I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
I read e.g. that [München, Germany] would look silly. Yes it does. That is why it should have been [München, Deutschland] in the first place with the redirect being [Munich, Germany] or even a disambiguation on [Munich] as it already is on the en-WP. What was clear to many people in the beginnig of commons now gets overthrown and people keenly start their bots.
Moreover I do not mind having [東京] as log as there is a redirect on [Tokyo], [Tokio] etc.
As far as I remember commons was planed for all projects to coexist but not to assimilate them until a bad english gets the upper hand.
I am appalled about this and do not know if I carry on in this pile of shards.
disappointed greetings
paddy
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails. http://mail.yahoo.com
On 29/12/06, Patrick-Emil Zörner paddyez@yahoo.de wrote:
I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
I read e.g. that [München, Germany] would look silly. Yes it does. That is why it should have been [München, Deutschland] in the first place with the redirect being [Munich, Germany] or even a disambiguation on [Munich] as it already is on the en-WP. What was clear to many people in the beginnig of commons now gets overthrown and people keenly start their bots.
Moreover I do not mind having [東京] as log as there is a redirect on [Tokyo], [Tokio] etc.
As far as I remember commons was planed for all projects to coexist but not to assimilate them until a bad english gets the upper hand.
I am appalled about this and do not know if I carry on in this pile of shards.
disappointed greetings
paddy
Was there a concensus on this or are individuals doing it off their own back? If it is the latter, I suggest we begin moving the article's back to their rightful names.
Hi,
Quoting Patrick-Emil Zörner paddyez@yahoo.de:
I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
There's no reason why we shouldn't have a gallery at both [[Munich, Germany]] and [[München, Deutschland]]. If people aren't interested in maintaining both, then I suppose we could get really worked up about which one is the redirect and which one is the actual gallery, but it is a pretty trivial thing to argue over. Categories are different, and should use English, with the goal of eventually translating based on user preferences.
Jkelly
On 29/12/06, jkelly@fas.harvard.edu jkelly@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
There's no reason why we shouldn't have a gallery at both [[Munich, Germany]] and [[München, Deutschland]]. If people aren't interested in maintaining both, then I suppose we could get really worked up about which one is the redirect and which one is the actual gallery, but it is a pretty trivial thing to argue over.
Commons is multilingual, so a redirect to the local language and text in all redirected languages would make the most obvious sense.
(and then we can argue about countries with two national languages, of course - [[Brabant]] or [[Bruxelles]]? I think the *essential* point is that people can find images and media!)
Categories are different, and should use English, with the goal of eventually translating based on user preferences.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm ... I believe category redirects work in current versions of MediaWiki, though they're less than ideal. Hopefully categories will morph into tags soon (if MySQL's hideous performance difficulties can be worked around) and we can do things like tags-with-aliases (so that [[Tag:Brabant]] and [[Tag:Bruxelles]] work like they're one tag).
- d.
On 29/12/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
(and then we can argue about countries with two national languages, of course - [[Brabant]] or [[Bruxelles]]? I think the *essential* point is that people can find images and media!)
And I hit "send" and *then* realised that, of course, I should have used the example [[Gdansk]] or [[Danzig]]. O the embarrassment!
- d.
The discussion about Munich can be found at the top of the Village Pump, or maybe in the latest archive by now.
Bryan
On 12/29/06, jkelly@fas.harvard.edu jkelly@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi,
Quoting Patrick-Emil Zörner paddyez@yahoo.de:
I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
There's no reason why we shouldn't have a gallery at both [[Munich, Germany]] and [[München, Deutschland]]. If people aren't interested in maintaining both, then I suppose we could get really worked up about which one is the redirect and which one is the actual gallery, but it is a pretty trivial thing to argue over. Categories are different, and should use English, with the goal of eventually translating based on user preferences.
Jkelly
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
I am fairly certain that the policy on Commons is that cities and other localities are in the native language. Therefore München and Praha are absolutely correct and the categories must be fixed.
Cary
-----Original Message----- From: commons-l-bounces@wikimedia.org [mailto:commons-l-bounces@wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Bryan Tong Minh Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 4:56 PM To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Anglo-Saxonisation of the commons
The discussion about Munich can be found at the top of the Village Pump, or maybe in the latest archive by now.
Bryan
On 12/29/06, jkelly@fas.harvard.edu jkelly@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi,
Quoting Patrick-Emil Zörner paddyez@yahoo.de:
I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
There's no reason why we shouldn't have a gallery at both
[[Munich, Germany]]
and [[München, Deutschland]]. If people aren't interested in
maintaining both,
then I suppose we could get really worked up about which one is
the redirect and
which one is the actual gallery, but it is a pretty trivial
thing to argue over.
Categories are different, and should use English, with the
goal of eventually
translating based on user preferences.
