text:
User:CatherineMcIntyre

I'm a third year student at the University of King's College, doing a combined honours degree in Journalism and Psychology. My academic interests span many subjects, and journalism is a medium through which I can explore all of them. I am particularly fascinated with human behaviour—its processes and development. I hope to apply what I learn in psychology (critical thinking, research techniques, and a basic understanding of thought and behaviour) to my work as a journalist.

Blog Posts
Week 1

What struck me from this week's lectures was the Whorfian hypothesis and how it relates to physical sensation. Whorf's idea that words and syntax shape the way we think initially seemed lofty to me. Despite my fascination with words-their power to evoke and manipulate-I had my own lofty idea that there is too much emphasis on language, specifically vocabulary. I believed (for no scientific reason) that someone with poor verbal communication could be just as capable, intelligent, kind, interesting, wise, etc., as someone with a rich vocabulary. I thought of words as heuristic cues that allowed for quick and easy evaluation and judgement. However, when discussing the linguistic determinism aspect of Whorf's hypothesis, Dr. Newman raised the idea that Native American languages are strictly in the present tense. For something as abstract as time, with no verbal (or other communicative) representation, it seems likely that the culture's perception of the concept would be different from the Western notions of past, present, and future.

It was especially difficult for me to grasp the idea that words can affect how we experience sensation, like colour and sent. Dr. Newman pointed out that our vocabulary for odors is fairly limited. I agree that it is often difficult to identify odors without supporting verbal or visual stimulus. Although I may not be able to label the experience, however, I feel like I "know" the sent in a very specific way. Therefore, I don't think that enriching our sent vocabulary would enrich our sense of smell, but simply ease the identification process of our olfacotry experiences.

Week 2

This week’s lectures and readings touched on lateralization of language in the brain. Brain imaging technology and research with stroke and split-brain patients shows that language is predominantly left-lateralized. The left hemisphere is largely responsible for the rules and principles of grammar, which structures language as we know it. We have seen that aphasic patients with damage to the Broca’s or Wernicke’s areas of the brain (both of which are in the left hemisphere) have trouble constructing meaningful sentences. Women with left-hemisphere damage appear to maintain better language production and comprehension. This finding is consistent with the idea that men have more lateralized brains than women, and that the right hemisphere is not totally dormant when it comes to language. Given these two premises, I wonder if brain lateralization has anything to do with women being better than men at inferring emotion from tone of voice (am I being biased, or is there evidence for this?).

Real evidence does show that right hemisphere damage impairs the ability to detect emotional aspects of speech. Although patients with right hemisphere damage can form grammatically correct sentences, they have trouble detecting tone, and do not understand figures of speech, inferences, sarcasm or humour! Their language is restricted to the words they interpret literally. In many ways, the right hemisphere appears responsible for the social aspects of language that connect people.

I noticed that patients with right hemisphere damage appear to comprehend and produce language in ways similar to people with autism. People with autism do not have syntactic or phonological deficits, but they have pragmatic (social) language deficits. A study by Sally Ozonoff and Judith N. Miller explores this idea further.

Week 3

Text is just symbols that cue our speech, though the visual organization of words and sentences on a page does not reflect the verbal reproduction of these symbols. In text, we distinguish one word from the next with spaces, and we infer prosody (tone, pause, stress) with punctuation. But what we see in text is very different from how we speak. For example, I write, ‘could I have an orange?’, but what I say is more like, ‘CouldIyavanornge?’ Yet for some reason, it is more difficult to verbally reproduce the latter “word” than the former sentence. So how do we conceptualize language in the mind? Do we think of language as we see it in text, or how we actually speak it? It kind of seems like we think language sounds the way it looks, but that is an illusion and a product of exposure and learning. Think of listening to a foreign language. It is difficult to distinguish where one word ends and an other begins, but somehow people understand the subtle separations between units of their native language. The rules of language are complicated and variable, though producing language is so instinctual. What a concise example of the interacting influences of nature and nurture on behaviour.

Week 4

This week, we looked at what’s in a word. Technically, words are made up of morphemes; the smallest linguistic unit that carries some kind of meaning. These little units alter the word by changing its tense or the entire definition. To some extent we have rules about how morphemes make up and change words. But for the most part (and with the English language in particular), words are full of exceptions. In such cases, our ability to construct and understand words depends on our experience with and exposure to them. Basically, there is a lot of memorization involved. So in a sense, the structural units of words are fairly arbitrary. But what about the meaning of a word as a whole? It seems like these larger units are even more random than their individual parts. A single word can represent a complex idea and carry several connotations. But in contrast, it sometimes takes multiple words to convey one simple thought or idea. Language development in children highlights both the rules and the haphazard way we apply them. There is a U-shaped learning curve to the way kids develop language. At first, they know words without really understanding morphological rules. Once they learn these rules, they tend to overregularize and apply the rules to all words (I teached a class). And eventually, they learn of the many exceptional morphemes.

Week 5

This week’s lectures explored the mental dictionary--the memory bank of words and their meaning, i.e., lexical access. A major factor that influences the ease with which we access words is the frequency of words in text and speech. This is explained through Zipf’s law, or the “least effort” principle, which states that the more frequent a word, the easier it is to access. Studies have found that we are faster at naming words (from both auditory and visual stimuli) the more we are exposed to them. Now, there are many other factors aside from frequency (or in concort with frequency) that influence lexical access, such as semantic priming, gesturing, and morphological complexity. But word frequency seems to be a theme among several of my classes this week, so my focus will remain here. My question concerning word frequency and lexical access stems from a “chicken or egg” dilemma typical of correlation research. Can we access words faster because they are used more frequently, or do we use words more frequently because they are easier to access? I suspect that both possibilities at work here, contributing to the aggregate strength of the relationship. In another class, we looked at word frequency in terms of attitudes towards the words we use so often. In one study, Robert Zajonc suggested that words with positive semantic connotations or those that are phonologically appealing are used more frequently than their negative competitors. Putting this in context of Dr. Newman's lectures this week, one might conclude that "nicer" words (both in meaning and sound) are easier to access. What an appropriate realization on this Valentine's Day.

Week 6

Thus far in the course, we have focused on the structural components of language and how we produce and process them. With our latest lecture on discourse, we turned our attention to the motivation that drives our use of language; among other things, we began exploring why we use language. Much of the literature on discourse too, however, emphasizes technical aspects of language process and comprehension. This school of thought looks at the tools and strategies we use to string together coherent bits of language to form discourse. This process view (as it is called) describes the many inferences we make when engaged in discourse. We make inferences at different levels of discourse processing. At the surface structure, we use pronouns and other anaphora to infer missing information needed to make sense of adjacent phrases. At the textbase, we infer the semantic meaning of the text or conversation based on previous information from the discourse, and/or general knowledge from our memory.

