Erkan Yilmaz

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Anerkannter Wikiversity Projektvorschlag?

Guten Tag, Erkan Yilmaz. Wo ist der Deutsche Text für Wikiversity:Approved_Wikiversity_project_proposal?--Hillgentleman|書 22:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Hillgentleman, merry christmas to you my friend. I did not know, that I should translate it, but after that imperative I will do it :-) ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 00:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I am starting it now here. Can you please implement it into here? I seem to have a prob doing this. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 00:56, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I thought there were an existing German copy already.--Hillgentleman|書 02:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, not that I know of. Actually is there something like a participating list, so that we can see, if another German participant was around an dmight have created it? I am still online for a while :-) ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 02:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

There may be a category:user de. Not all users use these categories.--Hillgentleman|書 02:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I will continue then. Thx for your help Hillgentleman. I will tell you, when I finish the article. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 02:22, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

good night, will continue tomorrow then. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 03:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your information. I don't know what is evaluation.--Hillgentleman|書 21:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Template:wikiversity

• I would rather keep it until the corresponding pages are translated. Even a lot of the English pages are not yet here.--Hillgentleman|書 15:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

agreed, then we let them, until we translate all. ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 16:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• • However, since the entries in the template point only to the multi-lingual junction, I think we can translate them like this: Bereich ----Hillgentleman|書 16:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, then let me translate the article "Scope" :-) ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 16:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Zh-yue:Category:生命棋/wikipedia:en:Conway's Game of Life

Erkan Yilmaz, I have written a template-programme for Conway's Game of Life. Here is the glider in action: [1].Hillgentleman|書19:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Changing name in WV-en

Its me, again. Im writing to confirm that this account, and the one in WV-en are the same. Could you change my name in wv-en ? Rjclaudio 00:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

One thing is missing, see at en.WV:

This means you have to go to this page to ask a steward to delete your SUL account, so you can resolve all your conflicts and then merge accounts again. ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, wiki blog) 01:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikiversity:İçerik sınıflandırmaları

Merhaba, buraya tr.wv'de kullanabileceğimiz bir içerik sınıflandırma sistemi yazdım. Bir bakıp eksiklerini veya daha iyi bir sistem uygulayabilirsek fikrini alabilir miyim? Oraya, pek emin olamadığım için öğrenim kaynakları çeşitlerini yazamadım. Yardımcı olursan bu çeşitleri belirleyebiliriz. Fikirlerini bana iletirsen sevinirim Srhat 14:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Ne zaman boşsan o zaman bak. Acil değilSrhat 05:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Custodianship

Erkan, Do you or does any Turkish folk that you know is interested in helping out in beta? Hillgentleman|書 15:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Hillgentleman, well I know of Serhat, he is custod on tr.WB and probably knows the tools - will ask him. About me: let me think a while more about this, ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, wiki blog) 16:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Merhaba. Benim de bu konuyu biraz düşünmem lazım. Yapabilir miyim bilmiyorum. İngilizcem o kadar da iyi değil; ama belki olabilir.Srhat 08:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I will think about it. I am very busy now.Srhat 11:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Vikiversite

Merhaba Erkan. Vikipedi'de köy çeşmesine bir başlık açtım. Biraz uzun oldu ama neyse Bir bakalım herkesin yorumuna ne diyorlar diye. Srhat 19:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

link bu

ve istersen bu resimi de kullan başka zaman - orada şimdi kullanılırsa tek daha cok işi karıştırır :-)

ama konuştuğumuz gibi ne kadar basit olursa system daha iyi herkese:

, ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, wiki blog) 20:59, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Bu en.wv nin sistemini anlatıyor değil mi ? ü~~

Biraz - ama hepsi değil, ve bağzi seyler değisti (bu resim 2006 senesinden).

Ingilizce Wikiversity de hepsi generel olarak learning resources olarak görülüyor.

Insanlar kendileri icin structure gösteren kelimeleri kullaniyorlar (yani esas hayattaki gibi sekillerine benzesin diye): yani uiversitede ders varsa o zaman wiki'ye de ders diye koyulsun istiyorlar. Böyle kelimelere/namespace'ler baslangicta onlara yardim olabilir. ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, wiki blog) 17:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

what should we do with these pages?

1. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Antropoloji‎; 05:29 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
2. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Nümizmatik‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
3. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Siyaset Bilimi‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
4. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Suç Bilimi‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
5. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Uluslararası İlişkiler‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
6. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Geometrik Ortalama‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
7. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Aritmetik Ortalama‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)
8. (diff) (hist) . . Fakülte:Tıp‎; 05:28 . . (+46) . . 78.165.141.221 (Talk | block)

Erkan, Do you think these pages would become useful? We may

1. Ask at bugzilla to allow import from the respective sites (though from our experience, importing pages directly from wikipedia is often unuseful)
2. Fix the attributions per GFDL
3. Delete

Hillgentleman|書 07:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The user replied at tr.WB and said they should be deleted: wikibooks:tr:Kullanıcı mesaj:Joseph. I find it always best to import pages due to the staying version history. ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, wiki blog) 16:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Custodian

Erkan, as you are an experienced custodian and you know several languages, would you like to help out on beta as custodian? <Hillgentleman| ~ | 書> 13:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, will set it up at: Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Erkan Yilmaz, ----Erkan Yilmaz 15:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. We used to discuss everything on Wikiversity:babel :-) . <Hillgentleman| ~ | 書> 15:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

about my bot

I change my work in my real life, and i make a lot of error with my bot on some other wikiversity project. So now, I prefer use it with a lot of prudence and so i prefer work a lot with it in the french project. Crochet.david 17:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. Good to hear the bot is still active on one WV :-) I miss the interwiki weaving. Au revoir mon ami, ----Erkan Yilmaz 17:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome

Go to Template:Welcome and see how the new format is. It checks your default language preference and automatically uses that one so you can welcome people without having to guess at their language. :) Ottava Rima 14:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

sure, will have a look. ----Erkan Yilmaz 14:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Moulton

Erkan, in the interest of fair play, please unblock Moulton as well. Moulton had merely posted direct evidence to refute a false and defamatory charaterization on the English Wikiversity. He is entitled to exhibit the truth to refute a lie. —Firelion 17:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

bans

Why does SB Johnny have the ability to impose bans in the #wikiversity chat channel? --JWSchmidt 11:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Request management and bureaucracy In Farsi

Hello I am one of wikimedia users persian I want to apply Please please help me To manage the Persian section Ali ringo 14:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Selam, not sure what you mean

you do not need to apply to edit here (see for the pages at Category:FA)

or do you mean that the fa.WV is created?

if 2nd: did you see these links already?

• Language committee (Status of the Persian Wikiversity)

• Criteria for final approval: develop an active test project

• when I look here: e.g. editors (per month) - it seems not so active yet :-( ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

salam، I mean exactly Requests Management For Wikiversity Where do I request

thanks Ali ringo 22:33, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I still do not know what you mean, unfortunately :-(

Did you read any of the links I gave you above (this one contains a list of people who edited Persian language pages here, you might want to contact them due to language problems perhaps)? See also: Help:Contents, ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 11:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

thank youAli ringo 10:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

The Udacity model

http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Review_board/En#The_Udacity_Model

cheers -<Hillgentleman| ~ | 書> 00:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikiversity: possible next steps

Hello Erkan Yilmaz,

Regarding the discussion on Romaine's talk page. I'm not happy about the way a lot of content is deleted, but I also understand that a cleanup was necessary. I made an export of the content before the deletion took place and I will investigate if I can import this content in my user space. According to me this should be a best practice. Regarding possible next steps. On the colloquium of the English wikiverisity I started a discussion about the way of working on the Dutch wikiversity. In my opinion we need an open culture on wikiversity, where you can work on projects freely. This is already best practice on the English wikiversity. I also contacted Wikimedia Nederland to help me to get a similar culture on the Dutch wikiversity. Maybe you can help me with this initiative? Do you know a good place on a wikimedia project where to make such a plan? Regards, Timboliu (talk) 05:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

"open culture on wikiversity, where you can work on projects freely": agree, see also our Wikiversity:Policies/En (and also also en:Wikiversity:Policies)

"import this content in my user space": depending on the case (some of those imported) pages may not be safe there either :-(

"Do you know a good place on a wikimedia project where to make such a plan?": there is always meta:, but I'd prefer the discussion here tbh. e.g. I could imagine some/more pages from the policy pages from EN.WV discussed here at beta. You can also document the happenings so far and make a "lessons learned" from where then things can be developped as "policy". ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I have written about the situation on Babel, reviewing the history. It's obvious what happened, and it is a matter of high concern, because such an action could be used to attack the most fundamental purposes of Wikiversity (imagine a collection of Wikipedians coordinating off-wiki). There is no emergency, however; I have requested on his user talk that Romaine stop deleting pages, but rather proceed with organizational work (i.e., he can definitely organize discussion of remaining pages to be deleted, so that consensus can be shown.) At this point, though, the Dutch community participation has been drastically warped by an inflow of Dutch Wikipedians motivated to impose Wikipedia-like standards. Timboliu's basic concept of Wikiversity was closer to the original intention, merely implemented very poorly and clumsily, and slow to recognize that he was creating a problem. On the other hand, until this month, nobody else with a sense of Wikiversity possibilities and the mission helped him. It's a Beta problem, a lack of "adult supervision," so to speak.