Jkelly
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.2/613 - Release Date: 1/1/2007 2:50 PM
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.2/613 - Release Date: 1/1/2007 2:50 PM
On 02/01/07, Cary Bass bastique@bellsouth.net wrote:
I am fairly certain that the policy on Commons is that cities and other localities are in the native language. Therefore München and Praha are absolutely correct and the categories must be fixed.
No... did you ever notice [[category:北京]] ? (or even worse, maybe [[category:transport in 北京]]?)
Nobody likes enforcing English-only categories to further Anglo-saxon supremism or the like, but until we have proper category redirects...
regards, Brianna user:pfctdayelise
It must have been a mental infarction. Galleries are done using native language and redirects. Categories have generally been done in English.
~~~~ (Cary)
-----Original Message----- From: commons-l-bounces@wikimedia.org [mailto:commons-l-bounces@wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Brianna Laugher Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 7:43 PM To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Anglo-Saxonisation of the commons
On 02/01/07, Cary Bass bastique@bellsouth.net wrote:
I am fairly certain that the policy on Commons is that cities and other localities are in the native language. Therefore München and Praha are absolutely correct and the categories must be fixed.
No... did you ever notice [[category:北京]] ? (or even worse, maybe [[category:transport in 北京]]?)
Nobody likes enforcing English-only categories to further Anglo-saxon supremism or the like, but until we have proper category redirects...
regards, Brianna user:pfctdayelise _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.2/613 - Release Date: 1/1/2007 2:50 PM
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.2/613 - Release Date: 1/1/2007 2:50 PM
Hello,
Patrick-Emil Zörner a écrit :
I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
I read e.g. that [München, Germany] would look silly. Yes it does. That is why it should have been [München, Deutschland] in the first place with the redirect being [Munich, Germany] or even a disambiguation on [Munich] as it already is on the en-WP. What was clear to many people in the beginnig of commons now gets overthrown and people keenly start their bots.
Moreover I do not mind having [東京] as log as there is a redirect on [Tokyo], [Tokio] etc.
As far as I remember commons was planed for all projects to coexist but not to assimilate them until a bad english gets the upper hand.
I am appalled about this and do not know if I carry on in this pile of shards.
disappointed greetings
paddy
Yes, this is happening again. It is very disappointing that people try to enforce an English only categories naming. Actually categories redirect works quite well, so I don't see why there should English names when the language of the place is not English.
People do not even care about opposition to renaming categories, and threathen me as vandal when I am trying to keep the original name.
This on-going change should not happen.
Regards,
Yann
Sorry, but categories should have English-language names only.
How can someone find "Bridges in Athens" if the category title was written in Greek? Or "Palaces in Istambul"? Or "Rivers in India" (and what alphabet should we use in this last case?).
And category redirects do not work well, because they divide the media and cause more and more confusion.
My mother tongue is not English, but it's clear to me that we must have a lingua franca in order to understand each other.
If a find a picture of Teheran and I want to categorize it I'll have to find the correct Persian name of the correct category? That doesn't make sense to me. People should know that is no offence to use English in order to achieve a greater good: communication and understanding.
Dantadd
----- Original Message ----- From: "Yann Forget" yann@forget-me.net To: "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:18 PM Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Anglo-Saxonisation of the commons
Hello,
Patrick-Emil Zörner a écrit :
I am quite appalled about how things have a nasty tendency to a nasty outcome on commons. München is being moved to Munich, Praha is moved to Prague,... and all on a specious kind of based argumentation. I know how the cities are called. I have seen the traffic signs! The cities are actually called München, Praha,...
I read e.g. that [München, Germany] would look silly. Yes it does. That is why it should have been [München, Deutschland] in the first place with the redirect being [Munich, Germany] or even a disambiguation on [Munich] as it already is on the en-WP. What was clear to many people in the beginnig of commons now gets overthrown and people keenly start their bots.
Moreover I do not mind having [東京] as log as there is a redirect on [Tokyo], [Tokio] etc.
As far as I remember commons was planed for all projects to coexist but not to assimilate them until a bad english gets the upper hand.
I am appalled about this and do not know if I carry on in this pile of shards.
disappointed greetings
paddy
Yes, this is happening again. It is very disappointing that people try to enforce an English only categories naming. Actually categories redirect works quite well, so I don't see why there should English names when the language of the place is not English.
People do not even care about opposition to renaming categories, and threathen me as vandal when I am trying to keep the original name.
This on-going change should not happen.
Regards,
Yann
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
daniel1978@uol.com.br wrote:
Sorry, but categories should have English-language names only.
How can someone find "Bridges in Athens" if the category title was written in Greek? Or "Palaces in Istambul"? Or "Rivers in India" (and what alphabet should we use in this last case?).
Well, if I were a native speaker working on el:, "Bridges in Athens" would be Greek to me. :-)
My understanding was that we agreed to do category names in English as an interim compromise pending software improvements. If those improvements are not happening, then we should consider alternative ideas.
Stan
Hi!
On 2/21/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
daniel1978@uol.com.br wrote:
Sorry, but categories should have English-language names only.
How can someone find "Bridges in Athens" if the category title was written in Greek? Or "Palaces in Istambul"? Or "Rivers in India" (and what alphabet should we use in this last case?).
Well, if I were a native speaker working on el:, "Bridges in Athens" would be Greek to me. :-)
My understanding was that we agreed to do category names in English as an interim compromise pending software improvements. If those improvements are not happening, then we should consider alternative ideas.
Stan
There are some development in category redirects fixing (http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3311), but I don't know how ready to production.
With best regards, Eugene.
daniel1978@uol.com.br a écrit :
Sorry, but categories should have English-language names only.
How can you decide that?
How can someone find "Bridges in Athens" if the category title was written in Greek? Or "Palaces in Istambul"? Or "Rivers in India" (and what alphabet should we use in this last case?).
Categories redirect works quite well, so this argument is not valid. See for example http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Monte_Bianco
And category redirects do not work well, because they divide the media and cause more and more confusion.
See above.
My mother tongue is not English, but it's clear to me that we must have a lingua franca in order to understand each other.
If a find a picture of Teheran and I want to categorize it I'll have to find the correct Persian name of the correct category? That doesn't make sense to me. People should know that is no offence to use English in order to achieve a greater good: communication and understanding.
Dantadd
Regards,
Yann
Yann,
Well, I didn't say I can "decide" anything. I just said what I think, can I do it?
Sorry, category redirects do not work well at all, and require permanent attention. Can you imagine media divided in Schweiz, Suisse, Svizzera, Svizzra....? What is really the point? Language pride? I'm not offended to have categories such as "Brazil" or "Italy".
Extreme examples are quite illustrative. What do you think about more than 20 category names for India?
I'd really want to understand what's really the problem...
Dantadd
----- Original Message ----- From: "Yann Forget" yann@forget-me.net To: "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:25 PM Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Anglo-Saxonisation of the commons
daniel1978@uol.com.br a écrit :
Sorry, but categories should have English-language names only.
How can you decide that?
How can someone find "Bridges in Athens" if the category title was written in Greek? Or "Palaces in Istambul"? Or "Rivers in India" (and what alphabet should we use in this last case?).
Categories redirect works quite well, so this argument is not valid. See for example http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Monte_Bianco
And category redirects do not work well, because they divide the media and cause more and more confusion.
See above.
My mother tongue is not English, but it's clear to me that we must have a lingua franca in order to understand each other.
If a find a picture of Teheran and I want to categorize it I'll have to find the correct Persian name of the correct category? That doesn't make sense to me. People should know that is no offence to use English in order to achieve a greater good: communication and understanding.
Dantadd
Regards,
Yann
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
I see to main problems:
How many of you seeing eg. 'zolw' will know that it's 'żółw' without diacritics?
And what about if correct form is with and without diacritics and they mean something different?
I agree that 'Bridges in Athens' should be in English, same 'Churches in Warsow', but some people are trying to mix both English and non-English versions what would give (for me terrific) results eg.
'powiat mikołowski' is name of territorial unit in Poland and correct grammar and orthographic version is as I written, but people are trying to make English version like this:
* 'Poviat mikołowski' - Englicised 'powiat' with Polish adjective (ugly, but correct orthography) * 'Poviat Mikołowski' - as above but wrong orthography * 'Poviat Mikołów' - correct grammar and orthograph (Mikołów is noun in nominative, city name), but something like that doesn't exist * 'Poviat Mikolow' as above, but without diacritics
As we see all versions aren't really good ;) but first ('powiat mikołowski') is correct in Polish so I think we should keep it ;)
Everything is getting much more bad when we try to apply it to names of churches where are used constructions not existing in non-slavic languages and there is more then 10 different versions and every has some of reveled by me errors.
AJF/WarX
How can someone find "Bridges in Athens" if the category title was written in Greek? Or "Palaces in Istambul"? Or "Rivers in India" (and what alphabet should we use in this last case?).
Categories redirect works quite well, so this argument is not valid. See for example http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Monte_Bianco
Yes, you can redirect people. But you can't redirect images. Hence people will not find images that are not in the "deutsch name" gallery.
Furthermore, I object that this is made some kind of political/ideological issue. I speak a language that is not in the top 100 of most spoken languages in the world, which is not the case for most of you. I've also studied 14 foreign languages (no, I don't know most of them). Neither of these nor both of them combined stops me from seeing that the lingua franca (sic!) is English and using the most common language is the only practical solution.