Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language. Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence: - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
.When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well.
Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles? Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south slavenian languages?
Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism and now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own language, it become problem. AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very strong on WMF. But to this aspect of discussion is not place here. My question is what argument do you have on this? Did you check them or you just used POV to discuss on this topic?
Please, English is not my native language, and I don't see how you could miss interpret my statement about multilingual and multi cultural nature of wikipedia. Every language bring up cultural aspect and I don't see how you could by-pass this.
And again please return to the topic explain to me how you can be that CLAIRVOYANCE and assume that Montenegrin wikipedia will bring such bad image to WMF . You don't have arguments for that. This is just showing to me that you take POV. You just assume this with (for me) no particular reason. So I can just guess here why you are doing this. Please be more specific about your goals here, so I don't assume that you just take POV here.
I am ready to participate on any level of discussion but please don't make assumptions as that will bring bad connotation to your willingness to do right thing in this case.
Thank you, Darko Bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language. Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV than it would otherwise be. Thanks, GerardM
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language. Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV than it would otherwise be. Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in understanding.
Thank you Darko Bulatovic
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language. Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV than it would otherwise be. Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in understanding.
Thank you Darko Bulatovic
Hoi, What ISO language standard are you talking about ? As far as I am aware you are talking ISO-639-1/2. ISO-639-3 is quite different, ISO-639-6 will be different again.
It is rich that you inform me that I am clueless about languages and standards. Maybe you have to do some research yourself. You did puff yourself up by stating that you are the "President of IT Association of Montenegro". I have been active in the IT business myself and, /that /does not qualify me as either a linguist or as a politician. It does qualify me to know if an IT person is qualified being either; it does not implicitly.
Again, in your argument you value the political background. When it comes to a vote in the language sub committee, I will vote against the creation of a Montenegrin because the arguments provided are political and not linguistics. By your very arguments it seems impossible that a neutral point of view would be forthcoming. My advise is that for as much as a Montenegrin orthography exists, it should be permitted in the sr.wikipedia.org.
Thanks, GerardM
Some more motivation:: http://www.tol.cz/look/CER/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=14&...
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
> Hi, > > Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan > Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. > These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of > works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) > and stewards. > > Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the > administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive > attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the > wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There > is no expected improvement in the near future because the language > itself is in the middle of a political controversy. > > I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is > created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that > the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions. > > Regards, > > Yann > > > > > > > I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language. Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV than it would otherwise be. Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in understanding.
Thank you Darko Bulatovic
Hoi, What ISO language standard are you talking about ? As far as I am aware you are talking ISO-639-1/2. ISO-639-3 is quite different, ISO-639-6 will be different again.
It is rich that you inform me that I am clueless about languages and standards. Maybe you have to do some research yourself. You did puff yourself up by stating that you are the "President of IT Association of Montenegro". I have been active in the IT business myself and, /that /does not qualify me as either a linguist or as a politician. It does qualify me to know if an IT person is qualified being either; it does not implicitly.
Again, in your argument you value the political background. When it comes to a vote in the language sub committee, I will vote against the creation of a Montenegrin because the arguments provided are political and not linguistics. By your very arguments it seems impossible that a neutral point of view would be forthcoming. My advise is that for as much as a Montenegrin orthography exists, it should be permitted in the sr.wikipedia.org.
Thanks, GerardM
Some more motivation:: http://www.tol.cz/look/CER/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=14&... _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
you just change topic when you dint have any arguments. I am topic? :) I am totally apolitical personally but I rty to be realistic about this meter. I dont see what is your point? You will vote against ? I will take this statement here officially.
I don't see in any of your points here to be neutral you are POV all the time.
You did puff yourself up by stating that you are the "President of IT Association of Montenegro". I have been active in the IT business myself and, /that /*does not qualify me as either a linguist or as a politician*.
But you will vote against? Right? Ha.
I understand you very well here.
So you don't have any argument but you will still vote against the proposal.
Thank you for your honesty,
Darko Bulatovic My statement to be president of ITAM is just my official role nothing more nothing less. So don't be bothered by that.
Darko Bulatovic wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV than it would otherwise be.
Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in understanding.
It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200 countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.
Ec
It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200 countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.
Ec
I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian, Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....) so their process of building language is trough nation history. Same thing is with south Slavic language. It is not reference to country - more region in which people talk similar. History of south Slavic people ( Europe) is quite dense in political and demographic change, So many parts of South Slavs are developed differently try many centuries and that was also reflected on language. So here we have situation that all Balkan nations have their own languages and their wikipedias. I don't see how this same rule should be different for Montenegro. I will not mention that wikipedia is also possible for some artificial languages and don't have very harsh and strict rules regarding this. But in Montenegrin case it seems that people wish to close eyes. Why?
Darko Bulatovic wrote:
It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200 countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.
Ec
I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian, Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....) so their process of building language is trough nation history. Same thing is with south Slavic language. It is not reference to country - more region in which people talk similar. History of south Slavic people ( Europe) is quite dense in political and demographic change, So many parts of South Slavs are developed differently try many centuries and that was also reflected on language. So here we have situation that all Balkan nations have their own languages and their wikipedias. I don't see how this same rule should be different for Montenegro. I will not mention that wikipedia is also possible for some artificial languages and don't have very harsh and strict rules regarding this. But in Montenegrin case it seems that people wish to close eyes. Why?
