[Wikipedia-l] spanish wikipedia

[Anthere]

--- Lars Aronsson <lars at aronsson.se> wrote:
> Anthere wrote:
> > Ah, and who do you think would appoint a "site
> owner" ???
> > Jimbo ?
> 
> Yes, of course.  He owns the system, the name, and
> the machines.  He
> is very generous and liberal, but he is the owner. 
> If you fear that
> he will shut down Wikipedia, you should keep a
> backup copy of the GFDL
> contents on your own computer, but it is not
> self-evident that you
> can reuse the name "Wikipedia", since that would be
> regulated by U.S.
> trademark law.  Jimmy might decide to form a
> non-profit organization
> under U.S. law or perhaps Swiss law (like the
> U.N.?), but as far as I
> know, he hasn't done this yet.
> 
> I'm not unhappy with this.  I fully trust Jimmy. 
> But I don't see the
> point in denying the fact that he owns the current
> system and
> trademark.  If you eat in a restaurant, the
> restaurant has an owner,
> even if you pay for your food.

Lars, there's something rather important that I would
like to state here. And that will go for every
embassador I think. If we are, for example, to report
what the feelings on a subject are on a international
wiki, I think it is important that one does not
confuse the feelings reported with the feelings of the
reporter. And I feel that some of the "you" over there
might be adressed to me.

So, let's say, I have no problem with Jimbo being an
owner, and I decided to trust him. I don't like an
encyclopedia being confused with a dictionary (though
I own a Larousse encyclopédique and like it a lot, so
could survive with a few dictionary definitions
included in Wikipedia). I dont feel any need for a
backupcopy.
But I'm not gonna talk about the french wikipedians by
saying "they", but rather "we" or "some" or "most"
And I say, I think "most" would not appreciate at all
a surrogate site owner appointed by Jimbo. This is
just my opinion of course...

My personal belief is that we have to share a common
set of rules, the rest of them are our own business,
as long as it respect the common set view. 
 
> "Wikipedia is not a dictionary".  So if the French
> Wikipedia is
> becoming a dictionary, somebody is breaking this
> rule.  Either the
> French Wikipedia should straight up, or the rule
> should be revised.

The French wikipedia is not becoming a dic. Some
support it, other do not; and since we don't agree on
that, there certainly is no rules. So nothing to
revise. And I don't see very well who could straighten
that up.

> This has not been the conclusion of previous
> discussions on this list
> regarding the English Wikipedia.  People are now
> actively deleting
> "stub" articles.

this is an english rule. It was discussed on the
english list, by english people. Not us. Does your
wiki only follow english rules ? You don't have your
own ?

> If you eat in a
> restaurant or stay in a hotel, you must behave as
> the owner tells you.

I know how to behave when it is *required*. You are
welcome to invite me to the restaurant in the future.
I will behave ;-)


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com