Hoi,
From a policy point of view the language committee does not consider
political arguments. The argument that a likelyhood is very small is exactly the kind of argument that would still allow a language to be accepted. The aim of our foundation is to provide information to all people, not just the people that you care for.
The arguments for closure for Moldovan are not shared by the language committee and it was a VOTE that closed the mo.wikipedia it was definetly not consensus. It was also not done with permission of the board. The notion that you or anybody else feels that a language code is given out in error is politics. It is personal while I agree that you can have this opinion, it is an opinion you are entitled to it. I do not share your sentiments.
Also when you use these arguments and you insist that they are to be WMF policy, you do provide arguments to deny languages that are being considered. This is not a zero sum game.
Thanks, GerardM
On Nov 9, 2007 12:21 AM, Johannes Rohr jorohr@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 23:18:26 +0100, GerardM wrote:
Hoi, You are wrong, the Romanian Wikipedia is in the Latin script.. the Moldovan is not, consequently your conclusion does not follow from your argument. Thanks,
While it is theoretically possible that there are individual speakers of Romanian/Moldovan in Transnistria who, due to the pro-Russian policy of the Transnistrian authorities read only Cyrillic Romanian, the likelihood is extremely small. As I understand, the contemporary use of Cyrillic for Moldovan/Romanian is a product of continued coercion in Transnistria.
In my view, the main argument against the Moldovan Wikipedia is that it never had a native community. There is simply no demand from the side of Moldovans from either side of the Dniester river for such a wiki.
Apart from that, I feel that the use of the mo language code is a misuse, as the standard alphabeth in Moldova is Latin, not Cyrillic.
Apart from that, I am well aware, that Romanian has a history of being written in Cyrillic. I would even dare say, that the Latin script is a relatively new invention, as the Romanian ortodox church has historically used the cyrillic alphabeth well into the 19th centure, IIRC.
However, I don't think that this warrants a separate Wikipedia edition, else we could also have a separate German editon in Fraktur script...
Thanks,
Johannes
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l