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