Re: [WikiEducator] Assigning a category to be the top level of the WE category system
Hi Alison, When used in a well planned manner, category can facilitate systematic (and micro level) branching out of a curriculum – which should be one of the priorities of WE. Go ahead! -- Warm regards Anil http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Anil_Prasad http://www.apletters.blogspot.com On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Alison Snieckus alison.sniec...@gmail.comwrote: A few years ago, a few wikieducators started the Categories Workgrouphttp://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:Categories. The purpose of the group is ... to achieve a category structure which facilitates browsing related content, as well as finding specific content, inasmuch as categories are capable. The group has languished over the past 2+ years, but the early thinking is still available. In my opinion, the current state of categories on WikiEducator is chaotic and, although it's not a top priority, it would be nice if we could bring some structure to our offerings. As a first step in this effort, I propose that we create Category: Contents http://wikieducator.org/Category:Contents as the top (root) level of the WE category system. My reasoning for this suggestion is that the term Contents is easily understood by educators, generally, and also, Wikipedia uses Contents as its top category, offering good precedent for the choice (although most of the other Wikimedia projects use Category:Categories as their top level). If you are interested, you can access a short discussion from 2009http://wikieducator.org/Thread:Brainstorming!_(3)on alternatives. Please reply post with any thoughts on this suggestion. Thanks, Alison User:ASnieckus http://wikieducator.org/User:ASnieckus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [WikiEducator] Assigning a category to be the top level of the WE category system
Hi I fully agree and would like all to see the link below where a lot was discussed. http://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:Categories Looking forward to making this more meaningful Gita Mathur On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Anil Prasad aplett...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alison, When used in a well planned manner, category can facilitate systematic (and micro level) branching out of a curriculum – which should be one of the priorities of WE. Go ahead! -- Warm regards Anil http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Anil_Prasad http://www.apletters.blogspot.com On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Alison Snieckus alison.sniec...@gmail.com wrote: A few years ago, a few wikieducators started the Categories Workgroup. The purpose of the group is ... to achieve a category structure which facilitates browsing related content, as well as finding specific content, inasmuch as categories are capable. The group has languished over the past 2+ years, but the early thinking is still available. In my opinion, the current state of categories on WikiEducator is chaotic and, although it's not a top priority, it would be nice if we could bring some structure to our offerings. As a first step in this effort, I propose that we create Category: Contents as the top (root) level of the WE category system. My reasoning for this suggestion is that the term Contents is easily understood by educators, generally, and also, Wikipedia uses Contents as its top category, offering good precedent for the choice (although most of the other Wikimedia projects use Category:Categories as their top level). If you are interested, you can access a short discussion from 2009 on alternatives. Please reply post with any thoughts on this suggestion. Thanks, Alison User:ASnieckus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- Dr. Gita Mathur Associate Professor of Botany Gargi College, University of Delhi New Delhi 110049 Web. http://wikieducator.org/User:Gita_Mathur Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [WikiEducator] Assigning a category to be the top level of the WE category system
Hi, I was feeling the same as if lost and totally agree with this very useful idea . Balqis On 1/31/12, Gita Mathur gita.mat...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I fully agree and would like all to see the link below where a lot was discussed. http://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:Categories Looking forward to making this more meaningful Gita Mathur On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Anil Prasad aplett...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alison, When used in a well planned manner, category can facilitate systematic (and micro level) branching out of a curriculum – which should be one of the priorities of WE. Go ahead! -- Warm regards Anil http://www.wikieducator.org/User:Anil_Prasad http://www.apletters.blogspot.com On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Alison Snieckus alison.sniec...@gmail.com wrote: A few years ago, a few wikieducators started the Categories Workgroup. The purpose of the group is ... to achieve a category structure which facilitates browsing related content, as well as finding specific content, inasmuch as categories are capable. The group has languished over the past 2+ years, but the early thinking is still available. In my opinion, the current state of categories on WikiEducator is chaotic and, although it's not a top priority, it would be nice if we could bring some structure to our offerings. As a first step in this effort, I propose that we create Category: Contents as the top (root) level of the WE category system. My reasoning for this suggestion is that the term Contents is easily understood by educators, generally, and also, Wikipedia uses Contents as its top category, offering good precedent for the choice (although most of the other Wikimedia projects use Category:Categories as their top level). If you are interested, you can access a short discussion from 2009 on alternatives. Please reply post with any thoughts on this suggestion. Thanks, Alison User:ASnieckus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- Dr. Gita Mathur Associate Professor of Botany Gargi College, University of Delhi New Delhi 110049 Web. http://wikieducator.org/User:Gita_Mathur Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [WikiEducator] Assigning a category to be the top level of the WE category system
Thanks for posting your thoughts on the proposal. I will go ahead with creating Category:Contents as the top level. I have some thoughts on categories which would work well directly under the top category. I will create a draft second level and then repost to encourage feedback. Randy--yes, Jim added the hot cat gadget some time ago, which makes adding/revising categories really easy. To activate the hotcats gadget (which displays as (-) (±) | (+) next to existing categories at the bottom of a page) go to my preferences Gadgets and check the box for Hot Cat. Gita--Thanks for adding the link to Workgroup:Categorieshttp://wikieducator.org/Workgroup:Categories . All--If you are interested to work on categories, please feel free to join our categories workgroup. See you in the wiki, Alison User:ASnieckus http://wikieducator.org/User:ASnieckus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups WikiEducator group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [WikiEducator] Digest for wikieducator@googlegroups.com - 6 Messages in 1 Topic
Hello all, I just followed the link to the old discussion and the categories and content that were done around 2009. Under Category:Alternative / Renewable Energy, I found the following: In Solomon Islands you can find coconut everywhere ... which led to a discussion of coconut biodiesel production and values. That was it for content. My sense is that having this content in this location could have been a category killer, because like a monkey wrench in the gears, it jams up the works, in terms of proceeding to add other content, or even seeing what content is needed. The first step after creating a category like Alternative / Renewable energy is usually to make a list of basic types that are commonly known, such as biofuels (with subcategories of biodiesel, straight cooking oil, alcohol, and maybe more), wind (with subcategories of water-pumping and electricity generating; the latter has subcategories of vertical axis, which has sub-sub-categories of: Darrius (I think I mis-spelled it -- with catenary blades), Savonius (with something like barrel-half blades), with straight blades, etc., horizontal axis, which has sub-sub-categories of: 2-blade 3-blade 5-blade more than 5 blades, eg. Tom Chalk's bicycle wheel turbine from Popular Science, perhaps August of 1974 Then there is solar, with categories of thermal, photovoltaic flat panel, and concentrating photovoltaic with and without capture of the thermal energy rejected by the pv cell. Thermal also has subcategories of thermosyphon and pumped, with a variety of versions based on freeze protection schemes. That is just a few of the basic categories that have industries attached to them. Going back to biofuels and the sentence I reproduced, we see a classic indication of the variation in geography: In Solomon Islands you can find coconut everywhere ... Yes, and in Alaska, especially above the Inside Passage (i.e. Juneau south), you would be hard pressed to find a single coconut tree outside of a greenhouse! The most effective way to 1) encourage people to contribute the content that is relevant to their environment, and 2) make it possible to find information easily once created and posted, is to cross-index say, bio-fuels, according to availability from local natural resources, by eco-region, and possibly by the ecosystems within eco-regions. Thus for each eco-region or ecosystem, we would have a variant of the category tree and discussions of biofuels, focused on what natural resources are available which can readily be converted into fuels, without destroying the original sources. Much of the content could be the same, say for coconut oils from different regions. Similarly, for much of inland Africa (except mountaintops and passes, and other places where wind is strongly concentrated by terrain) we would need to focus on inexpensive wind energy conversion systems that perform well in low wind speeds, while along the southern flank of the Himalayas in Pakistan, and in the North Sea, we will usually be at the other extreme. Within many of the approximately 830 eco-regions, there are also multiple cultures, which have evolved in response to various combinations of resource availability, trade opportunities or competition for resources, and sometimes, history in other environments followed by migration. About 500 years ago there were about 9,000 languages; now about 7,000 are left. Each is a distinctive manifestation of a worldview and natural environment. Each has traditional bio-fuels, and some have traditional windmills. Each has designs for constructing buildings using only the locally available natural materials, and controlling or channeling sun and wind, rain or snow, as is relevant for their location. With all this richness and diversity of content, it seems to me that there ought to be a cross-categorization of natural environment, culture, problem and technology. It ought to be possible to start with technology if you wish (e.g. if you are a windmill manufacturer). However, most people trying to meet their needs would be better off: 1. starting with their traditional means of harnessing energy, then 2. if that is not sufficient, looking at the energy sources and technologies known to be viable in their eco-region or ecosystem, and from there, 3. considering the worldview of their culture to see what would be likely to win adoption and collaboration in creating. This could include adaptations to make it feel like a natural extension of the culture. An edited version of this discussion, translated into lots of languages, could serve as a unifying introduction. The core concept is theme (how to meet a human need, restore an ecosystem, or make something for one or more of the above work better) and variations. This informs users that there exists a discipline of renewable energy conversion, and encourages them to scan the globe (when I was young, literally, now, figuratively, in GoogleEarth or equivalent, using search terms) for other