The other school of thought (the product view) regarding discourse focuses primarily on the social aspects of language as a tool for communication. The product view describes discourse as a means of attaining a specific goal. To attain this goal, like with the process view, we make inferences about information that is not explicit. Here, we infer ideas about the person with whom we communicate--their intentions, motivations, attitude, etc--based on cues they provide through language, particularly pragmatics. There are many social/contextual factors that influence how we produce and interpret discourse. And despite extensive analysis on slight changes in tone or timing and their implications on the meaning or intent of discourse, the way we go about communicating is all very automatic. We don’t (for the most part) consciously plan how we will speak to someone, nor do we consider how we should react when someone speaks to us. Conversational exchanges tend to be spontaneous interactions, perhaps suggesting that our conversations are driven by implicit motivations.

Week 7

I found last week's lecture on music and language particularly interesting, as I consider myself both an amateur musician and quasi-psychology student. My interest for music and the brain was peaked a few years ago when I received the gift of Oliver Sack's book, Musicophilia. At that point, my love for music was well established, though I had only the slightest glimpses (as I still have) into neural networks wherein my perception and production (and thus love) for music is manifest. But enough with this flighty tangent, and on with the thoughts this week's lectures provoked in me. The idea that small children develop both language and music easier than adults is not exactly news to me. From my own experience, and from experience teaching piano little kids (versus trying to teach my mom), I am amazed at how quickly children internalize "grammatical" rules and techniques of music. What I hadn't considered before, however, is just how young children children are when they develop the ability to learn music. Dr. Newman provided us with evidence that aspects of music and language share certain neural resources. ERP studies showed positive P600 responses both to harmonic violations and syntactic violation in the same brain area. Thus, as there are brain areas that govern both language and music abilities, one might suspect that the ability to learn music develops simultaneously with the ability to learn language. However, learning language clearly appears more dominant than learning music. (Though I wonder whether kids whose parents communicated only through music would be as fluent in music as I am in English... probably not, as language has words with specific meanings, whereas music is largely non-referential.)

Week 8

This week’s lectures succeeded to heighten my self-consciousness. After learning about errors and gestures that accommodate our speech, I’ve been hyper-aware of what my hands and body are doing while I speak, and what my mind is doing with every slip-of-the-tongue. Freud suspected that speech errors were the verbal manifestation of suppressed subconscious thoughts; however, empirically based explanations now exist that invalidate the idea of Freudian slips (like many of Freud’s theories). Although speech errors do not (usually) represent internal thoughts or desires, they are not totally random. Research by GS Dell shows that there is predictability in what word might slip out as an error based on the number of semantic and phonetic connections the error word has with the intended word. And the tip of the tongue phenomenon also shows how we can have the meaning of a word in our cognition, and even some information about its phonology and syntax, it is the sounds of the word—its morphemes—that we can’t quote produce. When these frustrating blockages arise in conversation, I find (especially in the past week) that my body tries to communicate what my tongue has failed to. And as Dr. Newman explained, these gestures help me find access the words more than they help my listener access the meaning I try to convey.

Week 9

Living just down the street from my sister, I have been appointed to babysit her seven month old baby most days of the week. He's an easy baby--only cries when he's hungry or tired or if you're not smiling at him enough. When he first came along, I must admit that I found him kind of boring. He layed around, not doing much other than sleep, eat, poop, repeat. But before the little guy started showing some personality, and i started showing some interest in him. Now that I think of it, my first feelings of mutual attachment were around the time when he started communicating verbally. At about four months, I would speak "motherese" to him, and he would light up and start babbling, and so I would do it a little more. It didn't matter what words I was saying as long as I was exagegrating my tone and pitch. This fits with the idea that children are able to pick up on prosody in language much sooner than they are able to understand semantics. Since then, his babbling has become more systematic--repeating distinct morphemes, and my sister claims he can now say "mama". He is around the stage of understanding what is being said, but does not have the capacity to vocalize language (I suppose this means I should censor my motherese and stop making fun of his disproportionate physique).

week 10

Learning about bilingualism makes me want to kick myself. Not because the topic is uninteresting, but because at 21, I feel like I've missed the boat to fluency in another language. Similar to first language acquisition, there seems to be a critical period in which one can learn multiple languages with ease. This critical period is suggested to end around late childhood and certainly before adolescence. However, simply exposing a child to a foreign language does not necessarily mean they will learn it. There must be some social motivation for them to do so. I think this motivation clause limited my ability to learn a second language when I had the opportunity during that critical period. I took French immersion for my entire public school career, and by no means do I consider myself fluent in French. Sure, I can understand spoken French, and I can hack my way through a conversation, but when I speak French, there is no doubt in the listeners mind that I am English. I may fool them ever so briefly with my indiscernible accent, for though I may not employ the rules or a solid vocabulary of the language, to another French novice, I may sound like I do. So in terms of my accent, my early exposure to a second language was effective. However, with virtually no reason to speak French, my acquisition of the language was delayed to say the most. When people immigrate to Canada, learning English is motivated by job opportunities and social integration, and so even adults have the capacity to learn English quickly (though with more difficulty than children). It's amazing to look at my brother-in-law who came here from Italy three years ago knowing no English at all. Without any formal teaching, he is now totally fluent in the language. Whereas after 13 years of French schooling, I still struggle to find the right words. I suppose then, that there is still hope for us late language learners. Many studies have found that although adult learners do not tend to achieve as high a level of language proficiency as children, we may actually learn syntax and morphology faster than children (thanks to more experience with language in general?) Perhaps then I've just missed the speed boat to multiple language acquisition and am left to row my way to bilingualism in a life boat.

Week 11

It's hard to believe that we're already wrapping things up with our debate segment of the course. I'm always dumbfounded by the speed at which time passes- how is it that I never get used to it?! Anyway, these debates have been pretty cool so far. Again, something so different from any university (Science) class I've ever taken. The last time I debated was four years ago in high school, and like all aspects of that era, the debating was significantly less civilized than what we've been doing in this class. I suppose there are a number of reasons for that-- maturity, knowledge (we don't need to rely on aggression and emotion to argue our points), and the format of the debate (tight time-constraints keep debaters to the main arguments, preventing them from veering off onto fervent tangents). To my former dismay and present relief, my group was one of the first to present. We argued against the effectiveness of a teaching program, FastForWord, in improving the reading and writing abilities of children with dyslexia. Now that I've officially argued "my position", I can admit that I think we had the easier side. When you tell a group of psychology students that there are no significant studies with peer reviewed support for a program, they are likely to disregard it. Their scientific mind they have been developing since they stepped foot on campus tells them to consider the data, the reliability of the study, and the researchers' motivation for conducting the study. True, FastForWord has weak support from independent researchers, but that isn't to say that the program would not work for some people; a lack of statistical significance is irrelevant to those students for whom the program works. I think the problem arises when the company tries to sell the product as the one and only treatment to all your reading and writing woes. As we have argued, there are many different deficits that can present themselves as dyslexia, and different deficits may require different forms of treatment. Perhaps with a different audience, support would have been less lop-sided in favour of the 'against' side. But in the face of aspiring scientists (and despite the strength of the arguments), it would have gone against that critical morale to support a program tested under such experimentally lax conditions.