I do have advice for Timboliu, I'll place on his user talk page. --Abd (talk) 18:08, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, history is repeating. There is no effective measure against "inflows" (or socks), ...

I am still reading things, what comes to mind I add at: User:Erkan Yilmaz/some thoughts, ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 22:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Request re undeletion

I was going to suggest that Timboliu go through his XML export and remove problematic pages and then import back to his user space. However, about to write him that, I hit upon something much more useful. It requires this action:

Assuming that this can be done by bot, please undelete all the deletions by Romaine since he became a sysop. Please move all these pages to be subpages of User:Abd/Deletions, leaving no redirects.

I will then request Timboliu's participation, as well as that of others, in determining the ultimate disposition of these pages. I will not move back to mainspace any of the pages without independent consent, particularly the consent of the participating Dutch community. Some of the pages, though, might be moved to Timboliu's user space. An unknown number of these pages have other authors than Timboliu, all of which is of interest.

I will be responsible for these pages. This is much better than creating new pages here, where the history might be lost.

I will create a research project to study the ultimate disposition of the pages, as determined by community consent. This is a rare opportunity, an open study of the characteristics of such a massive set of page deletions when studied with more caution, without a rush.

(One detail: it may be alleged that some pages are copyright violations or other major policy violations. We do not consider such claims, on en.wikiversity, to be emergencies, unless the violation is gross and blatant, but such pages, if undeleted, could be tagged for speedy deletion, and I would request that you, as undeleting custodian, look at these promptly; if you confirm violation, the new deletions should be specially documented.)

At this point, I expect that the vast bulk of the pages will be redeleted, having been clearly categorized (by consensus). I expect that some will not. This is actually a fascinating opportunity.

This is not an attempt to make the deletions be wrong. As you know, I think there were process faults, and those could result in "overenthusiastic deletion," that's all. Possibly a few errors. --Abd (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

By doing this, we may be able to set up better guidance for the future, for project cleanup. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The pages which have been deleted have been done based on the guidelines the Dutch community has created. If you disagree with those guidelines, start discussing them instead of acting like someone who tries to take over the Dutch part of the wiki, while you do not speak Dutch at all. Why didn't you started any discussion/dialogue towards the Dutch community?

"I will then request Timboliu's participation, as well as that of others, in determining the ultimate disposition of these pages." -> Why didn't you started any dialogue then first? You are now bypassing both me and the Dutch community. You didn't request any participation from any of the Dutch users. You do not take us seriously.

Timboliu has requested the Dutch community to not delete pages but to put pages in his namespace, but there was no support for that.

A simple question: why do you place yourself above the Dutch community here? You did not contact the Dutch community, you haven't started any dialogue, you make false statements and accusations towards me, that is not a normal way of how to communicate or act. (At least not on Dutch projects.)

"As you know, I think there were process faults, and those could result in "overenthusiastic deletion," that's all. Possibly a few errors." -> You think, while you do not understand Dutch, you have a better understanding of all these Dutch pages than the community who speaks Dutch? Sorry, but nobody understands that.

I do not think it is up to you or me to decide pages should be deleted, that is up to the community who speaks that language. And I do think you are killing the Dutch community, because you bypass them, you think you can decide for them, you do not communicate with them, and you act purely on your own, you say things that aren't true and/or made up, you import your ideas/rules/guidelines to us without any discussion, you don't show any respect for the Dutch guidelines, you don't show any respect for Dutch procedures, you don't even know how Dutch projects normally work and function, ... I am willing to answer every question, I am willing to evaluate all actions I have done, but in a normal way. I certainly do not think it would be appropriate to restore all these pages outside the Dutch community, just because someone (who doesn't speak Dutch) thinks he know better, while he hasn't seen the actual pages. Romaine (talk) 19:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Romaine, it appears that you believe you and the Dutch community should be able to control what is in my user space. Is that correct? I have seen some of the actual pages, a few. I have stated, repeatedly, that I think most of the pages should properly have been deleted. I've seen a few where deletion, to me, would be clearly improper, but, quite precisely, I don't want to make decisions for the Dutch community, hence I'm carefully avoiding doing that.

Romaine, you don't understand what is going on, and that is probably because you have almost no Wikiversity experience, you don't understand how a Wikiversity wiki can normally avoid all the contentious debate that you are obviously accustomed to on nl.wiki. You have no clue what Wikiversity is actually about.

Yes, Dutch users will create a Dutch Wikiversity. Should they be informed as to what has been done before with high success? Or should Dutch Wikiversity be created entirely by Dutch Wikipedians who have no understanding of the Wikiversity mission? Timboliu was naive and unskilled, but his basic concept of Wikiversity was more advanced -- and more correct -- than yours. He did not understand how to apply it in a way that would avoid offense.

The answer to the questions will not be up to me, it will be up to Dutch users. However, where you have violated basic wiki traditions, here on Beta, that might be something that would need review. Are you asking for that? It's moot if you stop deleting pages, as the sole and ultimate judge, based on a "consensus" that you created by how you operated, and it's moot if you stop attacking Timboliu. How about making and keeping it moot? There are only a handful of pages left of the "Dutch Wikiversity." You have decimated it. So, how about leaving well enough alone?

Or are you demanding to control everything in the WMF that's in Dutch, including my user space on Beta? --Abd (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

"Romaine, it appears that you believe you and the Dutch community should be able to control what is in my user space. Is that correct?" -> Apparently even English is too difficult for you. If a page is deleted because it is considered as inappropriate for Wikiversity, there is no reason to add/move that page to the user namespace. A common rule which I think is practised on all wikis, is that all pages, including pages in the user namespace, should contribute to the goal of that wiki. If a page does not contribute towards that goal, it will be deleted. if a page is deleted as it is considered inappropriate for Wikiversity, it doesn't belong in the user space as well. Ow and yes, multiple pages have been deleted because they violate the copyrights as pieces of texts and text lines have been copied from external copyrighted sources. Not all copyright infringements have been identified.

"I have stated, repeatedly, that I think most of the pages should properly have been deleted." -> You have stated repeatedly that you want all the deleted pages to be restored, if you say a few lines later that most of the pages properly have been deleted, that would be called a contradiction in terms. Also that combined that you do not speak Dutch and do not understand it either, it is very very strange, that you think you are the one who should judge if a page is suitable or not. This also because you do not understand the guidelines we have created.

"Romaine, you don't understand what is going on," -> I have a clear view what is going on. An outsider thinks he can take it over with no respect at all for the community here.

"you don't understand how a Wikiversity wiki can normally avoid all the contentious debate that you are obviously accustomed to on nl.wiki. You have no clue what Wikiversity is actually about." -> You don't know me, and you still you think you can judge on who I am/think/etc. Sorry: rejected!

"Should they be informed as to what has been done before with high success?" -> Who has been informed before? ...?

"Or should Dutch Wikiversity be created entirely by Dutch Wikipedians who have no understanding of the Wikiversity mission?" -> I am very sure that the Dutch Wikipedias have a better understanding of what Wikiversity is, than your understanding of what Wikipedia is. You assume for now reason that Dutch Wikipedians have no understanding of Wikiversity, I have no reason to think that. The users active in the Dutch community at Beta Wikiversity show a large understanding of what the goals are of Wikiversity.

