text:
Wikiversity:Request custodian action/Archive/5

Threads related to the Moulton affair
See: Threads relating to the Moulton affair and related issues.

I've moved out 53kb of threads relating to Moulton. The current discussion is mainly on the colloquium and the reqiests for deletion page, as we are now at the stage of clearing up in the aftermath of the affair. The request to protect his user pages is still active and has been left below. --McCormack 08:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Review requested on recent behavior of JWSchmidt
I'm really concerned about some things John's been doing that I've come across and/or read about lately, and I'm frankly not at all certain what should be done about it (but I strongly feel something should be done). John is one of our "founding fathers", and has played an important role in shaping Wikiversity's growth over the past 2 years, but that's what makes it such a big problem: his actions of late have been distorting that shape in a very negative way.

Over the past week or so he has done the following:
 * 1) Created the sockpuppet as a parody account of . He says he did that only in order to rib a bit at, but it should be no surprise that Salmon of Doubt took offense.
 * 2) Salmon of Doubt's state of being offended was unfortunately justified by an edit made this morning, which was beyond inappropriate given the history between these three users.
 * 3) This, and the related issues that led up to the thread, is absolutely atrocious behavior.

I strongly urge some sort of formal review of this behavior, and request careful attention by all custodians to the developing situation between JWSchmidt, Moulton, and Salmon of Doubt. Our well is being poisoned. --SB_Johnny talk 16:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Before this gets out of hand: I will write them on their talk pages to meet in chat to talk about this. Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 17:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * User talk:SB Johnny: anyone is invited - let's see when people have time Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 17:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I really think this discussion should be on the wiki, but an irc chat would be a nice informal compliment to it. --SB_Johnny talk 18:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * JWSchmidt is online in chat now and will at least be available tomorrow also, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 21:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Folks, Whether we like it or not, sometimes it is important to set the tone right even before the start of a discussion.
 * Johnny, It is quite clear that John Schmidt has been involved in disputes. It is possible that he has not remained cool.  However, with so many edits (and possibly with much misunderstanding at many points, for people often don't realise that everybody talks differently, use different words, and take offence at completely different matters, and sometimes in opposite ways), before a complete reading, it is premature to talk about who is right/wrong/good/bad, or who exhibits "absolutely atrocious behavior".  Let us focus on the fact first; opinions can come later.
 * Instead of using the slightly metaphoric term of "founding father", I would rather say that John Schmidt has been involved deeply with and know much about wikiversity.
 * I think it is more productive to talk directly to John Schmidt and also to the other wikiversitians in the dispute. They are humans, not events.Hillgentleman|Talk 18:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Hillgentleman, this is a situation that has become a community issue, and I would not have brought it up here without thinking about it a good bit beforehand. I did talk to John briefly, and suggested that simply apologizing and moving on would be the best course in one of the situations. My impression was that he thought that was a good idea, but he went in the opposite direction this morning, so there's no sense talking one-to-one.
 * This is pretty serious stuff: if I were a Wikipedian looking to contribute here and saw this kind of behavior from a checkuser, I would not contribute here. If John wants to experiment with parody usernames and forced drama, he should request his rights be removed on meta and "play on a level field". --SB_Johnny talk 19:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia tends to often apply the "it's ok if you get caught doing bad if have contributed a lot of good," yet that isn't fair to someone that tries to actually do good and gets wrapped up in an act of an admin "doing bad" and subsequently being justified good by "lot of previous good contributions." It doesn't put people on an equal ground, and it's not fair to all. It's MMORPG thinking; where one can earn points and spend those points on doing bad, but still able to maintain karma. One shouldn't be able to earn points in order to do bad here on Wikiversity. It also tends to create scapegoats; where others that actually did bad will passively look good when any scapegoat is picked out of a group and forced away (leads to "outing" and "out-groups"). If one wants to truly be different than how Wikipedia has been managed, I suggest an action more aligned with recovery psychology.
 * To find a cure, I did a search for anything related to the topic of theatrical arts here on Wikiversity, and I found none appropriately structured into a proper hierarchy. Parody, in a collegial manner, best fits under a hierarchy of Topic:Theatrical arts as a typical collegial division. There are now a lot of resources and talk pages that have parodies left on them, and I suggest those entries be appropriately filed under Topic:Theatrical arts. If that parody material really is needed to learn or understand, then link from the non Theatrical-arts to the Theatrical arts resources. (You follow?) This recommendation here is a pill to cure the Pathological Normality Syndrome that SB Johnny has pointed out. Dzonatas 00:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Go to Colloquium "Civility" thread and search in page at the bottom of the thread for "Thespis". See also the reference to the "Bardic Arts" in Cerberus Rising. —Moulton 00:35, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree that a review might be useful. For those who are interested I've provided some information about recent events here. --JWSchmidt 22:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I have expressed my feelings on this situation, but just to make it clear: I believe that Moulton's and JWSchmidt's actions towards Salmon of Doubt are inappropriate. If Salmon baited them, harassed them, or anything, the only appropriate way to deal with it is to ignore it, or simply try to move on. Instead, they went on the offensive, which undermined any of their cause. This does not mean that I can see a reason for Salmon of Doubt being here besides an obvious past history between Moulton and he. I really don't know what to do. I tried to welcome Salmon into sharing his views on a situation in a page that I created that attempted to not talk about individuals nor personally attack people. However, I was criticized for being biased. I really don't know how to approach Salmon of Doubt, nor do I know if such a thing is possible. Ottava Rima 15:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Ottava, if it were only catcalls, I could ignore it. SofD came in and began dismantling content in the Ethics Project, erasing content, archiving active talk page discussions, moving questions associated with one case to another case where the questions were irrelevant, forking pages, and otherwise making a mess.  You cannot ignore it when someone comes to a construction site and begins dismantling it and hauling away the building materials.  Salmon of Doubt claims he and I have "no substantial" past history on Wikipedia.  I consider Salmon of Doubt to be the source of an ethical conundrum that exceeds my pay grade at ethical reasoning.  Perhaps if we put our heads together, we could devise an efficacious ethical practice when dealing with the likes of a vexatious character of his caliber.  —Moulton 17:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I didn't realize that ethical reasoning was limited by pay grade. The Jade Knight 02:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Alas, not all of us are in the same league as Rambam. —Moulton 09:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC).

 * Indeed, but does that excuse us from ethical behavior? The Jade Knight 13:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Ottava Rima: I'm puzzled by your use of the description, "went on the offensive". In your view, what is the correct response to someone who creates a user page like this? "their cause" <-- can you explain what this is? --JWSchmidt 18:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Returning in kind is a concept that makes me feel queasy. Ottava Rima 04:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Me too, so I spent a long time trying to talk it out first". I do not think what I did was exactly "in kind"....it was similar, but significantly different. --JWSchmidt 21:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree. JWS did not return in kind so much as return in model (e.g. allegory, parable, parody), where the reflection is dramatically attenuated in intensity or effect, whilst preserving the recognizable structure of that which is being modeled or reflected.  There is a long and historic tradition for this method which reaches it highest level of artistry and perfection in the Parables of Jesus.  Alas we do not rise to that divine level of talent.  (Not that it would diminish the calls for crucifying whoever had both the temerity and the talent to employ the Jesuisitic Method of Parables).  —Moulton 12:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

A page of "evidence" has been posted
Upon JWSchmidt's request, an "evidence page" has been created via a collaborative effort by a few concerned users. Please review the details here: Request custodian action/Review of JWSchmidt. --SB_Johnny talk 23:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It is false to claim that this is what I requested. I asked you and others to talk to me, you refused to talk to me. --JWSchmidt 16:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Page size warning
Some of my social psychology (psychology) students have been concerned by receiving page size warnings on their user pages, i.e., "WARNING: This page is 35 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.". I've assured them that its no big deal, just keep going, and also suggested subpages and transclusion as options. Does it matter? Do we need this warning? It is confusing for newcomers and if its not really relevant, then how can we remove or increase the limit? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Some web browsers impose a maximum limit on how much text can be edited or contained in text boxes/fields. These limitations aren't something that can be removed or increased by Wikiversity. This warning can also be a hint that the page might be slow to load for dial up users. I think using smaller pages is the way to go. Providing both smaller pages and an all-in-one page can be helpful for both broadband and dial up users, and users using different web browsers. As you probably already know/figured the all-in-one page can be done through making use of transclusion. --dark[[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]]lama 02:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks DarkLama, appreciate as always your quick responses - out of curiousity - do you know which browsers have this problem? I realise also you're reminding of the dialup speed issue which is independent of browser. But, I guess I'm wondering also then whether the message is customisable perhaps to be more user-friendly, e.g., with a link to a page with some suggestions and how-tos. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Which browsers may be affected: see Wikipedia:Browser page size limits#Web browsers which have problems with long articles.
 * The local message for this wiki is here: MediaWiki:Longpagewarning Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 18:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Erkan. From the 1st link you provided (Wikipedia:Browser page size limits#Web browsers which have problems with long articles), I get the impression that perhaps the browsers affected by editing over 35kb are rather antiquated and not much used, i.e., in practice I'm wondering how often would the warning actually be relevant in terms of browser limitations. The dial-up/speed issue I suspect is more relevant. I don't really have an agenda here other than to wonder whether we have a legacy warning which is increasingly less relevant and unnecessary. I also tried the local message link. It doesn't look editable to a custodian, so perhaps it requires a bureaucrat. I haven't got to the point of suggesting new wording, but it seems this could be possible? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * New wording: yes, why not ? We could have a look how other wikis did this (also at the talk page of the mediawiki message there). Would you mind asking the students who saw the msg what their initial reaction was ? So we can also express this in the message. I can edit the message btw. Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 17:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Erkan (I mostly got email from User:Jenny O (but also see on her talk page: User talk:Jenny O) who was genuinely concerned about the warning for her user page - she is good at raising appropriate questions that other students tend to keep quiet about (or not notice); Darklama has since worked some "usability" magic at: MediaWiki:Longpagewarning which I think is spot on in terms of being informative and user-friendly. The surrounding box, though, in Firefox, cuts into the text? Also, the page now appears as editable to me. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Large pages can be very slow to load for those who can not afford a modern, fast computer and it is desirable to make our content available to all. There is also the issue of limited mobile devices.  Large pages can crash a browswer running on a cell phone.  --mikeu talk 17:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Change protection level for User:Moulton user page
I was about to unilaterally protect Moulton's user page per the current Jimbo edit but changed my mind. My intention was to protect the page from further disruption, and to protect the community from further disruption in relation to it. I have checked Jimbo's edit and I have found nothing on there that could be damaging to Moulton, so there cannot be a criticism that an "unfair" version would be protected. However, I thought it would be best to bring it before the community and have some agreement on this action. I believe it would be best that there will be no possibility to fight over the content of this page while Moulton is blocked. However, I would like to know what others thought, and have all intention respecting what the community agrees on upon this matter. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree to protect this page. I also agree that I'd like to see at least one bureaucrat agree on this as well before we actually do it - i.e. gather a little more consensus first. Moulton is not going to use his user pages constructively. --McCormack 07:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Would this stop him from engaging in your project, then? The Jade Knight 09:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, he can still edit his talk page as long as the talk page isn't also protected (oddly enough, he can't edit his own userpage while he's blocked). If Moulton wants it protected, I say absolutely. --SB_Johnny  talk 10:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * With the current situation it's probably best to have Moulton's pages fully protected from editing, though with his talkpage we should leave it un-protected so that users could still speak to him, at least by doing that Moulton will be able to respond to any Custodian questions. DarkMage  10:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Here are User:Moulton's concerns about his userpage (copied from by --mikeu talk 04:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC))

 * A vandal has tampered with the biographical sketch on User:Moulton. I am the author of that biographical sketch, which sets forth my bona fides in academia.  Unapproved edits which distort my credentials have a corrosive and corrupting influence on the integrity of academic records which other scholars rely on to familiarize themselves with the background, interests, and publications of their fellow scholars.

