> |Here is a run-down of what I feel should be the ground rules for
negotiation.
Aquí presento un resumen de lo que creo deben ser los regulos de base para
cualquiera negociación.
> |What we concede;
Concedemos:
> |1) Make sure this is done in Spanish
que todo trabajo tiene que hacerse en castellano.
> |2) Ask them what we need to do in order to get them back into the
Wikipedia
> |community.
Preguntamos qué hay que arreglar para que vuelvan a ser parto de la
comunidad Wikipedia.
> |3) Promise that we will never have any ads.
Prometemos que nunca habrá ningún anuncio comercial en Wikipedia.
> |4) We will strive to make Wikipedia as non-U.S./English-centric as
possible
> |and ask them what we should do in order to accomplish this.
Nos esforzamos para que Wikipedia sea tan poco américo/anglocéntrico como
posíble, y les preguntamos su aviso sobre qué cosas debemos hacer para
cumplir eso.
> |5) Explain the benefits of being part of the more general Wikipedia
community
> |(inter-language links that work both ways, funding, publicity,
cross-traffic
> |and cross-collaboration and contributions)
Explicamos las muchas ventajas de participar en la comunidad Wikipedia
general (enlaces bilinguales ambidireccionales, recursos fiscales
(posiblemente), publicidad, y tráfico, colaboración y contribución
compartidos)
> |6) State that we have no intention of ever removing es.wikipedia.com but
we
> |could point that URL to the Seville server is they wish to stay on that
> |server.
Decimos que no tenemos ninguna intención de jamás eliminar es.wikipedia.com;
pero podemos redirigirlo para que indique el server sevillano se deciden
quedarse allí.
> |What would be nice;
> |1) For them to return to our server.
Lo que nos gustaría:
1) Que regresaran a nuestro server.
> |If negotiations break-down;
> |We set-up es.wikipedia.org with Phase III and ignore EL. OR
> |We set-up es.wikipedia.org with Phase III and provide el: inter-language
> |links to their project.
Si las negociaciones fracasan:
Estableceremos es.wikipedia.org con Fase III y no haremos caso a EL. Ó:
Estableceremos es.wikipedia.org con Fase III y ofrecemos EL: enlaces
interlingüísticos a su proyecto.
I would feel most comfortable with a native speaker looking over it of
course, preferably someone who unlike myself has half a clue what's going on
;)
Matt (Montrealais, Hispanic studies minor)
On Tuesday 01 October 2002 11:58 pm, Stephen Gilbert wrote:
> I think such a negotiation would go much better if we
> were at least in the process of setting up a
> non-profit free encyclopedia foundation. Otherwise,
> the perceptions that the American megacorporation
> Bomis intends to turn Wikipedia into a vast
> money-making empire will remain.
I think you might be right about this. What is the status of the non-profit
Jimbo? The schedule for this needs to be moved up.
In the mean time I've been gathering everyone's great ideas (and
translations) and have pasted a quick and dirty synopsis over at;
http://meta.wikipedia.com/wiki.phtml?title=Open_letter_to_the_Enciclopedia_…
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Ok, I see the problem. 24 prefaced many of his links
with w:. The parser is interpreting them as
interlanguage links. I'm off to file a report...
Stephen G.
--- Stephen Gilbert <canuck_in_korea2002(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I've encountered weirdness on Talk:Wikipedians
> (http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AWikipedians).
> I
> get a listing of "Other language" versions, but all
> of
> the links are to other Wikipedia pages.
>
> Can someone confirm that I'm not the only one seeing
> this? Then I'll go file a bug report.
>
> Stephen
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go
> here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
I've encountered weirdness on Talk:Wikipedians
(http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AWikipedians). I
get a listing of "Other language" versions, but all of
the links are to other Wikipedia pages.
Can someone confirm that I'm not the only one seeing
this? Then I'll go file a bug report.
Stephen
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
The following translations are off the top of my head and a few quick
trips to the dictionary. If there is any interest, I will work harder
to make better translations. I did the "what we concede" part only.
Anyone else who knows Spanish is welcome to join in, but it would
probably be prefereable to do this on a page in the wikipedia format
so there could be proper accents.
Tom Parmenter
Ortolan88
Presento mis excusas antes leer a todos el mundo hispanohablante.
|From: Daniel Mayer <maveric149(a)yahoo.com>
|Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 14:42:34 -0700
|
|Here is a run-down of what I feel should be the ground rules for negotiation.
Aqui es un resumen de que quiero deber las reglas fundamental para
negociacion.
|What we concede;
Lo concedemos
|1) Make sure this is done in Spanish
Hay que todo en castellano
|2) Ask them what we need to do in order to get them back into the Wikipedia
|community.
?Que necesitamonos hacer para que podemos colaborar in la comunidad Wikipedia?
|3) Promise that we will never have any ads. �
Nunca tendremos anunciados comercial
|4) We will strive to make Wikipedia as non-U.S./English-centric as possible
|and ask them what we should do in order to accomplish this.
No esforzaramos hacer Wikipedia internacional, y no demasiado ingles o
norteamericano
|5) Explain the benefits of being part of the more general Wikipedia community
|(inter-language links that work both ways, funding, publicity, cross-traffic
|and cross-collaboration and contributions)
Hay muchas ventajas ser participantes juntos en la comunidad Wikipedia
general (los enlaces bilingual, los fondos [en el futuro,
posiblemente], la publicidad comun, visitantes bidireccional, y
tambien contributantes y otra colaboracion
|6) State that we have no intention of ever removing es.wikipedia.com but we
|could point that URL to the Seville server is they wish to stay on that
|server.
Tenemos no intencion de remover es.wikipedia.com, pero podemos unirse
con el "server" americano o el "server" sevilliano si quieren
|
Tom Parmenter
Ortolan88
|What we want;
|1) Have them formally rejoin our project by changing their primary name back
|to Wikipedia or a convenient Spanish version of that word ("Huiquipedia"
|maybe).
|2) For them to use Phase III software.
|3) Provide inter-language links to all Wikipedia language projects.
|4) For them to use Intl-wiki-L.
|5) Update their about page to remove misleading statements about Wikipedia,
|especially the English Wikipedia.
|
|What would be nice;
|1) For them to return to our server.
|
|If negotiations break-down;
|We set-up es.wikipedia.org with Phase III and ignore EL. OR
|We set-up es.wikipedia.org with Phase III and provide el: inter-language
|links to their project.
|
|-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
|[Wikipedia-l]
|To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
|http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
On Monday 30 September 2002 04:25 am, brion vibber wrote:
> ....
> * Image maps are likely to be shared over many articles, either with the
> same image or over a group of related images (ie, 58 maps of California,
> each with a different county highlighted; 100-odd periodic tables, each
> with a different element highlighted). Thus, it _might_ be useful to
> have the maps in a magic namespace, which could be linked from the image
> description page -- thus, one image map can be cleanly shared over many
> almost-identical images, in any articles that link the images.
This would be most cool. Should you or I make the feature request?
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
On Monday 30 September 2002 09:33 pm, you wrote:
> We don't need a centralized server to work as one
> organization.
>
> Stephen G.
Isn't that the point though? EL is not part of our project. The Spanish
Wikipedia is. Jimbo's position is beggining to gain my favor. It is far
simpler for us to simply upgrade Spanish Wikipedia and for Wikipediaholics
like me and AstroNomer to revitalize the Spanish WIki than it is for us to
deal with a separate project alltogether.
If another language Wikipedia wants to be on its own server then that is
another thing but EL is not a Wikipedia language community.
We should ask them to re-join our community and remove their slander (keeping
their own server or not); if they say yes, then lets point our es: links to
them, but if they say no then let's fire-up the Spanish Wikipedia on Phase
III.
I'm now /not/ in favor of having our inter-language links go to a
non-Wikipedia project at all.
--Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
> In general, I think that policy changes should be discussed here
> before changes are made to the policy pages...
I generally agree, but I'd mention one exception explicitly:
brand new policies for things not previously covered. For example,
if someone knowledgeable wants to create a policy for, say,
transliteration of Kurdish names, he should just go for it, and
invite discussion afterward. Likewise, when I added the new image
system, I pretty much created the image policy from my own
preferences with little or no discussion (it's been edited and
expanded since then).
So I think older policies should be treated as /stare decisis/,
and only changed after discussion, but newer ones should be more
freely created and freely edited until /after/ they've settled.
Yeah, if anyone is going to _remove_ metacomments, I hope they edit them enough so that readers of the talk page will know what they refer to:
* this section needs work => the "no-trump" bidding convention needs work
* more should be written here => more should be written on how kids trade Pokemon cards
In general, avoid deletions that destroy information. We want to BUILD.
Ed Poor
-----Original Message-----
-From: mattheww+wikipedia(a)chiark.greenend.org.uk
-I disagree. I don't know about the WikiProject references, but 'is this
-correct?' and 'more should be written about <whatever>' both seem
-valuable to me.
-
-I prefer an article which points out its weaknesses to one which
-glosses them over; I think it's more useful to the reader, as well as
-more encouraging to potential editors. I don't think there's anything
-unprofessional about work in progress.
-
-In general, if someone thinks its worth their while to add something to
-a page, I think it's best to give them the benefit of the doubt, even
-if it's something you wouldn't have added yourself.
-
--M-
On Tuesday 01 October 2002 06:59 am, Khendon wrote:
> I'd like to know exactly what the consensus is on "metacomments" within
> an article text - "More should be written here", "See WikiProject Foo
> for help with editing this page", "Is this correct?", and so on.
>
> I'm of the opinion that things like this should almost always
> be in the Talk page. Having them in the article looks tacky and
> unprofessional. Only things that directly affect "customers"
> should be in the article, I'd say.
I agree and have already stated my reasons why I think WikiProject tags in
articles are a bad idea at;
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._States
I've also taken the liberty of moving each state, province and department
WikiProject tag to their respective talk pages.
Now the only ones I know of that still exist in their articles are on about a
thousand (at least) of the earlier US county articles imported by Ram-Man.
However, Ram-Man already has this on his ToDo list if anybody would like to
help. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ram-Man
Aside: Could somebody rerun the most active stats again? I'm sure Ram-Man has
leap-froged a couple dozen other users since the numbers were last done.
Hell, in a few months, he might even pass me up (esp. if he switches to
creating articles on each US city after he is done creating articles on each
US county -- madness).
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)