Week 12 I think this class was a pioneer for the way acedemia is heading in the near future. Props to Dr. Newman for initiating an evaluation method that is so different from typical courses. In many ways, the structure of this course encourages students to engage more in the material. Public blog postings every week is a motivating way to reflect on the material and delve into some independent reseach to invetigate any lingering questions from the lectures. The chapter assignment also required some expertise in a particular topic - even more so than by writing a research paper. And I think it's a valuable exercise to express ideas from scientific reasearch in a way that assumes the reader has no background knowlede of the material. Everyone benefits when ideas can be shared with such ease.

This course does run the risk of having students neglect a huge portion of the material. It is possible to focus on just the topic of your chapter, and although you have to think of lecture material for blog posts, knowledge for this material is not nearly as solid as for the chater topic. It might be a neat idea to have students complete each others' learning exercises for a portion of their mark.

I enjoyed finishing the course with debates. Again, this exercise incorporated the notion of clearly conveying ideas based on research. I found the topics of the debates often one-sided. One group was rarely much stronger than the other, and so my vote usually went to the side I agreed with (from the start) rather than how well they argued. I feel like in order for some sides to have won, their argument would have to have been much stronger than that of their opponents, and their research would have had to been more extensive. Nonetheless, I thought they were fairly well done.

Overall, this class was a great experience. I would recomend it to other students, and I would definitely take another course with this structure.

title: User:CatherineMcIntyre


text:
User talk:Chawannuch

 Hello Chawannuch, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

File:IMG 0439.jpg
Hi! Thanks for uploading the file File:IMG 0439.jpg. It is a beautiful photo, but unfortunately it isn't currently in use and doesn't have any licensing information, so as part of a cleanup I've tagged it to be removed. If you would like to keep the file here, though, that would be great - all you need to do is add an appropriate license if the copyright belongs to you, or if it is otherwise available under a compatible free license. If you need any help, just ask - I'm very happy to assist. - Bilby 02:19, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Chawannuch


text:
User talk:Patt~enwikiversity

 Hello Patt, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Me in Bhutan.jpg
Hi! Thanks for uploading the file File:Me in Bhutan.jpg. It's a beautiful photo, but unfortunately it isn't currently in use and doesn't have any licensing information, so as part of a cleanup I've tagged it to be removed. If you would like to keep the file here, though, that would be great - all you need to do is add an appropriate license if the copyright belongs to you, or if it is otherwise available under a compatible free license. If you need any help, just ask - I'm very happy to assist. - Bilby 02:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Patt. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Patt~enwikiversity that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:17, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Patt~enwikiversity


text:
User talk:Tensils99

 Hello Tensils99, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 16:29, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

About User:Tensils99/Dr. Jagatjit S Kohli
This page was tagged for speedy deletion by a Wikiversity user, and my opinion is that it is not, in fact, appropriate for Wikiversity. I have moved it temporarily to your user space to give you time to recover the file text, you can copy the wikitext ("edit" the page and select and copy the contents of the edit window) and paste it into a text file on your own computer. I have left the speedy deletion tag in place and another administrator might decide to delete the file at any time; if that happens and you want the text, ask me and I'll restore it temporarily for you. You are welcome to discuss this with me if you have any questions, by leaving a message for me at User talk:Abd or by email using the Wikiversity email interface. Welcome to Wikiversity, and I apologize for the necessity of dealing with this page. --Abd 18:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tensils99


text:
User talk:Rondonxj

 Hello Rondonxj, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat 17:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rondonxj


text:
User:Mabuabsdd/Aqib biggest news letter, for safe tips

$
Kidnappers really want to kill kids, so you know how hard it is for getting killed. So Aaqib`s news letter required standing that if your child needs improvement about Locking of killing and safety. Your in the right place, This moment we calculated that we can provide your child with a little knowledge. Thank you for listening to Aaqib`s biggest news letter
 * 1) Do not let your child be on chatting vases
 * 2) Look after your child
 * 3) Do not let your child to be on skype or twiter even or Facebook


text:
User:Atcovi/Aqib user expanding property connection

Allow for Sponsor of the Aqib Show
.T.U.F.F. Puppy is sponsor for the Aqib Show

Spongebob Squarepants is sponsor and reload sponsor again for the Aqib Show

Gummibar is also making for the Aqib Show

Avatar is also  made from the Aqib show.


text:
User:Atcovi/Aqib Sochal Club

Has bin moved from deletion

Ref-->

Presenting Aqib Aze Show in, Aqib Aze storie

title: User:Atcovi/Aqib Sochal Club


text:
User talk:Icezababy

 Hello Icezababy, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 18:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Icezababy


text:
User:Mlschram

I am in my final year of my BSc, with a double major in Psychology and French.

Blog Entry #1 - January 16, 2011
So far I am thoroughly enjoying the psycholinguistics class. I had some initial concerns, knowing that it would be focusing a lot on the brain, but I have been pleasantly surprised. Dr. Newman has captivated my attention, and I am eager to navigate my way through the creation of a wikiversity site; this is completely new to me and I am ready to make the leap! Having such a unique approach to an undergraduate class is sure to keep us all focused in a new way. I really appreciate the way that Dr. Newman is acknowledging the way in which education needs to change to meet the new needs of society. It is truly refreshing!

This week I was especially fascinated by the question of whether we need language to think. My initial reaction was that while we certainly use language for a large portion of our thinking, it isn't necessary. But this notion has stayed with me since that lecture, and I am becoming more and more aware of the realities of it all. I'm beginning to think now that having the use of language prohibits us from thinking without language. That language is ever-present, and even as we attempt to think without it, it manages to seep into our consciousness. While the truth that a description of certain smells and tastes can't be made with language, we can't help but consider those notions in a linguistic manner. I think that the simple development of language among our cognitive abilities is so all-encompassing, and so ingrained in our consciousness, that we cannot get rid of it. I must admit that this question has kept me thinking all week, and I would truly be fascinated to see some research on the subject. Is it possible, without taking drastic measures that involve harming the brain in some way, to get rid of language, even for a moment?

This topic expands even further when we examined the Whorfian hypothesis, and how our use of language shapes the world that we live in. It was interesting to hear of Toki Pona, and to look at the ways that language can actually be used to alter our consciousness. This notion isn't new to me, and we hear frequently in clinical psychology that treatment of various psychological illnesses often begins with a shift in the language that the patient uses. Certainly, we see frequently among people suffering from mood disorders that not only do they lack an understanding of their emotions, but that they lack the language necessary to describe those emotions. Often, this is one of the first steps in treatment. It is widely thought that without the language, the understanding will not be there.

title: User:Mlschram


text:
User talk:Mlschram

 Hello Mlschram, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mlschram


text:
User talk:Adventurejimbob~enwikiversity

 Hello Adventurejimbob, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 20:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Adventurejimbob. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Adventurejimbob~enwikiversity that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Adventurejimbob~enwikiversity


text:
User:Dennismelton/Perivity

Perivity is known as the perpendicular component to gravity, and is unified by the speed of light and mass. It is proposed that the electromagnetic spectrum is unified though a mass electric equivalence defined as perogravity.

This is a revolutionary new theory that has been published here in its originality. Basically if perivity is unified with gravity in the same way as magnetism is with electricity then it is possible that there is physical conditions that can cause a unified singular force where all the forces are the same.

