Aradhi and I am currently studying in the final year of the undergraduate course in Mechanical Engineering in Pune, India. I intend to take up technical writing as a career after graduation. As a step in that direction I have decided to complete the course for Technical writing which is being offered on Wikiversity.

All the exercises prescribed in the said course shall be uploaded on this page. Please do help me out with your precious feedback.

--Krishna Aradhi 00:54, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User:Krishna Aradhi


text: User:Theornamentalist

title: User:Theornamentalist


text:
User talk:Chachikujipampijo

Thank you for experimenting with Wikiversity. Your test was recorded, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for further testing. You may wish to learn more about what Wikiversity is to help you contribute. Consider registering if you are keen on our project. --Juandev 09:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Chachikujipampijo


text:
User talk:Krishna Aradhi

 Hello Krishna Aradhi, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --Juandev 09:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Technical writing
Hello, I have red your profile and it is nice to hear, that this course is usefull also for other people and there is an interest. You also said, that you would like to upload all excercieses to your user page, but what about to found a new page e.g. User:Krishna Aradhi/Technical Wrtiting excercises not messing it directly to your user page?--Juandev 09:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Krishna Aradhi


text:
User talk:Theornamentalist

 Hello Theornamentalist, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --Juandev 09:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

and good luck with studying in here :-)--Juandev 09:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed improvements
I saw that you are a member of the School of Engineering. May I suggest that you have a look at this: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Improving_Technical_Topics_At_Wikiversity and try to consider these ideas as you develop content and help other to do the same? Please let me know if you have comments/feedback on these ideas! Daviddoria 16:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Theornamentalist


text:
User talk:DesireeMBrinson

 Hello DesireeMBrinson, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --Juandev 09:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:DesireeMBrinson


text:
User talk:The myoclonic jerk

 Hello The myoclonic jerk, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --Juandev 09:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:The myoclonic jerk


text:
ATP mentor training/Teaching to overcome prejudices about others

Teaching to overcome prejudices about others
As a mentor you should teach your protégé to overcome prejudices about others. The categorical imperative can be a motivation for the protégé to do so: If you do not like others to hold prejudices about you you should not hold prejudices about others. The behavior of communicating prejudices as facts is a precedent that can be a role model for others, consequently the behavior pattern can spread with detrimental effect and could be seen as a part of the alien ecology.

Psychology of prejudices
A learning objective for the protégé should be to see the behavior of others as abstract variants of his own behavior, which should be suitable to increase tolerance towards others.

Prejudices between mentor and protégé
A convenient entry to the topic is the search for possible prejudices between mentor and protégé. Actual prejudices are not an interesting topic because they may lead to discord and mentor and protégé are likely to drop any prejudices they may hold about each other during the mentoring relationship anyway. Especially at the beginning of a mentoring relationship it may not be wise to discuss actual prejudices too openly. At least it doesn't seem to be suitable as a general recommendation.

Discussing possible prejudices can be done by telling the protégé some of the possible prejudices one could hold about him and allowing the protégé to invent some prejudices one could hold about his mentor. To avoid mixing own prejudices with inventions you can invite the protégé to think about the possible perspectives of other persons or people from other countries and centuries and what prejudices they might hold or might have held and why. Speaking about possible prejudices is bound to reveal something about each other's way of thinking, interests and education but without implying that an actual prejudice exists.

Reducing prejudices between adolescents
To reduce prejudices between adolescents the protégé may require workable strategies. As a mentor you can give recommendations how you would try to reduce prejudices in your life (e.g. during an interview or after changing your residence). The protégé should try to invent his own strategies that make sense in his social environment. As a mentor your can think about the abstract strategy and try to suggest improvements.


text:
Help talk:User talk page

hi!everybody!

title: Help talk:User talk page


text:
User talk:Kusbiantonugraha

 Hello Kusbiantonugraha, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. 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.

 * 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-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --mikeu talk 15:07, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kusbiantonugraha