Most of you would be aware of some of the discussions that have occurred
around Wikipedia in the Norwegian languages. Since the last round of
discussions on this list, there has been a lot of internal debate, as
well as what seems to be a fairly widely accepted agreement following
This e-mail intends to, after a brief recap on Norwegian language and
wikipedia issues, take those interested through the latest development
and will stake out the road ahead. It is also intended to inform the
international community about the current agreement on no.wikipedia, so
as to prevent misunderstandings in the future.
Finally, we will mention an unfortunate reaction to the vote by a small
number of users at the Norwegian Bokmål/Riksmål (no:) wikipedia who want
to disregard the result of the voting and are planning to create a
_third_ Norwegian wikipedia with the sole mission of mixing the contents
of the two current Norwegian versions.
== A short language history of Norway ==
Spoken Norwegian ("norsk") (ISO 639-2 alpha-2 code "no") is in a fairly
unique situation compared to most other languages of the world in that
it has two widely accepted written standards, Bokmål (ISO 639-2 alpha-2
code "nb") and Nynorsk (ISO 639-2 alpha-2 code "nn"). By national
legislation they are both regarded as official written forms of
Norwegian. In addition, many people still make a distinction between
Bokmål and its precursor which still is in use, Riksmål.
Briefly speaking, Bokmål and Riksmål are descendants of the Danish
written language. Until the 1800s, Danish was the only widely used
written language in Norway as a result of four centuries of union with
Denmark. With increasing independence came a wish to norwegianise the
Danish standard, with Knud Knudsen at the forefront for changing parts
of the vocabulary and orthographics. Thus, Riksmål, and later Bokmål,
resulted. These forms together are today probably used by about 90% of
Norway's population, or somewhere around 3,500,000 people.
Parallel to this development, a new written standard was created by Ivar
Aasen. He travelled extensively throughout Norway, and based his new
language, landsmål, on the grammar and vocabulary of dialect samples
from around the country. This was later renamed Nynorsk. Modern Nynorsk
differs significantly from modern Bokmål, and may be linguistically
looked upon as as different (or as similar if you like) as Swedish is to
Danish. For English or Dutch/German speakers, the differences may be
likened to those between (Lowland) Scots and English or Low German and
Dutch. Today it is estimated that about 500,000-600,000 people have
Nynorsk as their first written language.
More information about the Norwegian language history can be found in
English, German, French, Spanish or Portuguese on the website of the
Norwegian Language Council:
== A short history of Wikipedia in Norwegian ==
The first Norwegian wikipedia started 26 November 2001 on the subdomain
no.wikipedia.org. As most wikipedias, its contributor and article count
started really picking up around the end of 2003. At the time, it
accepted all written standards of Norwegian, although the amount of
Nynorsk was minimal. There were already several debates about the
feasibilty and appropriateness of keeping the two languages united on
one Wikipedia. On 31 July 2004 a Wikipedia for Nynorsk was created.
The creation of nn:, however, split the community at no: wikipedia. Many
felt that given that Nynorsk now had its own wikipedia, no: should
become a Bokmål/Riksmål Wikipedia only. Others disapproved and claimed
that there was no need to change and that it should continue its
language policy of accepting all and keep its interwiki link name of
Nynorsk Wikipedia soon proved a success, as it within the next few
months gathered several people who had felt uncomfortable in the
(mainly) Bokmål environment at no:. The name displayed in interwiki
links became "Norsk (nynorsk)" (languages are not spelt with upper case
in Norwegian). To date it continues to be one of the fastest growing
wikipedias, with a steady article increase, now at over 6000 articles
and >50 editors with more than 10 edits since arrival.
== Votes ==
The issue of no:'s language policy has come up time and again, and a
vote was held in March ([[:no:Wikipedia:Målform]]) as to which policy to
adapt. Independent of the method of the tally (whether or not to include
new contributors etc.) there was a majority for switching to a
Bokmål/Riksmål only language policy (50% for Bokmål/Riksmål, 43.2% for
Bokmål/Riksmål/Nynorsk/Høgnorsk, and 6.8% for the official variants
Following this result, there is now going to be a vote on which
interwiki link name will most appropriately reflect the current language
policy of no:. The result of this vote will most likely be either "Norsk
(bokmål)" or "Norsk (bokmål/riksmål)".
