Using XP Workstation.
Windows & Office Updates up to date.
This was reported by our staff & they said it was okay until a few
Washington County Library
8595 Central Park Place
Woodbury, MN 55125
Dear All, Dear Mark,
Belarusian Classical Grammar (sometimes called Tarashkievitsa)is used by
Belarusian Language Society
[http://www.tbm-language.com/eng/about.html], by Belarusian PEN Centere
[http://www.pen-centre.com/eng/pen_about.html], by most important
belarusian writers and free media (newspapers, magazines, radio) to name
just some: Nasa Niva Newspaper [http://arche.home.by/], ARCHE Magazine
[http://arche.home.by], Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
[http://www.svaboda.org], by main belarusian political parties and Non
Government Organisations: Party of Belarusian Popular Front
[http://www.pbnf.org], United Civil Party [http://www.ucpb.org],
Viasna'96 [http://www.spring96.org], by Civil Society Center
[http://www.cacedu.unibel.by/cscsc/], by belarusian Dictionary Project
[http://slounik.org], by Litara.net Webzine [http://www.litara.net], by
Belarusian Legal Portal [http://www.praunik.org], by Belarusian Students
Portal [http://studenty.by] by many belarusian bloggers from LiveJournal
Community and in particulary by Rydel's blog [http://www.br23.net/] wich
won this year the 4th National Belarusian Web Content Contest, organized
by prominent belarusian portal TUT.BY [http://www.tut.by].
All of above mentioned organisations and individuals use CLASSICAL grammar.
Most localisation and internationalisation job of free and open source
software (GNU/Linux)in belarusian is done according to classical grammar.
As you see, it's not just "some of belarusian nationalists" which want
to return to older belarusian, but intellectuals, writers, journalist,
students, politicals, translators and policymakers who use it.
It is not true, that "By sheer chance, the proponents of the
alternative style were the first to arrive at be.wikipedia[...]" this is
because major part of BYnet (belarusian part of the web) uses classical
In such situation I belive it is inappropriate to create an alternative
wikipedia for authors who want to write in official, imposed by soviet
regime grammar rules (which are still obligatory).
If someone want create article in "Narkamauka", should be allowed to do
so in the belarusian wikipedia.
PS Sorry for my English.
With best regards, Kiryl Nieviarouski
It has been obvious to me for a long time that this sort of thing is quite prevalent. On the one hand it sort of makes a mockery of the open and free principles espoused by wikipedia. But then again, it seem an inevitable development, afterall, we all know it can't be an out and out free for all.
So I accept that there is a place for it, but occasionally I get the feeling there is a cosy little club operating, to which not even 20,000 edits will open a door.
Furthermore, those born prior to 1976 need not apply - open and free indeed!
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe esclusive
>One more remark, I wouldn't dare to start the thread without
>seeing the following points on the Jimbo's Statement of
> 2. Newcomers are always to be welcomed. There must be no cabal,
> there must be no elites, there must be no hierarchy or structure
> which gets in the way of this openness to newcomers. [...]
> 6. The mailing list will remain open, well-advertised, and will be
> regarded as the place for meta-discussions about the nature of
Really, a point of order - there was never any "secret" list, it was not
created in secret, it was not meant to be a secret. As already stated
by Tomasz earlier in the thread it was created as a "restricted-access"
list but not a secret one. If you wish to discuss merits or drawbacks
of such a list please do so but do not use loaded and inflammatory
language by making it into something it was never intended to be.
Michal (roo72 on pl Wiki)
Recently it turned out on the Polish Wikipedia that somebody created
a secret mailing list for Polish Wikipedia administrators. Why I say
the list was secret?
* the information on it was not presented anywhere on the usual
public Wikipedia fora,
* the information on the fact that this list is planned has
not been announced anywhere,
* the list was private (only admins could read it and
had access to its archives),
* the information about the list leaked on some of the Wikipedia
There was a hot dispute concerning the problem on the official
Polish Wikipedia mailing list. However, there was no clear result.
A concrete proposal to discuss the issue in a narrow circle and achieve
a compromise of some kind made by [[:pl:User:Ency]] was more or less
ignored by the creators and supporters of the list.
My concern with regard to the issue is that this kind of initiative
spoils to high extent the open character of the Wikipedia community and
therefore the mailing list should be closed or the admins should be
obliged to sign off from the list. Another possibility is to just make
the list open for the whole community in some way. However, the
effective result of the discussion on the Polish Wikipedia mailing list
(that means that the list still exists) stays in contradiction with my
understanding of the openness of the Wikipedia projects. That's why I
raise this issue here in hope that I'll hear something that will allow
me to better understand the situation and act appropriately.
De toekomst is onzeker en het einde is altijd nabij
- Roadhouse Blues, The Doors
> Mark Williamson node.ue at gmail.com wrote:
> Also, several users have reported that their articles are deleted, only to
be rewritten minutes later by the admin in Classical spelling.
Sorry, but you didn't correct. Claims about changing spelling was from
one user, and was about categories, not about articles.
With best regards,
On 21/05/06, Giuseppe DAngelo <pippudoz(a)yahoo.it> wrote:
> So I accept that there is a place for it, but occasionally I get the
> feeling there is a cosy little club operating, to which not even
> 20,000 edits will open a door.
> Furthermore, those born prior to 1976 need not apply - open and free
> pippu d'angelo
One of two longest-serving arbiters was born in 1959 and the other is
of a comparable age, so I can say for certain that you're ....
Oh, wait a minute. It's secret. Never mind -- I can't say anything.
Sean Barrett | Most people who need to be shot
sean(a)epoptic.com | need to be shot soon and a lot.
| Very few people need to be shot
| later or just a little. --Sean Barrett
my point is: Don't split Belarusian Wikipedia.
We need one Belarusian grammar and we will reach it in effect. Time will
juge which one is better or worse. But splitting wikipedia is not good.
Belarusian Wikipedia does not favor classic spelling over official. It
contains articles on both spellings. There were some edit wars based on
spelling at beginning of 2005, but since that time both spellings
coexists peacefully without major problems. Belarusian speaking Internet
community is not so big, so further spelling dividing will do more harm
Yes Mark. I do speak, write, and can read in this language.
Please help by supporting:
Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 04:17:32 -0700
From: "Mark Williamson" <node.ue(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Request for a new Wikipedia in the
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Do you speak this language?
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
This is a request to start a new Wikipedia in the
Currently, there is no standard language code
for Chavacano in the ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2
The ISO 639-3 lists the language code for Chavacano as cbk
but since Chavacano has some dialects/varieties,
this request is for the Zamboangeño dialect
which has the largest number of this Philippine Creole Spanish
speakers in the Philippines, being the main language
of Zamboanga City, Philippines.
Hence, I am requesting the language code to be used for the
Chavacano de Zamboanga Wikipedia as cbk-zam
Please help us in the creation of this Philippine Creole
Spanish Wikipedia. Thank you very much.