I guess... probably one include also the majority of Kosovo, Albanian-speaking regions of Greece, P.Y.R.O.M./North Macedonia and maybe even Southern Italy and the other one is just centered on Albania as a state. This is not the same scenario as Brazil (not sure if, partially, also Greece) since in that case we had two group precisely centered on one country.
It's not totally practical but the geopolitical situation is not practical in the end by itself... You cannot force people to get rid of a group that might become a future national chapter because their language is spoken by many other people in neighboring countries who already clustered in a previous UG. So it should not be considered a critical situation per se, although the interaction of the two UGs should be closely monitored and addressed since the beginning.
What is missing is a precise guideline or attention to UG related to languages (of minorities or globally spoken). You could have the same problem with a future Italian minor languages UG active in Corsica or Croatia, with a Retho-romance Alpine language user group, with a gender gap UG active in a language distributed along various borders... and so on. They don't seem to show huge problems when similar situation exist in reality but they could degenerate, stop cooperation, or never start it with other UGs or national chapters. I value plurality, I want UG to be created and catalyze activities, and I think that the problem is mostly the character of people. However, I strongly advocate a more structured architecture of language-based UG to be implemented. Basically what I suppose was done with Catalan Wikimedia Thematic Organization, although in that case there is no main entity competing on the area of a sovereign country where Catalan is spoken (which is not necessarily a better scenario, just complex in a different way). We call them almost all "User groups" but they are sometimes local geographical unions of users and volunteers (embryonic future national chapters or just regional associations), language-oriented associations created to involve minorities or cross-projects of interested users unified by a topic. They all have different purpose and should be rationalized somehow. I think I pushed a little bit in that direction on the application to WikiSummit, stressing the importance to make order in the field. IMHO, we should have single-language thematic organizations (specifically for a language), cross-language thematic organization or local UG centered on a vague historic geographical area or a very precise administrative one. And think carefully about their status. This is however just a vague idea.
Alessandro Il mercoledì 6 febbraio 2019, 18:11:57 CET, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com ha scritto:
Just to close off this thread, there seemingly is no plan and others are left to deal with the fallout of this decision.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 at 08:23, Paulo Santos Perneta paulosperneta@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kirill,
I join Philip and Mardetanha on their concerns and questions. Having followed closely the Brazil situation - which ended up in the worst possible way, IMO - I'm very interested in your answer.
Best,
Paulo
2018-06-11 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mardetanha mardetanha.wiki@gmail.com:
Hi Kirill
Philip's concerns were not answered, would you please respond, I had the very same question.
Mardetanha
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Philip Kopetzky < philip.kopetzky@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Kirill,
what's the difference/relationship between this group and the
Wikimedians
of Albanian Language User Group, which is currently applying for a simpleAPG grant? How do we avoid creating more Brazilian scenarios by reconising even more user groups from the same area?
Best, Philip
On 22 May 2018 at 22:07, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
recognized
[1] Wikimedia Community User Group Albania [2] as a Wikimedia User
Group.
The group aims to improve content about Albania across the Wikimedia projects, including Commons and Wikidata, and to collaborate with
other
Wikimedia user groups, chapters, and other free culture groups in
Albania
and across the region.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/ Resolutions/Recognition_Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Albania [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
Group_Albania
Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe