Neil Harris (usenet@tonal.clara.co.uk) [050211 03:18]:
Just as with politics, there are many actual positions hidden behind people's ostensible positions. At the moment, we have a position where "yes, but only when we are happy", or even "yes, real soon now" actually mean "never". The key here is _breaking the deadlock_ of _indefinite_ opposition to other Chinese language Wikipedias, by making supporters on both sides commit in advance to a value of N, and automatically triggering the change in policy when N is reached. Making people make _objective_ choices always clarifies their positions.
The thing is you're still presupposing that an existing wikipedia has a right to block the existence of a new Wikipedia.
I ask the Board: is this the case?
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
The thing is you're still presupposing that an existing wikipedia has a right to block the existence of a new Wikipedia.
I ask the Board: is this the case?
Not speaking here for the board, but only offering my own tentative opinion, the answer to this is "no" in the general case, but that such factors can be a part of the overall decision.
I am told repeatedly by many people that while Mandarian and Cantonese are mutually unintelligible in the spoken form, in written form they are the same. This is pretty compelling for me.
If there is a significant population of people who can not read/write standard written Chinese, but *can* read/write Cantonese in some writing system that is different, then I want to learn about that, because that would be a very compelling factor in the other direction.
--Jimbo
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org