Dennis William Melton David Castro Rodrigues

Mathematical Model
Can you give the analog of Maxwell's Equations for your model of an orthogonal component to gravity? How would you measure the analogs of ε0 and μ0 for your analogous model? —Caprice 12:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Quantum Electro Gravity the Analogous Model Unification
In e/m the electric field and magnetic field relate E/B = c in perogravity G/P = Uμ velocity four-vector Uμ. That is my first step in calculating analogous μ and ε. Or in other words the same as E/B = γv where γ = 1/(1-β^2)^(1/2) β = v/c. Since the equations are unified they begin to behave the same. For G/P or g/p for perogravity the orthogonal waves are solutions to the wave equation for v => c. Such that there is a relativistic ε and μ. I suggest using just Uμ for both e/m and g/p to get e/g electro gravity. At least that is my starting point. 1/(εμ)^2 = c then in reality it is 1/(εμ)^2 = Uμ. I guess there is a four permittivity and permeability equivalence for e/g I just call them special four permittivity and permeability respectively. From here the question of how does that fit in with the rest of physics in terms of QED and quantum gravity. QEG is quantum electro gravity and the equations of qed are summed to get the orthogonal quantum components of perogravity. To be cont... but the whole of perogravity or perivity definition is to include QEG because just saying that the equations are the same isn't enough. Well that is my analogous g/p to e/m. Basically just replace c with γv and that would be how g/p is like e/m.

Unified QEG
In qed we arive at a probability density ψ*ψ for E and B the same is for g/p but at this point I do something different but it should seem familar. I optimize the combined likelihood to measure parameters using parameter estimation. Here is how: for each probability the ψ*ψ_ijk.. I compute the temperature of the distribution using 1/T = k d/dq (ln ∏ ψ*ψ_ijk...)_q where ∏ is the multiplication over all of the states of ψ*ψ_ijk... and ijk... represents the number of parameters in ψ*ψ. d/dq just represents that for that parameter space that the distribution should be optimized and as a bonus it can be used to calculate the temperature. k is just the standard bolzman k. Next I construct a similar equation and then compare their likelihood ratio to get a conservative force. L = ∏ ψ*ψ_ijk...)_q2 thus I get R = ln L_1/L_2 which corresponds to a conservative force = R = ln L_1 - ln L_2 ≈ g(1/r^2) where g is gravitational constants associated with the conservative force of gravity combined with whatever other charge interactions and perivity that are in L_1 and L_2 . Then calculate k(dR/dq) for the change in temperature ∆T_⊥ perpendicular. The orthogonal change in temperature ∆T_∥ shouldn't be the same.  ∆T_⊥ and  ∆T_∥ can be summed together to produce an orthogonal ∆T_∥/∆T_⊥ wave that has a composite field theory  ∆T_∥/∆T_⊥ = ∑Uμ = ∑ 1/(εμ_ijk..)^2 where Uμ is the velocity four vector and εμ is the special permittivity and permeability. This reduces to E/B = c for e/m and G/P = Uμ for g/p. QEG. There should be orthogonal components to all of the forces with a velocity four vector for each strong, weak, e/m, and gravity. Unified QEG.  Note that all forces should be associated with a standard temperature fluctuation or contributed kinetic energy range. Dennis William Melton David Castro Rodrigues

title: User:Dennismelton/Perivity


text:
Wikiversity talk:Custodianship/Archive 1

Log of freenode #wikiversity-en 8/18/06
Let's use this page for centralized discussion of the Wikiversity name for "sysop". --JWSchmidt 21:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I have a log of IRC #wikiversity-en for today, that resulted in the idea to try to use "custodians" rather than "administrators" the refer to "sysops". --JWSchmidt 21:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

(edited for readability and brevity)

guillom: *sigh* we have 4 sysop candidates sebmol: what if we didn't call them administrators on wikiversity

 sebmol: housekeepers SB_Johnny: janitors…..It carries a connotation sebmol: it does…..one i'm not sure i like SB_Johnny: Caretakers sebmol: it is similar. but the connotation is a little better sebmol: i like caretaker. even just Staff would be fine SB_Johnny: Hey, how about comrade? :) sebmol: janistrator? SB_Johnny: Wikiworker JWSchmidt: Staff has meaning in conventional universities JWSchmidt: "process facilitators"? SB_Johnny: Facilitator is good too. SB_Johnny: Gilly is the scottish word for the guy who takes care of the estate, keeps poachers out of the woods, etc. guillom: Trustguys guillom: Assistants guillom: friends ? :) JWSchmidt: wikiservant JWSchmidt: wikistaff JWSchmidt: wikifacilitator JWSchmidt: "community support staff" JWSchmidt: community facilitator JWSchmidt: consensus facilitator JWSchmidt: consensus helper JWSchmidt: process facilitator JWSchmidt: "community process facilitator" cormaggio has joined channel #wikiversity-en  cormaggio: i was wondering if we should have some sort of nomination system and not voting system for choosing admins?  JWSchmidt: adminship should be "no big deal" sebmol: many people perceive adminship as a big deal, as a confirmation of their work, as a means to climb the ladder, as a special badge, etc. sebmol: that's why we talked about a different term earlier cormaggio: what did you come up with? sebmol: i think the serious ones were staff, facilitator and caretaker sebmol: JWSchmidt: correct me if I misinterpreted that JWSchmidt: we did not find a "best" choice cormaggio: hmm, facilitator should be about helping people learn cormaggio: not blocking Ip addresses :-D sebmol: no, we didn't. there was also a lot of noise ;-) sebmol: agreed

 JWSchmidt: I would like to see a new name
 cormaggio: janitor?
 cormaggio: was that already suggested?
 guillom: cormaggio, it was
 sebmol: my personal favorite is staff because it's non-descript. it doesn't imply any hierarchy or privilege
 sebmol: but i can live with janitor too
 cormaggio: does staff not imply that they are being paid?
 sebmol: i've run events with volunteers before and they were all called staff. there was no paid position
 cormaggio: true - as with the recent Wikimania, which I have a "staff" t-shirt for..
 JWSchmidt: "janitorial staff"
 sebmol: JWSchmidt: you seem to like compound words a lot
 cormaggio: personally, i like short names/titles
 JWSchmidt: just brain storming
 cormaggio: one-worded

custodian (finally)
JWSchmidt: custodian
 sebmol: it's gotta be snappy so people adopt it
 sebmol: custodian would be fine with me
 sebmol: could we all live with custodian?
 cormaggio: custodian is ok by me actually
 cormaggio: caretaker?
 SB_Johnny: custodian is nice...
 Dvorty|gone points out that the Spanish Wikipedians/Wiktionarians call admins "Wikitecarias"
 Dvorty|gon: or approximately "wikibrarians"

 cormaggio: A Wikiversity custodian is a trusted user who follows and enforces policy for protection of pages from vandalism and blocking vandals from editing. Custodians also have the power to delete pages that the community has deemed unnecessary. cormaggio: ?
 sebmol: A Wikiversity custodian is a trusted user who can protect, delete and restore pages as well as block users from editing as prescribed by policy and community concensus.
 sebmol: a little less wordy
 sebmol: that they follow policy is assumed, if they wouldn't, they would be neither trusted nor users ;-)
 cormaggio: sure - i like yours better actually sebmol
 Rayc: that looks good sebol
 JWSchmidt: I think "custodian" will work
 cormaggio: yes
 cormaggio: yes, john, so put it up on the wiki, i suppose..
 sebmol: should we move pages?
 JWSchmidt: at least on the admin policy page for discussion
 JWSchmidt: I hate decisions that are only on IRC
 JWSchmidt: unless emergencies
 cormaggio: well, making it so on the wiki is a reversible action - if peopel agree they leave it, if they don't they'll edit
JWSchmidt: true
 JWSchmidt: Be bold
 sebmol: be bold
 cormaggio: yep
 sebmol: JWSchmidt: i'm a fan of taking action, especially on wikis
 JWSchmidt: wiki is reversible
 JWSchmidt: do it
 JWSchmidt: we are acting with honest good intentions

 cormaggio: John - i'd say all policies etc discussed on this channel must be discussed on wiki or on mailing list
 JWSchmidt: okay
 cormaggio: no decisions made on this channel are binding