"However, where you have violated basic wiki traditions" -> If I would have violated important traditions of this wiki, I expect that other custodians would inform me about it if that is really an issue. I am open for discussion or critics, but I am not open for wrong assumptions and false accusations.

"So, how about leaving well enough alone?" -> That you ask such question show to me that you really do not understand me, neither you understand the Dutch community. I have a strong sense of responsibility and accountability. It is probably the best for all if you follow your own words, so that others can work constructively on this wiki, without being harassed by an outsider.

"Are you asking for that?" -> I don't ask you anything, besides one thing: stop wrong assumptions and false accusations. As long as you can't comply with that, your words are useless.

"The answer to the questions will not be up to me, it will be up to Dutch users." -> And that is true if you mean Dutch community, now we are waiting for you to respect that. Romaine (talk) 02:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• Romaine, you are demonstrating and confirming what I've been writing about. What is up to the Dutch community is the Dutch project here, which does not cover my user space. Your comment about user space is very Wikipedian, and not Wikiversitan. User space is used for user education, which includes all kinds of writing and study. I could even create a page of total nonsense, in user space. You may think of this as not educational, but en:w:Jabberwocky would be a counterexample, or is that only for dead people?

• The pages in my user space will have educational utility as a study of wiki process and some of them, we already know, may have some potential as Dutch wiki pages, but what I've proposed completely defers that decision to the Dutch community, so your claims that I'm an "outsider" trying to "control" the Dutch wiki is completely preposterous, yet you are arguing it strenuously and repeatedly. You are not being harassed. There is nothing demanded of you. I was asked to explain what had happened, so I did. I am requesting undeletion as superior to restoral from XML, consuming less disk space. I could do the project as an XML restoral, but it would be less complete. The kind of undeletion I am requesting is *commonly* done on the English Wikipedia; one matter that I want to research is whether or not some of the deleted pages could collectively become a resource, in some cases of these pages, that I can see, that is almost certainly the case.
• These pages stood for a long time, so it is highly unlikely that there are serious copyright violations there. Many pages, you have said, were speedied. Normally, on wikis, speedy-deleted pages are restored on request. Even prod'd pages are restored on request. Not without exceptions, but that's what is routine. It is pages that have been subject to a regular, open-to-the-full-community deletion discussion that aren't restored in place on request, but normally, again if there is no strong reason against it, they will be restored to user space for study and development or, also in this case, educational purpose.
• What the Dutch community considered was deletion as-is, in mainspace, and I see no sign that adequate attention was paid to any of the many other options, as we would handle pages like this on en.wikiversity. Enough. Erkan will decide on the request I made of him. --Abd (talk) 03:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• "Your comment about user space is very Wikipedian, and not Wikiversitan." -> No, it is not Wikipedian but a global idea.
• "The pages in my user space will have educational utility as a study of wiki process and some of them" -> Bogus, nonsense, you can't even understand Dutch, (as a colleague described) "you came here with prejudice after a desperate cry for help by Timboliu", you think you help, but instead you don't. You have a total lack of the Dutch community, you ignore them, you don't communicate with them, you put false harassments and fictional stories on pages. You are not helping, you are making the situation worse for Timboliu. Also you ignore the guidelines for page creation, and asks for restoring pages which have been deleted for multiple reasons. You miss-use guidelines from en-wikiversity (not to do research, but) to help Timboliu from bad to worse, out of the frying pan, into the fire, purely because of a desperate cry for help by Timboliu and without understanding what actually happened.
• "I've requested that all the deleted pages be restored, not to the "Dutch Wikiversity,"" -> You clearly don't get it. You want the pages to be restored, so you can judge (the Dutch community already had judged and seems done with it), but you can't actually judge as you don't understand Dutch and you do not understand the guidelines and critics which have been written all in Dutch. If you want to have a page deleted, you already are too late because you gave the signal not to trust the Dutch community. If you want a page to stay undeleted, nothing can be done with that page, as it will be deleted when it returns to the main namespace as the Dutch community has decided that it wants it deleted. You probably think you can help the situation, but the onliest thing you do is making it worse.
• "but so that a study may be made of them in my user space" -> I think such would be called in Dutch wikilawyering or something, which is in general not acceptable.
• "Romaine claims to not "like deletions at all," but there are many alternatives to deletion" -> The Dutch community has discussed the situation and the onliest way to solve the issue is deleting when a page contains a series of problems.
• "As to my history on the English Wikipedia, which has nothing to do with the issue here, I could write much, but won't." -> It has probably everything to do with the issue here, you haven't learned from your earlier mistakes. A Wikipedia is designed to write, but if you do not want to write, you are there for different purposes than the goal of Wikipedia. The same here, you give in no way the impression you are here to improve the situation, because then you would have started a dialogue instead of bypassing the community and going over their heads.
• "Suffice it to say that I know my way around a wiki, including that one." -> Apparently not, as then you wouldn't haven been blocked indefinitely.
• "I don't edit Wikipedia because I don't want to. Waste of time." -> Your reactions here are also a waste of time, so that isn't a reason for you.
• "Why should I when I can create educational resources on Wikiversity, and help others to do the same, without conflict, with routine collaboration, and everyone learns?" -> Apparently you probably have no conflicts at the English Wikiversity, but instead you do have one here on beta Wikiversity with a whole community including me! Nothing what you have done on this wiki this month can be considered "collaboration". Collaboration means that you work together with other involved users, you don't, you ignore them because you heard a sad story and instead started with false harassments and wrong assumptions. Wake up: you are not collaborating here! Romaine (talk) 14:46, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, so you want to ignore the community input to recreate scrap-pages, outdated news-pages, empty pages and pages in the professional interest of Timboliu? Do you have so little confidence in Dutch-language editors that you want to judge those pages, written in a language you don't understand, all by yourself and start a wheelwar? The Banner talk 00:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I just responded to this user on my Talk page, with [2]. No, The Banner, my goal is to see what happened, not to "judge Dutch users," and I see no reason why a wheel-war would be started by what I've requested. It is a common request on en.wiki, I used to do it all the time, that a page could be undeleted and userfied, and that was for deletions after a full AfD process, not a summary process as was used here. *Normally*, summary-process-deleted pages are undeleted on request, without fuss, and if someone then wants them deleted, they then go through a full deletion discussion, developing community consensus, and no-consensus pages are not deleted.

I have now read a fair amount of the deletion discussion; obviously I can't read the deleted pages, but I already see that the inappropriateness of Timboliu's pages was exaggerated. At least some of his work can be rescued. However, the undeletion I requested was not to mainspace, but to my user space. (Technically, the sysop would have to undelete to mainspace, but he would then promptly move them, leaving no redirect.) Looking at your history, and in spite of very high contributions on 'pedias, The Banner, I see high conflict, you are currently blocked on nl.wiki, a long block, and you recently came off of block on en.wiki. You have a long block log on both wikis. I am not one to automatically judge a user because they are blocked, I've been blocked myself, for sure, but the style of argument I'm seeing here, if engaged in on a 'pedia, I'd expect to eventually result in a ban. You have no constructive edits here, you have, apparently, about 2000 page deletion requests, as indicated by comparing Central Auth with your live contributions. You came here solely to destroy the work of an editor, and show zero compassion or sympathy for the user, whose education is part of our mission, and no understanding of what can be done to both clean up a project and engage and educate a user. Are you interested in learning to work collaboratively on creating learning resources, or are you just here to destroy? --Abd (talk) 02:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)strike per objection from The Banner, see [3] --Abd (talk) 22:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Adb, to make clear that you have no proper arguments and that you need to discredit me. But when you are finished with your senseless personal attack, perhaps you can read User:The Banner/Workpage1. With your brilliant understanding of the Dutch language, you will quickly see that this is an attempt to create a gardening course. So I am building Wikiversity... The Banner talk 20:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

The nutshell, or, more accurately, the whole nut tree.

