Dear Sir/Madam,
Could you add The Cornish Language to your encyclopaedia. The Cornish language's name for Cornish is KERNEWEK so the xx could be ke, kr or kn.
Yours faithfully,
K. J. Sanderson
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now
I have been banned due to my efforts at [[Saddam Hussein]], where I have been attempting to (at the very least) leave a notice that it is highly inappropriate and offensive to refer to him as "Saddam". I have been banned without warning or justification.
In addition, my vote at [[Requests for adminship]] was deleted -- this is clear evidence of the cabal at work.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
I think there's one simple way to end this arguement,
Paramount owns the copyright to the Klingon language, the words, the
grammar, everything.
Let me repeat, (it is claimed) Paramount owns the copyright to individual
klingon words.
i.e. we can't legally have a klingon wikipedia.
If someone can get Paramount to produce a waiver documents stating that it
is perfectly legal for third parties to produce klingon language
documents and redistrbute them under any licence, then we can reconsider.
However until that time we should not risk copyright violation and wasting the time of contributors (to the
Klingon wikipedia).
Imran
--
http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran
> I'm amazed at the poor quality of the English
> Wiktionary, it seems to
> miss so many important English words. Most new pages
> seem to be slang,
> jargon, and people adding a few dozen words from
> their native tongue.
> Plans to import a public domain dictionary were
> abandoned, and now there
> seems to be little organisation or direction.
> Perhaps Wiktionary can be
> revitalised with extra features, but I doubt
> stylesheet changes will be
> enough. It needs a different look and a whole raft
> of features. It needs
> methods for easily adding new words, and for
> categorisation and listing.
> But I'm neither excited by the project nor
> optimistic about its future.
> So most of all, it needs people who want to work on
> it.
>
> -- Tim Starling
I think the reason for this is that a dictionary
cannot really take advantage of the wiki structure.
Consider the dense interlinking that occurs in any
decent encyclopedia article; how would something like
that be useful, or even apply, in a dictionary? An
encyclopedia is, I think, ideally suited to the wiki
format--that's why all those predictions of "7 years
to 100,000 articles!" seem hopelessly naive.
Wikipedia took off because it's the best type of
structure to exploit its format, and that attracted
contributors. In Wiktionary, you're basically just
asking people to write an online dictionary, and the
wiki concept is less useful to them.
Meelar
=====
"The difference between extra-marital sex and extra marital sex is not to be sneezed at."
--George Will, on hyphen use
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
LS,
When I follow what has happened the last few days, I can not help but come to the conclusion that things are done with wikipedia in mind.
Take for instance those lines that are "gratis" when you use headings. They make excellent sense when in Wikipedia but they look _horrible_ in wiktionary. Have a look at http://nl.wiktionary.org/wiki/Breton for instance. It does not look good.
Take a look at the restriction on the number of messages (5) per page. This is "reasonable" in wikipedia, but when you want to internationalise a page and use messages to indicate things that differ from language to language, like the gender of a word, you can have dozens words that are masculine and you get garbage as a result.
When there are problems, they seem to be relatively quickly fixed for the wikipedia's but, for the wiktionaries the consistency is lacking.
When you have an environment like wiktionary/wikipedia they _need_ to be the same in order to be able to fix things and understand the behaviour of the software. The wiktionaries do not behave in a same way. You can create an article with a Chinese (characters) name in English but not on the nl:wiktionary (and others).
We have just had a major disaster. What I expected in the aftermath was some consolidation. However, now the "Enhanced recent changes (not for all browsers)" in preferences is up the creek!!
What concerns me is that for us "simple" users there is no idea what problems are being tacled. What the priorities are and if things still get tested prior to production.
*Is the idea that we have stabilized??
*Do we still have database problems? (anecdotal evidence says we do)
*Is there a moratorium on minor stuff so that there is the peace and quiet to fix the major stuff?
Sorry for being difficult,
GerardM
Hello,
I implemented a new wiki syntax for mediawiki.
The syntax is:
^^sometext^^
It will render HTML as:
<small><sup>sometext</sup></small>
It's not commited in cvs yet, but you can test it on my development
website at:
http://www.twenkill.net/wiki/index.php/Exposant
Please test this function heavily and report bugs by replying to this
post or directly to me.
We can also discuss about using another token than ^^.
--
Ashar Voultoiz
LS,
I understand from Brian and from Timwi (who placed the monobook.js and monobook.css on nl:wiktionary) that this is where these things must be fixed. I am happy, this does indicate which way to go.
