The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
Of course. Wikipedia should be entirely secular. The only way we can be truly neutral and unbiased is to have no official position on anything (or do this as much as is possible).
Wikimedia should never, ever endorse any religion.
On 13/07/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
from nexus on #wikipedia
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
—Xyrael
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as translator in this matter? Michael
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
—XyraelOn 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton · sean@silentflame.com | xyrael.net
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host: -!- nexus [n=nexus@guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as translator in this matter? Michael
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
—XyraelOn 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton · sean@silentflame.com | xyrael.net
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Otherwise: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Embassy There are 2 entries for ur: and ur: has an embassy itself at http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%88%D9%8A%DA%A9%D9%8A%D9%BE%D9%8A%DA%88%D9%8... Michael
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host: -!- nexus [n=nexus@guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as translator in this matter? Michael
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
—XyraelOn 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote: > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... > Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton · sean@silentflame.com | xyrael.net
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host: -!- nexus [n=nexus@guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
Resonable list at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=T...
Whoever said that userboxes aren't useful? ;)
On 13/07/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host: -!- nexus [n=nexus@guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
Resonable list at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=T...
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host: -!- nexus [n=nexus@guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
Resonable list at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=T...
imho we should rather contact the people who actually listed themselves on the embassy page. They are (should be) able and willing to translate inter-wikipedia, something we don't know from all the "user-ur"-users.
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host: -!- nexus [n=nexus@guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
Resonable list at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=T...
imho we should rather contact the people who actually listed themselves on the embassy page. They are (should be) able and willing to translate inter-wikipedia, something we don't know from all the "user-ur"-users.
More precisely: If somebody has the desire to contact etc. ;-) Michael
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hi,
I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three different sources it seems
002.044 YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (To practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will ye not understand? PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense? SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
--heema
----- Original Message ---- From: Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 2:41:28 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice
geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as translator in this matter? Michael
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
—XyraelOn 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages... Michael
the only translation I have is "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any reason, why this should be shown to every user... Michael
from nexus on #wikipedia
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton · sean@silentflame.com | xyrael.net
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Jul 13, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Heema Khan wrote:
Hi,
I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three different sources it seems
002.044 YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (To practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will ye not understand? PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense? SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
--heema
Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I think it is a good thing.
Fred
Regardless. It uses a couple of undisputable proper nouns in there: "Scripture" and "Book" which can, in the context, only refer to the Qur'an. It also uses the religious POV "righteousness".
On 13/07/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Heema Khan wrote:
Hi,
I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three different sources it seems
002.044 YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (To practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will ye not understand? PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense? SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
--heema
Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I think it is a good thing.
Fred
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Does the benefit Fred suggests outweight the possible problems, which are huge to me. Loads of things could go wrong or be misunderstood, and I wouldn't want people to be put off contributing to the Urdu 'pedia by this. Communication is a priority here.
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless. It uses a couple of undisputable proper nouns in there: "Scripture" and "Book" which can, in the context, only refer to the Qur'an. It also uses the religious POV "righteousness".
On 13/07/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Heema Khan wrote:
Hi,
I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three different sources it seems
002.044 YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (To practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will ye not understand? PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense? SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
--heema
Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I think it is a good thing.
Fred
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
Does the benefit Fred suggests outweight the possible problems, which are huge to me. Loads of things could go wrong or be misunderstood, and I wouldn't want people to be put off contributing to the Urdu 'pedia by this. Communication is a priority here.
Right. If there was a text on a page for admins where it is written "Even Quran says you should behave so and so", okay, I wouldn't bother that much. But distributing it via Sitenotice, and so flagging it "official" (remember, visitors do not know that these sitenotice is editable by admins, they could think that it is an official statement of e.g. WMF) is quite another thing imho
As far as direct translation from Urdu goes, it is more read as "Book of God".
It is also discussed on Urdu Wiki
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%AF%DB%81_%D8%B3%D8%...
some of the posts are in English. The Urdu posts are in the favour and are from the site editors who added it. The arguments in favour are quite interesting, something in the line of, Urdu is the language of Muslims and no one is against Qur'an.
--heema
----- Original Message ---- From: Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 3:03:59 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice
Regardless. It uses a couple of undisputable proper nouns in there: "Scripture" and "Book" which can, in the context, only refer to the Qur'an. It also uses the religious POV "righteousness".
On 13/07/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Heema Khan wrote:
Hi,
I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three different sources it seems
002.044 YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (To practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will ye not understand? PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense? SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
--heema
Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I think it is a good thing.
Fred
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I think it is a good thing.
Fred
I think it is torated with a new quote at reguar intervels.
Oldak Quill wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
Even if the quote were essentially non-religious, *and* from a non-religious text, then it would still be inappropriate for a site notice. To my knowledge, the site notice has never been used to convey general good advice or anything of the sort on any project or any language. This is not a matter of religion versus non-religion, it is a matter of, well, this is not what the sitenotice is for.
--Jimbo
I stand corrected, the SiteNotice shouldn't be used for general good advice religious or otherwise. My point still stands, though, for other official areas where good advice is tolerated (say the upload file MediaWiki message). In these areas, religion shouldn't be used.
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
Even if the quote were essentially non-religious, *and* from a non-religious text, then it would still be inappropriate for a site notice. To my knowledge, the site notice has never been used to convey general good advice or anything of the sort on any project or any language. This is not a matter of religion versus non-religion, it is a matter of, well, this is not what the sitenotice is for.
--Jimbo
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
Thanks for pointing this out. Am I right to assume that http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A2%DB%8C%DB%81_31-45_%D8%AA%DA%A9 is just an text extract that has not encyclopedic style and would be more suitable at wikisource?
Mathias
Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
On 13/07/06, Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
Thanks for pointing this out. Am I right to assume that http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A2%DB%8C%DB%81_31-45_%D8%AA%DA%A9 is just an text extract that has not encyclopedic style and would be more suitable at wikisource?
Mathias _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include
1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia 2. Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements) 3. Wikipedia respects copyright law 4. Wikilove.
Mathias
My "individual project" statement was to do with whatever was written on the page of text (rather than the MediaWiki message). But you're right about these pillars and that page of text too should be moved.
On 13/07/06, Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
- Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements)
- Wikipedia respects copyright law
- Wikilove.
Mathias _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Mathias Schindler wrote:
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
- Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements)
- Wikipedia respects copyright law
- Wikilove.
Mathias
However, I would point out that the only thing this violates is #2 listed above. The Quran (Koran?) is in the public domain and certainly free of copyright, and Wikilove would encourage you to try and come to an accomodation here rather than micromanage this from the WMF board or stewards.
In other words, let the individual project deal with this, using their own cultural standards for native speakers of Urdu, tempered with these pillars and principles you mentioned. It doesn't need to take up bandwidth here unless there is a deadlock on this issue and isn't being dealt with.
In response to this I would say that #2 is the most important pillar, something which Jimbo used to quote on his userpage (this seems to have gone now). I would agree with him because a projects as wide reaching as the foundation's cannot prosper without this. We need to keep things as open and accessible as possible and only through NPOV can we encourage people to get involved. If I was a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu, I can imagine being concerned that the site was heavily orientated in that direction, which is not the idea. Referring to #1, it's an encyclopedia and the only purpose of having different languages is to allow others to read and edit, not to make any other divisions.
On 13/07/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
Mathias Schindler wrote:
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
- Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements)
- Wikipedia respects copyright law
- Wikilove.
Mathias
However, I would point out that the only thing this violates is #2 listed above. The Quran (Koran?) is in the public domain and certainly free of copyright, and Wikilove would encourage you to try and come to an accomodation here rather than micromanage this from the WMF board or stewards.
In other words, let the individual project deal with this, using their own cultural standards for native speakers of Urdu, tempered with these pillars and principles you mentioned. It doesn't need to take up bandwidth here unless there is a deadlock on this issue and isn't being dealt with.
-- Robert Scott Horning
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Sean Whitton wrote:
In response to this I would say that #2 is the most important pillar, something which Jimbo used to quote on his userpage (this seems to have gone now). I would agree with him because a projects as wide reaching as the foundation's cannot prosper without this. We need to keep things as open and accessible as possible and only through NPOV can we encourage people to get involved. If I was a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu, I can imagine being concerned that the site was heavily orientated in that direction, which is not the idea. Referring to #1, it's an encyclopedia and the only purpose of having different languages is to allow others to read and edit, not to make any other divisions.