Erkan, I requested an action on this page. I request that you either perform the action or decline to do so, so that I don't waste more time. I have plenty of other work to do, but if the deleted pages are restored to my user space here, I will assure that something useful is created with them. I'm not interested in piecemeal work on the Dutch wiki here, at all. I am interested in how Wikiversities are formed and developed, and in what user activities create problems, so they can be identified early and resolved, instead of waiting three years to handle them, when the problem has become huge and largely intractable.

I intend to study this affair and create an educational resource from it, it is obvious that fundamental issues have been touched, but the question is where and how I do it. One point I will respond to, this issue of "Wikipedian" vs."Wikiversitan."

Above, Romaine wrote, first quoting me:

"Your comment about user space is very Wikipedian, and not Wikiversitan." -> No, it is not Wikipedian but a global idea.

He's not exactly wrong, user space is indeed dedicated to the purposes of the wiki, but what he has missed is that Wikversity is unique among the WMF wikis in that "learning by doing" is an intrinsic part of the mission, and this part of the mission ultimately requires that users have high freedom in their user space, because "education" cannot be centrally defined without loss of scope. Not total license in user space, by the way, but, as I've mentioned in various discussions, I could create a page of nonsense in my user space, and it could be completely acceptable. In fact, I'm going to do that right now, before I save this: User:Abd/Nonsense. As it happens, this is a notable nonsense poem. However, Wikiversities, in general, don't have a notability policy. So if I created a page of my own nonsense, which is, in fact, an educational activity (it's not easy to do that with it having some personal value, not to mention value to others), is that allowed? Could I create an educational resource that invites users to create their own nonsense poems? My answer is, "Of course I could!" This is an activity that could easily be a school project in a brick-and-mortar school.

His comments and views would be largely appropriate on every wiki except Wikiversity. He is basing his opinion on his extensive experience. From CentralAuth, he has over 327,000 edits to nl.wiki, is a sysop on Commons, Outreach, Incubator, Test, Wikidata, nl.wikibooks, nl.wikimedia, nl.wiktionary, and a bureaucrat on nl.wikiquote, nl.wikisource, and nl.wikivoyage. That's an impressive hat collection, and behind it is, I'm sure, a totally ridiculous amount of work.

However, there is something missing from that experience: Wikiversity. I see from Central Auth: He has accounts with edits on 16 wikiversity sites. With fewer than a handful of exceptions, all edits were setting up his user pages. On en.wikiversity, he objected to Timboliu's request for advice, so there were a few edits there. So we can look at Beta, which now shows 193 edits. However, when he created the request for custodianship, June 23, he had 30 edits to Beta, 20 of which were to his user pages.

He had essentially no experience with a Wikiversity. He had not worked on Dutch beta. I'd assume that he's never seen actual deletion discussions on en.wikiversity, where strong traditions developed that mostly avoid contentious discussions, while still cleaning up the wiki. So when he talks about "global traditions," these simply don't cover Wikiversity, with its unique "learning by doing" mission, its allowance of original research -- which he explicitly does not understand -- and its high respect for intellectual freedom (which is common in academia).

I will, as part of a review of this affair that I intend to create, after the smoke clears, study who had experience with a Wikiversity, in the creation, organization, and maintenance of educational resources and learning-by-doing, before the events of the last few weeks. However, so far, I'm seeing no sign of that. What is clear is that, after the deletion of about 5000 pages, there remain not many more than 41 pages in Category:Wikiversiteit, and a fair number of those are also up for deletion, I haven't looked at the numbers yet. However, it's fairly obvious already that priority was assigned, by the "Dutch community" to deletion, not to resource creation, which is an accusation often levelled at Wikipedians.

There has been much disruption over this issue of academic freedom, which then relates to a relatively high freedom in user space. JWSchmidt, one of the major founders of Wikiversity, essentially immolated himself over the concept of high inclusiveness. My opinion was that he (obviously) went too far, and it was largely over affairs that ultimately led to the surrender of Founder tools by Jimbo Wales, but before he did, he was very popular and wasn't a bureaucrat only because he didn't think it necessary.

The narrow conception of "learning materials" is one that was rejected by the active en.wikiversity community, based on long experience. Periodically, Wikipedians would show up, propose some pages for deletion, and when they weren't deleted (but might be tagged, moved, including moves to user space), leave in disgust.

Deletion, however leads to conflict, almost intrinsically, if not done with caution. Moving possibly defective resources to user space is an ordinary user action, and it has frequently avoided any need for deletion. It allows the user to continue to work on the resource, and, if not, if it ends up abandoned, little or no harm is done. So we take care of each other; if I see a user create a resource in mainspace that is unlikely to survive a deletion effort if left there, I often will simply move it to the user's space and inform the user. Users do not get upset at this. They do get upset, very often, if their work is deleted.

(It is rare that odd pages in user space cause any actual harm, and those cases can be -- and are -- addressed. The usual issue is copyright, by the way, and it's sometimes a photo uploaded by the user, of themselves, with a restricted license. These usually end up deleted (the images, that is). It is not treated as an emergency, nor is it an emergency.

JWS constantly harped on "Wikipedians" as damaging Wikiversity, and there is a case that he was more or less correct. However, his concerns -- legitimate in themselves -- became crystallized into regular attack on "Wikipedians," when Wikipedians may also be Wikiversitans, and are also welcome. Wikiversitans just don't want Wikipedians imposing the ideas that are created by the needs of an encyclopedia project, on a much larger, in scope, educational project. Wikipedians commonly think of Wikipedia as the big sister, and it surely is in terms of user numbers. But in terms of eventual content possibilities, well, compare a university library, plus all the student papers, plus all the guest lectures and communications, with an encyclopedia. The latter is tiny, by comparison. (Much of the "library," to be sure, will not be on Wikiversity, but linked from it, original sources are on Wikisource, unless policies there prevent hosting, books ultimately belong on Wikibooks, if original research problems are not an obstacle, etc. Wikiversity fills the gaps.)

Romaine thinks of me as an "outsider," and the reason is obvious. I'm not Dutch. But he hasn't been a Wikiversitan. So I'm an outsider to Dutch resources (and one might notice that I've not attempted to edit them or to participate in Wikiversity:Forum, including voting there), and he is an outsider to the Wikiversity system. He's welcome, and I've suggested that the involvement of the Dutch community here could have very positive results, long-term. However, he doesn't seem to be welcoming me. Pretty much, he's telling me to go away, essentially claims that I'm lying (though he doesn't use that word), and generally claims that my opinions about Wikiversity are worthless. He has, now, less than a month experience here, dealing with a very unusual situation. I have years of experience with en.wikiversity, including as a very active sysop. My edit count is misleading, because my edits tend to be much longer than normal, but, still, it's over 12,000 on en.wv. and I have some substantial experience here, as well.

So what I see is the very common Wikipedian assumption that "I know, and you don't." And that users on those wikis where he has hats are subjected to that is unfortunate, but not my problem. Here, however, is my problem. This is Beta, dedicated to incubating Wikiversities, and it seems he would throw the baby out of its crib, because, after all, it messes all over the sheets. Got to have clean sheets before we can put the bed to good use.

Except that the baby is the good use. Timboliu is a student, not a "teacher," obviously. What I do not see, still, is why it was necessary to "clean up" Dutch Beta before actually creating resources here. But that is exactly what they thought, it's obvious. What was the "emergency" that Romaine wrote about? I haven't researched this more deeply, it would probably require reading more Dutch, which is tedious for me.

Having said all this, I still think, from what I've seen of Timboliu's work, that most of the pages were of so little use that even moving them to his user space would not be appropriate in itself. I'm suggesting a move to my space for an entirely different reason: study. That is, the pages are content that I would study and classify; and then compare with the deletion discussions or speedy deletion templates. I consider it likely that such a hasty process made some mistakes, it would be astonishing if it did not. How many mistakes? I can't tell, because the pages are deleted. This is one of the problems with deletion: it hides content from all but custodians. Many long-term Wikimedians are concerned about that. The goal here is very much not to pin some badge of shame on the foreheads of the Dutch users; just to find out what actually happened. It is quite likely that most of what they did was useful.

As an additional effect of a restoral to my user space, Timboliu would be invited to himself learn from the experience, and to support the categorization of the pages into what would be re-deleted, ultimately, what might be submitted for restoration, perhaps as improved, and what might, in a few cases, go into his user space. The goal is integration, not division. However, Wikipedians, way too often, don't think integration is possible, so accustomed have they become to the idea of "bad users," promoters, spammers, users with a conflict of interest, as well as "POV-pushers." Who presumed to be intrinsically disruptive, and who are to be handled with blocks and bans. So far, no ban proposals here, but, in my experience, having your work deleted on a wiki is more discouraging than a block. Being blocks, one wastes no more time. But the deletion of work can be a major loss. --Abd (talk) 19:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again for your view, Abd. I don't decline the action yet, but as I said here I don't see a pressing issue yet (1). But, I share your view about many learning projects acceptable here at WV (I've said this a few times, I wouldn't delete everything I saw, or just edit "away" the parts I see which can cause "conflict"). The "only thing" preventing me to restore all is, that the recently formed NL.WV community has made a decision.

WV is open to be "overrun" by let's say "majority" (this can be socks; people who know WP good and also want that environment here also (I have tried to formulate this differently, but I guess you know what I mean)). WV can go into different directions, e.g. in the direction which does not support the vision you and I share. That's also a result from experiment Wikiversity. (2)

I have said what I consider a minimum effort (for all parties). This morning I looked at some contributions by User:Timboliu on en.WV and gave him also feedback about it. I think a good way for fostering the NL.WV policies/guidelines more is to undelete a few pages where T. (and others) are willing to improve it (e.g. at (1)) to a state everyone can live with it (any learning resource can be improved).

(1) but for the studying you say we can fast import them elsewhere, until the matter here is clearer

(2) I was reminded today several times of WiseWoman who originally helped create also WV and later jumped off, disappointed. ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 20:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

There are several obstacles to proceeding without the undeletion I have requested.

• I don't have the XML. I'd have to get it from Timboliu. I can create a study elsewhere, or here -- I haven't decided which is best -- but without the full edit histories, it will be deficient and tedious, compared to what is possible with undeleted files. I could, as one example, then export the pages with full history.

• It is being claimed that there were many efforts to instruct Timboliu. They are not visible in contributions history, which appears to show almost nothing until the influx of Dutch Wikipedians. It is possible that some of these efforts were on deleted Talk pages.

• It is entirely unclear how much Timboliu saved as XML. I know that he was not the creator of all the pages, because there is an exception mentioned in his Talk page history. What other pages were also deleted? Did he save full file history?

• So, I could go ahead and study without the deleted pages, based on what is available of evidence. However, it will be more difficult and not as deep. If all the data is available ab initio, the study -- which I expect to be a lot of work, far more than was invested in deletion efforts -- will be much more efficient. So I'm reluctant to start unless I have a no, not only from you, but from other custodians as well.

The purpose of deletion on a wiki is not to prevent study. It is to clean up the project (aside from another purpose of dealing with illegal content, a separate issue.) It is being claimed that, somehow, undeletion is an offense to the Dutch community.

Now, these are generally highly experienced Wikipedians, and Wikipedians are accustomed to circling the wagons, against anyone perceived as an outsider, and they definitely and explicitly consider me an outsider. They don't want me looking at this history, they have strongly asked me to go away and "stop harassing them." And I've seen this from Wikipedians: observing what they do, and describing it neutrally, is considered harassment. So I don't expect that particular community to support undeletion, and they will frame it as being about "respecting consensus."

Except that the Dutch community doesn't have jurisdiction over my user space. We could, in fact, undelete and transwiki to en.wikiversity, likewise to my user space there. But that really shouldn't be necessary. These kinds of requests are normally respected, so there is something special and unusual going on here.

If the pages are undeleted, they could be exported as full-history XML and redeleted, thus leaving the status quo as the Dutch users wanted.

By the way, I'd give Timboliu the right to decline this process. It will be mostly his work that will be examined.

That undeletion/export/delete could provide a full solution, meeting all needs. The XML would be off-wiki and could be imported to another wiki, I have one I could use. The study would then be full, and results could be brought back here if it develops that there is some utility.

The down side: that would be more work for you, if you do it. The easiest for you would be a bot undeletion, at a planned time. I could be prepared with a list of pages and quickly run the export. Then you'd run the bot again for re-deleting. This, of course, should be announced, so that the Dutch community doesn't freak out that pages are being undeleted!

This could also be done in batches, but I'd think it would be less work for you to do it all at once. --Abd (talk) 21:33, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• @Abd: You have put too much false harassments and wrong assumptions that no reasonable person can take your wishes seriously.
• "I will assure that something useful is created with them" -> You don't speak Dutch, the pages are in Dutch, only in your fantasy you can make anything useful of them.
• "I am interested in how Wikiversities are formed and developed, and in what user activities create problems, so they can be identified early and resolved, instead of waiting three years to handle them, when the problem has become huge and largely intractable." -> No you are not interested, you have different intentions than building up a stable Wikiversity in Dutch. you made clear enough that you are here to disturb the community process.
• "I intend to study this affair and create an educational resource from it" -> You made clear that you can't speak, read or understand Dutch, the only useful study which you can perform here is how your behaviour is disruptive.
• "but what he has missed is that Wikversity is unique among the WMF wikis" -> Every type of project is unique, what you don't understand is that I do get that very well.
• "is an intrinsic part of the mission, and this part of the mission ultimately requires that users have high freedom in their user space" -> If you are here to disrupt a community process, those pages should be deleted and you should be blocked, just like you were disruptive on the English Wikipedia and blocked indefinitely.
• "as I've mentioned in various discussions, I could create a page of nonsense in my user space, and it could be completely acceptable" -> Whouw, you can create a user page, you just be very proud of yourself. It is the same nonsense as you posted on Babel and various other pages. Are you ever going to be a constructive user here, or do you keep on being destructive?
• "So if I created a page of my own nonsense, which is, in fact, an educational activity" -> Sorry, to disturb you with your fantasy, such is not an educational activity but a try to make your point, but you fail. You are only trying to disturb the project.
• "That's an impressive hat collection" -> This is called framing as it is not relevant here. You try to picture me as a bad user or something, while I followed community agreements while you ignore them and try to bypass the community.
• "However, it's fairly obvious already that priority was assigned, by the "Dutch community" to deletion, not to resource creation, which is an accusation often levelled at Wikipedians." -> Again you draw conclusions based on too little information. You are highly biased.
• "Deletion, however leads to conflict, almost intrinsically, if not done with caution." -> Such can only said if you have little experience with it. It is very likely that you have bad experiences with deletions, but there is no need to have a deletion to lead to conflict.
• "Romaine thinks of me as an "outsider," and the reason is obvious. I'm not Dutch. But he hasn't been a Wikiversitan." -> I would be more a Wikiversitian than you would ever become. You are indeed an outsider. You think you can come here with a large mouth saying that it is all wrong, sorry, go back to your own wiki, we try to create here a decent wiki with a couple of simple standards to make the materials useful for educational purposes.
• "and one might notice that I've not attempted to edit them or to participate in Wikiversity:Forum, including voting there)" -> Because you haven't seen only that page after someone was having a sad face on the English Wikipedia that the crap he had produced was deleted.
• "He's welcome" -> I certainly, and I guess nobody here, want your welcome, as it is full with false harassments and wrong assumptions by someone who is blocked on the English Wikipedia because of worse behaviour, exact that kind of behaviour you think you can have here.
• "However, he doesn't seem to be welcoming me." -> If you behave like you did, with false harassments and wrong assumptions, nobody is welcoming you here. It is good for you to realize, we do not take you seriously as long you keep on going with your bad behaviour.
• "Pretty much, he's telling me to go away" -> I can fully confirm that, if you act like a rude person, you do not belong here.
• "essentially claims that I'm lying", I call it false harassments and wrong assumptions, as that is what it is, an overview from only one message of yours in Babel:
  • "The response cherry-picks from Timboliu's over 32,000 contributions" -> I pressed random and all pages I got on my screen had issues. No "cherry-picks".
  • "They decided, off-wiki, to support the creation of a Dutch Beta custodian, who could then handle the situation." -> there was no "they", I thought I need to do something on my own. There is no "off-wiki", it all happened onwiki.
  • "That is, a group of Dutch users wants to use Beta for a project" -> A group of people wants to set up an education programme, one question which came up is "where?" I started personal thinking of Beta Wikiversity (where else?) and considered that if the education program gets more active, it needs a good place, and seeing all the negative comments on various places about the pages on beta Wikiversity, I thought something needs to be done.
  • "Votes immediately appear, and within a few minutes of each other, there are six supports, a red flag waving "canvassing."" -> That day some users wrote something on the IRC about the problems at Beta Wikiversity, went looking for issues and found out in the recent changes that I was going for custodian is something what actually happened. I did not announce it! That "Votes immediately appear" is not correct, see yourself and stop fantasizing!
  • "One of the clearest positions, which is contradictory to the Wikiversity mission, is a prohibition of original research." -> This proposal for a guideline was rejected!! Again you make up something! And yes, I do not understand why we should not allow original research, as this is a typical phrase from Wikipedia which isn't an issue for Wikiversity.
  • "This is a very Wikipedian view of education" -> You clearly do not understand what I meant, and then drawing such biased conclusion.
  • "where education only covers what could be in an encyclopedia" -> so far I know nobody has claimed such, you made that one up, again.
  • "So, as soon as Romaine was a sysop, he created Wikiversity:Te verwijderen pagina's as a new deletion process, for the Dutch community." -> Maybe it is fair to tell why: because nominations for deletion of pages with actual educational content should be community discussed, and not only just by me.
  • "He created a newCategory:NL verwijderverzoeken, which would keep the massive deletion process he was setting up out of the view of regular Wikiversity custodians, who might have freaked out at the appearance of over 5000 deletion templates." -> Incorrect. That category is only for pages with educational content which are nominated for deletion and (I think) the community must have a say in those. I can't decide for them.
    • Also the hundreds of pages that got deleted were mostly nominated as speedy!
  • "and possibly the only custodian aware that this was happening." -> this is framing, and you make something up again. At least two other custodians knew this.
  • "Given that this is all happening in Dutch, Romaine was setting up a process where he would be the only judge" -> The judge is the community, they have two weeks the time to judge the nominated page, and afterwards I do the action for them. What do you expect otherwise? That the Dutch community wants non-Dutch speaks to judge Dutch content? (Like you did with terrible conclusions as result?)
  • "What sysops do is to follow community consensus." - That is what I was doing, you try to frame me that I have/had the intention to to otherwise. Highly disturbing.
  • "but canvassed and biased and designed to set him up to do what he wanted." -> I proposed it first, and then set it up. The way it is set up is the way it is done on all Dutch wikis and that works fine, for more than 10 years! Saying that I would have set it up to do what I wanted is a personal attack, and purely fantasy.
  • "Normally, page creators will be notified of formal deletion process." -> The creator of the nominated pages was aware of the nominations (was reacting many times), that is what counts. A bureaucratic way of thinking is maybe only needed on projects that became too large to see what is happening. Also I must stress that this is your personal vision, not a hard fact.
  • "There was no attempt to negotiate a consensus" - totally untrue, as there is one thing we did most was discussing and negotiating with each other.
  • "He was given generic advice about deletion, and there was no hint of the real problem." -> Also not true, many pages have been specifically explained what the problems were.
  • "He was attacked, with the same kind of "you forgot to tell" argumentation as we see above." -> So if he tells half the story and I say that, that is an attack? Sorry, not really. That is called a critical view on the behaviour. being critical about someone's behaviour is a need for wikis, otherwise collaboration among users is impossible. You mistake a personal attack on the person himself with critics on the way of acting, those are two very separate things.
  • "The difference here was that this user was active for years without problems being seriously addressed." -> Timboliu has been addressed with the several issues multiple times, both live as on wiki. Again you make this up.
  • "So it appears that a collection of Dutch users decided off-wiki to attack the work of the only major Dutch contributor to Beta Wikiversity." -> This is really shameful of yours, there was no "collection" of users, they did not "decide", and it was not "off-wiki", and certainly not with the goal of working someone off the wiki. You are multiple times violating the Assume Good Faith policy, an official English Wikiversity policy, but also on other projects.
  • "Treated with respect, users don't complain, they almost always cooperate." -> In the real world also users complain for other reasons, too much assumptions again.
  • "Looking at his talk page archive for 2011, he first ran into some fairly normal problems over copyright, discussed by a custodian, Crochet.david. They seem to have been resolved." -> We had recently a discussions and multiple pages and files on Commons which were created/uploaded with copyright issues. Your conclusion is not correct.
• "and generally claims that my opinions about Wikiversity are worthless" -> that is again your assumption... Hard isn't it to stop fantasizing?
• "I have years of experience with en.wikiversity, including as a very active sysop." -> How did it go wrong then? Because as sysop you should know that this kind of statements I summarized above are on no wiki acceptable, or is the English Wikiversity the last and onliest place were personal attacks are more welcomed than substantive arguments?
• "My edit count is misleading" -> Indeed, looking up your edits, it seems you spend much time in useless talks on talk pages.
• "and I have some substantial experience here" -> If that is true, which I consider unlikely, than you are very good in hiding your experience, because you act on this wiki like a newby or a troll, and you apparently give the impression you **** the community, as you consider your opinion more important.
• "So what I see is the very common Wikipedian assumption that "I know, and you don't." " -> Yes, that kind of behaviour you are acting here all the time. If you dislike that so much, why do you not stop acting like a stubborn Wikipedian?
• "where he has hats" -> I don't have hats.
• "it seems he would throw the baby out of its crib, because, after all, it messes all over the sheets." -> No, I would kick out the troll out of the crib, because he is trying to steal the baby.
• "What I do not see, still, is why it was necessary to "clean up" Dutch Beta before actually creating resources here." -> It is clear you don't see that, but a normal user would have asked such question first. But no, you do not do that, you are here not to have a dialogue to understand the situation, you are here to disturb community decisions.
• "What was the "emergency" that Romaine wrote about?" -> I didn't wrote about an emergency...
• "I haven't researched this more deeply" -> You haven't researched at all, so if you would read one character, you already have done a more in-depth research than you have now.
• "it would probably require reading more Dutch, which is tedious for me." -> You forget to mention you can't read it, you can't understand it, and if you think it is to tedious, you should leave it up to other people. You are not the guardian here.
• "I still think, from what I've seen of Timboliu's work" -> You haven't seen anything from Timboliu's work.
• "that most of the pages were of so little use that even moving them to his user space would not be appropriate in itself" -> Correct.
• "I'm suggesting a move to my space for an entirely different reason: study." -> As you made clear you do not understand Dutch, there is nothing to study for you on these pages.
• "I can't tell, because the pages are deleted." -> As you haven't understand Dutch, haven't understand the guidelines the Dutch community has created, you still can tell.
• "The goal here is very much not to pin some badge of shame on the foreheads of the Dutch users; just to find out what actually happened." -> We are only ashamed about your behaviour. If you really wanted to find out what happened, you did communicate with the Dutch community, you did not bypass them, you did not ignore them, you would have asked questions. But no, instead you came here with prejudice after a sad story by Timboliu and started to make false harassments and wrong assumptions. Your goal is to disrupt the community process.

And let me add some more. If you truly want to study the deleted pages, you can freely research them on your own computer by downloading it here. You can also import them elsewhere. Restoring them on this wiki will only have a disturbing goal, disturbing what the community decided on. The pages which have been deleted, are deleted because the community could not live with them. If the community considered these pages as potential useful and improvable, they would have not requested their deletion. The Dutch community will be disappointed when deleted pages are restored. Romaine (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

"I don't have the XML." -> download here. These dumps are designed for importing.

"but without the full edit histories" -> Select the right dump and it includes full edit histories.

"I could, as one example, then export the pages with full history." -> No reason for that, you can download all pages at once, much easier.

"It is being claimed that there were many efforts to instruct Timboliu." -> You clearly haven't searched for any instructions and advices given to Timboliu, there are at least 5 different user talk pages filled with only Timboliu on it getting advice.

"I know that he was not the creator of all the pages" -> Timboliu was the creator of 99,99% of the pages.

"So, I could go ahead and study without the deleted pages, based on what is available of evidence." -> The things you call evidence is your fantasy, as you haven't seen any of the deleted pages and still you draw conclusions, based on.... nothing but your imagination.

"It is to clean up the project" -> It is looking on what pages are useful and what pages are not considered useful for educational purposes outside the wiki.