Understandably, there has also been a debate as to whether the subdomain
should change from "no" to "nb", as this is the correct representation
of Bokmål according to ISO 639-2. However, there is some resentment
towards such a move and currently a general acceptance in letting the
Bokmål wikipedia stay at "no". The alternative some have suggested is a
server-side redirect from "no" to "nb", in the same way that "nb" today
is a server-side redirect to the equivalent page on "no".
== Summary of the problem ==
Unfortunately, a small group of users (who all write Bokmål/Riksmål) are
ignoring the results from the vote, and are claiming they want to
re-establish a wikipedia for all written standards of Norwegian. They
claim they have been in touch with people centrally in Wikimedia
(developers? stewards?) and that they have so far received positive
comments. With this email, we would like to state the fact that there
have been no official decisions about creating a third Norwegian
wikipedia containing both Bokmål and Nynorsk, it is merely an unofficial
initiative from a small group of users which started a sign-on list at
[[:no:Bruker:Norsk_Wikipedia]]. A spontaneous list with signatures
against this activity was immediately created at
[[:no:Wikipedia-diskusjon:Fellesnorsk]]. The process of creating a third
Norwegian wikipedia has not gone through a voting process in any of the
two existing Norwegian wikipedias (no: and nn:) and can not be
considered as a decision by the Norwegian Wikipedia community.
We believe the creation of a third wikipedia under the Wikimedia
foundation would have a serious and unfortunate impact on the existing
wikipedias in Norwegian, no: and nn:, and would undermine Wikipedia's
reputation in Norway. This being said, we are all for extensive co-
operation between the four Scandinavian language wikipedias (including
Swedish and Danish), as evident by the recent creation of
[[:meta:Skanwiki]], the Scandinavian meta-pages, and the use of featured
articles from neighbour wikipedias.
== Conclusion ==
Hopefully, this letter will help people better understand the
complicated language situation of the Norwegian Wikipedia community, so
as to give a background on which discussion can take place on this list
in the future, such as the inevitable debate following a possible
request for a re-establishment of the common (and third!) Norwegian
>From the community of no.wikipedia.org and nn.wikipedia.org,
Bjarte Sørensen [[:meta:User:BjarteSorensen]] (Administrator/bureaucrat on nn:)
Lars Alvik [[:no:User:Profoss]] (Administrator/bureaucrat on no:)
Øyvind A. Holm [[:no:User:Sunny256]] (Administrator on no:)
Onar Vikingstad [[:no:User:Vikingstad]] (Administrator on no:)
Jon Harald Søby [[:no:User:Jhs]] (Administrator on no:)
Chris Nyborg [[:no:User:Cnyborg]] (Administrator on no:)
Guttorm Flatabø [[:no:User:Dittaeva]] (Administrator on nn:)
Gunleiv Hadland [[:meta:User:Gunnernett]] (Administrator on nn:)
Jarle Fagerheim [[:nn:User:Jarle]] (Administrator on nn:)
Øyvind Jo Heimdal Eik [[:en:User:Pladask]] (Administrator on nn: and no:)
Kristian André Gallis [[:nn:User:Kristaga]]
Vegard Wærp [[:no:User:Vegardw]]
Nina Aldin Thune [[:no:User:Nina]]
Thor-Rune Hansen [[:no:User:ThorRune]]
Claes Tande [[:no:User:Ctande]]
Arnt-Erik Krokaa [[:no:User:AEK]]
Rune Sattler [[:no:User:Shauni]]
I would like to invite you to join a chat about the relationship
between the Wikimedia community and the Open Access movement in
scientific publishing. This will explore issues of licensing, content
sharing, technology, and hopefully result in mutual commitments to
In a nutshell: December 17, 2006; irc.freenode.net; 21:00 UTC; #openaccess
for more (including a link to a web interface for accessing the IRC
channel). I would appreciate it if you would add yourself to the "I
want to attend!" list on the page, so we have an idea how many people
Peace & Love,
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
I haven't fallowed the discussion so I might be repeating an old idea,
if so just ignore my comment. In any case this is an old idea, this is
a business model you have probably seen before if you are familiar with
The Hunger Site (thehungersite.com) and The Million Dollar Homepage
(milliondollarhomepage.com). I was thinking we could have a button on
the fundraising-page that people would be asked to click if they wanted
to support Wikimedia (this is not advertising). Clicking that button
would send you to a side project of the Foundation (hopefully with a
special domain name) which would essentially be a page full of ads like
the Million Dollar Homepage. So in this way we do not advertise on
Wikipedia but instead offer people who whish to support the Foundation
to support us in this way (and in this way make use of our traffic).
- F.B. Dýrfjörð
On 28/12/06, Teun Spaans <teun.spaans(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/28/06, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 28/12/06, Teun Spaans <teun.spaans(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 6) Has there ever been an open call to all wikipedians to provide
> > > suggestions to the foundationboard of ways to receive money?
> > Does continuously saying "our traffic level is stupidly high and costs
> > a fortune / everyone at our web ranking has an actual budget and
> > income stream / we're operating on a shoestring / we're desperately in
> > need of cash" count?
> Did I really have to say that? ;-)
Then take it as read ;-)
Perhaps we can get going on creative new ideas for fundraising!
Post your idea below:
What is NeOpuntia?
NeOpuntia® is a natural lipophilic fiber made from dehydrated oval leaves (also called pads) of the Opuntia ficus indica cactus via a long development & patented process backed by strong scientific research. Developed by French scientists, NeOpuntia is the first effective vegetable fat-blocker. This 100% green and natural high quality ingredient enables you to lose weight safely, without starving yourself or force yourself to stick to a low-fat diet.
Originally native to Mexico, Opuntia ficus-indica (Indian Fig Opuntia) is a species of cactus, grown for the large, sweet fruits, called tunas, which are available in local and commercial markets worldwide. Most culinary references to the prickly pear are referring to this plant. The name tuna is also used for this cactus, and for Opuntia in general. The cactus leaves of Opuntia ficus-indica have been traditionally eaten in Mexico and southern Europe for many years. The cactus pads also provided a source of sticky binding material for adobe bricks during construction.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Solo les envio este email. para confirmar el recibo de los suyos a la esta
Si no me comunico con Uds. es porque estoy desarrollando unos proyectos. A
penas pueda me comunicare con Uds.
Charla con tus amigos en línea mediante MSN Messenger:
First of all, I wish all of you a very happy new year.
Now, my question:
Are there statistics on how much time users spend
editing wikipedia? For instance, when a user edits at
least once every 15-25 minutes for 10 hours, I would
say he/she spent 10 hours editing, which is cool.
I saw people doing better, and regularly. These people
are the true pillars of wikipedia.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
I would like to suggest to register www.wikipedia.cat for ca.wikipedia.org; however I am not sure that this is the right place. Thnk you.
Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses.
J.L.W.S. The Special One wrote:
> I remember reading a report in the Signpost which says that Wikipedia
> could earn over $500 million if it used contextual ads.
Please, if you're going to cite my work in making the controversial
argument that Wikipedia should carry advertising, at least get your
information right. The Signpost did not report "that Wikipedia could
earn over $500 million if it used contextual ads." The Signpost reported
about some people doing back-of-the-napkin analysis, and they didn't
come up with $500 million in revenue either. Even the biggest public
booster of such advertising, the inimitable Jason Calacanis, was only
plugging for $100 million as the annual revenue potential.
Perhaps you've gotten confused over the critical distinction between
income and valuation? Or if you were relying solely on memory, please
avoid that bad habit (responsible for quite a few Wikipedia errors),
especially when the facts require such a trivial effort to check.
Please forgive me if this is an inappropriate post as it is my first. In
reviewing a lot of the FAQs about Donations and Donation Matching, I thought
that perhaps it could be a great idea if sites could offer to their users
the ability to pledge a donation in their name.
My thought was this: a small Donate to Wikipedia in __________'s name. could
be placed on e-commerce sites that would allow people to add $1 or $2 to
their order, knowing that it would be donated to Wikipedia. I would be much
more inclined to donate $100. or more to Wikipedia if I could do it at $1
increments and wrap my donation up in my business expenditures. Then
businesses that strongly support Wikipedia could proudly post their
donations on their sites where they could show user contributions as well as
their own donations and the amount they matched, for example. This would
simultaneously boost support for Wikipedia financially, but moreover would
increase public awareness of Wikipedia (Wikimedia as well).
I have given it a great deal of thought, but wanted to pass it by the list
before I spent any more time on the issue. You see I have an expense account
that allows me to purchase equipment//software, etc. and could easily get
away with (legitimately--no deceit) rationalizing the occasional small
donation as part of my expense. But, unfortunately, I have little or no
money personally to donate and I cherish Wikipedia: A day without Wikipedia
is like a day without sunshine.
I am trying to get my company to make at least a small donation since we use
Wikipedia nearly every day and find it to be a terrific resource. Keep up
the great work.