We had the similar situation with Serbo-Croatian
(divided into Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian standard). We solved that
with separation of Wikipedias.
However, I think that Wikipedias are (standard) language-based, not
national-based (in general, I am sure that we can find some
national-based Wikipedia). So, solution is (as I see) very simple:
1. Moldavians who think that their language is Romanian should write
into Romanian Wikipedia (only in Latin alphabet).
2. Moldavians who think that their language is Moldavian should write
into Moldavian Wikipedia. Also, those Moldavians can implement Chinese
(and future Serbian) solution for them: they will have tabs (where
"edit", "dicsussion" and "history" tabs are) where they can
script. Also, they would have possibility to choose their interface
(Cyrillic or Latin).
Also, note that content on Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian Wikipedia can
be treated as "duplicated content".
On 4/14/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for your message.
The problem is indeed similar but there is an added problem.
Imagine for a moment that Serbian was only written in Cyrillic, but
that there was another language, let's call it "Naibres", which was
basically identical to Serbian except for political purposes. Now,
Naibres is officially written in the Cyrillic alphabet, but 10% of
Naibres users use the Latin alphabet.
Now, with a Serbian Wikipedia already existing and being relatively
large, would users wanting to add Latin-script content (in this
hypothetical case, not in the real world) be allowed to add it to the
Serbian Wikipedia since no "Serbian" speakers would use the alphabet,
or should a separate Wikipedia be created for Naibres?
And if a separate Wikipedia were created for Naibres, should it only
be written in Latin because any Cyrillic content would be a
duplication of the Serbian content?
I know the hypothetical is confusing, but if you can work your mind
around it that is basically the situation on the ground with Romanian
ro.wiki has over 11000 articles, but there is no willingness to accept
content in the Cyrillic alphabet, which is fine. So people started
having content in both scripts at mo:, but the very small community at
mo: (two or three people) has decided to redirect all Latin-script
pages to ro.wikipedia because the text is basically identical and we
don't want to create a content fork.
Ronline believes we should move Cyrillic pages to a separate subdomain
since Cyrillic is not the official or majority script of "Moldovan
language", but I believe that, since we already have two separate
Wikipedias, we can use ro.wiki for /all/ Latin-script content, and
mo.wiki for /all/ Cyrillic-script content, as long as there is a
prominently-placed link on the mo.wiki mainpage (see
, where it says "click aici" is the link)
On 4/14/05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/13/05, Mark Williamson
> Many Serbians (though certainly not all) believe Bosnian is a dialect
> of Serbian or is identical, but there is no interference with Serbians
> complaining about the Bosnian Wikipedia or vice-versa, and Serbian is
> bi-scriptal even though Latin is mostly used for "Montenegrin" which
> is in a similar situation to Moldovan (except it isn't officially
> recognised as a separate language).
Serbs are using both scripts (in Belgrade, Podgorica and Banja Luka)
and it seems that situation with Moldavians are similar (not the same)
with Serbian problem.
So, I suggest Chinese solution for Moldavians. They would have Latin
and Cyrillic interface such Chinese have Simplified and Traditional
script. Please, look Zhengzhu's page at Meta:
Wikipedia-l mailing list