Step II modification
"you will be approved for temporary custodianship"
At the start of Wikiversity there was a pressing need for some custodians who could protect the project from vandals. I hope we have enough people watching for vandalism at this time. I think we could afford to allow a minimum of 5 days for community discussion of new candidated for custodianship.
suggested change: "you will be approved for temporary custodianship after a 5 day comment period if you have a mentor and a bureaucrate is willing to activate you as a sysop" --JWSchmidt 20:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Issues related to the "sysop" status.
I want to go on the record that I am very much concerned to weekly opposed to this process of creating those with sysop status that is granting it to just about everybody who asks for it. This is primarily from the viewpoint that this is such a huge departure from the way it has been done on almost all of the other Wikimedia projects that it seems as though the experience and wisdom of the experience on the other Wikimedia projects is getting lost in the process.

First of all and most important, we can't "de-sysop" people locally. This to me is the #1 issue that can throw a bug into the whole process and stop it cold. As I tried to explain on the IRC channel (not listed above), we absolutely need to get the strong support of the stewards before we go off and institute this very liberal policy of granting sysop status. While policy states that stewards need to act on behalf of established policy on each project, I have seen an incredible relutance on the part of stewards getting involved in local projects even when there is very clear project support for a certain action. Even to the point of reversing the decisions of some local projects. A classic for me is the absolute apathy that stewards have for performing checkuser scans when then are explictly requested by project admins (I've done it) that go unresolved for months. I've even taken them down because the stewards simply don't even seem to care. The same could be said about admin requests that take weeks to be reviewed, and even bureaucrat requests that have taken over a month to be acknowledged.

I will also acknowledge that stewards are usually involved with other projects and don't check the steward pages constantly or as faithfully as perhaps is needed, but the point here is that if we have somebody who is getting out of hand with the admin options, it is very difficult or even impossible to stop them except by wheel warring. BTW, I got into a wheel war with Jimbo of all people, and it wasn't pretty.

Another huge issue that is of concern, and this has been raised on many forums including Foundation-l, is that custodians have access to deleted content. This also includes copyright violations and other inflamatory content that is often better left alone. One particular Wikibook that was deleted (for a good reason) has been formally requested by several individuals to have it "undeleted" so they can have a copy of it, and put me in a real awkward situation as an admin.

On the other hand, the merit that this whole concept is to remove the "elitism" that exists currently among the admins and bureaucrats on other Wikimedia projects, especially Wikipedia. It has been widly acknowledged that becoming an admin on Wikipedia is incredibly difficult, and the standards are getting even harder. To the point that even honest and generally trusted users are getting turned down simply because of these increasingly higher standards. If there were dozens or even hundreds of people with sysop privileges here, we can all keep each other in check just as we all do anyway in terms of reviewing content on a regular basis.

Finally, I want to make mention that ordinary registered users can help combat vandalism and other project issues about as well as admins. You can mark pages for deletion, revert edits, move pages, create new pages, and access almost every page on the Wiki with very few exceptions. There are even protections available now that make pages editable only for registered users, so we can help fight off anon users who might try to vandalize prominent pages (such as has happened with Main Page).

Also, the sysop privileges are not needed at all for anybody who wants to form a learning experience, nor those who want to participate in those learning groups. This really is the janitor crew that cleans up after everybody, and has the "keys" to the buildings so they can do that cleanup which is necessary. --Robert Horning 23:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

case study. We already had our first removal of sysop permissions. As shown at Custodian requests, User:Mirwin requested to be removed from the sysop ranks at 06:14, 20 August 2006. At 07:57, 20 August 2006, User:Sebmol requested that a Steward remove sysop status from Mirwin. By 8:15 it was done. Wikiversity custodianship: easy come, easy go. --JWSchmidt 17:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I would like to note that while this is good so far as it goes (a statistical study of n=1 BTW), I am concerned about long-term issues related to Wikiversity. That said, Wikiversity seems to be getting incredible support from developers and other interested supporters including stewards, and some people who know the difference between the official places to make requests and where to really make them if you want them done (there is a huge difference here.... documentation on Meta is absolutely horrid on this point and I think somewhat deliberate).  This example doesn't change my mind but rather seems to demonstrate a good ol' boys club that simply should not be right now.  --Robert Horning 23:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know what you mean about an "ol' boys club", "where to really make" requests, and "deliberate" bad documentation. If any of these systems (on Meta) are not as efficient as you would like them to be, please tell the people who monitor those pages, or make it clearer by editing them. It is true that you can get swift action on IRC (if that's what you're referring to here) by pinging a developer - hey, that's the one and only reason I'm a bureaucrat* - but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to get swift action on Meta (within reason). Or have I somehow missed your point, perhaps? Cormaggio 10:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I would also like to add that Custodian status is not given to anybody who wants it. There's a process that needs to be followed and capacities that constrain new custodianships. Right now, for example, we have several candidates without mentors. As long as there are no mentors available, requests for custodianship will not be granted which I think is a very wise decision. Once the two custodians currently in mentorship emerge, they can take on their own mentees. -- sebmol ? 10:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict: slightly duplicating what Seb is saying, but I'll paste it in anyway): I'd also have to say, in response to Robert's main point above - that I agree we shouldn't get too laissez-faire about handing out custodianship - I fully agree with your earlier point about simply getting stuck in and helping out in the numerous way anyone can without needing those few extra custodian abilities. I would only say that we have been fairly casual about it in our first week in order to get the importing (from meta and wikibooks) we need to do done, and to keep a general eye on things. And we don't have too many that we can't monitor eachother - and, as you can see, not every request on WV:CC has been acted on. Cormaggio 10:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Questions at Wikipedia about the term "administrator"
Rename admins to janitors - discussion at Wikipedia. --JWSchmidt 17:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Is mentorship the only path to custodianship?
There was some discussion at IRC #wikiversity-en about the possibility of becoming a custodian without having a mentor. Should there be a process by which a custodian candidate could ask for community evaluation/discussion/support and then be made a custodian without having a mentor? --JWS 15:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * In the end if it leads to a better wiki(versity), the means for becoming custodian is not important.
 * Custodians should be seen only as normal users, which have access to tools to help the community. The power to decide still is in the hands of the community - we are wiki.
 * Probably there will be many pro and contras, but how about doing this in Wikiversity style ? Let's evaluate this with an experiment to learn from it. Erkan Yilmaz ( my talk page, wiki blog ) 18:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * At Requests for Custodianship it says "Candidacies that have not secured a mentor within one week are archived". We could just remove that and replace it with, "If you do not have a mentor, try to gather community support for you candidacy. If you get a show of support then you can ask a bureaucrat to start your one month probationary period without a mentor."
--JWSchmidt 19:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