 * If it becomes necessary to protect the User:Moulton page from continued vandalism and unauthorized tampering, then I request that the protected version be one that I have approved as authentic, accurate, and germane to my participation here. At this time, this version is most appropriate.

 * Moulton 04:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Unless there are any concerns or negations, after 12 hours (16:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)), can we have a Bureaucrat protect Moulton's user page (and only user page for this time being). Thank you. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

✅ But, Moulton's request above should be discussed. He should be given the opportunity to request changes or to ask that the page be blanked if he does not feel that it adequately represents him. --mikeu talk 04:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Recent changes to Moulton's talk page
Note: User:Centaur of attention is now blocked. --mikeu talk 12:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

After Moulton was blocked, I asked for community consensus to set Moulton down a series of tasks to focus on definitions and policies in abstract ways. This cannot be construed as "an attack" nor could it be construed as anything but trying to guide Moulton to craft arguments and topics without attacking others.

User:Centaur of attention deleted the task here. This was a task deemed acceptable by many custodians, regular users of this project, and even those who Moulton has had disagreements with in the past. It is also to allow a trial set up of a possible Peer Review process.

I do not see what justifications there can be for such a thing. Nor do I understand what justifications there can be to deleting the link to Moulton's archives. Perhaps this is a mistake on Centaur of attention's part. However, Centaur of attention has also unilaterally decided to blank many pages instead of waiting for the community's deletion process to finalize. I have not found a contribution by this user except to perpetuate such a thing.

I would recommend at this time that this user is blocked for a period of 36 hours, based on not knowing when this user is active during the day, so that they are prevented from continuing this deletion cycle during this time. If they continue, I would ask that this user is blocked until they recognize the harm that can come from blanking topics while labeling them "trolling" or "attacks", which is one of the definitions of vandalism on Wikipedia.

I wish that it would not come down to this, but I have not seen anything from this user that has shown awareness to the possible trouble that could come from blanking many pages while relying on such summaries. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

 * User:Centaur of attention is in a long-running argument with Mouton. Jimbo's intervention at Wikiversity has made CoA bold. I'm not sure this is the time to get into a major fight over the methods of CoA. I reversed CoA's unilateral blanking of one page that I believe does not fall under Jimbo's directive. Lets take this one page at a time and keep CoA in the loop. --JWSchmidt 20:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I am inclined to agree with Ottava that Centaur needs to stop blanking pages without prior discussion. I think a short block would be appropriate if he continues.  --mikeu talk 00:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

 * This edit here needs to be considered. I thought for awhile about what to do after it was posted, and I dismissed several options. I figure there is one of two conclusion each one can come to: 1) I acted in bad-faith, or 2) I'm being threatened. Please, I ask those here to decide. Dzonatas 00:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

 * If he blanks the page again, I would support a short block on Centaur of Attention. The Jade Knight 06:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I left a warning. I suggest he be blocked 2 weeks if he does this again, to allow the community time to discuss. --SB_Johnny  talk 10:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Was Jimbo justified, or fair, in warning me for reverting the very same user who's now on warning himself? Dtobias 12:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, Centaur has two types of reverts - those that deal with Moulton's personal blog, and those that don't. I think Jimbo (in warning you) was mostly concerned with the first type (but that is not to say that he isn't further concerned about other pages in addition to those that have a link to his blog). Ottava Rima (talk) 13:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Removal of JWSchmidt's custodian status
With great regret, we inform the community that a decision has been taken to remove checkuser and custodian status from JWSchmidt. This decision was taken after consultations at many levels of the community and the foundation, and we feel this to be in the best interests of Wikiversity at this time. In particular, we intensely regret that it was not possible to more closely involve the community as a whole, but we felt that the issue was already damaging the community so profoundly that we had to act quickly to minimize further community damage. This decision can, in any case, be reversed by the community at a later date if JWSchmidt decides to stand again for office and is successfully elected. The reasons can be found in full detail in the review, posted for community discussion several days ago. This decision was taken in concert by three bureaucrats (SB_Johnny, Mu301, and Cormaggio) in consultation with the fourth (Sebmol) and with the support of Jimmy Wales, and was implemented after approval by a Wikimedia steward.

In coming to this decision, we took into account JWSchmidt's willingness to apologize for his actions, but we also saw a failure on his part to change his behaviour, evidenced almost immediately by his return to teamwork with Moulton and encouraging Moulton to transfer his "work" to beta.wikiversity.org, a project which was already under threat of closure and where Moulton's activities would have been even more harmful.

At the same time we would like to pay tribute to some of JWSchmidt's positive contributions to Wikiversity, including:
 * Helping formulate, define, shape, and set up the project during 2005 and 2006.
 * Prompt and thorough action against vandals.
 * Unwavering support of an experimental vision of Wikiversity's educational potential
 * Creation of a rich variety of multimedia resources to encourage different types of learners

As a part of the same set of decisions regarding JWSchmidt and Moulton, we also wish to state categorically that the recent "learning projects" on Wikimedia users and other Wikimedia projects do not, in their current form, fall within the scope of Wikiversity's mission, and do not represent the level of scholarly ethics that all Wikiversity projects should adhere to. We therefore strongly recommend a moratorium on such projects until the community has ample time to discuss how best to proceed with projects of this nature.

We owe the community a more detailed explanation of the decision-making processes. In the first of the two Moulton-crises (July 2008), a deliberate decision was taken at Wikiversity to try to accommodate Moulton and steer him towards positive community involvement. This approach was painful and exceptionally time-consuming for those who dealt with Moulton at the time, but the approach seemed to be working at the end of July and beginning of August. During August, JWSchmidt became involved with Moulton and we quickly escalated into the second and more serious "Moulton-crisis". Internally, the JWSchmidt side of this crisis was very much more serious than the Moulton side and led to a near-breakdown of internal communication and "management". When Jimmy Wales blocked Moulton, we saw this as a solution for one side of the case, but not sufficiently dealing with the full range of problems Wikiversity has been facing, particularly in the past month.

It has been an extremely difficult for us to address the issues because our time is limited. Wikiversity is very important to us, but our time is limited because we have jobs, families and other pressing real-world commitments which limit our ability to give as much time as we would like. It is also particularly difficult to go up against one of our own co-founders, who we all love and respect. It is a challenge to our principles at Wikiversity, where we have always deliberately set out to be the most tolerant Wikimedia project. After much thought and consultation, it has become clear to us that our community is still simply too small to absorb this kind of behaviour, and that we had to take assertive action to prevent the situation from devolving any further. We regret that our hesitation to act has allowed things to worsen, but it is not in our natures to take these measures.

We hope that this goes towards explaining to the community any perceived shortcomings and inconsistencies in our actions, but we invite community discussion and reflection at this difficult time. We are confident that this community can and will rebuild an environment in which Wikiversity and its many ideals and visions can grow and flourish. We urge the community to help ensure that an action such as this will never be repeated, which we can do by developing and clarifying our policies, guidelines, and management structures. We also hope that JWSchmidt will eventually find a mentor and join us again as a member of our staff. (The preceding unsigned comment was added by SB Johnny (talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 September 2008.)

 * JW is currently indefinitely blocked - pending clarification of some guidelines? (I think) - I've dropped a note off on his talk page. I'm scrambling to get up to speed with goings on, but just in general would like to ask, for the sake of a healthy community, that discussion move 'on-wiki'... please! :-) Privatemusings 22:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Why is JWSchmidt blocked? I would like to see him unblocked as quickly as possible.  The Jade Knight 02:16, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

We see JWS's block as a temporary measure, in order to provide some breathing space for participation from the wider community, and to gauge consensus for the issues that have been raised during this period. We see these issues as centred around 1) user behaviour (civility, and related guidelines), 2) permitted scope and type of Wikiversity learning projects, and 3) site governance. We would like to open a community discussion around these themes, in which we want to use the recent past as an opportunity to collectively define what we are about as a community, and how we deal with community issues. This latter point relates directly to the third theme - governance - about which none of us feel has been ideally managed. If we can use this experience to build a more robust set of policies and guidelines, we can hopefully ensure that we will never have to go through such an experience again.

John's ban from the irc channel will be lifted, under the condition that he does his part to maintain a congenial and constructive atmosphere on the channel. We further ask that any discussion of the "problems of Wikipedia" take place on another channel (apparently there is a channel called #Moulton which has been used for this purpose). He may be kicked or banned without prior warning by any op if these conditions are not met.

John's block on the wiki will be maintained until the community has time to reach at least provisional consensus on policies and guidelines that can be relied upon to help prevent the problems that led up to this situation. These should include at least the following:
 * 1) Respect people, Privacy policy, and Civility (and possible ammendments) -- these need to be shored up to prevent further outbursts.
 * 2) Appropriate Venues -- needs a lot of modification, but the idea is that main namespace content pages and Wikiversity namespace community discussion pages should not be used as part of a dispute resolution tactic.