But are you a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu who has complained and dealt with this locally on the project? I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't raise concerns, but a knee jerk reaction is also not called for if there is a place to address this within the Urdu Wikipedia and getting active users from within that project to deal with the issue. I just havn't see what steps are being done from within the community to address the issue. If you have tried to deal with this issue and admins are being belligerant in keeping this sitenotice up, that would be a completely different issue altogether. Even then, we are only getting one side of this issue and assuming bad-faith.
You're absolutely right, the discussion should be raised over there, and it appears that it already has. However, I don't quite understand the comments of Heema - when you say that the discussion is over and the decision has been made, do you mean that there was an overwhelming argument or that someone with a level of authority stepped in? The latter seems unlikely because theoretically there isn't anyone except the board of a local arbcom that could do that, afaik. Could you clarify this, please?
On 13/07/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
Sean Whitton wrote:
In response to this I would say that #2 is the most important pillar, something which Jimbo used to quote on his userpage (this seems to have gone now). I would agree with him because a projects as wide reaching as the foundation's cannot prosper without this. We need to keep things as open and accessible as possible and only through NPOV can we encourage people to get involved. If I was a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu, I can imagine being concerned that the site was heavily orientated in that direction, which is not the idea. Referring to #1, it's an encyclopedia and the only purpose of having different languages is to allow others to read and edit, not to make any other divisions.
But are you a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu who has complained and dealt with this locally on the project? I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't raise concerns, but a knee jerk reaction is also not called for if there is a place to address this within the Urdu Wikipedia and getting active users from within that project to deal with the issue. I just havn't see what steps are being done from within the community to address the issue. If you have tried to deal with this issue and admins are being belligerant in keeping this sitenotice up, that would be a completely different issue altogether. Even then, we are only getting one side of this issue and assuming bad-faith.
-- Robert Scott Horning
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
What I understood from the discussion. Two guys oppose it. They gave their reasons. Two are in favour and both are administrators. I think why the other people didn't talk much was because the few arguments that are in Urdu literally made it like everyone who is working on urdu wikipedia is not against Qur'an and if you are not against Qur'an then you shouldn't have any problem with this Sitenotice, and as long someone who doesn't like Qur'an is not part of the community, this should go on. The final point is that as no one is getting angered therefore this promotion of Islam should continue. This point was made on 8th of July. After this there is no discussion, and I think it is assumed that it is fine with everyone, therefore continue with this practice.
I can see why people didn't reply much. If you make this issue religious, like in favour or oppose of Qur'an then obviously people will be reluctant. I think the sitenotice should be removed. There is simply no point in it at all.
--heema
----- Original Message ---- From: Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 5:57:32 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice
You're absolutely right, the discussion should be raised over there, and it appears that it already has. However, I don't quite understand the comments of Heema - when you say that the discussion is over and the decision has been made, do you mean that there was an overwhelming argument or that someone with a level of authority stepped in? The latter seems unlikely because theoretically there isn't anyone except the board of a local arbcom that could do that, afaik. Could you clarify this, please?
On 13/07/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
Sean Whitton wrote:
In response to this I would say that #2 is the most important pillar, something which Jimbo used to quote on his userpage (this seems to have gone now). I would agree with him because a projects as wide reaching as the foundation's cannot prosper without this. We need to keep things as open and accessible as possible and only through NPOV can we encourage people to get involved. If I was a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu, I can imagine being concerned that the site was heavily orientated in that direction, which is not the idea. Referring to #1, it's an encyclopedia and the only purpose of having different languages is to allow others to read and edit, not to make any other divisions.
But are you a non-Muslim speaker of Urdu who has complained and dealt with this locally on the project? I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't raise concerns, but a knee jerk reaction is also not called for if there is a place to address this within the Urdu Wikipedia and getting active users from within that project to deal with the issue. I just havn't see what steps are being done from within the community to address the issue. If you have tried to deal with this issue and admins are being belligerant in keeping this sitenotice up, that would be a completely different issue altogether. Even then, we are only getting one side of this issue and assuming bad-faith.
-- Robert Scott Horning
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
However, I would point out that the only thing this violates is #2 listed above. The Quran (Koran?) is in the public domain and certainly free of copyright, and Wikilove would encourage you to try and come to an accomodation here rather than micromanage this from the WMF board or stewards.
There is no accomodation. If people want they can edit their own monobooks to include quotes. Sitenotice is not acceptable
In other words, let the individual project deal with this, using their own cultural standards for native speakers of Urdu, tempered with these pillars and principles you mentioned. It doesn't need to take up bandwidth here unless there is a deadlock on this issue and isn't being dealt with.