pilot project - Single User Login (SUL)
At the moment there is a pilot project running for all wikimedia project custodians. More info at beta, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 19:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't find where this policy was discussed or voted on.
While reviewing the history of this page I noticed that JWSchmidt changed this policy from a proposal to an official policy on 12 February 2007. However I am having trouble finding any discussion or vote that took place either on this talk page or on the talk page for Policies at around the time of the change. Now I don't doubt or question that such a discussion or vote took place, but I think proving a link to the discussion or vote could help improve or reaffirm things for anyone confused over what appears to be inconsistencies in the establishment of policies, guidelines and processes on Wikiversity. --darklama 15:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

 * In the light of this unexplained change, and the subsequent changes to the policy for which I can also find no wide discussion and agreement, I think we must change this policy back to proposed. --McCormack 20:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

 * A review template was placed on this policy page. Discussion and vote is not necessary to establish a policy; rather, that the policy stands without change for a substantial period is adequate. By placing the policy Templage, JWS was proposing that the page, indeed, become policy, and because that template was not removed (it's been three years!), or because any removal was reverted and was not sustained, that is precisely the history of the page. I do not see any attempt to materially change the policy, hence I intend to also remove the "material change" template. A change made to a policy that stands for clearly adequate time for review (in this case, over two years, must be considered as accepted. "Policy," on a wiki, does not mean "rigid rule, violations of which will be punished." It merely shows a strong precedent, such that users may expect support if they follow it. Policies are merely strong guidelines, well-established by consensus and precedent. If a policy contains some "proposal" that is not accepted, the proposal should be reverted out until consensus is established. (But a separate Custodianship guideline could be established for less-confirmed proposals that do not enjoy strong consensus, but merely some "rough consensus," probably more support than opposition.)
 * Accordingly, I will remove both templates, but if Darklama continues to disagree, he may revert my action, in whole or in part, with my consent. If there is some matter of substance improper about the policy (etiology is not of substance, in my opinion, policy is policy regardless of the exact origin), I'd ask that someone restoring one of these templates please discuss it specifically here. --Abd 16:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Maybe you should look further down on this page. There are even recent materially changes being discussed for this page. There are parts that people do not agree on what the correct interpretation is, and what the right procedure should be, and because of this a review still makes since. -- dark lama  17:24, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've seen no proposed changes that have any substantial support. The tag adds no value, because anyone watching the policy page will also see discussion on this Talk page. If there is a major change being suggested, it should receive wider notice. The policy, as-is, is quite clear, and is long-standing, the "disagreement" is based on a preposterous interpretation of the words of the policy, and I'm not sure it's even worth changing the policy to make it crystal clear that this self-contradictory interpretion is rejected. That tag would imply there is substantial controversy. However, if two editors think that the policy is seriously defective and must be changed, then I'd encourage the second editor to also revert the tag(s) back in. And to participate in the actual decision here. These change tags should not remain for three years with a policy which matches actual practice! People should know what to do. We may make small edits to the policy, and if they are accepted, that's it. If they are not, if there is actual disagreement on the policy, then a tag should go up and we should expeditiously find consensus on it. So, if the tag is replaced, a reference to the specific section of talk, at least one of them, on which the tag is based, would be in order. Otherwise it is vague and unlikely to help. --Abd 21:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The page doesn't document actual practice either. In practice the mentorship/probationary period has been longer then 4 weeks or is extended, and there is no community announcement when a mentor wishes to go beyond the 4 weeks. Just recently actual practice shows that 48 hours isn't always given. I think in actual practice when time was given to find a new mentor more than 48 hours was given. -- dark  lama  11:56, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Post-agreement modifications
The changes should be discussed, not simply inserted into an official policy. --McCormack 20:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Original version: "If you are not nominated for full custodianship, you will have 48 hours to find a new mentor. If you are unable to find a new mentor, you will lose your custodianship status but you may reapply for a new mentorship period."

 * Proposed variant #1 by User:Darklama: "If your mentor evaluates you as unfit for permanent custodianship at any time during your probationary period, you will have 48 hours to find a new mentor. Your mentor may request removal of your custodianship at the end of the 48 period if you are unable to find a new mentor, without any further notice or discussion by the community. You may however reapply at a later date."

I don't see the sense in this process of 48 hours to find a new mentor, to be honest. (48 hours from when exactly?) I think it is fine for the mentor to give an evaluation: either positive, negative, or a recommendation for a further mentoring period. This evaluation could be opened to discussion for a set period - say, a week. If consensus is positive, full custodianship is conferred; if clearly negative, custodian rights are removed; or, where appropriate, a further mentoring period is renewed, with a new mentor only if the original mentor has decided not to do so. Any problems with this? Cormaggio talk 09:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Proposed variant #2 by User:McCormack: "If you are not nominated for full custodianship, you will have 48 hours to find a new mentor, or alternatively you may nominate yourself for full status. If you are unable to find a new mentor or secure the immediate approval of the community for full status, you will lose your custodianship status but you may reapply for a new mentorship period."
 * I prefer this one. -- Jtneill - Talk 01:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems like may be prudent to allow for the community to grant full status, but I think the word "immediate" should be removed from the last sentence. Emesee 06:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I can agree with this, too. Sounds simpler, and friendly to all concerned. --McCormack 10:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, 48 hours could be uneccessarily short - a week sounds fairer. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Jtneill, Interesting.  In what sense is it fairer?  A candidate custodian is someone whom wikiversity would sufficiently trust as an editor, but not as a custodian.  Why should wikiversity leave the candidate unsupervised for a week?  And in the interim, should the candidate be allowed to touch the custodial tools? Hillgentleman|Talk 08:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, fair enough hillgentleman - 48 hours to find or new mentor or self-nominate for full status or lost tools - but I gather removal of tools from a probationary custodian is going to take longer than this to achieve, wouldn't it? I gather it requires "community consensus" that the tools be removed before the request is made to WMF?. So, how would this work here on WV in practice? e.g., the scenario is: a probationary custodian's mentor withdraws during the candidacy, the candidate doesn't find a mentor, and doesn't self-nominate for full custodianship. 48 hours passes - what takes place then? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Stewards are allowed to remote the tools without discussion if its part of the community's policy, because a community's policy is based on "community consensus". This happens on English Wikibooks for instance due to inactivity, no discussion is required before removal if the criteria for inactivity are met. Just requires pointing to the relevant information like there contribution history and the log for them, to show the criteria has been met on English Wikibooks. Similarly if English Wikiversity wants custodians who have not gotten the approval of the community, there mentor or not secured a new mentor within 48 hours of there probationary period ending, then a policy just needs to make it crystal clear what conditions must be met for a steward to remove the tools, as stewards may not be familiar enough with a project to know what kind of assumptions are being made or how policy is intended to be interpreted. I think the suggestion of writing an unstable draft is probably the best approach to resolving this problem, if it is still considered a problem. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 19:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speaking for myself (!!), I think we are all watching the probationaries all the time anyway. More to the point, most active custodians watch each other and help each other out. --McCormack 08:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Proposed variant #3 by User:McCormack taking Cormaggio thoughts into account: "A candidate may be transferred between mentors if all involved parties agree. At the end of the 30-day period, the mentor will give a report with one of three recommendations: positive, negative, or extension of the probationary period. The recommendation is then opened up to community discussion for the establishment of consensus (7 days or so)."