Many languages in Europe do not have countries to match the language: Galician, Catalan, Frisian, Sardinian ... And what should happen with the Roma? Other languages are spoken in several countries. Wikipedia is based on languages, not on nations or the evil of nationalism or patriotism.
I don't like the artificial languages any more than you do. Except for Esperanto, there is nobody that really speaks these languages on a regular basis, and nobody to be the audience for the language games that their supporters like to play. It would be very difficult to get rid of them, as the experience with a totally ridiculous language like Klingon has shown.
I have no problem with Montenegrin independence, though I have sometimes wondered why it was so much slower to break away from Serbia than the other repblics of Yugoslavia. Many of us from outside the Balkans find the persistent chauvinism of the entire area (not just Yugoslavia) thoroughly mystifying, and I don't think that Wikipedia should be encouraging these separate language in the face of contrary linguistic evidence.
Ec
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Many languages in Europe do not have countries to match the language: Galician, Catalan, Frisian, Sardinian ... And what should happen with the Roma? Other languages are spoken in several countries. Wikipedia is based on languages, not on nations or the evil of nationalism or patriotism.
I don't like the artificial languages any more than you do. Except for Esperanto, there is nobody that really speaks these languages on a regular basis, and nobody to be the audience for the language games that their supporters like to play. It would be very difficult to get rid of them, as the experience with a totally ridiculous language like Klingon has shown.
I have no problem with Montenegrin independence, though I have sometimes wondered why it was so much slower to break away from Serbia than the other repblics of Yugoslavia. Many of us from outside the Balkans find the persistent chauvinism of the entire area (not just Yugoslavia) thoroughly mystifying, and I don't think that Wikipedia should be encouraging these separate language in the face of contrary linguistic evidence.
Ec
What linguistic evidence? I am asking you all this time to give such evidence. What are the rules on WMF about this? Is it the evidence that 200.000 people talk Montenegrin language?
And I am not talking about countries I am talking about nation marks (Country don't always mean nation). I dont see that we follow each other up on this. You seems talk about something else.
Darko Bulatovic
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
What linguistic evidence? I am asking you all this time to give such evidence. What are the rules on WMF about this?
No formal rules that I know of but evidence that there is a consensus of linguists that Montenegrin is a language rather than a dialect would but a good start.
Is it the evidence that 200.000 people talk Montenegrin language?
No that is how many claim to speak Montenegrin. It is likely that over 300 million speak US english. Doesn't make it a language seperate from British english.
geni wrote:
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
What linguistic evidence? I am asking you all this time to give such evidence. What are the rules on WMF about this?
No formal rules that I know of but evidence that there is a consensus of linguists that Montenegrin is a language rather than a dialect would but a good start.
What linguists?
Do you have some quotes about this? I am ready to talk about this.
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
What linguists?
Hopefuly ones that are experts in the languages of the Balkan Peninsula
geni wrote:
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
What linguists?
Hopefuly ones that are experts in the languages of the Balkan Peninsula
Do you have some reference on witch you build up your opinion? Please share with us.
Darko Bulatovic
I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian, Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....)
You forgot that German is spoken in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Italy all three happily living together on one wiki - and of course: there are some differences among these four versions of German, but nevertheless they are ONE language. French is spoken in France, Canada, Switzerland etc. and they work on one Wikipedia. Dutch is spoken in the Netherlands, Belgium and France and they work on one Wikipedia. Italian is spoken in Italy and Switzerland and they work on one Wikipedia. English is spoken in Great Britain, USA, Australia, New Zealand etc. and they all work on one Wikipedia.
Of course there are slight differences in the usage of certain terminology, in writing etc., but they all happily work together. There is the possibility, even now, to handle more than one language on a Wiki and the smaller the communities of a certain language or variation or dialect the more sense it makes to co-operate in one wiki for the simple fact that the project has a better chance to survive - anyway the day is not all too far that it will become even easier to hav various scripts and dialects live on one wiki.
A Wiki project is about co-operation and not separation. You want to be different: well, then show it and co-operate instead of allowing for political separation. We all have one thing in common: we are human beings and as such we have something called intelligence that distinguishes us from other living forms ans as such we have the power to decide ... the wiki way is co-operation and trying to understand each other and not separation.
Languages develop over centuries, sometimes you have vowel shifts and even stronger differences within one language ... well that is about spoken language ... if you force the writing in a certain different way that means that you create an artificial version of a language or you write in a dialect.
Again: please co-operate and show that people, even living in different nations, are able to work together.
Thank you for your attention and understanding.
Best,
Sabine Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com
Sabine Cretella wrote:
I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian, Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....)
You forgot that German is spoken in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Italy all three happily living together on one wiki - and of course: there are some differences among these four versions of German, but nevertheless they are ONE language. French is spoken in France, Canada, Switzerland etc. and they work on one Wikipedia. Dutch is spoken in the Netherlands, Belgium and France and they work on one Wikipedia. Italian is spoken in Italy and Switzerland and they work on one Wikipedia. English is spoken in Great Britain, USA, Australia, New Zealand etc. and they all work on one Wikipedia.