Other discussions we should have as soon as possible include these (but might be fine to do after an unblock):
 * IRC guidelines
 * Deletion and blocking policies, and perhaps formal dispute resolution protocols

--SB_Johnny talk 12:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Johnny, What do you mean by "governance"? 119.14.25.196 13:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Essentially: when to say "stop" and "no", and when to take measures to enforce that. --SB_Johnny talk 14:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, "governance" refers to how Wikiversity is managed. Decisions in a wiki are usually taken by consensus - but what we've seen here is action taken by Jimbo, and then the bureaucrats (myself included), when it had not been explicitly consensually agreed by the community. This is not, usually, the "wiki way". So a focus on governance would be a focus on the role of bureaucrats in these actions, in an attempt to ensure that future actions happen in as wiki-like a way as possible. Cormaggio talk 09:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Governance requires carefully crafted continuous and proportional measures to regulate a dynamic system. Harsh and abrupt measures are a contra-indicated practice, long deprecated and eschewed in the secular, mathematical, and theological literature dating back some 3500 years.  —Barsoom Tork 12:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Update on IRC channel status: After careful review of and much debate over what has been going on on our main irc channel (#wikiversity-en), we have decided that both JWSchmidt and Moulton will be banned from that channel until next Saturday in the hopes of holding constructive discussions and beginning the process of restoring Wikiversity to its normal functioning. Both JWSchmidt and Moulton are welcome to use #wikiversity-en-projects to discuss the future of the ethics project and any spin-off learning projects. This is by unanimous consent of the 'crats. --SB_Johnny talk 18:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Binding, gagging, and kicking scholars is hardly a civil or professional way to treat fellow scholars. It only compounds the problems.  —Albatross  12:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Let's bring this up at Unblocking or Blocking, or wherever those redirect to. Emesee 05:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Moulton's talk page protection
I've added a review about Moulton's posting of personal information at Request custodian action/Moulton's talk page. Please read and comment. Cormaggio talk 19:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Ranges
Verizon Boston DSL is 141.154.42.0 - 141.154.87.255 and 68.160.128.0 - 68.160.191.255 You can block that with

 * 141.154.42.0/ 23
 * 141.154.44.0/ 22
 * 141.154.48.0/ 20
 * 141.154.64.0/ 20
 * 141.154.80.0/ 21
 * 68.160.128.0/ 18

Blocks should be anon-only talk page OK. Salmon of Doubt 15:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Outing
I am disturbed to read that Wikiversity, the most "tolerant" of Wikimedia Foundation projects, is subject to fiat from on high. Who exactly is "tolerant" here? I guess I am, if I put up with such authoritarianism.

I am still more disturbed to read that chronic "outing" was going on here, without appropriate response from this community. That is utterly, totally unacceptable. I can only conclude that fiat, however anti-wiki, was necessary. The problem with outing is not only revealing what is true but that the outed person did not wish to reveal; the problem is also "revealing" lies. A community that would permit pseudonymy simply cannot allow outing. A pseudonymous person cannot defend against such outing except by self-outing. --Una Smith 05:05, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Please be aware that "Montana Mouse", a.k.a. Moulton, is the one who has been blamed for doing the "outing". He is currently blocked, but has chosen to disrespect the block (you'll notice he's posting from an anonymous IP—he uses several).
 * I think many of us dislike Wales' decision to get involved in this case, though many individuals apparently felt it was necessary. I am not an administrator, and there's little I can do about this other than talk.  There was major disruption (and "tension", as some have called it) in the Wikiversity community which reached a sort of boiling point, I suppose.  The Jade Knight (d'viser) 06:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Una, I'm relatively new here, but I think a lot of what's going on relates more to some internal issues. Some of the people have been a bit idealistic, and Moulton took advantage of that.  Outing, on the other hand, has been oversighted when attempted here, in my experience.  I agree that it's very unethical to "out" anyone in a community that allows pseudonyms.

 * As for Moulton's above post, don't worry. He just tries to turn things around on anyone who makes any comments about him that he can't refute. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 06:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Moulton, as continues to try to out people, see his recent edit summaries. His anonymous sockpuppetry to evade his indefinite block belies any claim he makes about participating here in good faith and respecting the community. The lack of response from Wikiversity admins is sadly predictable and is what led to Jimbo be forced to taken action to reign him in the first place. 71.202.65.147 16:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, here's some more of his anonymous sockpuppet accounts:. He's been also signing his comments as "Caprice", "Albatross", "Barsoom Tork", etc. to throw people off. 71.202.65.147 16:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

He's now editing as Original Spin. Salmon of Doubt 01:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Note: Wikiversity quickly removed any personal information.  Wales blocked moulton for other reasons.  --Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 10:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

 * True, but it was taking a lot of time and effort to keep track of his posts, because as many times as he was told not to do that, he continued to do so. --SB_Johnny talk 12:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Censorship
Emesee has been removing all sorts of comments relating to his recent behavior here. Please see this, and then review the edit history of Community Review; it seems impossible to engage in any sort of discussion over there while Emesee is constantly removing comments. The Jade Knight (d'viser) 07:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If you would be civil about your dialogue and just post facts with out attached opinions then it might seem a bit more balanced and fair. Emesee 07:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Appreciate you letting this post stand, Emesee. I'd really like the community to get to see what's been going on.  The Jade Knight (d'viser) 07:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Initial Resignation
I have become aware that Emesee resigned his sysop bit, and then withdrew the resignation. Geo.plrd 08:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Emesee requested removal of all flags on his accounts, and asked not to be flagged CU. Then he reverted the request.  Stewards then removed admin access for account User:Emesee and put his CU request on hold.  Please note that his User:Remi and User:Remi0o accounts are still active as custodian.  --mikeu talk 10:07, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Page history merging
If anyone remembers how to do a history merging, could you merge Topic:Electronic engineering with School:Electronics. I was trying to clean up redirects and thought I deleted the wrong thing. Turns out, I didn't. What happened was someone decided to copy and paste entries over instead of moving. So, before the one page is deleted the history should be merged over. Gah. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm... the histories should be merged to School:Electronics, right? And what about the talk pages? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I never figured out the history merging process so I wouldn't know the details. However, the redirect page (Topic) contains the first history of the current page (School). I never checked the talk pages, but I would assume so. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, well I've merged the content pages. But we now have Topic talk:Electronic engineering and School talk:Electronics which I guess should be merged too? Someone familiar with the content of the talk pages should probably do that (& I can do a history merge on that once it's done). – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I want to upload a photo to my wiki page
Please tell me how and can i do this;)Thank you.You can post me at User:Lilia or at my e-mail: kudjooo@abv.bg .Thanx in advance;)

Image deletion
deletion of Image:Wikipedia-logo.png existing in Commons.Crochet.david 16:32, 4 November 2008 (UTC) ✅ --mikeu talk 17:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Unified login
JoliePA is the unified account of Jason O; whom has been active here for two months+ as Jolie. I have decided that it is easier to maintain a JoliePA account on wikiversity than to continue to change 'identities' everytime I go to wikibooks.

I would have gladly unified jolie, if I could but apparently somewhere in the wikimedia foundation someone else is using that username (jolie).

so thus the odd notice that I am a sock puppoet of mascotguy is incorrect. I will immediately log in as Jolie and confirm this notice. apologies if I'm putting this in the wrong place.--JoliePA 14:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I am confirming that I just wrote this moments before as the user JoliePA. since JoliePA is a unified account I would like to use exclusively.  --Jolie 15:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Right so I guess I will be Jolie for the day (at least here on wv). I've been having alot of computer problems and that has apparently raised red flags.  --208.15.226.2 15:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)..--Jolie 15:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Well now I'm (Jolie) have been told I am a suspected sock puppet of mascotguy as well this is bizarre! and who is Kewpie5000, anyway?--Jolie 15:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Kewpie5000 indefblocked, reverted, and most of his pages deleted. Sorry Jolie... I'm sure it's nothing personal (he's just a plain ol' vandal, being silly). A few more "faux userpages" still need deleting, see Special:Contributions/Kewpie_5000 (gotta run!) --SB_Johnny talk 16:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

delete and protect
Storyboard Artwork Project/w/wiki/Talk:Storyboard Artwork Project/ - delete and protect works now?

 * Moved from colloquium, deleting. --SB_Johnny talk 11:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The spambot gets cleverer. Or stupider, depending on one's POV. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * They haven't been active here for a long time, actually. --SB_Johnny talk 12:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was the point of my comment. They had been stopped effectively on all Wikimedia wikis, Wikia wikis, and a good portion of the third-party wikis running MediaWiki. Updates needed... *adds to to-do list* – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 07:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Rename request
Hi, I havent found a desk of bearoucrats so asking here. I would like to request to rename me from Juan to Juandev. I have found out, that under the name Juan would be difficult to SUL me. I also use the alternative name Juan de Vojníkov, but that one is with diactritics. Dont know how much edits I have - tool server is of. Thanks.--Juan 08:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

 * ✅ --SB_Johnny talk 09:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Juandev 21:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

delete and protect
Storyboard Artwork Project/w/wiki/Talk:Storyboard Artwork Project/ - delete and protect works now?

 * Moved from colloquium, deleting. --SB_Johnny talk 11:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The spambot gets cleverer. Or stupider, depending on one's POV. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * They haven't been active here for a long time, actually. --SB_Johnny talk 12:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was the point of my comment. They had been stopped effectively on all Wikimedia wikis, Wikia wikis, and a good portion of the third-party wikis running MediaWiki. Updates needed... *adds to to-do list* – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 07:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Rename request
Hi, I havent found a desk of bearoucrats so asking here. I would like to request to rename me from Juan to Juandev. I have found out, that under the name Juan would be difficult to SUL me. I also use the alternative name Juan de Vojníkov, but that one is with diactritics. Dont know how much edits I have - tool server is of. Thanks.--Juan 08:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

 * ✅ --SB_Johnny talk 09:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Juandev 21:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Coordinate transformations

=Do not use the Voigt notation !=

The projection of second order tensor in the orthonormal base is not the Voigt one. I think it's a better idea to introduce real base.

E_{1}=e_1 \otimes e_1 $$

E_{2}=e_2 \otimes e_2 $$

E_{3}=e_3 \otimes e_3 $$

E_{4}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(e_2 \otimes e_3 + e_3 \otimes e_2) $$

E_{5}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}( e_3 \otimes e_1 + e_1 \otimes e_3) $$

E_{6}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}( e_1 \otimes e_2 + e_2 \otimes e_1) $$

The stress and strain tensors are now defined by :

\left \{\sigma \right \} = \left \{ \begin{align} \sigma_{11} \\ \sigma_{22} \\ \sigma_{33} \\ \sqrt{2}\sigma_{23} \\ \sqrt{2}\sigma_{31} \\ \sqrt{2}\sigma_{12} \\ \end{align} \right \} $$ and

\left \{\varepsilon \right \} = \left \{ \begin{align} \varepsilon_{11} \\ \varepsilon_{22} \\ \varepsilon_{33} \\ \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_{23} \\ \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_{31} \\ \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_{12} \\ \end{align} \right \} $$

Then once constructs the bound matrix in the orthonormal base $$ E_{i} \otimes E_{j}$$

\left [ \hat{R}(\theta) \right ]= \left [ \begin{align} R_{11}^2 & R_{12}^2 & R_{13}^2 & \sqrt{2}R_{12}R_{13} & \sqrt{2}R_{11}R_{13} & \sqrt{2}R_{11}R_{12}\\ R_{21}^2 & R_{22}^2 & R_{23}^2 & \sqrt{2}R_{22}R_{23} & \sqrt{2}R_{21}R_{23} & \sqrt{2}R_{22}R_{21}\\ R_{31}^2 & R_{32}^2 & R_{33}^2 & \sqrt{2}R_{33}R_{32} & \sqrt{2}R_{33}R_{31} & \sqrt{2}R_{31}R_{32}\\ \sqrt{2}R_{21}R_{31} & \sqrt{2}R_{22}R_{32} & \sqrt{2}R_{23}R_{33} & R_{22}R_{32}+R_{23}R_{32} & R_{21}R_{33}+R_{31}R_{23} & R_{21}R_{32}+R_{31}R_{22}\\ \sqrt{2}R_{11}R_{31} & \sqrt{2}R_{12}R_{32} & \sqrt{2}R_{13}R_{23} & R_{12}R_{23}+R_{32}R_{13} & R_{11}R_{33}+R_{13}R_{31} & R_{11}R_{32}+R_{31}R_{12}\\ \sqrt{2}R_{11}R_{21} & \sqrt{2}R_{12}R_{22} & \sqrt{2}R_{13}R_{23} & R_{12}R_{23}+R_{22}R_{13} & R_{11}R_{23}+R_{21}R_{13} & R_{11}R_{22}+R_{21}R_{12}\\ \end{align} \right ] $$

with

$$ \left [ R(\theta) \right ] $$ the rotation matrix in $$ e_{i} \otimes e_{j}$$ base.