 * I've just gone through Terra's process, and I recognise that SBJ was keen to keep his initial advisory words to Terra's talk page and not to invite a wide discussion/vote. Bearing in mind that we're always trying to avoid the sourness that WP's admin process has often created, I think it's probably a good idea to have this agreement to a further probationary period between mentor and mentee as an explicit option. Hence:

 * Proposed variant #4 by User:Cormaggio: "At the end of the 30-day period, the mentor will either suggest to the candidate that the probationary period be extended, or give an evaluation of the probationary period thus far on WV:CC. The evaluation is then opened up to community discussion for the establishment of consensus (7 days or so). In the event of consensus towards a further probationary period, the candidate may seek another mentor if all involved parties agree." Cormaggio talk 10:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

All this is good, but I note we are now extending ourselves to cover what is pretty well the entire scope of the current sections IV and V, so it might be worth going back to the original (see project page) and making a few additions to #4 so that it really is a completely replacement for the whole of sections IV and V. --McCormack 11:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Seems to me rather than discussing how to best rewrite it, there is a need to first discuss what perceived problems people have with the current policy, how people propose to address the problems, and to take into consideration that mentors are volunteering to take a custodian under there wing. A mentor or a probationary custodian might end up having other obligations, or may no longer feel conferable with their mentor/mentee, preventing the process from working as intended. There seems to be three issues that needs discussed before trying to rewrite this policy, 1) what the normal process should be for custodianship (e.g do people agree on this?), 2) what to do when the normal process fails, and 3) should mentors/mentees be accountable for having other obligations or for not wanting anything to do with there mentor/mentee, and if so how. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 18:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

This could be a very long conversation - how about putting new proposed versions on a fork/draft page, and then we can 'freely' work together on shaping a new version. Obviously the mentorship process needs some further thoughtful consideration, as indicated by this thread so far. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 * If I understand correctly, when I used to be known by Terra - the main reason why my RFC failed, could have been because of me just creating categories and not doing anything else other than that, in despite of that I'm trying to expand of what I do on Wikiversity - though like I said to Erkan on my talkpage I mainly prefer to do small edits and not large ones - the other main reason why I'm cautious of creating articles is because last time when I was active on wikipedia, I did start to do some but then went into serious problems with a number of user's - the categories I'm now trying to avoid due to the amount of criticisms which I received last time. DarkMage  11:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Are mentors answerable to the community?
This post follows a discussion on IRC. The issue is: "Are mentors answerable to the community?" It is my understanding that all the actions of custodians, including their actions as mentors, are ultimately under community supervision. There has been a suggestion that mentors are not answerable to the community, which would mean (for example) they do not have to give reasons for their actions or behave transparently. I dislike a system where cronyism could emerge, because probationaries are over-dependent on a mentor's favour. --McCormack 20:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not sure of the context, but I would have thought in (this type of) wiki-land that anyone with "power" should be even more answerable to the community than those without the powers. -- Jtneill - Talk 01:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * McCormack, (You probably know all that - any potential for the problem of cronyism was supposed to vanish as the number of custodians grows;  In the beginning, the custodian mentor system was a means to get as many custodians as wikiversity needed quickly.)   May I suggest that on a wiki, custodian actions should be answerable (with due respects to privacy issues), but custodian inactions are unanswerable? Hillgentleman|Talk 06:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, and thanks for your knowledge from the past. No - I did not know that at all! But if you are right (I'm sure you are) then it is a further indication that we may need to improve and democratise the current system. It is a great problem that we are rather few active custodians, although it is good to see more content being written than in the past. If numbers cannot guarantee fairness, then we may need some improved rules to act as a safeguard instead. Anyway, this is not an urgent issue right now - but it is a medium-term thing we need to sort out. --McCormack 08:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I couldn't abide a system where someone's actions were above being answerable to the community. That's why I think the discussion process around a mentor's evaluation is a good idea. However, I don't see how "numbers" of custodians is relevant - custodian, like all other actions, are answerable to the whole community, not to the sub-community of custodians. Cormaggio talk 11:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

and move pages and all subpages
It does not appear that non-flagged users can do this. Emesee 21:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * What do you mean here? Are you talking about very recently logged in users, who need to wait a few days (I think) before they can move pages? Cormaggio talk 11:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's restricted to sysops. – Mike.lifeguard | @meta 19:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Trying moving a page that has subpages; you'll see an option to move all subpages. Non-flagged users do not have this option. Emesee 20:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason it's restricted to sysops? The Jade Knight (d'viser) 11:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The massive potential for abuse? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You think it would be abused more than the normal "move" function? The Jade Knight (d'viser) 06:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It was abused on Wikipedia and that is why the developers switched to restricting it use to people with the sysop flag. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 14:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * As I recall it was abused on more than just Wikipedia, but yes that's essentially correct. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:22, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


text: User talk:Fred Bauder

title: User talk:Fred Bauder


title: File:Fe1.s11.mtg4.djvu


title: File:Nm1.s11.mtg4.djvu


text:
User:Charles Jeffrey Danoff/delicious tags

I'd like to ask you for help. For a few years I have been keeping a log of my links on delicious. It's a social bookmarking site. Basically, the idea is you find a link you like (e.g. inspiring sports article) and you save it. The swell part is you add tags that help you remember said item (4 sports article: sports, journalism, inspiring, writing, etc.). Over time all the links you have with a certain tag tell a story.

To get into my tags please click [http://www.delicious.com/tags/Charlie.Danoff? here]. You will see the following.

Poke around.

I would like the internet's help in exploring my tags and telling me something about myself. So, can you look into my tags and let me know what you find?

WRITE HERE

 * One question: what conclusions do you get from these tags so far? Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat 12:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * First conclusion was not being surprised about how many personalhomepage tags are there, exemplifying how that's been one of my favorite things to note as I surf the web. --Charles Jeffrey Danoff 19:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


text:
User:Raghith

 Welcome! I am Raghith, and I was born in the wonderful city of Kannur,India.

 Talk · Guestbook· Pictures  · Wikia· Contributions·

Contacting Me
Kannur,Kerala,India Raghith.

Wikipedia can say as a bundle of knowledge. You can have it from wiki, and please load in it if you can.Edit existing. (But have no fear, as you will see below.)   Wikipedia is growing fast   'Freshers, feel free to edit wiki.'

  cotton bucket

Wikimedia Projects

Quotations

Every path should lead to success.

