Hello,
Not directly about Wikipedia, sorry :-)
I have a vocabulary question... and Wikipedia was not able to help me !!!
In French, we have a term "mécénat" which refers to the act for a person or a company to financially support a creator.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9c%C3%A9nat
This word exist in other languages, but there is apparently no english article. In our definition, Foundation (such as the Ford or the Gates Foundation) are mécènes, but a commercial company can also be directly a mécène.
We also use the term "sponsor" (or parrainage), which is a direct translation of the english term sponsor.
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial reasons. Except that within the articles, in both cases, it notices that both mécène and sponsors get financial benefits (deductibility etc...) and that both mécène and sponsors get benefits in terms of image. So, I guess it is sometimes a bit tricky to know when a gift is a "mécenat" and when it is "sponsoring". But still, we try to make the differenciation. For WMF, the recent big donations would be "mécénat", whilst those giving money for Wikimania (with public recognition, thank yous, logo display etc...) are "sponsors".
My question (yes, there is a question): do you really have no term to describe "mécénat" as the lack of Wikipedia article seem to suggest ? If there is no term, would "philanthropic activity" fit both the concept for an organisation OR a unique person ?
2008/9/4 Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial reasons.
The traditional distinction would be "patron" - you would talk about so-and-so being the patron of an artist, of Michaelangelo working under the patronage of the Pope. The patron would gain advantages, usually prestige, and the artist would gain a living and perhaps respectability.
But this is a bit archaic - it would seem very strange to use it in a modern context.
Generally speaking, I'd say "donor" implies it's a simple gift, whilst "sponsor" suggests they explicitly intend to capitalise on it.
2008/9/4 Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com:
2008/9/4 Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial reasons.
The traditional distinction would be "patron" - you would talk about so-and-so being the patron of an artist, of Michaelangelo working under the patronage of the Pope. The patron would gain advantages, usually prestige, and the artist would gain a living and perhaps respectability.
"Patron" is the first word I though of too, although it's not perfect. A patron supplies you with a living, you would only have one patron and they supply everything for you (at least, in my understanding of the word). That's not really what Florence is looking for.
Generally speaking, I'd say "donor" implies it's a simple gift, whilst "sponsor" suggests they explicitly intend to capitalise on it.
Yeah, "donor" works for me. "Benefactor" is another option.
Florence, you could try the Reference Desk (humanities, probably), the people there are probably better at this kind of thing than this mailing list.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
2008/9/4 Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial reasons.
The traditional distinction would be "patron" ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage has an interlanguage link to Mécénat. Not sure if the lack of a link the other way is deliberate or not.
Angela
Angela wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
2008/9/4 Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial reasons.
The traditional distinction would be "patron" ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage has an interlanguage link to Mécénat. Not sure if the lack of a link the other way is deliberate or not.
Angela
Hmmm. No. That's not the same. I updated the link so that it now goes to [[fr:patronage]] :-)
ant
On 9/4/08, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage has an interlanguage link to Mécénat. Not sure if the lack of a link the other way is deliberate or not.
If the equivalence is even slightly debatable it should not be interwiki-linked. I'd suggest a stub in English explaining the meaning of the French word.
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:French_words_and_phrases
—C.W.
Charlotte Webb wrote:
On 9/4/08, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage has an interlanguage link to Mécénat. Not sure if the lack of a link the other way is deliberate or not.
If the equivalence is even slightly debatable it should not be interwiki-linked. I'd suggest a stub in English explaining the meaning of the French word.
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:French_words_and_phrases
—C.W.
I can not help appreciating that the category include 4 subcategories
[+] French legal phrases (0) [+] French loanwords (0)[+] [+] French names (3) ... and Charcuterie (1)
:-)
Ant
Amazingly we use the word "angel" for such people, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_investor
Fred
Hello,
Not directly about Wikipedia, sorry :-)
I have a vocabulary question... and Wikipedia was not able to help me !!!