Example

\left [ R(\theta) \right ]= \left [ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & cos \theta & sin \theta \\ 0 & -sin \theta& cos \theta \end{matrix} \right ] $$ is the rotation along the axis $$e_1$$ in the :$$e_i \otimes e_j$$ base

The associated rotation in the $$E_i \otimes E_j$$ base is :

\left [ \hat{R}(\theta) \right ]= \left [ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & cos^2 \theta & sin^2 \theta & \sqrt{2} sin \theta cos \theta & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & sin^2 \theta & cos^2 \theta & -\sqrt{2} sin \theta cos \theta & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & - \sqrt{2} sin \theta cos \theta & \sqrt{2} sin \theta cos \theta  & cos^2 \theta - sin^2 \theta & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & cos \theta & -sin \theta \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & sin \theta & cos \theta \\ \end{matrix} \right ] $$

The rotation of a second order tensor is now defined by :
 * $$ \left \{ \sigma(\theta) \right \} = {\left [ \hat{R}(\theta) \right ]}^T \left \{ \sigma \right \} $$

=Four order tensor=

The élasticity tensor $$C_{ijkl}$$ in the :$$e_i \otimes e_j \otimes e_k \otimes e_l$$ is defined in the  :$$E_i\otimes E_j$$ by

\left [ \overline{C} \right ] = \left[\begin{align} C_{1111} & C_{1122} & C_{1133} & \sqrt{2}C_{1123} & \sqrt{2}C_{1131} & \sqrt{2}C_{1112} \\ C_{1122} & C_{2222} & C_{2233} & \sqrt{2}C_{2223} & \sqrt{2}C_{2231} & \sqrt{2}C_{2212} \\ C_{1133} & C_{2233} & C_{3333} & \sqrt{2}C_{3323} & \sqrt{2}C_{3331} & \sqrt{2}C_{3312} \\ \sqrt{2}C_{1123} & \sqrt{2}C_{2223} &  \sqrt{2}C_{2333} & 2C_{2323} & 2C_{2331} & 2C_{2312} \\ \sqrt{2}C_{1131} & \sqrt{2}C_{2231} &  \sqrt{2}C_{3331} & 2C_{2331} & 2C_{3131} & 2C_{3112} \\ \sqrt{2}C_{1112} & \sqrt{2}C_{2212} &  \sqrt{2}C_{3312} & 2C_{2312} & 2C_{3112} & 2C_{1212} \end{align}\right] $$

and is rotated by:

{\left [ \overline{C} (\theta) \right ]}_g = {\left [ \hat{R}(\theta) \right ]}^T \left [ \overline{C} \right ]\left [ \hat{R}(\theta) \right ] $$

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

title: Talk:Coordinate transformations


text:
User:Eas4200c.f08.wiki.b/HW3

The rate of twist angle, $$\displaystyle \theta $$, is defined as

 * $$\displaystyle \theta = {\alpha \over x} $$

Where $$\displaystyle \alpha $$ is the angle of rotation. The horizontal displacement (displacement in the y-direction) is

 * (1) $$\displaystyle u_y = -\theta x z $$

The vertical displacement of a point of the cross section (displacement in the z-direction) can be determined from

 * $$\displaystyle u_z = +(PP') \cos \beta = +\alpha \zeta_p $$

Where $$\displaystyle (OP)\alpha $$ can be substituted in place of $$\displaystyle PP' $$ and $$\displaystyle \theta_x $$ can be substituted in place of $$\displaystyle \alpha $$, thus resulting in the following

 * (2) $$\displaystyle u_z = +\theta x y $$

The displacement due to warping along the x-axis is defined as

 * (3) $$\displaystyle u_x = \theta \psi (y,z) $$

Equations 1, 2, and 3 make up the kinematic assumptions.

=Roadmap for Torsional Analysis=

The following list lays out a general step by step roadmap of equations to apply for the torsional analysis of an aircraft wing:

 * A. Kinematic assumptions (equations 1, 2, and 3 above)
 * B. Strain-displacement relation given by the two equations:
 * $$\displaystyle \gamma_{yz} = {\partial u_x \over \partial y} + {\partial u_y \over \partial x}$$
 * $$\displaystyle \gamma_{zx} = {\partial u_x \over \partial z} + {\partial u_z \over \partial x}$$
 * C. Equilibrium equations for stresses:
 * $$\displaystyle {\partial \sigma_{yy} \over \partial y} + {\partial \tau_{zy} \over \partial z} + {\partial \tau_{xy} \over \partial x} = 0 $$
 * $$\displaystyle {\partial \tau_{yz} \over \partial y} + {\partial \sigma_{zz} \over \partial z} + {\partial \tau_{xz} \over \partial x} = 0 $$
 * $$\displaystyle {\partial \tau_{yx} \over \partial y} + {\partial \tau_{zx} \over \partial z} + {\partial \sigma_{xx} \over \partial x} = 0 $$
 * But, since $$\displaystyle \tau_{yx} $$ and $$\displaystyle \tau_{zx} $$ are independent of x in the displacement field, the equations reduce to the following:
 * $$\displaystyle {\partial \tau_{yx} \over \partial y} + {\partial \tau_{zx} \over \partial z} = 0 $$
 * D. Prandt stress funtion $$\displaystyle \phi (y,z) $$:
 * $$\displaystyle \tau_{yx} = {\partial \phi \over \partial z} $$
 * $$\displaystyle \tau_{zx} = -{\partial \phi \over \partial y} $$
 * E. Strain compatibility equation:
 * $$\displaystyle {\partial \gamma_{zx} \over \partial y} - {\partial \gamma_{yx} \over \partial z} = 2 \theta $$
 * F. Equation for $$\displaystyle \phi $$
 * $$\displaystyle {\partial^2 \phi \over \partial y^2} - {\partial^2 \phi \over \partial z^2} = -2G \theta $$
 * G. Boundary conditions for $$\displaystyle \phi $$:
 * The traction free boundary condition $$\displaystyle t_x = 0 $$ on a lateral surface yields the following:
 * $$\displaystyle {d \phi \over ds} = 0 $$
 * thus, $$\displaystyle \phi $$ is a constant. But, this constant becomes arbitrary since it is a solid section with only one contour boundary, thus
 * $$\displaystyle \phi = 0 $$
 * H. Resultant torque:
 * $$\displaystyle T = 2 \iint_A \phi dA $$
 * I. $$\displaystyle T = G J \theta $$ where
 * $$\displaystyle J = -{4 \over \triangledown^2 \phi} \iint_A \phi dA $$
 * $$\displaystyle T = 2q \bar A $$
 * J. Twist angle
 * $$\displaystyle \theta = {1 \over 2G \bar A} \oint {q \over t}ds $$
 * where $$\displaystyle s $$ is the curvilinear coordinate along a thin wall

title: User:Eas4200c.f08.wiki.b/HW3


text:
User:EAS4200C.Fall08.AERO.Watlington.VG

10/3/08 Lecture 17

Roadmap continued...

K. Multi-cell section (cell i=1,...$$n_c$$):

K1. The total torque T for a multi-cell section is defined as:

$$T=2\sum_{i=1}^{n_c}{q_i\bar{A}_i}$$

where $$q_i$$ is the shear flow in cell i, and $$\bar{A}_i$$ is the average area in cell i.

Justification for Torque equation

Define $$T_i=2q_i\bar{A}_i$$

as the torque generated by one cell. It then follows that T is the sum of all individual cell torques.

K2. The shape of air foil is rigid in the (y,z) plane (however, it can warp in and out of the plan in the x-direction.)

This rigidity leads to the following relation about the angles of rotation for each cell:

$$\theta =\theta _1=\theta _n$$

and $$\theta =\frac{1}{2G_i\bar{A}_i}\oint_{}^{}{\frac{q_i}{t_i}ds}$$

where $$G_i$$ is the shear modulus of the cell and $$t_i$$ is the thickness of each segment. $$t_i$$ can also be a function of $$s$$, the curvilinear coordinate along the cell wall.

Example

Now, let us refer back to Problem 1.1 to demonstrate the above equations in a single cell section.

(picture of cell goes here)

First, calculate the area: $$\bar{A}=\frac{1}{2}\pi(\frac{b}{2})^2 + \frac{1}{2}(b*a)$$ = $$\bar{A}=\frac{1}{2}\pi(\frac{2}{2})^2 + \frac{1}{2}(2*4) = 5.57$$

Then, Shear flow: $$T= 2q\bar{A}$$ => $$q=\frac{T}{2\bar{A}}$$

Finally Twist Angle: $$\theta =\frac{1}{2}G\bar{A}\sum_{j=1}^{n_c} q_j\frac{l_j}{t_j}$$, where $$j$$ is the index for segment number within the cell.

NOTE:

integral sign: $$\int$$, standing for summation (continuous)

summation: $$\sum{}$$, (discrete) sum

This method is derived from the Riemann sum, which is computed by dividing a body into smaller rectangles and adding their areas together to arrive at a total area for the body.

title: User:EAS4200C.Fall08.AERO.Watlington.VG


text:
User:Eas4200c.f08.aero.e/Week 5

=Monday=

Curved Panel:

Equations used are

$$V_x = \tau ta$$ -- Eq. 1.4 from book

$$V_y = \tau tb$$ -- Eq. 1.5 from book

$$F_x = qb$$ -- Eq. 3.49b from book

$$F_y = qh$$ -- Eq. 3.49c from book

Problem 1.5 from the Aircraft Structures book states:

Derive the relations given by Eq. (1.4) and (1.5).

This will be done with the help of the following figure.

The shear flow is from A to B and is written as $$q = \tau t$$.

Then we see,

$$ d\overrightarrow{F} = q(d\overrightarrow{l}) = q(dl_y \hat{j} + dl_z \hat{k}) = q(dlcos \theta \hat{j} + dlsin \theta \hat{k}) $$

The figure below is of the section dl:

The resultant shear force vector is,

$$ \overrightarrow{F} = \int_{A}^{B} d\overrightarrow{F}\ = q	\left[(\int_{A}^{B} dy) \hat{j} + (\int_{A}^{B} dz) \hat{k} \right] $$

$$ \overrightarrow{F} = q(a \hat{j} + b \hat{k} ) $$

To compare this to Eq. 1.4 and 1.5, q = τt then add 1.4 and 1.5 to get a vector, and they are the same.

This leads to,

$$ \frac{F_y}{F_z} = \frac{a}{b} $$

The resultant magnitude will be,

$$ R = \left \Vert \overrightarrow{F} \right \| = \left[(F_y)^2 + (F_z)^2 \right]^{\frac{1}{2}} = q \left[ a^2 + b^2 \right]^{\frac{1}{2}} $$

Where,

$$ \left[ a^2 + b^2 \right]^{\frac{1}{2}} = d $$

So,

$$ R = qd $$

Where d is the length between A and B.

Closed thin walled cross section.

$$ dF = qdl \quad, $$  and   $$, \quad\ dA = \frac{1}{2} \rho dl $$

$$ d\overrightarrow{T} = \overrightarrow{r} \times d\overrightarrow{F} $$

$$ d\overrightarrow{T} = \rho dF = \rho qdl$$

$$ \overrightarrow{T} = \int d\overrightarrow{T} = q \int \rho dl = 2q \int_{\bar A} dA $$

$$ \overrightarrow{T} = 2q \bar A $$

The equation above is Equation 3.48 in the book.

=Wednesday=

 Exam 1

=Friday=

Homework:

For the image shown below, prove that the area of the shades triangle is: $$= \frac{1}{2}bh$$

Bold text Solution:

We know that the formula to find the area of a right triangle is $$= \frac{1}{2}BH$$

And we notice that we have a right triangle defined by the points BED of area $$= \frac{1}{2}(\bar{BD})(\bar{DE}) = \frac{1}{2}(\bar{BD})h$$,

the same way we notice that we have another right triangle defined by the points CED of area $$= \frac{1}{2}(\bar{CD})(\bar{DE}) = \frac{1}{2}(\bar{CD})h$$

So the area of the triangle BEC (shaded triangle), will be:

$$A_{BEC} = A_{BED}- A_{CED}$$

Then,

$$A_{BEC} = \frac{1}{2}(\bar{BD})h - \frac{1}{2}(\bar{CD})h = \frac{1}{2}h(\bar{BD}-\bar{CD}) = \frac{1}{2}h(\bar{BC})$$

And we know that $$BC = b$$

So, finally we get that:  $$A_{BEC} = \frac{1}{2}hb$$

Open thin walled cross section

The following equations apply:

$$Re = T = 2q\bar{A}$$

$$T = 2q\bar{A}$$

'''Uniform bar with circular cross-section. Non-warping case (cross section behaves like a rigid disk)'''

For this case:

$$T = \int \int _{A}r\tau dA$$  and notice that

$$\tau = G\gamma $$ (Hooke's Law)

$$\gamma = \frac{rd\alpha }{dx}$$

$$ \frac{rd\alpha }{dx} = \theta $$ (Rate of twist)

So we get that:

$$T = \int _{A} r G (r\theta )dA$$

Where $$da = dydz$$ and recalling that  G is independent of Y and Z.

And finally we obtain:

$$T = G\theta (\int _{A}r^{2}dA)$$

Where $$J = \int _{A}r^{2}dA $$ Which is the second polar area moment of inertia.

Homework

Prove that $$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi a^{4}$$ for a solid circular cross section

For this case a ring of infinite element area of radius dr is chosen. And we designate a as the radius of the disk.

Then:

$$dJ = r ^{2}dA = r^{2}(2\pi rdr)$$

So we integrate r from 0 to c and obtain:

$$J = \int_{0}^{c}{}r ^{2}(2\pi rdr) = 2\pi \int_{0}^{c}{}r ^{3}dr$$

So, finally we get:

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi ^{4}$$

Case2: Hollow circular cross-section.

For this case we have that:

Is a thin-walled case therefore t << a

$$r_{i} = a$$

$$r_{o} = b$$

ri is simply the inner radius while ro is the outer radius.

The we have the following expresion:

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi (b^{4}-a^{4})$$

Which can be rewritten as:

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi (b^{2^{2}}-a^{2^{2}})$$

And:

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi (b-a)(b+a)(b^{2}+ a^{2})$$

Notice that

$$(b - a)=t$$

and

$$ (b + a) = 2\bar{r} $$

Which is the approximate value for the average radius.

We can make a thin wall assumption, t << a or b so,

$$b\approx a $$

And from the equations above,

$$ \bar{r} \approx \frac{(b + a)}{2} \approx \frac{2b}{2} \approx b  $$

With the above approximation, we then know that:

$$b^{2}\approx \bar{r}^{2}$$

and that:

$$a^{2}\approx \bar{r}^{2} $$

Then finally we get:

$$J = 2\pi t\bar{r}^{3}$$

Which also can be expressed as:

$$J = (2\pi ^{\frac{-1}{2}}t)(\pi \bar{r}^{2})^{\frac{3}{2}}$$

Notice that the expression $$\pi \bar{r}^{2}$$ equals the area.

Then, we can conclude that J is proportional to  $$\bar{A}^{\frac{3}{2}}$$   with   $$2\pi ^{\frac{-1}{2}}t$$   being the proportional factor.

Homework:

Compare solid circular cross-section to a hollow thin walled cross-section of the figure below:

a = Solid cross-section

b= Hollow cross-section

 * 1) Compute areas A(a) and A(b)
 * 2) Compute J< (a) amd J(b)
 * 3) Compute $$\frac{J_{(a)}}{J_{(b)}}$$
 * 4) Find ri(c) with $$t = 0.02r^{c}_{i}$$ at J(c) = J(a)
 * 5) Compute $$\frac{A_{(a)}}{A_{(c)}}$$

Solution

Part 1

To calculate the areas we use the formula : $$A = \pi r^{2}$$

So, for the solid cross-section

$$A = \pi 1^{2} = = 3.14159 cm^2$$

For the hollow cross-section, we simply find the area of the circle formed by the outer radius and subtract it from the area formed by the inner circle.

$$A = \pi (5.1cm - 5.0cm)^{2} = 0.0314159 cm^2$$

Part 2

To compute J we use the formula : $$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi r^{4}$$

So for (a):

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi (1cm)^{4} = 1.5708cm^4$$

For (b):

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi (0.1cm)^{4} = 0.000157cm^4$$

Part 3

Compute $$\frac{J_{(a)}}{J_{(b)}}$$

$$\frac{J_{(a)}}{J_{(b)}} = \frac{1.5708cm^4}{0.000157cm^4} = 10000$$

Part 4

We know that J(c) = J(a) = 1.5708cm^4

Then, we know that t = 0.02ric

So, we use the formula:

$$J = \frac{1}{2}\pi r^{4}$$ and simply solve for ro - ri

Then, we get:

$$r_{o}^{4}-r_{i}^{4} = \frac{2J}{\pi }$$

$$J = 1cm^4$$

So if

$$r_{o}^4-r_{i}^4 = 1 cm^4$$

Also,

$$r_i = \frac{t}{0.02}$$

Then:

$$R_{0}= t-\frac{t}{0.02}$$

Then

r_{0}= 1.02r_{i}

And:

$$1.02r_{i}^4-r_{i}^4 = 1 cm^4 r$$

$$r_i = 2.65915 cm$$

Area_c =  $$\pi (0.444288cm )^{2}$$ $$= 0.620126 cm 2$$

And :

finally,

$$\frac{A_{(a)}}{A_{(c)}} = \frac{3.14159}{0.620126}= 5.06605$$

title: User:Eas4200c.f08.aero.e/Week 5


text:
User:Eas4200c.f08.aero.e/Week 6

=Monday=

Homework #3
NACA 4 digit airfoil series

For homework number four teams will develop Matlab code to plot and analyze a NACA airfoil. This homework assignment will be an ongoing project with the ultimate going of developing Matlab code to do structural analysis of a wing. For the first assignment teams should:

 * Plot the airfoil.
 * Compute location of the airfoil.
 * Plot the centroid of the airfoil with cross hair.
 * Compute A_bar (from any point in the plane).

The user will input the number of segments and the coordinate of the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil.

Matlab code is provided to plot a straight line. Teams should modify the code to plot the entire airfoil. Given some wing thickness the code must then find the centroid of the airfoil segment. A summation of the individual segment centroids will yield the overall airfoil centroid.

For each small airfoil the perpendicular distance from the origin (or other point) will need to be calculated.

This distance is assigned the variable $$\rho$$ as shown in the illustration below for vector $$\overrightarrow{PQ}$$

Note,

$$ \overrightarrow{dT} = \overrightarrow{r} $$ $$ \mathbf{x}$$ $$\overrightarrow{dF} = q\overrightarrow{r}$$ $$ \mathbf{x}$$ $$\overrightarrow{PQ} = (2dA)\overrightarrow{i}$$

$$ T = \oint_C \,dT $$

$$= q \oint_C \rho \, dl $$

$$=2q \int\limits_A \, dA$$

END OF HOMEWORK 3

Torsion of Uniform, non-circular bars
When a torque is applied to a uniform bar it leads to warping along the longitudinal axis of the bar. The amount of warping depends on the applied torque.

Warping - axial displacement along longitudinal axis of a point on the deformed (rotated) cross section.

