Test pages for Võro and Scots language Wikipedia http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/fiu-vro/ http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/fiu-sco/ are in danger!
I can't find any hint of fiu-sco in the deletion log, can't see anything about it.
Now user of Wikimedia Aphaia threats to erase our work and has already destroyed Scots test page!!
Did you tell Aphaia about the purpose of the pages? [ok, read the revelant pages, she understood the purpose]. Maybe she didn't read wikimedia-l and doesn't know what has been decided. Remember: assume good faith first (no, i am not accusing *you* of lying, merely pointing out that it's almost certainly a misunderstanding between you two). Also, on VfD, she indicates that it's the *number* of planned articles that bothers her, not their *existence*. (disclaimer: i don't know meta policy)
Sulev Iva (Meta User Võrok) (En User Võrolang)
Nicolas Weeger
Accédez au courrier électronique de La Poste : www.laposte.net ; 3615 LAPOSTENET (0,34/mn) ; tél : 08 92 68 13 50 (0,34/mn)
Thank you for your mails, Ryo and Sulev
On 5/20/05, Nicolas Weeger nicolas.weeger@laposte.net wrote:
I can't find any hint of fiu-sco in the deletion log, can't see anything about it.
Surely because none of those files were deleted. In my opinion it sounds too strong to call a lising for RfD as "destroying".
I made a research if there is a possibility those files are already legitimate parts of existing Wikipedia (meta policy allow us to speedy it, like already transwikied media, copied article from some mysterious reasons), but I didn't find any evidence to think so and meta namespace is apparently not dedicated for normal encyclopedia articles, therefore I thought those pages were appropriate to list on the RfD.
Because of lisiting, he or she could get a chance to advocation, so I think it was a fair decision for both parties. And I think it was a rude action to put such pages withouth remark like "this is a test page" specially on main namespace.
Now user of Wikimedia Aphaia threats to erase our work and has already destroyed Scots test page!!
You misunderstood the situation unless you make a lie. Oscar lilsted [[Scotland]] and I put a {{rfd}} tag. It is a part of our routine of request for deletion and every editor has a right to do according our policy. And both test main page and article haven't been deleted by anyone, you have no right or reason to say the above. I request hereby for apology on this bad and wrong labelling.
Did you tell Aphaia about the purpose of the pages? [ok, read the revelant pages, she understood the purpose].
I know it after I listed those pages on RfD. And I would like to point out those are actually substubs on main namespace without any links so I wondered first if I could speedy them as test.It is very regret to see my torelence is rewarded wiith such bad wording.
Maybe she didn't read wikimedia-l and doesn't know what has been
decided. Remember: assume good faith first (no, i am not accusing *you* of lying, merely pointing out that it's almost certainly a misunderstanding between you two).
Thank you Ryo, no, I don't subscribe wikipedia-l. I am a Wikiquoter rather than a Wikipedian. And I think it is too rude and unwise Wikipedia-l introduces a new policy not to Wikipedia but to Meta which has its own community independent from any particular project without announcement or discussion. I pointed out there was no message on meta, even on [[Meta:Babel]].
Also, on VfD, she indicates that it's the *number* of planned
articles that bothers her, not their *existence*.
(disclaimer: i don't know meta policy)
On IRC conversation yann agreed 100 are too many. If someone really wants to create "a test wiki with some 100 or 200 articles", I think he would be better to create a separate wiki.
And also I oppose to put those test articles without remark on main namespace. It is very annoying and rude from my view. You could put a remark at the top, categorize them as "test articles" or put them into subpages of your test page.
Thank you for considerations,.
22.05.2005 9:24:22, Aphaia aphaia@gmail.com kirot':
Now user of Wikimedia Aphaia threats to erase our work and has already destroyed Scots test page!!
You misunderstood the situation unless you make a lie. Oscar lilsted [[Scotland]] and I put a {{rfd}} tag. It is a part of our routine of request for deletion and every editor has a right to do according our policy. And both test main page and article haven't been deleted by anyone, you have no right or reason to say the above. I request hereby for apology on this bad and wrong labelling.
Hi Aphaia,
I apologize. Yes, I misunderstood the situation. It is my fault because I am still quite unfamiliar in MetaWiki. I had no idea that a test page may disturb the Meta system. So I was very surprized when I saw my work listed to deletion. Then I saw in the deletion list that both sco and fiu-vro test pages are really considered as rude and wrong action which should be deleted. Now I understand that it was just a every-day routine for you to mark pages for deletion. But for me it was really shocking that my work done with heart is wrong and bad and must be deleted. I did not understand how test pages for small languages' Wikipedias can be so seriously harmful that they must be marked to deletion. It seemed to me so agressive and dangerous that I was really in panic. Now I understand that you just followed rules and every-day routine. Thank you for suggestion to write to the beginnig of the test page remark "this is a test page". I will do it. I am so sorry that I caused misunderstandings.
With best wishes Sulev Iva (Võrok)
Thank you for your reply, Võrok.
On 5/23/05, Sulev Iva juvasul@ut.ee wrote:
22.05.2005 9:24:22, Aphaia aphaia@gmail.com kirot':
I apologize. Yes, I misunderstood the situation. It is my fault because I am still quite unfamiliar in MetaWiki.
I accept your apology with gratitude for your understanding. Already we communicate on meta factually and I suppose you convince now both of us acted on a good faith.
Friendly advice: if you seriously plan to launch a new Wikipedia and seek cooperators, it would be better to have at least two project documents as soon as possible : NPOV and Copyright (or explanation of GFDL precisely). Sorry if you have both of them already, but from my experience lacking of those two policies any Wikimedia project is unfeasible.
Good luck,
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org