In French, we have a term "mécénat" which refers to the act for a person or a company to financially support a creator.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9c%C3%A9nat
This word exist in other languages, but there is apparently no english article. In our definition, Foundation (such as the Ford or the Gates Foundation) are mécènes, but a commercial company can also be directly a mécène.
We also use the term "sponsor" (or parrainage), which is a direct translation of the english term sponsor.
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial reasons. Except that within the articles, in both cases, it notices that both mécène and sponsors get financial benefits (deductibility etc...) and that both mécène and sponsors get benefits in terms of image. So, I guess it is sometimes a bit tricky to know when a gift is a "mécenat" and when it is "sponsoring". But still, we try to make the differenciation. For WMF, the recent big donations would be "mécénat", whilst those giving money for Wikimania (with public recognition, thank yous, logo display etc...) are "sponsors".
My question (yes, there is a question): do you really have no term to describe "mécénat" as the lack of Wikipedia article seem to suggest ? If there is no term, would "philanthropic activity" fit both the concept for an organisation OR a unique person ?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
2008/9/4 Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net:
Amazingly we use the word "angel" for such people, see
I think "angel" implies something more than just giving money. I interpret it as including advice, usually to someone just starting out from someone with lots of experience. Also, when there is money involved, they usually expect a return on their investment.
2008/9/4 Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net:
Amazingly we use the word "angel" for such people, see
I think "angel" implies something more than just giving money. I interpret it as including advice, usually to someone just starting out from someone with lots of experience. Also, when there is money involved, they usually expect a return on their investment.
Its original use was apparently in the British theatre. I've seen it used for those who fund political projects, for example, in referring to rock stars such as Bono. In the case of actual investors in startups, a advice component could certainly come into play. Financial return is not essential to the concept however.
At any rate, I see no problem at all in calling our major financial supporters "angels" (Well, not really, obviously there is a religious connotation which might be inappropriate)
Fred
Its original use was apparently in the British theatre. I've seen it used for those who fund political projects, for example, in referring to rock stars such as Bono. In the case of actual investors in startups, a advice component could certainly come into play. Financial return is not essential to the concept however.
At any rate, I see no problem at all in calling our major financial supporters "angels" (Well, not really, obviously there is a religious connotation which might be inappropriate)
Yeah, it's close enough. I think "benefactors" is better, though.
Fred Bauder wrote:
2008/9/4 Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net:
Amazingly we use the word "angel" for such people, see
I think "angel" implies something more than just giving money. I interpret it as including advice, usually to someone just starting out from someone with lots of experience. Also, when there is money involved, they usually expect a return on their investment.
Its original use was apparently in the British theatre. I've seen it used for those who fund political projects, for example, in referring to rock stars such as Bono. In the case of actual investors in startups, a advice component could certainly come into play. Financial return is not essential to the concept however.
At any rate, I see no problem at all in calling our major financial supporters "angels" (Well, not really, obviously there is a religious connotation which might be inappropriate)
Fred
This is wildly off topic, but I have also heard the term "sugardaddy" used, (if you must know, it was specifically used in terms of early plans for commercial spaceflight in the year 1990, that I recall) alluding to Marily Monroe in Some Like It Hot...
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
I'm sorry if I misunderstood the question.
Fred
Fred Bauder wrote:
2008/9/4 Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net:
Amazingly we use the word "angel" for such people, see
I think "angel" implies something more than just giving money. I interpret it as including advice, usually to someone just starting out from someone with lots of experience. Also, when there is money involved, they usually expect a return on their investment.
Its original use was apparently in the British theatre. I've seen it used for those who fund political projects, for example, in referring to rock stars such as Bono. In the case of actual investors in startups, a advice component could certainly come into play. Financial return is not essential to the concept however.
At any rate, I see no problem at all in calling our major financial supporters "angels" (Well, not really, obviously there is a religious connotation which might be inappropriate)
Fred
This is wildly off topic, but I have also heard the term "sugardaddy" used, (if you must know, it was specifically used in terms of early plans for commercial spaceflight in the year 1990, that I recall) alluding to Marily Monroe in Some Like It Hot...
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen