After the successful wikinews vote
the board has discussed and decided to move forward with this project!
In order to continue to work towards as broad a community consensus as
possible, we are launching this at http://demo.wikinews.org/ and
invite all interested parties (particularly the "no" voters) to come
and help work on the site.
We will be keeping the site demo-only until November 22 at least, and
at that point evaluating the next step. (Probably to launch
The demo has not yet been publicised widely, and my hope is that an
extended demo might convince those who voted against the project to
change their views, or to come and influence the project now in a
direction that overcomes or alleviates the legitimate objections that
have been raised.
This will also give people more of a chance to discuss the proposed
policies before the site goes live.
The one thing I want to personally stress right now: this is at this
point a pure wiki. We can make of it what we wish. All of the
proposed policies are just that: proposed policies, and we should
strive to organically create policies that solve actual problems as
they arise, rather than trying to a priori make a lot of rules that
could constrain us in the early days. This formula worked well for
wikipedia: common sense and flexibility.
"La nèfle est un fruit." - first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org
Ahh, I sent the whole digest to the list again, did I not. That'll teach me
to speak my mind in the middle of the night.
PO Box 764
Ashgrove, Q, 4060
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
I agree fully with Olve Utne's solution. I don't think it matters that no:-links
redirect to nb:-links. They are for the most part pointing to articles that
would stay on nb: anyway, and after a while most no:-interwiki links will be
changed to reflect the move to nb:. When it comes to static links on say Google
or other search engines these will sooner or later be replaced by appropriate
ones from nn: and nb: and the no: links will slowly die away. So in other
words, it will be a temporary "problem", and both wikis will soon enough have
required fully equal status.
When at Wikisources [[Pi to 1,000,000 places]] an anonymous user changes
the first 10 digits of line 14320 from "0628419546" to "1516171819" how
is anyone possible able to know which is correct? :-) :'(
Hello, I'm the user (Klenje) who was quoted at the beginning in the request;
a friulian speaker, I'm active in italian wiki, and there are other friulian
people like me outside in the net (don't forget that Friulian is spoken by more
than half million people), therefore i think there is the chance for a decent
friulian wikipedia to be created; I can show you several site in friulian, and
if they aren't more, this is due to the policy of italian government which so
far doesn't promote minorities within Italy. Friulian speakers share this
problem with sardinian and sicilian ones, but in my opionion wikipedia could
help changing this situation; the only risk in creating a friulian wiki is the
possibility of vandalism, but every wiki is started from few users and there
many ways to prevent it.
Well, I had to go back and find my original e-mail and find the replies to it (achk!) but thanks for the inadvertant compliment about my Norwegian. :-) Ein Sprachennazi?! Ich?! Nein, danke, aber jetzt müssen wir in Deutsch sprechen! (Und jetzt muß ich Deutsch lernen!)
I'm going to digress on the Bokmål/Nynorsk issue. I'll leave it to you Nordmenn to come up with an appropriate solution. I feel very confident about my abilities and understanding of Norway, though! :-) Takk!
Yeah, I am a bit of a "language Nazi," aren't I? Well, never a Nazi in any way, shape, or form, but the language part, yeah, I guess so! Languages are just a skill of mine.
Dodadagohvi! (Tsalagi idiwiwoni!)
See you all later! (Let's speak Cherokee!)
Not! That would be like the ultimate act of lingual sabotage with our fiery Scandinavian audience here, wouldn't it? :-) Or Muskogee. That would be worse!Give this a try: http://www.tfn.net/Museum/points/Very_Useful1.htm
You all speak Muskogee, don't you?
Just playing! ^_^ Take care, all!
Hello Lars A. & everyone else,
This posting has two main parts: First, a reply to your recent posting
quoted below; and then a summary of my arguments in light of, amongst
others, your and Mark Williamson's recent postings; and finally a modified
suggestion with the following main points:
1) Renaming to Norsk (bokmål) and Norsk (nynorsk)
2) Moving Norsk (bokmål) to nb:, while KEEPING NO: as an automatic
("shadow") redirect to nb: -- thus parallelling Danish, with dk:> da:,
keeping full continuity through keeping the two current codes; and making
cooperation with nn: politically easier through discrete use of the domain no:.
>*Paints "POV" in huge red letters over Williamsons mail*
I will get back to this further down.
>Your mail have inaccuancies to bokmål and nynorsk, bokmål people view
>nynorsk as a pest? This goes both ways, the ones that mostly hates nynorsk
>(or bokmål) is teenagers that is forced to learn a different language in
>school, that they don't feel they have any use for (unlike english or
>perhaps german). Perhaps this "haterd" is stronger with the bokmålusers
>(since nynorsk is smaller and is, in their eyes, less useful).
What you write seems to be pretty much in agreement with what Mark wrote...
I recognise the factual situation from both descriptions -- with yours
maybe describing/articulating the "hatred" from Bokmål users against
Nynorsk in more local terms (?)
>It was the same time that part of the norwegian history was romantized,
>the union with denmark was seen as "the four thousandyear nigth",
>eventhough this where directly false.
I presume you mean "400-year-night", not "4000-year-night" :)
>Mr. Aasen made nynorsk by collecting dialects (dominantly the western and
>the valleys in central-south norway. However the parts of norway with the
>largest population was largely ignored, like the farming areas of eastern
>norway, the south part of Oppland, Hedmark, Akershus, Østfold, Buskerud
>and Vestfold) also the northern part of norway was largely ignored.
Aren't Mr. Aasens "Norske Folkesprog" as well as the mid-19th Century
Danish used in Norway both quite far removed from our Nynorsk and
Bokmål...? Since the 1840s, both Nynorsk (then called Det norske Folkesprog
by Ivar Aasen, later coined Landsmaal, but also actually known as Bokmaal
(!)) and Bokmål (then near-identical with Danish, later known in its
historically increasingly norvagised form as Rigsmaal and Riksmål) have
changed very much.
Today's mainstream Nynorsk most closely resembles dialects in relatively
"moderate" dialect areas like Lofoten, Vesterålen, eastern parts of
Telemark, parts of Vestfold and Oppland (including Toten).
Today's mainstream Bokmål is also quite different from the Danish used in
Norway in the mid-1800s, and lies closest to the dialects of middle-class
and upper-class people in the cities of SE Norway -- esp. Oslo and Drammen.
It is true that Nynorsk is currently most commonly used in Sogn og Fjordane
and Møre og Romsdal. However, it is also used to varying degrees most other
places in Norway, and Norwegian literature abounds with authors from both
Bokmål and Nynorsk.
You wrote about Mark's posting: *Paints "POV" in huge red letters over
Williamsons mail*. I do not agree that Mark is unprecise or skewed enough
in his writing to warrant such an outburst. Whereas I personally think that
one mainly Bokmål Wikipedia is more constructive than two,
>Yes, no: should point to the norwegian written language, but there
>are none such thing. 80% of norwegians use bokmål (allthough some of them
>speaks a dialect that contains some nynorsk words, like -a endings (these
>are allowed on bokmål too). However, the languages are equal in terms of
>administrative language. But on a national basis bokmål is more used.
When some of us mention that a large proportion of Norwegians speak a
dialect that is closer to Nynorsk than Bokmål, we are of course not talking
about "some nynorsk words, like -a endings" (that would include, in fact, a
rather large proportion of Oslo's population), but of dialects which show,
*predominantly*, traits that are closer to the continuum if Nynorsk
morphology than Bokmål. Such traits include, amongst others:
- different plurals for masculine nouns (-a(r) or -æ(r), occasionally
-ø(r)), feminine nouns (either merged -e(r) or, like in Swedish -e(r)/-o(r)
depending on the class of each noun) and neutral nouns (mainly -) as
opposed to a generic plural in Bokmål (-er, with neutral nouns varying
between - and -er)
- forms of personal pronouns that are closer to Nynorsk (such as e(g), æ(g)
rather than je(g) = I; ho, hu rather than hun (she); dykk(~), dekk(~),
dokk(e(r)) rather than dere = you (pl., accusative); etc.)
- forms of verbs that are closer to Nynorsk (such as a higher incident of
strong verbs, ablaut and umlaut forms; and, less significantly, -a in past
tense of verbs were stylistically mainstream Bokmål has -et)
Of secondary importance is the vowel system, with Nynorsk tending to have
more historical vowels and fewer secondary vowels than Bokmål. The presence
of many vowels is popularly viewed as "the" characteristic of Nynorsk --
but this trait is actually of less use in this connection.
Forms that are permitted but in practice deprecated in Bokmål include: -a
in past tense of certain verbs; -a as definite article in plural of neutral
You pointed out that some -a endings are permitted in Bokmål. You did not,
however, mention that these forms tend to be criticised, or even
"corrected" away in practice -- because many (the majority?) of Bokmål
users find them to be stylistically inappropriate.
>btw. the paralell solution would kill the no: (informaly bokmål) wiki.
I agree that that could be a risk, and therefore I believe that such a
split *should be avoided at any reasonable cost*.