Virtual Displacement:

Uy = y - component of displacement vector $$\overrightarrow{PP'}$$

Uz = z - component of $$\overrightarrow{PP'}$$

Note: Horizontal Bar

Matlab: NACA 4 Digit Airfoil Series
=Wednesday=

 Torsion Analysis

PP' is a vector that describes displacement.

$$u_{y}= $$ y-Displacement (Horizontal)

$$u_{y}= $$ Z-Displacement (Vertical)

 * $$\theta =\frac{\alpha }{x},$$

$$\theta = $$ rate of twist

$$u_{y}= -\theta xz,$$

$$u_{z}= PP^'cos\beta ,$$

$$u_{z}= OP\alpha cos\beta ,$$

$$u_{z}= \alpha y,$$

$$OP\alpha cos\beta =\alpha y,$$

$$OP cos\beta = y,$$

$$u_{z}=\theta +xy,$$

$$u_{x}=\theta \psi(x,y) ,$$

source: http://www.3dscientifics.com/airfoil_cfd.htm

Roadmap to torsional analysis of aircraft wing

A. Kinematic assumption,  (sec. 3.2)

B. Strain - Displacement relations,    (sec. 3.2)

C. Equilibrium equation - stresses,    (sec. 3.6)

D. Prandtl stress $$\phi$$,    (sec. 3.15)

E. Strain compatibility,   (sec. 3.17)

F. Equation for $$\phi$$,    (sec. 3.19)

G. Boundary consitions for $$\phi$$,    (sec. 3.24)

H.

$$T=2\int\int_{A}^{}{}\phi dA$$

$$J=\frac{-4}{\nabla^{2}\phi }\int \int _{A}\phi dA$$

I. Thin-walled cross-section,  (Pg. 5-2) Ad Hoc assumption on shear flow $$T = 2q\bar{A}$$ Formal derivation can be found in section 3.5

J. Twist angle $$\theta$$,  Method 1  (sec.3.56)

$$\theta = \frac{1}{2G\bar{A}}\oint{\frac{q}{t}ds}$$

K. Section 3.6 on multicell thin-walled cross-sections.

=Friday= 10/3/08 Lecture 17

Roadmap continued...

K. Multi-cell section (cell i=1,...$$n_c$$):

K1. The total torque T for a multi-cell section is defined as:

$$T=2\sum_{i=1}^{n_c}{q_i\bar{A}_i}$$

where $$q_i$$ is the shear flow in cell i, and $$\bar{A}_i$$ is the average area in cell i.

Justification for Torque equation

Define $$T_i=2q_i\bar{A}_i$$

as the torque generated by one cell. It then follows that T is the sum of all individual cell torques.

K2. The shape of air foil is rigid in the (y,z) plane (however, it can warp in and out of the plan in the x-direction.)

This rigidity leads to the following relation about the angles of rotation for each cell:

$$\theta =\theta _1=\theta _n$$

and $$\theta =\frac{1}{2G_i\bar{A}_i}\oint_{}^{}{\frac{q_i}{t_i}ds}$$

where $$G_i$$ is the shear modulus of the cell and $$t_i$$ is the thickness of each segment. $$t_i$$ can also be a function of $$s$$, the curvilinear coordinate along the cell wall.

Example

Now, let us refer back to Problem 1.1 to demonstrate the above equations in a single cell section.

First, calculate the area: $$\bar{A}=\frac{1}{2}\pi(\frac{b}{2})^2 + \frac{1}{2}(b*a)$$ = $$\bar{A}=\frac{1}{2}\pi(\frac{2}{2})^2 + \frac{1}{2}(2*4) = 5.57$$

Then, Shear flow: $$T= 2q\bar{A}$$ => $$q=\frac{T}{2\bar{A}}$$

Finally Twist Angle: $$\theta =\frac{1}{2}G\bar{A}\sum_{j=1}^{n_c} q_j\frac{l_j}{t_j}$$, where $$j$$ is the index for segment number within the cell.

NOTE:

integral sign: $$\int$$, standing for summation (continuous)

summation: $$\sum{}$$, (discrete) sum

This method is derived from the Riemann sum, which is computed by dividing a body into smaller rectangles and adding their areas together to arrive at a total area for the body.

title: User:Eas4200c.f08.aero.e/Week 6


title: File:3elementdiagram.jpg


text: User:Ecapa

title: User:Ecapa


text:
User:Jock Boy

Hi! I am a user form Wikipedia who is currently just learning stuff there. In the future, I will probably look at these other projects. For right now however, if you want to get a hold of me, either see my Wikipedia talk page or [mailto:jockboywikipedia@gmail.com e-mail me]]

title: User:Jock Boy


text:
User talk:Jock Boy

 Hello Jock Boy, 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 random project.
 * Browse everything on 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! Jtneill - Talk - c 23:16, 3 October 2008 (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:Jock Boy


text: File:Shear stress diagram.PNG

title: File:Shear stress diagram.PNG


text: File:Shear force in shear flow2.PNG

title: File:Shear force in shear flow2.PNG


text: File:Curved panel iso.PNG

title: File:Curved panel iso.PNG


text:
Stigma/Examples

Classical Examples

 * Many of the great teachers of human civilization have been stigmatized or silenced at some point in time. Here are three well-known examples that may be considered notorious instances of stigmatization.

In the Story of Galileo and the Catholic Church, the upstart scientist was condemned by the Inquisition for contravening the teachings of the Church. The effort of the Church to stigmatize Galileo backfired in this case, as Galileo's theories were scientifically sound and very significant, unlike many others condemned and killed or stigmatized by the Inquisition, and the Church ended up embarrassing itself (not for the first or last time).

In the Story of Darwin and his Detractors, the biologist's work was reviled for undermining the biblical account of creation and being an "abuse of science". The effort of Darwin's detractors to stigmatize Darwin backfired, and his Detracators ended up making themselves look foolish and backward. In the Story of Martin Luther King and the FBI, the young African-American preacher was targeted by the FBI and numerous southern jurisdictions who sought to criminalize and stigmatize him for what they perceived were his ties with Communism. Despite the support of several prominent officials (President Johnson, for example, called King a "hypocritical preacher"), their efforts backfired. King became venerated as a great American civil rights leader, and the governmental authorities who used the violent power of the state against King lost their claim that this was a legitimate use of governmental power.

Disputed Examples of Stigmatization

 * The following examples are disputed as examples of stigmatization. Please discuss here.

In the Story of Socrates, the aging Greek philosopher was condemned for corrupting the youth of Athens (by teaching them his philosophies). He was ordered to commit suicide by drinking Hemlock; he complied. He later became a venerated figure, and the culture that sought to repress Socrates ended up degrading itself:
 * Is Athens usually praised or condemned for this act?
 * Is Athens usually praised or condemned for its application of absolute democracy (as was the case here)?
 * Is Athens usually praised or condemned for its treatment of philosophers when compared to its contemporaries (Sparta, Persia, etc.)?

In the Story of Thomas Becket, the radical Archbishop of Canterbury was condemned by King Henry for being a "meddlesome priest." While King Henry succeeded having Thomas Becket killed (as appears to have been his intention), some argue that King Henry's reign ended up degrading the Monarchy.
 * Did King Henry's reign degrade the monarchy? In what ways?
 * Were any of these ways a direct result of Henry's treatment of Becket?
 * Would Henry be viewed differently had he not had Beckett killed? In what ways?
 * Are these issues inherent to monarchies, or were Henry's choices to blame?
 * Do historians specializing in the matter condemn Henry for his actions?

In the Story of the Witches of Salem, many members of the Puritan colony condemned many innocent members of their community to death.
 * Has the account of the Witch Trials increased, or decreased awareness of Salem?
 * Has it increased or decreased general awareness of Puritanism and its practices?
 * Has it increased or decreased the influence of Salem via the spread of stories or via its tourism industry?
 * Has Puritanism been stigmatized as a result of this?

In the Story of Thoreau and the State of Massachusetts, the radical scholar was imprisoned for civil disobedience (i.e., not paying his taxes).
 * If you were familiar with who Thoreau was, were you familiar with this event before reading it now?
 * Does this event change your perspective of the state of Massachusetts?
 * Do you support or condemn the state in imprisoning Thoreau for not paying his taxes?

In the Story of Gandhi and the British in India, the pacifistic activist was frequently jailed by British magistrates. In the end, however, the British stood down from their policies and the governance of India was changed.
 * Gandhi was imprisoned, but was very popular throughout his life as an activist. Was he ever truly stigmatized?
 * Is stigmatization the same if it comes from a group one does not belong to (at all)?
 * Does anyone support those who imprisoned Gandhi?
 * Were they stigmatized as a result of their actions?

title: Stigma/Examples


text: Category:Stigma

title: Category:Stigma


text: File:Curved panel side view.PNG

title: File:Curved panel side view.PNG


text:
Talk:Stigma/Examples

Stigmatization serves an important social function in establishing norms, etc. In some cases, this stigmatization is useful (it was an important form of discipline in Greece and Anglo-Saxon Britain, for example). In other cases, when individuals have been incorrectly stigmatized, it is a hindrance to society. If killing is also considered stigmatization, then this is even more extremely the case—every single individual who was executed or killed in the history of mankind has been "stigmatized"; sometimes quite rightly (in the case of mass murderers, etc.) The Jade Knight (d'viser) 01:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

 * That is all your opinion, Moulton, and a great many people (including many brilliant ones) disagree with you. Yes, there is a school of thought which opposes stigmatism.  There is another which supports it.  The only tackiness I see going on is your use of condescending language, loaded rhetoric and one-sided examples.  Can't you be more mature than that?  Or at least more open-minded?  The Jade Knight (d'viser) 03:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm willing to listen, but won't stand for disrespect. The Jade Knight (d'viser) 06:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Examples
The Jade Knight (d'viser) 06:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Socrates execution, while universally condemned, does not seem to have negatively affected perceptions of Athens in any significant way, and it was certainly popular at the time (though Socrates retained a loyal following after his death; had Plato not written the Republic, however, it is questionable how much would be known of him as a philosopher today).
 * It's impossible to deal with Jesus in a succinct fashion without taking a stance interpreting him as a god, a Prophet, or explicitly none of these at some point in the context of stigmatization. If you want to give him his own page and disclose an explicit POV, ok.  But there isn't room to do him justice here.
 * Henry's reign seems to have been degraded by a lot of things. Becket's execution strikes me as incidental in many ways.
 * If anything, the Witch Trials seems to have been popularized. Universally condemned, yes, but they've been a great tourist attraction for Salem.
 * It seems as if you're trying to stigmatize those who you are claiming did the stigmatizing. Funny, that.
 * I still don't consider any of this "stigmatization" in the Sociological sense.

title: Talk:Stigma/Examples


text: File:Detailed dl.PNG

title: File:Detailed dl.PNG


text:
Construction engineering

Construction engineering concerns the planning and management of the construction of structures such as highways, bridges, airports, rail roads, buildings, dams, and reservoirs. Construction of such projects requires knowledge of engineering and management principles and business procedures, economics, and human behavior. Construction engineers engage in the design of structures temporary, cost estimating, planning and scheduling, materials procurement, selection of equipment, and cost control. Construction engineering is differentiated from Construction management from the standpoint of the use of mathematics, science and engineering to analyze problems and design a construction process. A good familiarity with reading blueprints is necessary because Construction engineers build many of the things that people use everyday. Construction engineering involves many aspects of construction including: commercial, residential, bridges, airports, tunnels, and dams. It is an extremely large industry that provides jobs to many and continues to grow. Currently there are nearly 6 million people working on construction in the United States. Construction engineers are in high demand so it is easy for a CE to get a job in any part of the country.

Careers
Construction is the largest industry in the United States. It provides jobs to millions ranging in all types of education. Construction makes 14% of our countries Gross National Product. Construction engineering is an important part to the construction industry because it provides much of the design aspect to the field. Construction engineers follow the plans of architects and sometimes design the actual structure. After the structure has been designed the engineers make sure it has been built correctly by testing and overseeing the construction.

Tasks - Construction engineers have a lot of responsibilities in their job. Certain tasks have to be completed everyday in order to get the job done correctly. Analyzing reports is a main part of their job description. They must analyze maps, drawings, blueprints, aerial photography and other topographical information. Construction engineers also have to use computer software to design hydraulic systems and structures while following construction codes. They have to calculate load and grade requirements, liquid flow rates and material stress points to ensure that the structure can withstand stress. Keeping a safe workplace is key to having a successful construction company. It is the construction engineer's job to make sure that everything is conducted correctly. In addition to safety, the construction engineer has to make sure that the site stays clean and sanitary. Surveying the land before construction begins is also a job of the construction engineer. They have to make sure that there are no impediments in the way of where the structure will be built and if there are any they must move them. They also must estimate costs and keep the project under budget. Construction engineers have to test the soils and materials used for adequate strength. Finally, construction engineers have to provide construction information, including repairs and cost changes, to the managers.

Knowledge - Construction engineers build structures that are used by people everyday so they have to be safe and be able to withstand the elements. To complete the job properly construction engineers have to have the knowledge of many different aspects. Those aspects include engineering, technology, design, math, construction, English, customer service, management, transportation, public safety, and computers. They understand technical drawings related to the industry and use the engineering, technology, and math aspects to make sure they build the structure to the set standards. They use English, customer service, and management knowledge to deal with the people that could possibly buy the structure. They also use this knowledge to inform the management on how the project is coming along and if any changes are needed.

Skills - Most construction engineers have a love for math and science. In addition to these abilities there are many other skills needed to be a construction engineer. Critical thinking, listening, learning, problem solving, monitoring, and decision making are all very important in construction engineering. Construction engineers have to be able to think about all aspects of a problem and listen to other’s ideas so that they can learn everything about a project before it begins. After they have begun a project they must solve the problems that they encounter using math and science. They also have to monitor the workers on the job site for safety and to make sure that the project is on time and done correctly. Whenever a problem occurs it is up to the construction engineer to make the decision on how to fix it.

Abilities - Construction engineers have many different kinds of abilities they use to do their job. They have the abilities to reason, express themselves orally, sense a problem, comprehend (oral and written), order information, speak clearly, and visualize. Construction engineers use these abilities to communicate with other workers and to solve problems. They also have to use there abilities to know what kinds of materials to order and how to get those materials while staying under the budget.

Work Activities - Construction engineers have many activities that they have to do everyday. Those activities include drafting, decision making, computer interaction, communication, documenting, creative thinking, organizing, information collecting, estimating, and analyzing. Construction engineers use drafting to design structures and to show others how to build them. They have to analyze information and make the best decision and solve problems. Computers are an important tool used by construction engineers. They use them to write programs and solve equations. Communication is used everyday to interact with coworkers and supervisors. They have to communicate in person, by telephone, and through e-mail. Documentation is used to record important information that needs to be passed on to management. Most documenting is done in electronic form. Creative thinking is used to come up with new ideas and solve problems. Construction engineers have to be organized to accomplish goals and prioritize jobs. They have to gather information on the task at hand before they can start a project. This will help ensure that the job is completed correctly. In order to keep a project under budget, construction engineers have to estimate costs of materials and workers. Finally, they have to analyze data to find answers to problems they are having on the job site.

Educational Requirements - Construction Engineers are educated to design and build structures that are necessary for everyday life. There are only a handful of schools that offer a major in Construction engineering. Some of the more popular colleges are Purdue University, Iowa State University, Bradley University, California State Polytechnic University-Pomona, and National University. Bradley University offers a Bachelor of Science degree in Construction while Cal Poly Pomona and National University offer a Bachelor of Science degree in Construction Engineering Technology. Cal Poly Pomona, Bradley University and National University are not accredited by ABET to offer degrees in Construction Engineering. However, Cal Poly Pomona is accredited by the Technology Accreditation Committee (T.A.C.) of ABET and their graduates are eligible to sit for the California E.I.T. exam. The list of accredited ABET programs in Construction Engineering can be found here. The University of Southern California offers a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering with an option in Construction Engineering. For most Construction engineering jobs a Bachelor of Science is required and some construction experience. In order to work on projects that will be used by the public a construction engineer has to get a professional engineers license. The Fundamentals of Engineering and Principles and Practice exams must be passed, and other requirements met, for a construction engineer to receive a Professional Engineers license.

title: Construction engineering


text:
Marketing

Marketing is the study and management of exchange relationships. It is the business process of identifying, anticipating and satisfying customers' needs and wants. Because marketing is used to attract customers, it is one of the primary components of business management and commerce.

Courses

 * Principles of Marketing
 * Services Relationship Marketing

Learning projects

 * /Marketing educational wikis/

title: Marketing


text:
Social psychology (psychology)/Lost contributions

The following sections appear to be student contributions which, if you own them, should be moved to your e-portfolio page.

Misplaced text
Hi James. I think one of your students (using an IP address) managed to post a feedback comment to the wrong place. Text follows. --McCormack 11:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Week Four: Aggression and Antisocial behaviour; In the text book it was very interesting to read about the magnitude map, or the difference in outcome between the perpetrator and the victim. You never really think of it in this kind of depth, of course one always acknowledges the misfortune of the victim but hardly ever do we weigh up the victim's suffering in relation to the perpetrators' crime. A victim is a victim and a perpetrator a criminal. It was interesting for me to look at crime as loss or gain, loss on the victims' side and gain on the perpetrators' side. I also found the definition of relational aggression (when one intentionally harms someone's relationship with others) very interesting. Moreso, because I aggree that this would be more evident in females than in males. Females, when confronted with a potential competitor for someones' love or friendship will bide their time untill something happens that allows them to enforce the end of that particular relationship. I also aggree with the frustration-aggression hypothesis, that frustration and aggression go hand in hand. In my daily life I noticed this not only in others but myself also. If someone is in a bad mood, or dissasstisfied with an aspect of their life, then of course they are going to be more susceptable to aggressive acts (of course not necessarily violent acts.) Through this hypothesis I think that one can begin to understand aggressive acts such as stealing, vandalism, and other various delinquent behaviours that tend to occur at the lower end of the socio-economic strata due to frustration. Frustration (as defined in our textbook) seems to be more consuming than I first thought, the blockage or interference of a personal goal, that kind of setback, I think, can really damage a person and not surprisingly may lead to aggression or anti-social behaviour, who would want to be social when you're not able to reach your full potential for one reason or another. I guess this is one for Maslow's hierarchy of needs, how can someone reach self-actualisation if their basic needs are not met.

Although I did not get to see all of "Ghosts of Rwanda" it was very confronting. A good example of the frustration-aggression hypothesis,the Tutsi people who were the minority had begun to form a rebel army. It isn't any wonder why, when people are subjected to oppression such as they would have been, they rise up to defend themselves. I found it interesting, the Canadian General (i can't remember his name) was saying how after lodging written documentation stating the intelligence he had gathered, he felt a sense of "Bravado" like he was going to make a difference. I think that this false sense of hope was instilled in him, through his own culture, and also through the ignorance of the events that had previously taken place in this country he had never been too. It also seemed strange to me, that the UN sent a General who had never seen war or conflict (as they said at the start of the video I think) to deal with this delicate situation.

Oskar Schindler: A student observation
this could be shifted to a user's e-portfolio page, but is placed here for now Reading about prosocial I came accross an intriging story of Oska Scndler who managed to earn all the names connected with unlawfullness. In 1935 Oska sought work in Poland, and when Nazi German invaded Poland he joined the Nazi Party. This was to gain access to resources and benefits given to part-card holders.Reading through the story it appears Oska Nazis save Jews from being killed. Oska used the the Nazi system to defeat German.

It would be expected that after giving so much life to Jews Oska would have been hailed a hero. Yet some of the Jewish responsed seemed unsure why Oska did what he did for them. Others thought he was an adventurer seeking fame and recognition. Several responses were not any clearer since everyone thought he did what he did for self-interest. Despite the different views held about Schindler during World War II the single factor remains that he voluntarly risked his life to a small number of Jews.

The interpretation to this story is that there no logical reason for saving human life as it appears Schindler himself did not know. {Love has never been reasonable,yet is the most noble of emotions and is necessary for life itself to be]. So maybe kin selection(?) makes people want to save another human being in danger.


text: File:Write right.jpg

title: File:Write right.jpg


text: Writing arts

title: Writing arts


text:
User:Beetstra

 Hi, and welcome to my user page.

I am Dirk Beetstra, my main projects are en.wikipedia and meta.wikimedia

My main edits here will concern editors who have been performing the same (or similar) edits on more than one wikipedia.

If you want to contact me quickly, leave a message on en.wikipedia or on meta.wikimedia!

For justification of my edits, please see the header of my talkpage.

(Global) rights: General links: aa:User:Beetstra af:User:Beetstra als:User:Beetstra ar:User:Beetstra as:User:Beetstra ast:User:Beetstra ay:User:Beetstra az:User:Beetstra be:User:Beetstra bg:User:Beetstra bn:User:Beetstra bo:User:Beetstra bs:User:Beetstra cy:User:Beetstra da:User:Beetstra eo:User:Beetstra et:User:Beetstra eu:User:Beetstra fa:User:Beetstra fy:User:Beetstra ga:User:Beetstra gl:User:Beetstra gn:User:Beetstra gu:User:Beetstra he:User:Beetstra hi:User:Beetstra hr:User:Beetstra hy:User:Beetstra ia:User:Beetstra id:User:Beetstra is:User:Beetstra ka:User:Beetstra kk:User:Beetstra km:User:Beetstra kn:User:Beetstra ko:User:Beetstra ks:User:Beetstra ku:User:Beetstra ky:User:Beetstra la:User:Beetstra ln:User:Beetstra lo:User:Beetstra lt:User:Beetstra lv:User:Beetstra hu:User:Beetstra mi:User:Beetstra mk:User:Beetstra ml:User:Beetstra mn:User:Beetstra mr:User:Beetstra ms:User:Beetstra mt:User:Beetstra my:User:Beetstra na:User:Beetstra nah:User:Beetstra nds:User:Beetstra ne:User:Beetstra nl:User:Beetstra no:User:Beetstra oc:User:Beetstra om:User:Beetstra pa:User:Beetstra pl:User:Beetstra ps:User:Beetstra qu:User:Beetstra ro:User:Beetstra sa:User:Beetstra si:User:Beetstra sk:User:Beetstra sl:User:Beetstra sq:User:Beetstra sr:User:Beetstra sv:User:Beetstra sw:User:Beetstra ta:User:Beetstra te:User:Beetstra tg:User:Beetstra th:User:Beetstra tk:User:Beetstra tl:User:Beetstra tr:User:Beetstra tt:User:Beetstra ug:User:Beetstra uk:User:Beetstra ur:User:Beetstra uz:User:Beetstra vi:User:Beetstra vo:User:Beetstra xh:User:Beetstra yo:User:Beetstra za:User:Beetstra zh:User:Beetstra zu:User:Beetstra zea:User:Beetstra v:User:Beetstra
 * m:Global rollback
 * meta external links policy
 * matrix of local policies and pages

title: User:Beetstra


text:
User talk:Beetstra

 Hi, and welcome to my talk page.