-- Robert Scott Horning
I belive this this has already been disscused on ur.wikipedia. They have come to thier descision. Now we are going to have to deal with that problem.
I belive this this has already been disscused on ur.wikipedia. They have come to thier descision. Now we are going to have to deal with that problem.
Yes, the matter was discussed there and the discussions are finished on the 8th of July, so it seems that Sitenote is permanent for now.
--heema
On 7/13/06, Heema Khan heema_khan@yahoo.com wrote:
I belive this this has already been disscused on ur.wikipedia. They have come to thier descision. Now we are going to have to deal with that problem.
Yes, the matter was discussed there and the discussions are finished on the 8th of July, so it seems that Sitenote is permanent for now.
--heema
Unless the foundation or the stewards act.
On 7/13/06, Heema Khan heema_khan@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes, the matter was discussed there and the discussions are finished on the 8th of July, so it seems that Sitenote is permanent for now.
Nothing like this is really "permanent". --LV
Heema Khan schrieb:
I belive this this has already been disscused on ur.wikipedia. They have come to thier descision. Now we are going to have to deal with that problem.
Yes, the matter was discussed there and the discussions are finished on the 8th of July, so it seems that Sitenote is permanent for now.
The purpose of the sitenotice is to announce important, wikimedia specific news like a fundraising campaign, the international wikimania conference or important project specific news like a policy change or whatever.
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
If urdu wikipedians want to fill the sitenotice, there's wikimania to announce at the moment.
greetings, elian
On 7/13/06, Elisabeth Bauer elian@djini.de wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
Absolutely. Does Urdu even have a translation or independent version of the NPOV policy? It's not listed on the interwikis for en:WP:NPOV.
On Wikinews, we make it mandatory that a few key policies are translated or created before a new language is set up, including NPOV: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_language_pre-launch
Erik
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
On 7/13/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
To be fair the Urdu Wiktionary still has the fundraising notice up.
http://ur.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%AD%DB%81_%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%84
So, we are in agreement that it should be removed? If I'm right here, would a steward care to do it?
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I think we should tell the community before it is removed; present them with the Foundation's position and allow members of the community who are for the message to respond before anything is done. We don't want to seem like distant bureaucrats unfamiliar with custom and lacking diplomacy.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
So, we are in agreement that it should be removed? If I'm right here, would a steward care to do it?
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should tell the community before it is removed; present them with the Foundation's position and allow members of the community who are for the message to respond before anything is done. We don't want to seem like distant bureaucrats unfamiliar with custom and lacking diplomacy.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
So, we are in agreement that it should be removed? If I'm right here, would a steward care to do it?
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I think a quote from Jimbo would be inappropriate. If there are angry reactions, there is no reason for Jimbo to be the target of their anger. It was not he who raised the issue initially. Afterall, the foundation should be able to function with or without Jimbo (he does a priceless, invaluable job and is very good at it, but the foundation is a seperate entity). I don't think every decision relating to, or by, the Foundation should be supplied with a quote by Jimbo. Let it stand on its own two feet.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should tell the community before it is removed; present them with the Foundation's position and allow members of the community who are for the message to respond before anything is done. We don't want to seem like distant bureaucrats unfamiliar with custom and lacking diplomacy.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
So, we are in agreement that it should be removed? If I'm right here, would a steward care to do it?
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I would totally agree with you here, and I wanted to float the idea anyway. As for the language of the message, would it be appropriate to post both? I wouldn't want to make a mess of the page and yet I wouldn't want to alienate people from the discussion, which would make us seem like distant bureaucrats, as someone said above. geni's message is better than mine, but the ending looks perfectly valid to me - we don't want to appear forceful, we want to open discussion by the users of that wiki, which few of us on this list seem to be. So, are we happy with that suggestion?
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
I think a quote from Jimbo would be inappropriate. If there are angry reactions, there is no reason for Jimbo to be the target of their anger. It was not he who raised the issue initially. Afterall, the foundation should be able to function with or without Jimbo (he does a priceless, invaluable job and is very good at it, but the foundation is a seperate entity). I don't think every decision relating to, or by, the Foundation should be supplied with a quote by Jimbo. Let it stand on its own two feet.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should tell the community before it is removed; present them with the Foundation's position and allow members of the community who are for the message to respond before anything is done. We don't want to seem like distant bureaucrats unfamiliar with custom and lacking diplomacy.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
So, we are in agreement that it should be removed? If I'm right here, would a steward care to do it?
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oldak Quill wrote:
I think a quote from Jimbo would be inappropriate. If there are angry reactions, there is no reason for Jimbo to be the target of their anger. It was not he who raised the issue initially. Afterall, the foundation should be able to function with or without Jimbo (he does a priceless, invaluable job and is very good at it, but the foundation is a seperate entity). I don't think every decision relating to, or by, the Foundation should be supplied with a quote by Jimbo. Let it stand on its own two feet.
Well, unless Brad does in in an official capacity, or I do it in an official capacity, or a board member does it, or the board votes, or Danny does it per instructions of one or more of the prior, or.... then it is not a decision "of the foundation" and should not be presented as such.
As it stands, I think it is a community matter, not a foundation matter, and as such I think it is perfectly fine to quote me on it to that effect. If the foundation wants to do something, it can.
If there are angry reactions, it is ok with me if people get mad at me. That is part of my job, to serve as the brunt of people's anger. :)
--Jimbo
Most people can understand English there, so there shouldn't be any problem in posting the message in English. Otherwise, I can translate the message in Urdu, if required.
--heema
----- Original Message ---- From: Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 7:48:24 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should tell the community before it is removed; present them with the Foundation's position and allow members of the community who are for the message to respond before anything is done. We don't want to seem like distant bureaucrats unfamiliar with custom and lacking diplomacy.
On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
So, we are in agreement that it should be removed? If I'm right here, would a steward care to do it?
On 13/07/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Quran quotes (or any other, btw) in the sitenotice are an abuse of the tool and should be removed immediately.
The "or any other" bit is extremely important. This is not about religion, it is just that the sitenotice is to be used for announcements of upcoming events, news, fundraisers, things of that nature, not for quotes.
-- ####################################################################### # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge # # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world # #######################################################################
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
—Xyrael Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean@silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list and IRC about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy sitenotices of that type should not be used on wikimedia foundation projects. In particular it conflicts with the principle that wikipedia is written in NPOV (this includes religious endorsements). As a result we would like to disscuss the removal of the the text from site notice.
That gives the reasons but the ending is too weak.
Incerdentaly what is their article in Israel like?
That's a scary thought.
What's the article on Israel on Arabic or Farsi Wikipedia like?
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list and IRC about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy sitenotices of that type should not be used on wikimedia foundation projects. In particular it conflicts with the principle that wikipedia is written in NPOV (this includes religious endorsements). As a result we would like to disscuss the removal of the the text from site notice.
That gives the reasons but the ending is too weak.
Incerdentaly what is their article in Israel like?
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Urdu Wikipedia, article on Israel is very short:
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%DB%8C%D9%84
I can translate it:
"Israel, a palce where jews live. In addition to Pakistan there are many other countries that do not recognize this place of Jews as a country. Majority of the Urdu speaking public believes that there is no country by the name of Israel exists. But there is a country named Palestine, whose some part is captured by Jews and they call it Israel. And the English speaking world says that in a country called Israel some Palestenians want to create a country called Palestine."
This is the whole article. Quite extraordinary, nothing to add more.
--heema
----- Original Message ---- From: James Hare messedrocker@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 9:26:39 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice
That's a scary thought.
What's the article on Israel on Arabic or Farsi Wikipedia like?
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list and IRC about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy sitenotices of that type should not be used on wikimedia foundation projects. In particular it conflicts with the principle that wikipedia is written in NPOV (this includes religious endorsements). As a result we would like to disscuss the removal of the the text from site notice.
That gives the reasons but the ending is too weak.
Incerdentaly what is their article in Israel like?
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
In the words of Strong Bad,
PRROOOBLEMMMATTTIICC.
On 7/13/06, Heema Khan heema_khan@yahoo.com wrote:
On Urdu Wikipedia, article on Israel is very short:
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%DB%8C%D9%84
I can translate it:
"Israel, a palce where jews live. In addition to Pakistan there are many other countries that do not recognize this place of Jews as a country. Majority of the Urdu speaking public believes that there is no country by the name of Israel exists. But there is a country named Palestine, whose some part is captured by Jews and they call it Israel. And the English speaking world says that in a country called Israel some Palestenians want to create a country called Palestine."