>And since most of the articles on no: is on either bokmål or riksmål, some
>100-200 on nynorsk (i've been rcpatroling on no: since we where just ~800
>articles, so i have a pretty good idea of the amount of articles in either
>language. Knowing that a large part of this work would fall on me i don't
>cherish this idea, and the fact that it's creating a chaos, two rcs to
>monitor and a devertion of work. Also, there are no bokmål grasroot
>movement that wants to do this work, the people that supports this
>solution is mostly nynorskusers (primary nynorsk atleast).
I believe that once there is a solution that "everyone" agrees on
(including, hopefully, the Wikipedia community as a whole) -- which I hope
will be an adjustment of the current language-based split rather than a
fork within the current no: -- the work of adjusting the language contents
of the Bokmål version will be relatively easily accomplished. I for one
hereby volunteer to do my share of the job. Even though I seem to have been
coined as a Nynorsk user (and even, to my frustration, as a Bokmål hater)
by some, I am very interested in
>I vote for a solution where bokmål keeps no: (but creates a page
>with reasons to why bokmål have no:, that's going to get linked from the
>mainpage, and "ads" for nynorskwiki), the interwiki decoding changes
>to "norsk (bokmål)" to clairify for non-norwegians that it's bokmål.
>This way we don't kill a well functioning wiki, and i belive/hope
>most parts would be happy with the solution.
The Norsk (nynorsk) vs. Norsk (bokmål) (without capitalisation of nyn. and
bokm.) renaming is OK with me. Whether the Norsk (bokmål) Wikipedia
actually lies on no: or nb: has, as has been pointed out already,
absolutely no significance: The Norsk (bokmål) Wikipedia will be exactly as
continuos on nb: as on no:, with absolutely no foreseeable extra work for
its admins and other users, other than an optional long-term bot task of
going through the various wikipedias and automatically changing all [[no:
entrances to [[nb:. Since a change of domain would include a universal
redirect from no: to nb: for a relatively long period (in fact, just
reversing the current situation, there should be plenty of time to do this.
To illustrate the current situation: Please try clicking on this link to
the article "Norge" on nb: (Norway) and see what happens...
See? That is how easy the reversal of this would be on the readers! :)
SUMMARY OF REPLY:
A I think a split of the current no: Wikipedia
should be avoided at any reasonable cost.
B A move of this Wikipedia to nb: would not lead to
any significant extra work for the admins and users on no:
C If no: is moved to nb: in accordance with a more precise
implementation of the language codes, then no: should
be a redirect domain to nb: the way it is today,
with the main page as the only exception.
D In the event of such a move, bots should be set up
to go through the other wikipedias and change all [[no:
and [[:no: codes to [[nb: and [[:nb:
E It seems that the main argument against having Norsk
(bokmål) on nb: is an emotional one rather than practical
(since the move would be very easy to implement and
would be executed centrally rather than by no: admins)
or logical (since no: is the country code and the umbrella
language code, whereas nb: is the specific language code
for Bokmål, including Riksmål).
F Those emotional arguments must be respected, since
our long-term goals as an international Wikipedia community
would be adversely affected if there were to be unnecessary
long-term resentment between the user groups of individual
Therefore, my hunch is that we should first try to reach consent about the
underlying factors. Here is what I propose that these are:
LOCAL UNDERLYING FACTORS
- Bokmål as a written language has more users than Nynorsk
- Bokmål and Nynorsk are both recognised as official languages in Norway.
- Bokmål and Nynorsk are linguistically extremely closely connected with
Swedish and Danish.
COUNTRY AND LANGUAGE CODES IN A SCANDINAVIAN PERSPECTIVE
- The Swedish language Wikipedia,
primarily serving people in Sweden and parts of Finland,
has the language code sv: rather than the country code se:
(which is connected to the use of se: for Northern Sami
and sa: for Sanskrit)
- The Danish language Wikipedia,
primarily serving people in Denmark,
has the language code da: rather than
the country code dk.
There is a redirect from dk: to da:
- The Nynorsk language Wikipedia,
primarily serving Nynorsk language
users in Norway, has the language code nn:
- The mainly Bokmål Wikipedia, which started out as
a mixed Bokmål/Nynorsk environment with the
emphasis on Bokmål (including Riksmål),
uses both the country code no:
(which, when used as a language code,
includes both Bokmål and Nynorsk)
and the language code nb: (as a redirect).
CURRENT SITUATION ON NO:
- The no: Wikipedia is changing its rôle from a generic
Bokmål/Nynorsk language wikipedia (albeit with
almost exclusively Bokmål contents, as Lars Alvik
has pointed out) to a specifically Norsk Bokmål
- The new Nynorsk Wikipedia works as an independent
project and, while fastly expanding, has not had any
significant effect in terms of disrupting the continuity
of the no: Wikipedia in general except for there being
a bit more activity on the Village Pump page than
MODIFIED SUGGESTION FOR LONG-TERM SOLUTION
(This suggestion is based primarily on Lars Alvik's previous suggestion,
with modifications/additions based on arguments that have emerged in the
debate locally on no: and nn: as well as here on wikipedia-l.)