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks. In Montenegrin case in Montenegro lives 45% Montenegrin s, 35% Serbs, Albanians, Bosnnjaks,... On other cases those countries was colonies of mayor European empires.
Of course there are slight differences in the usage of certain terminology, in writing etc., but they all happily work together. There is the possibility, even now, to handle more than one language on a Wiki and the smaller the communities of a certain language or variation or dialect the more sense it makes to co-operate in one wiki for the simple fact that the project has a better chance to survive - anyway the day is not all too far that it will become even easier to hav various scripts and dialects live on one wiki.
A Wiki project is about co-operation and not separation. You want to be different: well, then show it and co-operate instead of allowing for political separation. We all have one thing in common: we are human beings and as such we have something called intelligence that distinguishes us from other living forms ans as such we have the power to decide ... the wiki way is co-operation and trying to understand each other and not separation.
Sabine, When I come here my idea was to collaborate and cooperate with others. If that was not the case we could make our own wikipedia. But that is not the case. I agree with you about humans but I will add: Human also have stereotypes, mis understanding, limited knowledge about specific topics and dont judge always the same in same cases.
Thank you for joining discussion, Darko Bulatovic
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks.
No. Switzerland has proved itself to be independent of these rather firmly for quite a number of centuries.
Switzerland also has a few Romansh speakers.
Sabine, When I come here my idea was to collaborate and cooperate with others. If that was not the case we could make our own wikipedia. But that is not the case. I agree with you about humans but I will add: Human also have stereotypes, mis understanding, limited knowledge about specific topics and dont judge always the same in same cases.
However there is no need for a separate wikipedia unless it can be shown there is a language barrier.
geni wrote:
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks.
No. Switzerland has proved itself to be independent of these rather firmly for quite a number of centuries.
Switzerland also has a few Romansh speakers.
Sabine, When I come here my idea was to collaborate and cooperate with others. If that was not the case we could make our own wikipedia. But that is not the case. I agree with you about humans but I will add: Human also have stereotypes, mis understanding, limited knowledge about specific topics and dont judge always the same in same cases.
However there is no need for a separate wikipedia unless it can be shown there is a language barrier.
Will we ask for it or talk here if we don't thing there is language barrier? This started to look like philosophic question. We already get proposal from Serbian community, also we wait from Croatian community and Bosnian community. But for now there is no consensus between them. If there ever be one we will participate.
On 11/30/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
Will we ask for it or talk here if we don't thing there is language barrier?
It is possible. You are a new country. National pride of some sort is sure to exist. Perhaps you feel that along with the flag, the seat at the UN and the votes in the Eurovision song contest your dialect should be declared a distinct language.
Hi,
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
Will we ask for it or talk here if we don't thing there is language barrier? This started to look like philosophic question. We already get proposal from Serbian community, also we wait from Croatian community and Bosnian community. But for now there is no consensus between them. If there ever be one we will participate.
If you really mean to participate in a common Wikipedia for all variant of the Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, then do it! There is http://sh.wikipedia.org/ which is just meant for that.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbocroatian_language
Regards,
Yann
Quoting geni geniice@gmail.com:
However there is no need for a separate wikipedia unless it can be shown there is a language barrier.
a reason could be the conservation of a slowly dying language.
On 11/30/06, elvis@chan.de elvis@chan.de wrote:
Quoting geni geniice@gmail.com:
However there is no need for a separate wikipedia unless it can be shown there is a language barrier.
a reason could be the conservation of a slowly dying language.
And the benifit of doing that would be?
No matter In this case we are not talkina about a dying language. We are tlaking about something that may or may not be a language.
geni wrote:
On 11/30/06, elvis@chan.de elvis@chan.de wrote:
Quoting geni geniice@gmail.com:
However there is no need for a separate wikipedia unless it can be shown there is a language barrier.
a reason could be the conservation of a slowly dying language.
And the benifit of doing that would be?
What you are saying ???? People dig ashes to find something new, and you dont care? Wow
No matter In this case we are not talkina about a dying language. We are tlaking about something that may or may not be a language.
I have asked you,and I will ask you again, do you even know anything about this topic?
Thank you,
Darko
On 12/1/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
What you are saying ???? People dig ashes to find something new, and you dont care? Wow
Languages don't need to be liveing in order extract information from them. Late Egyptian has been dead for over 2000 years. We can still extract informatrion from it. However this is irrelivant since if Montenegrin is indeed a seperate language there is no evidence it is dying.
I have asked you,and I will ask you again, do you even know anything about this topic?
Enough to ask questions. In this case the relivant question is what is the general view of the experts in the field?
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
Sabine Cretella wrote:
I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian, Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....)
You forgot that German is spoken in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Italy all three happily living together on one wiki - and of course: there are some differences among these four versions of German, but nevertheless they are ONE language. French is spoken in France, Canada, Switzerland etc. and they work on one Wikipedia. Dutch is spoken in the Netherlands, Belgium and France and they work on one Wikipedia. Italian is spoken in Italy and Switzerland and they work on one Wikipedia. English is spoken in Great Britain, USA, Australia, New Zealand etc. and they all work on one Wikipedia.
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks. In Montenegrin case in Montenegro lives 45% Montenegrin s, 35% Serbs, Albanians, Bosnnjaks,... On other cases those countries was colonies of mayor European empires.
There is nothing specific about that. The examples given by Sabin e is perfectly valid. The problem is that you don't want to admit it.
Thank you for joining discussion, Darko Bulatovic
Regards,
Yann
Yann Forget wrote:
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks. In Montenegrin case in Montenegro lives 45% Montenegrin s, 35% Serbs, Albanians, Bosnnjaks,... On other cases those countries was colonies of mayor European empires.
There is nothing specific about that. The examples given by Sabin e is perfectly valid. The problem is that you don't want to admit it.
Thank you for joining discussion, Darko Bulatovic
Regards,
Yann
Yann,
How much do you know about this? You are angry at me Yann? That I called you to not make assumptions? Your assumptions affect half of million people Yann.I hope that you relise that, as I don't really understand you. Sabin did at least showed her point of view here, and you just make comments without any argument.
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
Hi,
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
Yann Forget wrote:
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks. In Montenegrin case in Montenegro lives 45% Montenegrin s, 35% Serbs, Albanians, Bosnnjaks,... On other cases those countries was colonies of mayor European empires.
There is nothing specific about that. The examples given by Sabin e is perfectly valid. The problem is that you don't want to admit it.
Thank you for joining discussion, Darko Bulatovic
Regards,
Yann
Yann,
How much do you know about this? You are angry at me Yann? That I called
I am not angry.
you to not make assumptions? Your assumptions affect half of million people Yann. I hope that you relise that, as I don't really understand
Do you realize that what you ask affects the whole of Wikimedia?
you. Sabin did at least showed her point of view here, and you just make comments without any argument.
Why do I need to argument? Did you listen to arguments made by others?
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
As Geni said: "Enough to ask questions. In this case the relivant question is what is the general view of the experts in the field?"
Regards,
Yann
Darko Bulatovic wrote:
Yann Forget wrote:
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
That is very specific case, As in Switzerland live Italians, Germans and Franks. In Montenegrin case in Montenegro lives 45% Montenegrin s, 35% Serbs, Albanians, Bosnnjaks,... On other cases those countries was colonies of mayor European empires.
There is nothing specific about that. The examples given by Sabine is perfectly valid. The problem is that you don't want to admit it.
Yann,
How much do you know about this? You are angry at me Yann? That I called you to not make assumptions? Your assumptions affect half of million people Yann.I hope that you relise that, as I don't really understand you. Sabine did at least showed her point of view here, and you just make comments without any argument.
I don't think that Yann was expressing anger. His suggestion to use the sh.wikipedia was a constructive one. Of Montenegrin, Serbian, Albanian, and Bosnian mentioned above most people outside of the Balkans would see only Albanian as different enough from the others to merit being called a language. To say that this issue will affect half a million people (by which I assume you mean the entire population of Montenegro) is overly dramatic; most of those people will just carry on normally with their lives no matter how the arguments here are resolved.
The five of us who have so far participated with you in this discussion are from five different countries (none of which is Serbia), and five different native languages. I have seen three of the others regularly participate in discussions about language, so I would pay attentiont their opinions even when I don't agree with them.
If you really want to do things for the Montenegrin language you could do better than argue in favour of the correlation between nation and language. Begin by giving references to existing Montenegrin dictionary and grammar books, showing Montenegrin words in Wiktionary and how they differ from other Serbo-Croatian languages, show us the important differences in Montenegrin grammar, or.add important out-of-copyright books by Montenegrin authors to Wikisource.
Ec
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I don't think that Yann was expressing anger. His suggestion to use the sh.wikipedia was a constructive one. Of Montenegrin, Serbian, Albanian, and Bosnian mentioned above most people outside of the Balkans would see only Albanian as different enough from the others to merit being called a language. To say that this issue will affect half a million people (by which I assume you mean the entire population of Montenegro) is overly dramatic; most of those people will just carry on normally with their lives no matter how the arguments here are resolved.
The five of us who have so far participated with you in this discussion are from five different countries (none of which is Serbia), and five different native languages. I have seen three of the others regularly participate in discussions about language, so I would pay attentiont their opinions even when I don't agree with them.
If you really want to do things for the Montenegrin language you could do better than argue in favour of the correlation between nation and language. Begin by giving references to existing Montenegrin dictionary and grammar books, showing Montenegrin words in Wiktionary and how they differ from other Serbo-Croatian languages, show us the important differences in Montenegrin grammar, or.add important out-of-copyright books by Montenegrin authors to Wikisource.
Ec
Ray,
Thank you for showing you interest in this, Yan just showed to me( and some of others) that they don't have a clue what they talk about. And that producing a anger that is not provoked by anything from my side. The committee has made decision that is on hand to Serbian clero-nacional-shovinism that I think you all know about in close history of Sloboan Miloshevic. I have asked people here to explain their opinion (and still waiting committee to give official one).
I think that my statement is not over dramatic, as you will see when this come to media. In which way some people act as judges but dont even bother to take time to gather evidence from both sides. I have called many times but no one event tried to go deeper in this.
Some people here just comment (and after dont wish to elaborate)they dont give any constructive element to this discussion.
your idea here is not possible from many reasons. First: - Montenegrin language exists. Allmost 200.000 people stated that they talk Montenegrin language and 650.000 are affected by it. - Montenegrin is part of South Slavic languages that includes: Bulgarian, Slovenian, Macedonian, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian.
Montenegrin has specifics that differ from others(closer group Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian) in many was. Some time from 10-30% and from Slovenian. Macedonian, and Bulgarian much more.
I see I got commented on serbian mailing list: ????????? ?? ??????? ????? ??? "??????????????". ???? ? ?? ?????? ??????, ? ?? ?????? ???? ????????? ?????? ????????. ????? ????... ??? ????? ?????? ????, ? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ? ????????. ?????? ?? ???? ???????. ??????? ?? ??????? ??????????? ????? ???? ??? ???????? ?? ??????, ?????? ??? ? ???????? ?? ???, ?????????? ???????..., ? ????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ??????, ??? ? ?????.... ????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ??????? ?? ????????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ????? ???????? ??????????? ????????... ? ??????????? ?????? ??????? ?????????????. ????? ?? ?? ?????, ??????? ?'? ????????. :) translation: Djukanovic is spiritual leader of that "new-montenegrins". In same way he talk shit, and that he is not even see what stupidity he talks. Good for them... when they have that kind of leader, and to majority is worst than in Albania. Kosovo comes to them as America. Shiptars (It could be called as mocking name to Albanian people) seeling them humanitartian help which they get on Kosovo, they even buy a medicaments from them, smuggled of course. And here they are dicky that they have a nation, and now language.... Fuck nation which people waiting Bus from Shiptaria (Albania-Kosovo maybe - mocking), that driver will smuggle them aspirins. In meantime that Dog become multimillionaire . They are stupid like Penis or maybe better like VIBRATOR
That kind of fascism you are supporting? You call us to participate with this kind of people? You are insane. It is quite obvious who is political motivated here.
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
Darko Bulatovic wrote:
I see I got commented on serbian mailing list: ?????????
...
??????? ?'? ????????. :)
translation: Djukanovic is spiritual leader of that "new-montenegrins". In same way he talk shit, and that he is not even see what stupidity he talks. Good for them... when they have that kind of leader, and to majority is worst than in Albania. Kosovo comes to them as America. Shiptars (It could be called as mocking name to Albanian people) seeling them humanitartian help which they get on Kosovo, they even buy a medicaments from them, smuggled of course. And here they are dicky that they have a nation, and now language.... Fuck nation which people waiting Bus from Shiptaria (Albania-Kosovo maybe - mocking), that driver will smuggle them aspirins. In meantime that Dog become multimillionaire . They are stupid like Penis or maybe better like VIBRATOR
That kind of fascism you are supporting? You call us to participate with this kind of people? You are insane. It is quite obvious who is political motivated here.
I have no reason to question your translation.
A person who carried on in this way in an English language project would very soon be criticized severely, and some would demand some kind of punishment.
To me this quotation by itself is a strong argument against the separate projects. As much as this attitude may thrive in a closed community of like-minded people, I'm sure that it would not be well received in a combined serbo-croatian project. It is clearly not a Neutral Point of View. It is arguably more difficult to maintain neutrality in a small wiki. It is more likely to pursue the neutrality of the minority than a broader neutrality because most outsiders simply don't understand the language, and if the few that do have their own separate wiki there is no incentive to do so. A combined project that would force these people to get along and work at solving their differences would benefit NPOV.
As Wikipedia grows this can have severe long-term implications about the application of NPOV.
Ec
Hi,
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
Ray,
Thank you for showing you interest in this, Yan just showed to me( and some of others) that they don't have a clue what they talk about. And
I know very well what I am talking about. Stop talking about others when you don't know them. And please stop NOW your political motivated propaganda.
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
Yann
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Darko Bulatovic a écrit :
Ray,
Thank you for showing you interest in this, Yan just showed to me( and some of others) that they don't have a clue what they talk about. And
I know very well what I am talking about. *Stop talking about others when you don't know them.*
You are one that do that Yann. I don't have reason to doubt that you know what you are talking about and why.
And please stop NOW your political motivated propaganda.
What you are saying is childish. It is interesting that you don't find any respect to prove your claims to this community. I am calling you hole this time in this thread to just do that, but you go on same road of false accusations and assumptions. And you find this OK?
Yann, I don't think that this is level of discussion on which I wish to participate.
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
Ray Saintonge wrote:
If you really want to do things for the Montenegrin language you could do better than argue in favour of the correlation between nation and language. Begin by giving references to existing Montenegrin dictionary and grammar books, showing Montenegrin words in Wiktionary and how they differ from other Serbo-Croatian languages, show us the important differences in Montenegrin grammar, or.add important out-of-copyright books by Montenegrin authors to Wikisource.
Ec
But I didnt make this point, people from here made that point. I have just tied to say that it is not the point. You want reference:
- Try to read work of Petar Petrovic Njegosh II. You will find on other part of the book dictionary for people which talk Serbian language. As they don't understand much of it. - All state letters and philosophic, poems, etc that come from Montenegro in past of 100+ years contains such specific. Modern one also has same specific that use Montenegrin language.
In current draft of state constitution is stated that official language of Montenegro is Montenegrin, also there are some Books from mr. Nikcevic that have this topic, but I cant find reference on Internet that will show this.
Darko Bulatovic
On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language.
Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou" still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation there is is often not goverment mandated.
Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous.
The oxford manual of style is not writen by the goverment.
I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
.When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well.
Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles? Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south slavenian languages?
Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism
It shouldn't be
and now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own language, it become problem.
Well yes because we are yet to establish that the language exists.
AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very strong on WMF.
Not really. the WMF is based in the US the board is mostly from the US and most significant non US chapter is prbably germany.
geni wrote:
Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou" still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation there is is often not goverment mandated.
--- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level I was talking about.
Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous.
The oxford manual of style is not writen by the goverment.
Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following *government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
.When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well.
Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles? Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south slavenian languages?
Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism
It shouldn't be
and now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own language, it become problem.
Well yes because we are yet to establish that the language exists.
But under same rule WMF has given
AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very strong on WMF.
Not really. the WMF is based in the US the board is mostly from the US and most significant non US chapter is prbably germany.
AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF
or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is
very
strong on WMF.
Not really. the WMF is based in the US the board is mostly from the US and most significant non US chapter is prbably germany.
The problem that is discussed here looks like political problem, it is not yet at that level ( e.g. WMF Board of Trustees), As I can see it is just affected some part of this community. I just don't understand this dilemma here regarding Montenegrin Wikipedia, so I am just trying to realize what possible reasons cold be for this. I didn't aspect this kind of welcome here on WMF, as we indeed had a good intentions. So much assumptions here with no reason, as we didn't do anything to provoke this.
Darko Bulatovic
On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
The problem that is discussed here looks like political problem, it is not yet at that level ( e.g. WMF Board of Trustees), As I can see it is just affected some part of this community. I just don't understand this dilemma here regarding Montenegrin Wikipedia, so I am just trying to realize what possible reasons cold be for this.
There is a lack of solid evidence that is is a solidly distinct language
I didn't aspect this kind of welcome here on WMF, as we indeed had a good intentions.
I'm sure you do.
So much assumptions here with no reason, as we didn't do anything to provoke this.
There isn't much we can do until we can figure out if Montenegrin is a distinct language or a dialect.
Hi,
Just to be clear, I don't care that the Montenegrin is created or not. But I care that it would be created and become a battle field. Which means that if it is created, there should be appropriate measures to insure that it does not become a back spot on Wikimedia, like the Moldavan Wikipedia is now. The problem is not that the Moldavan Wikipedia was created. The problem is that Moldavian people did not benefit from the creation of the wiki.
Regards,
Yann
On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
geni wrote:
Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou" still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation there is is often not goverment mandated.
--- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level I was talking about.
Historically things have been somewhat different.
Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following *government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
Governments at the present time are one of the few groups to produce enough material to need to create manuals of style. that does not mean they are required for standardisation of language
geni wrote:
On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
geni wrote:
Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou" still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation there is is often not goverment mandated.
--- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level I was talking about.
Historically things have been somewhat different.
Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following *government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
Governments at the present time are one of the few groups to produce enough material to need to create manuals of style. that does not mean they are required for standardisation of language
Criteria for ISO 639-1
The following criteria for defining new languages in ISO 639-1 has been established by the ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee.
* Relation to ISO 639-2. Since ISO 639-1 is to remain a subset of ISO 639-2, it must first satisfy the requirements for ISO 639-2 and also satisfy the following. * Documentation. o a significant body of existing documents (specialized texts, such as college or university textbooks, technical documentation manuals, specialized journals, subject-field related books, etc.) written in specialized languages o a number of existing terminologies in various subject fields (e.g. technical dictionaries, specialized glossaries, vocabularies, etc. in printed or electronic form) * Recommendation.A recommendation and support of a specialized authority (such as a standards organization, *governmental body*, linguistic institution, or *cultural organization*) * Other considerations o the number of speakers of the language community o t*he recognized status of the language in one or more countries* o the support of the request by *one or more official bodies* * Collective codes. ISO 639-1 does not use collective codes. If these are necessary the alpha-3 code shall be used.
This document was revised on 22 Sept. 2006 as approved by the ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee on 10 June 2006. This replaces the published text in ISO 639-2, sections 4.1.1, 4.1.3, and A.2.1.
ISO 639-2 defines a proper subset of the totality of alpha-3 language identifiers in all parts of ISO 639. The primary applications for which ISO 639-2 is intended include libraries, archives and other documentation applications. Thus, the general criterion for inclusion of a language in ISO 639-2 is that there is a significant body of literature in the language or describing the language. In order to establish this, the following objective and subjective metrics will be applied.
* Number of documents. The request for a new language identifier shall include evidence that one agency holds 50 different documents in the language or that five agencies hold a total of 50 different documents among them in the language. Documents include all forms of material and are not limited to text. This is a necessary requirement, but not sufficient in and of itself. In addition the following requirements will be considered. * Size and variety of literature. The size and variety of the literature in the language, be it written or oral, will be considered and should be documented in the proposal. The documentation may be in the form of reference to library holdings or bibliographies or more general statements quantifying the literature and its variation. ** National or regional support* The proposal should preferably be explicitly supported by a national or regional language authority or standardizing body. If such support for some reason is unobtainable, a recommendation from another authority or language organization will be taken into account. * Formal or official status If the language in question has some sort of "official" status, documentation of this status will greatly support the proposal. The assignment of formal status to languages is in no way consistently practiced throughout the world, *and the lack of such status is not a negative argument if other requirements are met.* * Formal education If the language is used as a means of instruction in formal education on any level, documentation of this use will support the proposal. Teaching of the language is also relevant, in particular if the teaching is extensive.
I think that give list of requirements for standardization so that we don't waste time in future discussion on this. I hope thios will clear up my reference to government and to political aspect of this story.
Regards, darko Bulatovic
geni wrote:
On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic mail@itam.ws wrote:
geni wrote:
Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou" still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation there is is often not goverment mandated.
--- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level I was talking about.
Historically things have been somewhat different.
Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following *government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
Governments at the present time are one of the few groups to produce enough material to need to create manuals of style. that does not mean they are required for standardisation of language
Governments also need style manuals for official publications, but these do not have the force of law for non-governmental operations. Our schools never make reference to any kind of official spelling or grammar when teaching children. English, more than any other language is based on history, custom and usage. There is such a thing as poor language skills for native speakers, but one feature that makes it very difficult for the health of other languages is the easy acceptance by English of ways of speaking drawn from other languages.
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Governments also need style manuals for official publications, but these do not have the force of law for non-governmental operations. Our schools never make reference to any kind of official spelling or grammar when teaching children. English, more than any other language is based on history, custom and usage. There is such a thing as poor language skills for native speakers, but one feature that makes it very difficult for the health of other languages is the easy acceptance by English of ways of speaking drawn from other languages.
Ray,
Here is not same situation, In all publications or education there must be followed rules thats are called "Pravopis" and they are in some part very strict. As this is not my field and I have trouble to talk about it on English, I hope you will understand at least some of this. Our language is very different from English as there are many rules (because many native English speakers have problem to learn our language). One example there are "Rodovi" which change construction of sentence, which in English is absent. This is based on ( Him, She, it).
Darko Bulatovic
Darko Bulatovic wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Darko Bulatovic schreef:
Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too. These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill) and stewards.
Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There is no expected improvement in the near future because the language itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
Regards,
Yann
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your statement. Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
Regards, Darko bulatovic President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi, Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
There are languages where the cultural and political differences are quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard,
I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as there must be political will to make standard from people language. Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
Being multilingual and multicultural does not mean that each language needs its own Bantustan. South Africa already showed us that apartheid was a bankrupt system. Post-colonial Africa had to accept that abandoning colonial boundaries in favour of a return to tribal areas would be a recipe for chaos.
To say that languages must be driven by politics is absurd. Generally it works the other way. Tribes develop their own way of talking, and use that as an excuse for making politics.
As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
Culture is absolutely connected with language. But a special language in a closed circle prevents the culture from being spread to any but those who already know the language.
.When you read the article about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be found outside of Montenegro as well.
Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles? Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south slavenian languages?
I'm glad you use the word "dialect". If you and a Serb speak with each other (preferably about a neutral topic) in your own dialects you each should be able to understand most of what the other is saying. Thus they are dialects of the same language. If you can't understand each other they are different languages.
Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism and now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own language, it become problem. AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very strong on WMF. But to this aspect of discussion is not place here. My question is what argument do you have on this? Did you check them or you just used POV to discuss on this topic?
Using Wikipedia to spread nationalism is absolutely contrary to a Neutral Point of View. Wikipedia did start in the United States, but if the Americans who were involved at the earliest stages had insisted that Wikipedia was there to promote US nationalism it would have failed miserably in all other English-speaking countries.
Personally, I don't think that there should ever have been separate Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian wikipedias. If any of them are using their respective projects to spread their own nationalism that is wrong. As long as they have their own wikis nobody from within the Yugoslav communities will be willing to seriously criticise them for it, and nobody from outside the Yugoslav communities will understand the language enough to be able to do it.
I can understand that Montenegrins can feel prejudiced when the same mistake is not made for them as was made for the Serbians.
Please, English is not my native language, and I don't see how you could miss interpret my statement about multilingual and multi cultural nature of wikipedia. Every language bring up cultural aspect and I don't see how you could by-pass this.
Your use of English may have a few errors, but not enough to comment about, or to leave the impression that you are not making sense. (Neither Gerrard nor Yann are native English speakers.) My own view of multiculturalism is typically Canadian, and that involves appreciating that a country is made up of many cultures that bring a rich diversity into a country.
And again please return to the topic explain to me how you can be that CLAIRVOYANCE and assume that Montenegrin wikipedia will bring such bad image to WMF . You don't have arguments for that. This is just showing to me that you take POV. You just assume this with (for me) no particular reason. So I can just guess here why you are doing this. Please be more specific about your goals here, so I don't assume that you just take POV here.
