From: Angela sloog77@yahoo.co.uk Anthere wrote:
It was my understanding non-english speakers were welcome to the simple wikipedia. If not, I would
like
Angela to confirm it, so we can change the rules of the simple accordingly.
Huh? Me? Since when did I become GodKing? I have absolutely no say whatsoever over who contributes to Simple. I'd kind of assumed that anyone was welcome to contribute anywhere if they were serious about creating an encyclopedia, and willing to adhere to
Sure not Angel. But since you are the biggest contributor there, you know what the rules and recommandations are. I checked yesterday, it is written that it is intended for people with poor english *reading* skills. In fact, not for people with poor english writing skills. However, it is also mentionned that Users are likely to understand rules with difficulty, which might imply they are not english (or kids).
You would made a beautiful pink Queen :-) (I remember some months ago, someone said once that Jules was the Queen of Wikipedia - who said that ?)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
Anthere wrote:
But since you are the biggest contributor there, you
know what the rules and recommendations are.
Yes, but I don't necessarily agree with those rules. A lot of the 'policy' currently at Simple has been written by 142 over the past couple of weeks and I haven't got round to looking at all of it yet. Of the pages I have seen; look at the talk pages of those articles and you will see that I have stated I disagree with quite a bit of it.
I see no reason why people with poor English writing skills shouldn't contribute to it. IMO, it is better to have poorly written content that none at all, and I personally find it easier to edit what someone else has written than to write it from scratch.
Anthere wrote:
However, it is also mentioned that users are likely
to understand rules with difficulty, which might imply they are not English (or kids).
I think that was something 142 wrote. I am against making generalisations about the characteristics of the people that might be reading or editing the encyclopedia.
Angela.
________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
Angela wrote:
Yes, but I don't necessarily agree with those rules. A lot of the 'policy' currently at Simple has been written by 142 over the past couple of weeks and I haven't got round to looking at all of it yet.
I think that's one of the biggest problems with 142 -- his complete disregard for community policy-setting mechanisms. I remember on meta, a long time ago, he wrote a bunch of lunatic nonsense and tried to pass it off as policy. It's probably important for us to monitor that sort of thing and disclaim it, as was done appropriately on the 'mediator' page on en.
--Jimbo
--- Angela sloog77@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Yes, but I don't necessarily agree with those rules. A lot of the 'policy' currently at Simple has been written by 142 over the past couple of weeks and I haven't got round to looking at all of it yet.
I see no reason why people with poor English writing skills shouldn't contribute to it. IMO, it is better to have poorly written content that none at all, and
Some one anon (I assume now it was 172 ) was writing on Simple Talk -- advocating, it seemed, my old idea of using Simple as a translation warehouse --still a good idea.
I responded to them saying that it was still unclear that simple be used for such a purpose--but that such a wiki might be a useful experiment.
~S~
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com