Brian mentioned that he is going to revisit the “template inclusion”. I hope that he will fix the inclusion of headers from within templates; the problem is that no TOC is generated from headers entered from within templates. This would help me a lot in making the standardised presentation (as I envision it) acceptable.
In his mail Brian mentions: “English and German are exceptions to this rule because of special-case work done by the respective contributors.” I have several words ready for inclusion in the nl:wiktionary. I cannot create them for the current restrictions. The idea of wiktionary is that it not only provides the local language words but also the words in other languages. Therefore it is part and parcel of what wiktionary stands for.
The "Enhanced recent changes (not for all browsers)" works again as specified. Thanks!
Brian is right where he says that he does not want to publish everywhere what he is doing. Consequently I am not subscribed to wikitech-l. He mentions that I cannot expect a minimum level of service. This is true up to a point. When a massive exercise like the “1.3 upgrade” is undertaken, there should be a proper conversion with all the necessary steps taken. This does mean that the sysops as a group undertake this. All steps should be taken for all environments. Doing it this way ensures that you provide a quality upgrade and, it prevents all kinds of nastiness down the line. It is in the interest of the sysops to ensure a standardized environment!!
Practically: the {{msg:-nl-}} should be converted to {{-nl-}} there is a script to do it. I cannot run it. It should be part of finishing up the upgrade.
Brian does not think much of en:wiktionary. He thinks that it needs many new features. In the nl:wiktionary, I am adding words for languages with a ISO 639 identification. I have a standardized way to indicate the translations (using ISO 639 to indicate the language) this should enable the quick translation from words from one wiktionary to other wikionaries that support the messages that are used.
I also have a 8878 word glossary (public domain) with mainly English botanical terms with a Dutch explanation. Those are the things I work on.
Concluding; Wikimedia is a success because of all the people that work on it. We all play our part and we do what we can, what we want. However, the aim is to produce something that stands up to scrutiny. It is a long hard road and traveling it together makes it enjoyable.
Thanks,
Gerard
o {{-nl-}} there is a script to do it. I cannot run it. It should be part of finishing up the upgrade.
Brian doe
From: "Timwi" <timwi(a)gmx.net>
> Andre Engels wrote:
> > I find this a rather disappointing compromise.
> I sure hope that it is temporary. If after a year the Klingon Wikipedia
> does turn out to be a real success, I'm pretty sure nobody will mind if
> we add inter-wiki links then. If by then the Klingon Wikipedia is quite
> obviously dead, nobody will mind getting rid of it again.
But the fact that inter-wiki
links are disallowed does
hinder progress in some
manner to this Wikipedia
language project. Imagine
if we did that to say French.
The premise is that Klingon
isn't worthy of having inter-wiki
links just because it is a
constructed language.
I'm sure that there are by now
more people in the world that
have heard of Klingon as a
language, than of many minor
natural languages. And even
some major constructed
languages, also.
I'm not a user of Klingon but
I do support the right of any
community using a standardized
form of communication to be
recognized and considered
worthy of inclusion as a
wikipedia language project.
To place restrictions on a
certain language do to the
bias and prejudice of some
is unjust, it hinders the progress
of the wiki in question and it
gives it a mark of doom from
the start.
Let's face it whether we may
want it or not there are actually
some folks out there who are
quite into this language. It is
by no means an easy language
to learn. It is used in other projects
like Google without bringing
reproach to that website. For
Wikipedia to make exclusions
and restrictions seems highly
unfair and biased.
Sincerely,
Jay B.
[[User:ILVI]]
We need to start fundraising again, and at least for today, we should
have a link up on the 'wikipedia is dead' page to the donations page
on the wikimedia website. I am sure people will contribute at a time
like this.
Going forward, I think that we need a constant message on every page
of the site, most likely at the bottom of each article, saying
something like "If you have found Wikipedia helpful, remember that we
are a nonprofit organization that relies on donations from users like
you."
We have now a total of approximately $12,000-$14,000 in the bank...
we are going to need to use that to buy additional apaches and
probably additional squids. Other than the fact that we're currently
in the middle of a database fiasco, we likely have enough DB power for
right now... although we should try to be ahead of the curve.
Last week, before I left, traffic had approximately doubled in a
single week. This is staggering, because traffic was already huge.
In my opinion, we are going to need another $100,000 of equipment by
the end of the year, *and* we can *easily* raise that from donations
from the general public.
But to raise money, we have to ask. People won't give unless they
know that we need it, and unless they know how incredibly efficient we
are with the resources that are given to us.
--Jimbo