I don't think that bringing a bad image is a factor. It's a broader question of linguistics.
I am ready to participate on any level of discussion but please don't make assumptions as that will bring bad connotation to your willingness to do right thing in this case.
The only assumption there is that what you want is the right thing.
There is another alternative. Start using the serbo-croatian (sh) Wikipedia. It was the original Yugoslav project, and is still alive and well.
Ec
Being multilingual and multicultural does not mean that each language needs its own Bantustan. South Africa already showed us that apartheid was a bankrupt system. Post-colonial Africa had to accept that abandoning colonial boundaries in favour of a return to tribal areas would be a recipe for chaos.
To say that languages must be driven by politics is absurd. Generally it works the other way. Tribes develop their own way of talking, and use that as an excuse for making politics.
Please Montenegro is not in Africa, and it has much to offer to the world, from their own culture and civilization. Many great people was born in Montenegro and many had a great contribution to the human civilization. In other sense the Montenegrin Wikipedia is great tool for Montenegro to put effort in building unified Encyclopedia that anyone can use. Many Benefits are possible for future generations of Montenegrin to aggregate knowledge and to continue to share their knowledge and to translate form English to their native language and vice versa.
Wikipedia and WMF had a vision when I started to use it and to use their tools, if that vision was changed I don't know. This vision was saying that Wikipedia is multilingual encyclopedia, not some -lingual encyclopedia.
Using Wikipedia to spread nationalism is absolutely contrary to a Neutral Point of View. Wikipedia did start in the United States, but if the Americans who were involved at the earliest stages had insisted that Wikipedia was there to promote US nationalism it would have failed miserably in all other English-speaking countries.
Personally, I don't think that there should ever have been separate Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian wikipedias. If any of them are using their respective projects to spread their own nationalism that is wrong. As long as they have their own wikis nobody from within the Yugoslav communities will be willing to seriously criticise them for it, and nobody from outside the Yugoslav communities will understand the language enough to be able to do it.
I can understand that Montenegrins can feel prejudiced when the same mistake is not made for them as was made for the Serbians.
But there are many articles on wikipedia that promote nationalism with support of some facts or invented ones. Montenegrin related articles are good examples, please see discussion on some of them and you will see what happen there. If you stop Montenegrin wikipedia I don't see how that will help in this effort? I think that will just do opposite. On other languages cold be the same ( As I know it is on some Balkan versions).
I don't think that bringing a bad image is a factor. It's a broader question of linguistics.
I am not linguist but for this occasion I gathered many material on this topic and I am ready to contribute to clear this part and to put it on light.
I am ready to participate on any level of discussion but please don't make assumptions as that will bring bad connotation to your willingness to do right thing in this case.
The only assumption there is that what you want is the right thing.
There is another alternative. Start using the serbo-croatian (sh) Wikipedia. It was the original Yugoslav project, and is still alive and well.
Ec
But I don't really see what happening here. Many people talk about Montenegrin wikipedia in bad way as it should be killed before it is born without fair trial. This not looks very good for community and for future development.
It is not problem with Montenegrin wikipedia it is problem with current wikipedias that don't obey rules to be NPOV. And it looks like no one are willing to be persistent to change this. In contrary to Yann I think that Montenegrin wikipedia could contribute in solving this problem in one part. At least that could show that problem is not on small projects, That problem could be in people that lead and contribute to the projects (easy could be on much larger WP). Laziness and trouble fighting vandals should not be reason to stop new projects.
Yugoslavia have place in History but not in future, now future for Balkan nations are in EU.
Regards, Darko Bulatovic
But there are many articles on wikipedia that promote nationalism with support of some facts or invented ones. Montenegrin related articles are good examples, please see discussion on some of them and you will see what happen there. If you stop Montenegrin wikipedia I don't see how that will help in this effort? I think that will just do opposite. On other languages cold be the same ( As I know it is on some Balkan versions).
I thought that mixing different cultures in the same wiki was a way to reach NPOV... If there are a Montenegrin wp, and a Serbian wp, will we not have a Montenegrin version of the history and a Serbian version of the history? I don't see how this is NPOV...
Or maybe I didn't understand well (quite possible), then please explain.
Regards, Kip.
Christophe Millet wrote:
But there are many articles on wikipedia that promote nationalism with support of some facts or invented ones. Montenegrin related articles are good examples, please see discussion on some of them and you will see what happen there. If you stop Montenegrin wikipedia I don't see how that will help in this effort? I think that will just do opposite. On other languages cold be the same ( As I know it is on some Balkan versions).
I thought that mixing different cultures in the same wiki was a way to reach NPOV... If there are a Montenegrin wp, and a Serbian wp, will we not have a Montenegrin version of the history and a Serbian version of the history? I don't see how this is NPOV...
Or maybe I didn't understand well (quite possible), then please explain.
Regards, Kip. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes,
Montenegro is multicultural and multi etnical society. We will get Montenegrin history, Islam history in montenegro, we will get ilirs history in montenegro, we will get helens history in montenegro, ... Many diversity in Montenegro give rich heritage and it will be very exiting to work on it.
Darko Bulatovic
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org