Dont expect anything from anyone

title: User:Raghith


text:
Marine Fuels

Marine Fuels

Crude oil is, at the present time, the source of most fuel oils for marine use. Synthetic fuels are being developed but will probably be too expensive for ship propulsion. Solid fuel, such as coal, is returning in a small way for certain specialised trade runs. The various refined products of crude oil seem likely to remain as the major forms of marine fuel. The refining process for crude oil separates by heating and distillation the various fractions of the oil. Paraffin fuel would be used in gas turbine plants, gas oil in high- and medium-speed diesel engines and crude oils in slow-speed and some medium-speed diesels. Paraffin and gas oil are known as 'distillates', which are free flowing, easily stored and can be used without further treatment. Residual fuels, however, are very viscous or thick at normal temperatures, and require heating before use. Additional treatment to remove harmful chemicals or sulphur may be required for all or some of the refined products, depending upon their application. Finally blending or mixing of the various oils is done to provide a range of commercial fuels for different duties.

Fuel oils

Fuel oils have various properties which determine their performance and are quoted in specifications. The specific gravity or relative density is the weight of a given volume of fuel compared to the weight of the same volume of water expressed as a ratio, and measured at a fixed temperature. Viscosity is a resistance to flow. A highly viscous fuel will therefore require heating in order to make it flow. Measurement of viscosity is by Redwood, Saybolt or Engler instrument flow times for a given volume of fuel. The ignition quality of a fuel is measured by the time delay between injection and combustion, which should be short for good controlled burning. Ignition quality is indicated as cetane number, diesel index and calculated cetane index; the higher the value the better the ignition quality of the fuel. The flash point is a figure obtained and used mainly to indicate the maximum safe storage temperature. The test determines the tempera- ture at which the fuel will give off sufficient vapours to ignite when a flame is applied. Two values are possible: an open flash point for atmospheric heating, and a closed flash point when the fuel is covered while heating. Low-temperature properties are measured in terms of pour point and cloud point. The pour point is slightly above the temperature at which the fuel just flows under its own weight. It is the lowest temperature at which the fuel can be easily handled. At the cloud point waxes will form in the fuel. Below the cloud point temperature, pipe or filter blocking may occur. The carbon residue forming property of a fuel is usually measured by the Conradson method. Controlled burning of a fuel sample gives a measure of the residual carbon and other remains. Sulphur content is of importance since it is considered a cause of engine wear. A maximum limit, expressed as a percentage by weight, is usually included in specifications. The calorific value of a fuel is the heat energy released during combustion. Two values are used, the more common being the Higher Calorific Value, which is the heat energy resulting from combustion. The Lower Calorific V alue is a measure of the heat energy available and does not include the heat energy contained in steam produced during combustion but passing away as exhaust. The measurement is obtained from a bomb calorimeter test where a small fuel quantity is burnt under controlled conditions. The various fuel properties have different effects on performance of the engine and the storage and handling requirements of the system. Blending and the use of various additives will also influence both the engine and the system. Viscosity will affect jerk-type injector pumps and injector operation since the liquid fuel is the operating medium. The pump mechanism is lubricated by the fuel which, if it is of low viscosity, will cause wear. Cloud point and pour point values are important when considering the lowest system operating temperatures. Wax deposited in filters and fuel lines will cause blockages and may restrict fuel flow to the engine. The cetane number or diesel index will determine injection timing and also influences the combustion noise and production of black smoke. The temperature in a fuel system should be progressively increased in order to deliver fuel at the correct viscosity to the injectors or burners. System cleanliness is also very important to reduce wear on the many finely machined parts in the fuel injection equipment.

Problems with heavy fuels

The problems of present and future heavy residual fuels can be categorized as: 1. Storage and handling. 2. Combustion quality and burnability. 3. Contaminants, resulting in corrosion and/or damage to engine components: for example, burnt out exhaust valves.

Storage problems

The problems of storage in tanks of bunker fuel result from build-up of sludge leading to difficulties in handling. The reason for the increase in sludge build-up is because heavy fuels are generally blended from a cracked heavy residual using a lighter cutter stock resulting in a problem of incompatibility. This occurs when the asphaltene or high molecular weight compound suspended in the fuel is precipitated by the addition of the cutter stock or other dilutents. The sludge which settles in the bunker tanks or finds its way to the fuel lines tends to overload the fuel separators with a resultant loss of burnable fuel, and perhaps problems with fuel injectors and wear of the engine through abrasive particles. To minimize the problems of sludging the ship operator has a number of options. He may ask the fuel supplier to perform stability checks on the fuel that he is providing. Bunkers of different origins should be kept segregated wherever possible and water contamination kept to a minimum. Proper operation of the settling tanks and fuel treatment plant is essential to prevent sludge from entering the engine itself. A detergent-type chemical additive can be used to reduce the formation of sludge in the bunker tanks.

Water in the fuel

Water has always been a problem because it finds its way into the fuel during transport and storage on the ship. Free water can seriously damage fuel injection equipment, cause poor combustion and lead to excessive cylinder liner wear. If it happens to be seawater, it containssodium which will contribute to corrosion when combined with vanadium and sulphur during combustion. Water can normally be removed from the bunkers by proper operation of separators and properly designed settling and daily service tanks. However, where the specific gravity of the fuel is the same or greater than the water, removal of the water is difficult—or indeed not possible—and for this reason the maximum specific gravity of fuel supplied for ship’s bunkers has generally been set at 0.99.

title: Marine Fuels


text:
User talk:Jonbonraki

 Hello Jonbonraki, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 15:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Please see here, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat + Identi.ca 13:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jonbonraki


text:
User talk:Deus Vult

Hi I have been leaving posts in Discussion pages on the Biblical Studies page looking for a way to move forward. Biblical Studies seems to have been active in 2008 and then stalled. I think that part of that stall is due to the "policy" of having material conform to a "literal normative" outlook which tends to reduce academic inquiry. I am planning on starting a Department Project on the Synoptic Gospels which will definitely not consider the text of the gospels involved to be "inerrant" but before starting that I am leaving this message on the discussion page of all noted "active participants". It could be that I should set up the seminar/discussion somewhere else in Wikiversity and I need some direction. --Bill A 15:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Deus Vult


text:
User talk:Chanchira

 Hello Chanchira, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 15:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Chanchira


text:
User talk:Raghith

 Hello Raghith, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 15:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Raghith


text:
User talk:Ploymheng

 Hello Ploymheng, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 15:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ploymheng


text:
User talk:Nutnutz

 Hello Nutnutz, 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. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

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

 * 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! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Ottava Rima (talk) 15:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Files Missing License Information
Thank you for uploading files to Wikiversity. See Media for copyright and license requirements for Wikiversity files. All files must have copyright and/or license information added to the file.

Instructions for adding copyright and/or license information are available at License tags. Files must be updated within seven days or they may be removed without further notice. See Requests For Deletion for more information.

The following files are missing copyright and/or license information:
 * File:Photo.jpg

MaintenanceBot (discuss • contribs) 03:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nutnutz