I am Dirk Beetstra, my main projects are en:User:Beetstra and m:User:Beetstra

My main edits here will concern editors performing the same edits on more than one wikipedia. Some general texts about such edits:

meta external links policy

matrix of local policies and pages

If you want to contact me quickly, leave a message here on en or here on meta!

My edits here

My edits here will mainly be due to removal of unwanted external links and vandalism. Generally the edits have been performed on a (large) number of wikipedia, and the edits were very similar in nature.

Terms I use in my edit summaries:
 * 'cross-wiki spam' or 'xwiki spam' -> a user has been adding the link(s) I am removing/reverting to a large number of wikipedia. The link may already be blacklisted on meta (see m:Talk:Spam blacklist).

For more information, see my meta userpage: m:User:Beetstra.

User:COIBot on Meta
HI beetstra,

just in case you are wondering why i did not post this to your page on Meta, the simple answer is I cannot.

Here is my questionː in 2012 this bot added my username to the COI list, but I only became aware of it today. I wonder if you can tell me why I am still suspected of a COI? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 21:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi user:Ottawahitech, thanks for the question. There are currently basically two reasons why you can be in reports:
 * Either your username overlaps with a subject you edit / domainname you add. If someone creates a username that looks like their company name (e.g. 'mycompany') and then starts adding 'mycompany.com' then that is a clear indication of a possible conflict of interest.  However, that system will throw false positives, if I were to edit Beetstra I would score 100% overlap.  If you were to edit Ottawa or High tech you would likely score an overlap of ~30-40% on each.  However, those are not conflicts of interest.  So any of those cases need to be examined case-by-case.  (note, that if I would write a page on myself on en.wikipedia I would score likely ~70 overlap, and the bot would be correct in flagging me).
 * Some reports are generated because we are interested on how external links are being used. Seeing if (and how) other people are using the link we are looking at helps spam-fighters in determining what is the best cause of action: blacklist locally, blacklist globally, just remove the spammed material, block the only editor who is spamming.  Sometimes good editors show up in those lists as the link does have good use (and we would generally not blacklist).  On other cases good editors appear in the lists because they reverted a spammed link back in (spammer adds link that does not get removed, vandal blanks the section the link is in, other editor reverts the vandalism but does not notice there is a spammed link in there).
 * The template w:en:User:COIBot/Summary/LinkReports explains it better than on en.wikipedia. Anyway, it is all case-by-case to be examined, and even cases that are confirmed still do not result in actions against the users except for continued or rather blatant spam cases.  Moreover, we have to take into account that not all wikis treat/define COI similarly.  --Beetstra (discuss • contribs) 08:31, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Hi

 * Thank you for the friendly and elaborate response. I would like to explain why I posted this question to you on your wikiversity page, but unfortunately it may cause me further difficulties, so with regret I cannot provide diffs or even name the wiki they occured on.

 * Let me try to give you some points that may help:
 * On the 3rd of February 2012 I was indef-blocked on the main wmf-project. This event was a total surrpise to me as at that point I had been contributing content to that project for several years with no hint of any blocks. The blocking admin posted to my user page 25 edits starting from the time their block was initiated, and ending a couple of weeks later.

 * The block itself was lifted by another admin within a few hours, but exposed me to some pretty ugly behaviour from other users if I remember correctly. Also, it appears in hindsight that the block was lifted on a technicality, and not because the unblocking admin truly believed I was faultless. I know this now, but at the time I had no interest in the wiki-bureaucracy and was totally intimidated by the whole affair.

 * The reason I am telling you this is because I figure, but am not sure, that my 2012 indefinite block has a connection to the entry on your COI list, which also occured in 2012. Since that time I have been indef-blocked again 3 times, and my talk page access was revoked on one of those projects. I did not attempt to appeal those blocks since I believe my situation is futile.

 * Do you think there is a connection between the Meta-COI-2012 entry and my 2012-indefblock? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 14:50, 14 April 2020 (UTC) (note to self: Looks like I am starting to learn how to produce wallsoftext, sigh...)

 * User:Ottawahitech: I very, very much doubt that. For what is left of the reports of pre-2013 report-generations by COIBot (many may have been overwritten) I do not see any reason to suspect that someone came to you because of a report saved by COIBot, and I even doubt that they used it in their reasoning.  Unless someone has been so thick that they found the COIBot-reported connection 'Ottawahitech' <-> 'Ottawa' a block-worthy COI issue.  For me, the reason was that your username is representing an 'organisation' and hence your username would fall in the 'promotional usernames'-category.  Since you've been editing for quite some time, my approach there would probably have been to 'let it go' (thanks, now I have that song in my mind) or maybe (small maybe) to leave a note on your talkpage to suggest to request a username-change.  I understand, and don't disagree with, the underlying concern, but an immediate block was there strongly overdone, to say the least.  --Beetstra (discuss • contribs) 15:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Most other editors, especially admins or admin-wannabes, have ignored me since my 2017 Blocks, so your friendly attitude stands out even more!

 * Back to the topic of COI, I still believe that it is the cause of the negative reception I had experienced. Otherwise why would the 2012 blocking admin tell me to read WP:COI and WP:ADVERT? Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 11:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

 * User:Ottawahitech: being an admin, they also would have had access to the deleted version of your userpage, and anyone has to Google. Your username does suggest a company focusing on high tech based in Ottawa.  They could have done a search and found such a link in 2012.
 * I am afraid we can speculate whatever we want. Yes, maybe editors in 2012 saw something that they found the need to warn you about, and maybe that block was completely wrongly based on a COIBot report.  First, I don't think that they would remember what their reasoning was 8 years ago, secondly, if they remember they would probably not say whether the report was a major part of the process, and third, they are unlikely to say that they were wrong.
 * Anyway that block was overturned in 3 hours for being rather over the top, and your next block is 4 years later and does not seem to have any relation to the first one (though the 'you have been blocked before' is certainly a possible reason for a second block). --Beetstra (discuss • contribs) 14:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

 * My userpage was deleted both on enwiki and on meta. I was not informed of these deletions, did not realize my pages were deleted until much later, still have no clue why they were deleted, and since i have no access to private email I know admins are not permitted to publicly share this information with me. There. Cheers, Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 14:29, 16 April 2020 (UTC) oh, and I don't remember what i put in them, except i can assure evryone it was nothing sinister. Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 14:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * user:Ottawahitech: your page on meta was created by a vandal. Your page on en was made by you in 2007.  I can see it, I would call it a bit soapbox-y, spammy, but 2007 was different than now.  You can say you figured out much later, but you were immediately notified.  —Beetstra (discuss • contribs) 18:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it appears I WAS notified at the time. I immediately recognized the user who left the deletion message on my page. I remember finding my way over to post a message in response with difficulty, because at that time I did not fully understand what talk-pages and user-pages were and how to find my way to one. This is the complete message I posted in response on 11:42, 26 September 2007. :

I know your lengthy introduction is meant to be funny, but please also remember that not everyone who is forced to visit your talk page is a “criminal”.

I am a (very) new Wikipedia (wannabee) “editor”. I created a new Wikipedia entry for a candidate in the upcoming Ontario elections. I am not here to “spam”, and I do not have a “conflict of interest”. What I am though, is very confused about how one is actually supposed to enter material and who calls the shots here. You are the third official looking editor who has commented on the material I created. The first Wikipedia official (JodyB) deleted my original entry, but after some discussion and advice back and forth decided to re-instate the improved version. Someone else (I forget who) also want(s/ed) to delete this entry and now you. Here is what I saw before I entered my article (and decided to be bold): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction

How can I help? Don't be afraid to edit — anyone can edit almost any page, and we encourage you to be bold! Find something that can be improved, whether content, grammar or formatting, and make it better. You can't break Wikipedia. Anything can be fixed or improved later. So go ahead, edit an article and help make Wikipedia the best information source on the Internet!

Ottawahitech 11:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Reposting here in its entirety to help me reconstruct the events in my own mind. Thanks again for allowing me to explore this pre-history. Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 19:29, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

 * user:Ottawahitech: I feel we are diverging. The reasoning and what you did around the 2007 userpage deletion in itself has nothing to do with the block.  The point I was making above is that I could see that that content was deemed spammy and/or soapboxing, and that it could give rise to the appearance of a COI.  As I said earlier, it is a complete guess what the editor(s) who was/were looking at your Wikipedia account at that time were thinking (did they google 'ottawahitech' and seeing possible relations there, did they look at your deleted userpage, or was there a worrying COIBot report, it is nearly impossible to trace back).  Your best guess is to start a discussion with that blocking editor and hope they remember something.  And then, it has nothing to do with your second block 5 years later (as I read the block reason).  To me, the first block was even just an honest mistake by that admin, and it does not seem to have influenced the second block in any form.  --Beetstra (discuss • contribs) 11:05, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays
Hi, Happy hollidays. Ottawahitech (discuss • contribs) 17:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Beetstra


text:
User:Stress9

Warning template Collaboration and competition

title: User:Stress9


text:
User:Stress9/Warning template

 WARNING: Please move your work to the user namespace, and request a deletion of all of your wiki page under the main namespace by inserting the delete or delete my page template at the top of the page so wikiversity custodian could delete them. Remember to log in when you perform these operations so you are not mistaken to be vandals. Failure to do the above immediately will result in a lower HW grade. Eml4500.f08 09:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User:Stress9/Warning template


text:
Social psychology (psychology)/Guides/Week 11

Week 11

 * 1) Complete the Week 10 guide.
 * 2) The lecture this week is on Groups and leadership
 * 3) This fortnight's tutorial is on the Australian zeitgeist.


text:
Social psychology (psychology)/Guides/Week 12

Week 12

 * 1) Complete the Week 11 guide.
 * 2) The lecture this week is on prosocial behaviour
 * 3) This is the second week in which the Australian zeitgeist will be conducted.


text:
Social psychology (psychology)/Guides/Week 13

Week 13

 * 1) Complete the Week 12 guide.
 * 2) The lecture this week is on environmental psychology.
 * 3) This fortnight's tutorial will be conducted as an assessment workshop.