--- Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I am not quite getting all emails through so this is
reconstructed from the archive:
Arnomane said:
On independence of Wikipedia communities:
* A Wikipedia that generates interwikis to such
contentless articles en masse
destroys one of our common strengths: Our cool
interwiki system.
Certainly there must be another option for protecting
the interwiki system than becoming an admin in a wiki
you have no inherent interest in developing to delete
articles against the local consensus. I cannot agree
that interwiki bloat is such priority that it demands
a solution so radical as that.
* Furthermore they challenge the reputation of the
>
whole international
Wikipedia community to outsiders.
This is hardly the first time for such a challenge. I
suggest you follow the successful example of what was
done when en.WP was blocking non-latin usernames which
was certainly a challenge to international reputation.
[1] [2] I can't see the vo.WP issue as beeing a larger
challenge to general reputation than the any of the
top 10 issues that have come from en.WP. So I cannot
support a more radical handling of vo.WP than en.WP
has recieved for "internationally" unpopular
practices.
* And above all. There are some unchangeable rules
>
in every Wikipedia imposed
by the Wikimedia Foundation. One of them is NPOV
and vo.wikipedia in its
current stage simply has no chance to get somewhere
near NPOV because of
their methods choosen.
With NPOV concerns we also have precedents. Look into
how the NPOV concerns for ar.WP were handled.[3]
Certainly a reasonable person cannot think vo.WP is in
a worse state of bias than those complaints and
therefore deserves a more radical reaction than they
were given.
I think I am correct to say that many people opposing
you are not arguing that vo.WP is 100% correct in what
they have done and how they have responded to
concerns. Rather many people are opposing you because
your proposal is *extremely radical* and the issue you
wish to address comparatively less important than
issues that have needed intervention from outside a
community in the past. The issue at hand does not in
any way merit such new precedent of intervention.
Please find a less radical means of addressing your
concerns.
Birgitte SB
[
1]http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-December/025769.ht…
[
2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Username/Archive_3#Non-latin_…
[
3]http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/htdig/foundation-l/2006-November/02506…
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