"they definitely and explicitly consider me an outsider" -> You made your own situation. You decided to attack the Dutch community, you try to bypass them, to go over their heads, you think you can decide for them. You made yourself an outsider who is only here to disrupt.

"They don't want me looking at this history, they have strongly asked me to go away and "stop harassing them."" -> You haven't looked at the history, you came up with a piece out of your fantasy dropped as "fact" on the wiki. That kind of things only trolls do. And yes, trolling is not an accepted why of acting in the Dutch community. Everyone who is able to respond normal is welcome, but you aren't able to, so you are not welcome.

"If the pages are undeleted, they could be exported as full-history XML and redeleted, thus leaving the status quo as the Dutch users wanted." -> No need for that, you can download it here.

"thus leaving the status quo as the Dutch users wanted." -> There is no status quo, the community agrees on having the pages deleted.

"I'd give Timboliu the right to decline this process" -> Which process? You aren't able to do it as you don't speak Dutch, the Dutch community already has spoken, and Erkan Tilmaz has no need for it as he can view the pages already.

"That undeletion/export/delete could provide a full solution, meeting all needs." -> Nobody needs it... See the line above.

"The XML would be off-wiki and could be imported to another wiki, I have one I could use. The study would then be full, and results could be brought back here if it develops that there is some utility." -> That is already possible from here.

"The easiest for you would be" ... downloading a dump.

Got the point? There is a dump available for this kind of reasons. Romaine (talk) 22:31, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Dutch wiki deletion process

I have not gone into looking at what deletion criteria were set up by the Dutch community. However, the process followed appears to have been two-fold: template:delete tags were sued for speedy deletions, and Template:Weg tags for a slower deletion process. It is not clear that Timboliu knew that he could remove a speedy deletion tag. As to the Weg template, it was implied that, not. This is the reality of the Weg usage, as I've seen. first, the template text:

At least one user thinks that this page is in this condition not suitable for Wikiversity. Therefore this page is nominated on Wikiversity:Te verwijderen pagina's. There a detailed reason and arguments are given why it is nominated.

After adding this template, this page will stay there for two weeks, so that any additional arguments or objections can be raised at Wikiversity:Te verwijderen pagina's. After two weeks, the nomination will be judged by a custodian based on the primary principles of Wikiversity, the guidelines and the given arguments.

Notice that the decision is made by the custodian, and there is no mention of consensus. The sole judge is the custodian. There is only one Dutch custodian, no other custodians would be watching the Category:NL verwijderverzoeken. So the custodian who set this process up is the sole judge of content. All he needs is a nomination, and to wait two weeks.

Looking at the first archive: [201407]. About 130 pages were nominated. With most there was no discussion, just a nomination. No closing statement, we know the page was deleted by the redlink. This is effectively speedy deletion process, just with a little delay. So, were any of the deletions contested? Yes. Timboliu. It looks like he gave up on July 30, he did not contest any of the July 31 proposals, which were becoming many.

July 26, he started out commenting on each deletion (google translations):

• Scrum The Banner proposed as "disguised advertising," Timboliu questioned. Worth looking at, possibly.
• Scrum alleen geschikt voor software? The Banner proposed as personal observation, not learning objective. Timboliu questioned. Woodcuttert asked, "Why is this on a separate page." Good question. That was not a deletion argument; it could have been an argument to merge the pages.
• De Scrumgids The Banner proposed. Timboliu appears to have requested removal of the nomination.
• Jeff Sutherland The Banner proposed. Timboliu questioned. Woodcuttert actually proposed merge with Scrim. Timboliu requested removal of the nomination.
• Home.mendix.com The Banner proposed. Timboliu questioned.
• Sprintr: filmpje The Banner proposed, "nonsense." Timboliu questioned, then consented to deletion. Woodcuttert confirmed with "deleted from the main namespace. I.e., as I read this, Woodcuttert may have consented to the page being in user space.

July 28, this continued.

• RuralWeb Kattenkruid proposed as "self promo." Timboliu objected that RuralWeb was a Wikiversity learning circle. Questioned by The Banner, Timboliu claimed 100 people on Facebook, hard to get people to edit the wiki. [Note that "self-promo" would not be a legitimate deletion reason on Wikipedia. It's one of the arguments to avoid.] The Banner
• Kritiek op scrum proposed by The Banner. No response.

July 29:

• Agile Proposed by The Banner as "no clear learning goal." Timboliu objected. Woodcuttert made some comments, did not clearly support deletion.
• mostly Timboliu stops responding. So most nominations are just a single comment nominating, with a very brief reason. The following are exceptions:
• Definition of done Proposed by The Banner as better merged with Scrum. Timboliu questions refers to possible nl.wiki policy, I did not check.
• Collaborative software Proposed by The Banner. Timboliu makes a generic objection to all these deletions. Kattenkruid appears to support deletion with "loose threads." Timboliu's comment is worth looking at.
• DevOps nomination by The Banner. Becomes an accusation of "promotion." Here I see the first non-Dutch comment, from the Beta Custodian, Crochet.david, who writes that he had previously "informed" Timboliu of a problem. I referred to that in the history. Crochet.david did raise an issue and then completely dropped it. Timboliu could have assumed all was well.
• Pools nomination by Kattenkruid. Timboliu (apparently) objects.
• This continues, most nominations now have no response, but sometimes Timboliu responds.
• Waarom is het belangrijk dat kinderen leren programmeren? ("Why is it important for children to learn programming?) Nominated by Kattenkruid, "no content, only external link." Timboliu objected. I could not understand where this discussion went.
• I'm ending here. This is what I see on that page:

• All pages were deleted. No pages were saved. Most were single-user nominations, no discussion, no confirmation, just a deletion. However, more interesting, quite a few pages were a single user nomination and an opposition, no other comment. Those would ordinarily be considered, at that point, no-consensus. (And I would myself not consider a single nomination with no additional comment a consensus for deletion, and such AfDs on Wikipedia are often renominated instead of closing with Delete.)

However, the process set up by Romaine created himself as the only judge, effectively. And it's clear what his agenda was. In one case, from that first archive, it looks like there could have been a consensus for a merge (to Scrum.

Basically, Timboliu was very undisciplined about page creation, and created names all over the place, as if Wikiversity should be a collection of questions and answers with little organization. We've seen the same problem on Wikiversity: sometimes we delete pages when there is no hope for improvement, or we move them into a page hierarchy that connects them into a structure. Wikipedians often don't think of that solution because the Wikipedias do not allow subpages in mainspace. There was one hint that a user considered that a page could be userfied. Again, ignored by Romaine. He was not looking for any compromises.

I would see that process as being highly discouraging. timboliu was continually made wrong in his arguments, even where they might have had some level of probity. Facing that many deletions all at once? Few users would survive that. In spite of that, he never became uncivil.

The process was not standard, by any stretch. This was invented, obviously, and with consideration of the off-wiki discussions that have been revealed, to almost totally wipe out the existing Dutch Wikiversity, which was mostly Timboliu's creation. The purpose was to prepare for the use of Wikiversity for "real educational resources," a noble purpose, in itself. If it had a lot of poor material, that would look bad. However, there was no balance in the pursuit of this agenda. Possible compromises were ignored (as with the merge suggested).

Discussions with one user on one side and one user on the other, were closed without comment with the actual deletion. And always. That is strong evidence of custodial bias, even without Romaine's declared intentions. From the discussions, it is apparent that the claim of utter and complete uselessness was biased and incorrect.

There remain on the nomination page Wikiversity:Te verwijderen pagina's, some undeleted pages. One page was skipped from the nomination on August 5, Plan 2014. It contains a heartbreaking section about the custodianship of Romaine. I removed the tag, since it wasn't deleted as the described process represented would happen, a possibly minor interference. Timboliu was truly excited to see Dutch interest in Wikiversity, and obviously did not realize the agenda that was already formed, see Romaine's email of June 23.

Mmm.... I'm moving that page into Timboliu's user space. It really should be a Wikiversity space page, not a mainspace page. But someone can figure out where it goes. I'm moving it out of the way. I've dropped a speedy deletion tag on the redirect.

That is my analysis. I do not plan to participate in Dutch process, I very much want the Dutch to handle their own process. If asked to comment, I will. Otherwise, it is their business. As with a meta RfC, outsiders do not control the individual wikis. The only reason I'm at all involved here is this is Beta, and facilitating wiki formation here is part of our purpose.

But, this is the difficulty for which I do not see a ready resolution: these users were not Wikiversitans. They had no experience with Wikiversities, that I've seen so far. They are the "Dutch Wikiversity" only because they are Dutch and decided to gather here to "improve" it. Shoving aside the prime user for years. I have so far just looked at global contributions of two users: Romaine and Edoderoo. Practically no contributions to any wikiversity, before this affair. Romaine has edits on almost every wikiversity project, but only to his user pages. Romaine has an astonishing number of contributions to nl.wiki, and an astonishing array of hats. And obviously no concept of what makes Wikiversity different, what makes it more than a place for some educational handouts to be prepared, perhaps. Stuff too short to put on Wikibooks. And if this takeover succeeds, Dutch Wikimedians have nowhere to do the kind of work that is only allowed, in English, on en.wikiversity. So I'm reflecting on this situation. In any case, the deletion practice established, as reflected in Template:Weg and how Romaine actually handled this, is far from standard wiki process. --Abd (talk) 00:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

"Notice that the decision is made by the custodian, and there is no mention of consensus." -> You still try to force your vision towards us. You still do not understand that since the beginning of the Dutch Wikimedia communities, the current procedure is used more than 10 years with success. Apparently the Dutch community is better in dealing with possible disagreements and do respect the nomination which is done.

"The sole judge is the custodian. There is only one Dutch custodian, no other custodians would be watching the Category:NL verwijderverzoeken." -> There is no reason to watch that category as every nomination in that category must be mentioned on Wikiversity:Te verwijderen pagina's. That page is watched by the community who discusses the nominated pages.

"With most there was no discussion, just a nomination." -> The discussion about the guidelines was earlier at Forum and already took pages as example of how Wikiversity should not be. You try to create a picture of how you think the Dutch community works, while you do not understand it at all.

"However, the process set up by Romaine created himself as the only judge, effectively." -> 1. the process was proposed first before it was created, so not created simple by me. 2. I think Vogone is also able to read Dutch, as he has given reactions in Dutch and has done deletions of Dutch pages. 3. It is the community which decides what guidelines we have and what pages should be deleted.

"And it's clear what his agenda was." -> I wrote clearly on my request for custodianship what my intentions are. You assume too much and infringe my words.

"In one case, from that first archive, it looks like there could have been a consensus for a merge" -> You think you can understand Dutch, but you can't. Your assumption in this matter is incorrect.

"Wikipedians often don't think of that solution because the Wikipedias do not allow subpages in mainspace." -> One of the guidelines is about subpages and is a minimal requirtement! That your "solution" isn't used, is because the pages are considered to be used for any use. Not the subpage issue was the reason for deletion, the terrible unusable content of the pages was the reason for deletion. Again you draw conclusions based on nothing but your fantasy.

"Again, ignored by Romaine. He was not looking for any compromises." -> You infringe the situation, because you still do not understand how the Dutch deletion process works, you do not read nor understood the guidelines, you didn;t read any of the discussions nor understood those. So again you draw a conclusion on what you think what happened, while you completely fail in being correct. Plus, what you consider a compromise, isn't seen as solution as it does not solve anything and the pages still are against our basic policies.

"I would see that process as being highly discouraging." ->Your way of acting is discouraging, even for Timboliu!

"timboliu was continually made wrong in his arguments, even where they might have had some level of probity." -> You project your vision, the vision likely common on the English Wikiversity, on what we should think according you. The Dutch community disagrees with your vision that keeping crap is a workable way to avoid deletions. Sorry, no.

"This was invented" -> No, copied from other Dutch projects.

"and with consideration of the off-wiki discussions that have been revealed, to almost totally wipe out the existing Dutch Wikiversity" -> That contains again a large number of wrong assumptions. All the discussions with effect on this wiki took place on this wiki.

"The purpose was to prepare for the use of Wikiversity for "real educational resources,"" -> No it was not for "real educational resources". You infringe my words, again.

"Possible compromises were ignored" -> The English level of quality is considered to low. The English way of working ("compromises" by keeping crap because of being afraid of getting quality) is considered no solution for the creation of usable educational resources.

"That is strong evidence of custodial bias" -> As you still have no actual experience how the guidelines are written, how the discussions have been and how the deletion process actually works, you are unable to judge as you do not know. The only bias here is yours.

"that the claim of utter and complete uselessness was biased and incorrect." -> Indeed if you compare it with the English Wikiversity habits which are mostly considered as a very worse example of how it absolutely shouldn't be done. The English Wikiversity adores crap, of course you then think that the crap which has been deleted would have been kept on the English Wikiversity. But this is not the English Wikiversity, here we have an active Dutch community who decides on guidelines, and not the English community who has their own wiki for that.

"the agenda that was already formed, see Romaine's email of June 23" -> There was no agenda. That is your assumption again.

"That is my analysis." -> Which is completely biased and even worse than the worst crap on the English Wikiversity.

"I do not plan to participate in Dutch process, I very much want the Dutch to handle their own process." -> The onliest thing you try is to bypass the decisions of the Dutch community.

"They had no experience with Wikiversities" -> Again an assumption. You think, assume, that the onliest way of getting experience is by editing. You miss completely that reading is also a way of getting some experience. And also, Wikiversity in Dutch language already exists for years on the Dutch Wikibooks.

"Shoving aside the prime user for years." -> Again your assumption, a very false assumption. Timboliu is very welcome and there are nor were any intentions to shove him aside.

"And if this takeover succeeds, Dutch Wikimedians have nowhere to do the kind of work that is only allowed, in English, on en.wikiversity." -> That the English allow crap on their Wikiversity is for nobody a serious way of working.

"In any case, the deletion practice established, (...) is far from standard wiki process." -> No, it is far from what you are used to, and you still do not understand how it actually works. You still do not understand that this way of working works already for more than 10 years on Dutch wikis.

"So I'm reflecting on this situation." -> And no, you are not reflecting on this situation. You are putting your fantasy and very limited experience outside the English Wikiversity as a absolute fact, while you still haven't read nor understood the discussions, you still haven't red nor understood the guidelines, and you completely fail in what you think you are doing here. My condolences with the English Wikiversity that they have to deal with you. Romaine (talk) 07:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Upload files, Upload Wizard?

Hello! Sorry for writing in English. As you're an administrator here, please check the message I left on MediaWiki talk:Licenses and the village pump. Thanks, Nemo 19:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

About MediaWiki:Sitenotice

Hi, because the "Proposals for closing projects/Move Beta Wikiversity to Incubator" already marked as: " The previous proposals on this same topic was a rejection to transfer betawikiversity into incubator.",so I removed message.
Discussion does not help more, but I've run beta Chinese(recruit more contributors), from the beginning of November 2014. Currently there are some people already have joined.But those messages will let participants hesitated. Those message still provide notice in Main_Page bulletin .Do not worry no one sees. Thank you for your enthusiasm. ^_^ Best Regards--User:Wasami007 (talk) 16:34, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Block IP

Please block 186.95.90.90 and delete all the article created by himself.--John123521 (talk) 13:04, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

done, ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 00:56, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Your advanced permissions on beta.wikiversity.org

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, etc.) was adopted by community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing activity on wikis with no inactivity policy.

You meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no log actions for 2 years) on this wiki. Since this wiki, to the best of our knowledge, does not have its own rights review process, the global one applies.

If you want to keep your advanced permissions, you should inform the community of the wiki about the fact that the stewards have sent you this information about your inactivity. A community notice about this process has been also posted on the local Village Pump of this wiki. If the community has a discussion about it and then wants you to keep your rights, please contact the stewards at the m:Stewards' noticeboard, and link to the discussion of the local community, where they express their wish to continue to maintain the rights.

If you wish to resign your rights, please request removal of your rights on Meta.

If there is no response at all after one month, stewards will proceed to remove your administrator and/or bureaucrat rights. In ambiguous cases, stewards will evaluate the responses and will refer a decision back to the local community for their comment and review. If you have any questions, please contact the stewards.

Yours faithfully. — regards, Revi 13:27, 6 January 2019 (UTC)