And, if I can, let me try to provide concise counterarguments for what
I understand to be Andrew's reasons for not creating a Cantonese
Wikipedia:
1) That it's not used in formal situations (at least not in written
form). Neither are languages such as Sicilian, Javanese, Sundanese,
Cebuano, and many other languages which already have Wikipedias. And
just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be done
now. If there are people willing and ready to create real
encyclopaedic content in Cantonese, then how is this one a problem?
2) That all people literate in Yutyuh-Bakwahman are also literate in
Mandarin (= Puntonghua-based Baihuawen). The same applies to many
other languages which already have Wikipedias, and often quite large
(although Mandarin isn't nessecarily the language in which all or most
are literate): Catalan, Basque, Galician, Asturian, Aragonese (with
Spanish) Ukrainian, Belarusian (with Russian, at least to a great
degree), Sicilian, Sardinian, Friulian (with Italian), Corsican,
Catalan, Basque, Breton, Occitan, Walon, Haitian Creole, Luxembourgish
(with French), Sundanese, Javanese (with Indonesian), Frisian,
Limburgish (with Dutch)... and the list goes on. Some might even argue
that those literate in Finnish are all literate in Swedish, or even at
an extreme that those literate in Dutch are all literate in English
(certainly not true, but perhaps it would be in the future). And,
again, just because a Wikipedia isn't "needed" doesn't mean it
shouldn't be created, if there are people willing to work on it and it
has at least some possible uses.
3) That it will take away contributors and potential contributors from
the already-starving Chinese Wikipedia. Now, you have said that "every
little bit counts", but in all likelyhood that's just what it will be:
a little bit. I don't have a factual argument against this since both
of our arguments on this seem to be purely conjecture, but I think
it's rediculous to think that enough users would leave (or never
arrive in the first place) zhwiki to cause even the tiniest noticable
decrease in productivity and/or growth.
If I have missed one, please forgive me.
Mark
On 25/09/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't see how it's interesting.
If you take a look at the vote, and exclude all non-Cantonese speakers
(at least, as far as I am aware):
Support:
Jasonzhuocn
Bourquie
Connie
Eternal
Jogloran
Felix Wan
Enochlau
CantoneseWiki
Xingmu
Ffootballchu
Seasurfer (Maybe -- Seasurfer is a Malaysian Chinese; in most of
Malaysia, Chinese people can speak Cantonese, including Kuala Lumpur,
but there's the notable exception of Penang where the main language is
Hokkien, so it could be either way and we'd have to ask)
Oppose:
Sl
Zektonic
Crosstimer
Jeromy~Yuyu
Simon Shek
Now, you may claim the vote was rigged all you want.
But if it _was_ rigged, it was actually _in favour_ of Cantonese
speakers, given that I personally informed everyone who had a
Cantonese babel template and was accepting Wikipedia e-mails. AND,
_all_ of the Cantonese speakers who voted "oppose", with the exception
of Simon Shek, were informed by me of the vote via e-mail.
Now, even if you add the 7 users from the meetup (not counting Simon
Shek, who voted as well) as "oppose" votes, you end up with equal
numbers in favour and opposed.
Having said that, I'm still a bit surprised that Alex would change her
mind when it seemed before like she was really interested in a
Cantonese Wikipedia...
And it also seems suspect to me that while the majority of Cantonese
speakers who VOTED were in favour, those at the meetup were
"unanimous" in their opposition.
You may think that this has to do with the alleged vote rigging,
however all that consisted of was me e-mailing Cantonese speakers to
tell them about the vote. The message said, quite basically, that
there was a vote, and that their input was requested. I didn't include
my views, an endorsement of either side, etc.
Mark
On 25/09/05, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
Walter van Kalken wrote:
Yet here we are, with non-Cantonese folks
spearheading the effort, and
a Cantonese-based
meetup saying no, they don't want one.
And all the voting Cantonese speakers were there? Why are your Cantonese
speakers who met there more valuable than the many supporters? You act
like the group that met has Veto rights on the issue.
No, but it sure is interesting, isn't it?
--Jimbo
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE