Daniel Mayer wrote:
Why not make it equivalent to a language Wikipedia? We already have the 'Simple English' Wikipedia. The other language type link on an article could tell you the page had been selected (or moved).
No offense, but this is a horrendously bad idea. We should instead focus on adding a good category system and on writing articles in news style so that the first section of each article is a concise article in its own right (I call this the 'lead section').
And who is going to have the time to verify that all the chosen articles are written in "news style"? Even if we limit ourselves to a mere 10,000 srticles it will be a horrendous task.
I also think that Simple was a bad idea as well since the lead section can and should be written in language that can be understood by an average person - no special knowledge of the subject area should be required to understand the lead section.
I'm no great fan of the Simple project, but I have no incentive to bother them in whatever they are doing. Keeping the language simple is easier said than done. It's a fine ideal, but I can forsee a lot of arguments over whether this or that has been put in simple terms.
Ec