User talk:Areil314

Re:Controversies in Science?

Welcome to Wikipedia, Areil314! I would be happy to help in any way I can. Around what time in January would the course begin? Wilhelmina Will (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. How comfortable are you with scientific journals. That will be what my students will be reading and reporting from (in their own words) to support both sides of the controversies. You are correct that we will be starting in January. The first class (where we will be covering water fluoridation) will be on January 10, 2012.

What I really need is guidance about what should go in Wikiversity vs Wikipedia. As you'll see in our Controversies in Science page, all the second level pages are (or will be) stylized with a table and lead to third level pages that are stylized with a description, methods and results. Wikipedia articles might have some of the same content, but are not setup in this style. I want to keep my style, but respect Wiikipedia's rule of putting stuff where it belongs. Can you offer some guidance on how to do that?

Also, is this the best for me to communicate with you? Or should I post it on your talk page, or on our Controversies in Science talk page? And what about my students? Should they talk to you? If so, where should they post questions? Areil314 (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I've never written in a scientific journal myself, but I've read a number of articles on species/genera of animals and plants, while researching for articles I've written in Wikipedia; if other sorts of sci-journal entries follow a similar pattern of arrangement, then I suppose I have a basic understanding of them.

I've never worked in Wikiversity, but I'll take time between now and the tenth of January to read up on its content style and policies. If it requires a separate account from Wikipedia, then I may have to register there as well.

As for communication over the matter, if a question is intended for me specifically, I would prefer if it were posted on my talkpage in either Wikipedia or Wikiversity, when I've registered there. If it is intended for the entire group, or a number of members of the group, then it is probably best posted on the talkpage for Controversies in Science.

I hope this helps! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MRU Campus Shot 100px.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MRU Campus Shot 100px.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

So is it there now only temporarily? [1]. Gabby Resch suggested I post it to WIkimedia first and then link to it from there. If so, what parameters should I use to indicate that I not only received permission, but that the department that represents the copyright holders asked that I use this image to officially represent them on WP?Areil314 (talk) 12:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

You should take your own photo. You could take it from a similar position to get the same look. Then you will own the copyright in order to release a cc-by-sa-3.0 license. Here we require iamges that are free for all uses. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Controversies in Science.

Greetings, Areil314, is everything alright with the project? It's been almost two weeks since the 10th, and I've heard no word from you or your students. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 03:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

It's been a bit hectic. We do our work in class in a computer lab, so I'm there to help them. I wouldn't mind your feedback about our site at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Controversies_in_Science

I've been thinking about how to make overtures to Wikipedia, and I think I'll have them examine the Wikipedia page for that controversy and see if their work can add to it. What do you think?Areil314 (talk) 17:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I have looked over several of the pages on the controversies being discussed, but I am not sure where you would like the feedback posted - for instance, would you want feedback for Water fluoridation controversy posted on the talk for that page, or on the main Controversies in Science talkpage?

I'm not sure what you mean by overtures to Wikipedia - do you mean transcluding the discussions in Wikiversity so they can be viewed in Wikipedia? Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry I'm a little vague. I'm still trying to figure out how to do this course in Wikiversity. Talk in the page is a good idea. I'll mention it to my class.

As for Wikipedia, I don't plan to copy anything from Wikiversity, rather I think I would like my students to see if what they have learned from the scientific paper they studied is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on that controversy. If it isn't, then add to the Wikipedia article. Does that sound reasonable?Areil314 (talk) 05:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding in the information sounds very sensible, in fact. One of the most important areas of contributing to Wikipedia! ^_^ But I'd advise you to make sure they know that whatever information they add in has to have an inline citation to the source it came from, to avoid suspicion of original research. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 05:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, they will provide citations. Were pretty good now in Wikiversity, and I'm continuing to help them to that properly.Areil314 (talk) 19:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi I have signed on to help as an online ambassador. I have very little experience on Wikiversity. However on Wikiversity original research is permitted, unlike here. So if you want students to write an essay expressing an original synthesis or idea then it should take place on Wikiversity. Wikiversity is far more political so I have no idea what will happen. Here on Wikipediad it is an encyclopedia, far more widely read, but not appreciating new ideas that have not previously been written about. On Wikipedia topics that are controversial will also be controversial with edit wars about what is included. Many of the articles will be protected so that a discussion must take place first on the talk page before the text is included. This will take away some of the joy of seeing students edits immediately available for all to see, but will demonstrate collaborative work with others. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

On the topic of where to engage in "conversation with Wikipedia" the best place is indeed the talk page of the article. If there is a project that includes the page, then you could talk on that project's talk page. For Wikiversity, I don't know. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The first topic Water fluoridation controversy has not been protected since last June on Wikipedia. For big bang there is Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory but as yet no big bang controversy article exists. So the first debate will be should such a contoversy article exist? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for helping! There's no page, but there's a section of the big bang page [Features, issues and problems].17:31, 27 January 2012 (UTC)13:51, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello from Germany

Hi there, just saying hello. I'm Msb on Wikiversity. I'm learning from your way of using wikipedia and wikiversity in tandem. For now, I'll only put only a short e-learning course on, but next term, I would like to begin creating a course on business process modeling at the German Wikiversity. Cheers from Berlin! --birkenkrahe (talk) 09:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Check in

Student list themselves here: Wikipedia:Canada Education Program/Courses/Controversies in Science (Andrew Reil)/Students. As you can see User:Ixby has already signed in and you can see his contribs. The only limit to seeing the stats or contributions is that they must be logged into their account (the timing doesn't matter). If they make an edit without logging in, only their IP address will appear (if this happens that student should disclose to you their IP address so you can attribute the edit to that person). maclean (talk) 00:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)