[Wikipedia-l] en.wikipedia.org vs www.wikipedia.org and the Wikipedia family

[tarquin]

Cunc, as I understand it, you have three points to your argument:

1. it's a disruption
2. it's a minor fix to a larger problem
3. why should the largest wikipedia have to move anyway?

1 has been adressed earlier. we've moved domain name before.
2 -- yes, I agree. The problem is larger than this. But this is a 
significant move. Like mav said, it's *symbolic*. it's not the solution, 
but it's part of it. It shows that the other languages are siblings -- 
younger siblings, yes, -- but not subordinates.

I fear I cannot answer point 3. I seems to me to stem from a 
fundamentally different view of life. But I trust that should the German 
Wikipedia ever grow larger than the English, you will be in favour of it 
acquiring the coveted www. domain, with the English being demoted to en: ?

Anyway, if we're talking numbers, we should save www. for the Chinese 
Wikipedia ;-)

An older post of yours says:
 > More effort should be put into building the cross-link capabilities, 
perhaps with some automatic dictionary translations.

Yes. But please please please can we drop this idea of "automatic 
dictionary translations". Try it sometime. Computers cannot translate.



The Cunctator wrote:

>On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 04:00, Daniel Mayer wrote:
>  
>
>>On Friday 11 October 2002 12:40 am,  The Cunctato wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On 10/10/02 6:41 PM, "Daniel Mayer" <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Granted the English Wikipedia is the oldest
>>>>and largest but it shouldn't be vaulted as /The Main/
>>>>Wikipedia with the other languages relegated to second
>>>>class status in The Main WIkipedia's shadow.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>By the same token, the English-lang Wikipedia is the oldest and largest (by
>>>far), and it shouldn't be shoved around simply for the sake of political
>>>correctness.
>>>      
>>>
>>? How is finally having the English Wikipedia at en.wikipedia.org shoving 
>>around the English Wikipedia? All the others are at xx.wikipedia.org so this 
>>isn't about political correctness, it is about what is fair and equal.
>>
>>    
>>
>By writing "finally having" you imply inevitability. That certainly
>isn't the case. One could also write "How is redirecting the
>overwhelming preponderance of all Wikipedia entries shoving around the
>English Wikipedia? A small percentage of entries are at xx.wikipedia.org
>so this isn't about political correctness, it is about what is fair and
>equal (where equality means having every language group be given
>equivalent URLs, even though that concept of equality ignores the gross
>differences in the representation of the groups)."
>
>By definition doing "what is fair and equal" for groups with unequal
>representation is being politically correct. The Wikipedia entry
>[[political correctness]] is pretty good.
>
>Some acts of political correctness are good and necessary; but many aim
>to solve important problems with surface changes, and this proposed act
>is largely the latter.
>
>
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>  
>