1) The "Norsk" and "Nynorsk" interwiki names are changed to "Norsk
(bokmål)" and "Norsk (nynorsk)" respectively.
2) The "Norsk (nynorsk)" wikipedia uses the language code nn:
3) The "Norsk (bokmål)" wikipedia is moved to the proper language code nb:,
with the central Wikipedia developers/admins making sure that the extra
workload on the current no: admins is kept to an absolute minimum. (This
will in effect (see #4) only be an internal reversal of the two domains
already de facto used by the Norsk (bokmål) Wikipedia, thus ensuring
4) For reasons of continuity and relative size of community, "Norsk
(bokmål)" Wikipedia keeps the domain no:, but for reasons of impreciseness
of the term as regards the language situation in Norway, this code will
only be used as a redirect of links and URLs with the code to the
corresponding nb: page. (Thus parallelling exactly the Danish usage of dk:
5) The communities on nn: and nb: will commit themselves to implementing
the solution locally, with a special emphasis on information about and
promotion of the other Wikipedia on the "Main" and "Latest edits" page; and
also, to the extent possible, through putting the interwiki link to the
other language first in the list of links in each article.
6) A specific technical solution that has been brought up is the splitting
of the "Donations" link into a locally wikipedia-wide universal link to the
other Wikipedia of the two. This solution, while admittedly clogging up the
quick navigations field slightly, may have positive effects for the local
cooperation, and should therefore be reciprocally applied to the nn: and
7) In the interest of strengthening the Scandinavian Wikipedia community, I
suggest to implement points 5) and 6) also to sv: and da:, thus
facilitating quick navigation between these wikipedias, effectively
creating a half-integrated article pool of about 83,000 articles (on 14
Nov. at ca 7 AM GMT) and an incitement for each of the four Scandinavian
communities to cooperate and expand.
8) Work towards more integrated multilingual wikipedias through making the
Scandinavian wikipedias a test project for the development of an
interlingual search function limited to a specific pool of wikipedias,
where searches and no-hit events lead to a search within the pre-defined
pool of closely related languages. For Scandinavian, this would include, in
order of community size, sv:, da:, nb:, and nn:.
I had gathered that people were getting fed up with requests from me
for new Wikipedias, and now somebody has said it to my face.
It's really a bit weird from where I am though because I have
requested only two new Wikipedias, the first one having been created
and now growing steadily, and the second one (Friulian) with popular
support from speakers of the language that is surer than it was for
Sicilian (people committed for Sicilian, but they weren't Wikipedians
Now, in this message I don't want to ask your opinion about policy or
about whether or not a certain Wikipedia should be created, I just
want to know this:
Are you fed up with the requests from me for new Wikipedias? Why?
I realise I may not be a fluent speaker of either of the languages I
requested, but the way people are talking (somebody referred to me
"flooding" this list with requests) makes it sound like I am selecting
languages at random from a list and requesting them at a rate of 10
per week or something, when in fact I had already asked fluent
speakers if they would be interested, got a commitment, and so far
have only requested two Wikipedias (a few months ago, I asked Brion to
create sc: on IRC [but not this list!], and I recognise now that was
probably a mistake)
for special pages, it is not possible to get the source code, because
they are generated. I am thinking of Recentchanges, Contributions, etc.
Is it possible to export those pages? It would make parsing easier.
I want to parse my Contributions in order to create some statistics
about them. Yes, I'm aware of Kate's tools, but these do not enable me
to see 1) the size of my changes, 2) the number of Newpages I created.
Without the latter, 'number of edits' doesn't say too much. It is
relatively low for me (User:Gerritholl) because I spent time writing
articles in one go, not doing minor edits for VfD, FAC, etc. I want to
see more meaningful statistics on myself (and others...).
Weather in Twenthe, Netherlands 14/11 13:25:
8.0°C wind 3.1 m/s NW (57 m above NAP)
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of
unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the
military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of
misplaced power exists and will persist.
-Dwight David Eisenhower, January 17, 1961
> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:06:39 -0500
> From: ilooy <ilooy.gaon(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] presentation on Wikipedia goes well!
> OpenOffice was very handy as a presentation tool.
> I used the suggested presentation from French and
> edited it and thinned it down for the time I had to
Which presentation? Do you have a link, or contact person. I've used
OpenOffice Impress myself but I there's a good looking Wikipedia
template out there I'd much prefer it instead of my crappy-looking