I fully agree with Tim here. Wikipedia's aim is to become an encyclopedia like the "Britannica or better". Editions in Volapük or Pali are plainly counterproductive here. Like I mentioned earlier I attach the same value to each and every single language in the world. And I'm not opposed to any constructed languages as many are great creative works. Furthermore, I fully approve all efforts to preserve and foster minority languages for they are all part of the world's cultural heritage.
However, I think it's finally time to realize that not every language is suitable for a wikipedia. Matter of fact, from a realistic perspective we have more Wikipedias that aren't working than ones that are. The moment we focus on what an encyclopedia is really about (i. e. collecting and transfering information, not language which only serves as a vehicle) we'll see more clearly that e. g. languages with no native speakers will not serve our principal aim.
Boris
wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org schrieb am 08.07.05 01:18:16:
As far as I'm concerned, Lojban and Gothic are in the same category, they both have a very small speaker population with 100% bilingualism, and Esperanto and English are in the same category, they both have a speaker population larger than the native language of many people. I'd like to see a focus on effective information transfer rather than language preservation, restoration and construction, but I think I'm fighting a losing battle.
-- Tim Starling
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_________________________________________________________________________ Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail können Sie eine SMS an alle Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179