Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-27 en.wikiversity.org

Why is the creation of the en.wikiversity.org namespace being stalled by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors?

The lack of a dedicated namespace where custom materials, formats, procedures, and policies may be created and which advertising and interested new participants can be directed to is threatening to stall the entire effort. Despite the fact that an overwhelming 200/266 people who bothered to vote (I did not, I do like to vote in public opinion polls routinely disregarded by cabals.) supported the project.

Further, a German wikiversity http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Hauptseite has already been setup ... although since I do not read or speak German I have no idea how successful it is to date. It claims at the top to be hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation.


 * This is not correct. The heading reads: "Wikiversity is not yet an official project of the Wikimedia Foundation. This German version exists only for demonstration purposes." The pages of this demonstration are mostly empty. The comment "It claims at the top to be hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation." was apparently added by an anonymous editor who didn't leave a signature. --Fasten 14:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

The only publicised response from the Board to date to the formal proposal to establish en.wikiversity.org has included a requirement that en.wikiverisity.org not include "courses" and that its proponents convince the Board that they shall be "joyful" participants.

A further complication is that several participants have now advocated relocation to wikicities.com and moved some activities to that commercial endeaver. It is no great leap for some to conclude that with two members of the stacked Wikimedia Foundation Board profiting from advertising at wikicities.com; that they have no great incentive to respond timely or fairly to the en.wikiversity.org proposal.

Does Wikicities.com also compete with the German wikiversity?

Perhaps the Mediation Cabal could get us (potential en.wikiversity.org participants) some clarification from the allegedly non-existent Cabal or stacked Board regarding when some further clarification or arbitrary decisions will be forthcoming?

It is unreasonable to require detailed procedures and policies before initiating development of an experimental organization and project. It is also unreasonable to expect effective learning processes and communities to prosper in a Wiki environment such as Wikibooks where militant community members want their articulated policies designed for the benefit of Wikibooks (text books only, NPOV reqired) followed slavishly.

There has been plenty of discussion of how to proceed with Wikiversity. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikiversity http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Moving_Wikiversity_forward

What is needed is either a permanent namespace in which volunteers can begin experimenting with material they are confident will be retained and improved into useful free materials or a firm committment from the stacked Board that the Wikimedia Foundation is not interested in supporting free development of free online pedagogical materials and processes for the commons.

Either of the above will facilitate the effective establishment of an English version wikiversity like experiment somewhere online. In the event that it is decided not to establish en.wikiversity.org I believe an explanation to the contributing community members and Wikimedia Foundation donors of the differences between de.wikiversity.org (apparently a going concern supported by the Wikimedia Foundation) and en.wikiversity.org is appropriate.

Perhaps we merely need an English translation of the German proposal which initiated de.wikiversity.org or the policies and procedures with which they are currently operating in ways satisfactory to the stacked Board members concerned with their fiduciary responsiblity?

Is it the intent of the stacked Board to wait and evaluate the success of de.wikiversity.org so that they may extract and mandate wisdom to English speaking students, instructors or participants at en.wikiversity.org? If so, this is a dramatic departure from the Wikimedia "community"'s past alleged practices regarding various language Wikis.

Thanks in advance for your mediation services. Any progress the Mediation Cabal can make in furthering effective coordination between the stacked Board and the pending Wikiversity community will be greatly appreciated by at least me.

Lazyquasar 06:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC) aka mirwin the lying troll

Request Information

 * Request made by: Lazyquasar 06:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?

en.wikibooks.org


 * Who's involved?

Wikimedia contributors who would like to start en.wikiversity.org and the Wikimedia Foundation Board.


 * What's going on?

de.wikiversity.org has been operating for months or years but the Board has refused to establish en.wikiversity.org until we eliminate the concept of "courses" from en.wikiversity.org and tell them how we are going to provide "joyful" contributors.


 * ''What would you like to change about that?

I would like some specific feedback from the Board regarding the policy discussions that have taken place at the Wikiversity main pages and policies drafted at main page of en.wikibooks.org and at the wikiversity proposal pages at the foundation's meta wiki site.

I would like a definate go or nogo decision and the link en.wikiversity.org either activated with wikimedia software on foundation servers or the domain name en.wikiversity.org transferred to someone willing to experiment with it effectively. Gabe Sechwaun might be a good candidate acceptable to most of the Wikiversity advocates to date. It is also probable we could find an accredited university willing to experiment with domain and concept.


 * If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?

There is no discetion at the moment since I chose not to create a sock puppet for this request and the ability to edit pages anonymously has apparently been disabled. Simply use my talk page at en.wikibooks.org/wiki/user:lazyquasar


 * Would you be willing to mediate yourself and accept an assignment as a mediator?

No. I spend plenty of time mediating as a professional project manager. As a volunteer participant I allow myself a tit for tat strategy and would thus be a poor mediator. The third or fourth time someone called me a troll or a "lying troll" to avoid discussion of the actual issues; I would be unlikely to assume good faith on their part in the discussion for quite a while; and therefore quite likely not unbiased or impartial.

Indeed. The very first time I attempted mediation informally here at Wikipedia, in accordance with the published wikietiquette and policies endorsed publicly by the nonexistent cabal, I was labeled and harrassed as a troll for weeks/months at meta by a project founder until I demonstrated on the Wikipedia-L mailing that I could deliver as much unpleasantness as I received, after which I was ignored if possible. This brought me email to email with some of the "nonexistent" cabal who apparently were given access to allegedly private emails after discussion was diverted away from the public mailing list.

I would be willing to play neutral troll and tell each party to a debate why I think each of them are incorrect idiots or absolute geniuses depending upon how their arguments compare to my own preconceptions or independent research. Actually, that is not true. I currently limit my participation at Wikipedia to occasional anonymous tweaks, questions, applicable links, or citations.

As an occasional volunteer in a "community" with no ratification method beyond endless debate, edit war, untracked placebo votes, or mandate from the stacked Board, I accept no assignments.



Mediator response
This case is outside the jurisdiction of the Mediation Cabal. That is, if it had any jurisdiction to begin with, which it doesn't. However, if we did have any official scope, this would be well out of it. the Mediation cabal is designed to mediate disputes between authors concerning wikipedia articles. Case closed. Firestorm 01:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments by others
The Mediation Cabal offers informal mediation for the informal process of editing wiki pages. I think this mediation request is inappropriate. Even if there is a page with an ongoing dispute on the topic this issue, in my opinion, requires a formal process. --Fasten 15:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)