This is the whole article. Quite extraordinary, nothing to add more.
--heema
----- Original Message ---- From: James Hare messedrocker@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 9:26:39 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice
That's a scary thought.
What's the article on Israel on Arabic or Farsi Wikipedia like?
On 7/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton sean@silentflame.com wrote:
That sounds sensible, how about something along the lines of (after translation by a kind soul): Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy the sitenotice should not be used <perhaps a quote from Jimbo here>. We'd like to hear the opinions of the users of this wiki before we take any action over this issue.
Sound okay?
Discussion on the [[foundation-l]] mailing list and IRC about the Urdu Wikipedia's sitenotice has come to the conclusion that according to policy sitenotices of that type should not be used on wikimedia foundation projects. In particular it conflicts with the principle that wikipedia is written in NPOV (this includes religious endorsements). As a result we would like to disscuss the removal of the the text from site notice.
That gives the reasons but the ending is too weak.
Incerdentaly what is their article in Israel like?
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Heema Khan heema_khan@yahoo.com wrote:
On Urdu Wikipedia, article on Israel is very short:
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%DB%8C%D9%84
I can translate it:
"Israel, a palce where jews live.
Perhaps they meant to define Ghetto.
In addition to Pakistan there are many other countries that do not recognize this place of Jews as a country.
Puts the complaints about americanocentricism into context doesn't it?
Majority of the Urdu speaking public believes that there is no country by the name of Israel exists. But there is a country named Palestine, whose some part is captured by Jews and they call it Israel. And the English speaking world says that in a country called Israel some Palestenians want to create a country called Palestine."
Well at least an attempt a NPOV (en.wikipedia just goes ahead and accepts it as a country). The sides could be better defined and it doesn't quite get the position of the "English speaking world" right but a start.
Heema Khan wrote:
On Urdu Wikipedia, article on Israel is very short: http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%DB%8C%D9%84 I can translate it:
While the text is very short and not very well-written, one must bear in mind that ur.wikipedia.org has a total of 1490 articles and that every language of Wikipedia had short and bad articles at that early stage. After submitting an article to such a small and young wiki site, the main frustration is not spelling errors, factual errors, slanted point of view or poor organization, but the fact that all wikilinks are red and not blue. (In the case of ur:Israel, there are no links in the main wikitext, so the article still needs to be wikified.) The main "WikiProjects" at that stage are typically to establish stubs for every country of the world and for every day in the calendar. At around 10 or 20 thousand articles, the WikiProjects are the years in the calendar and taxonomies for all mammals and birds. At between 50 and 100 thousand articles, newspapers begin to write comparisons between Wikipedia and traditional printed encyclopedias in the same language.
Somewhere along the road, adhering to NPOV and phasing out stubs becomes more of a concern. But it would probably miss the target to make a big fuzz about the Urdu Wikipedia's viewpoint on Israel (or other controversial topics) at this early stage. And I think the same goes for this fuzz about the sitenotice. You don't need to call the fire brigade to put out a single candle. And this time, the house is not really on fire.
If you speak Urdu (which I don't), by all means, help to improve the articles, and help to write more stubs. After 10,000 articles are created, start a WikiProject to identify and weed out stubs. But just like a gardener, you cannot start weeding before the crop has started to grow.
The Swedish Wikipedia was initially very enthusiastic about the chance to copy articles from an old out-of-copyright encyclopedia (very similar to the 1911 Britannica). It took quite some time before the problems became apparent: Negroes were described as an inferior race, almost like animals, and old Swedish kings were attributed god-like virtues. You can't really write that today. Fortunately, this sorted itself out long before the newspapers started to compare the Swedish Wikipedia to contemporary printed encyclopedias.
On 7/14/06, Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se wrote:
While the text is very short and not very well-written, one must bear in mind that ur.wikipedia.org has a total of 1490 articles and that every language of Wikipedia had short and bad articles at that early stage.
The problem is who it is writen by. Not by some random IP but by a buracrat.
If you speak Urdu (which I don't), by all means, help to improve the articles, and help to write more stubs. After 10,000 articles are created, start a WikiProject to identify and weed out stubs. But just like a gardener, you cannot start weeding before the crop has started to grow.
The question was prompted by rumors I had heard about ar.wikipedia. Of course I can't read that either.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org