In saying that this is not a language list, both Boris and Gerard are quite wrong.
There was some logic or other behind the merger of intlwiki-l with wikipedia-l. I think it's because intlwiki-l was never extremely active.
But when the two were merged, it's a flaw that people now consider anything that would've formerly gone on intlwiki-l to be "noise" -- it belongs here very much.
Gerard said a language cannot survive without a dictionary. Dictionaries are a relatively recent invention. Navajo didn't have a dictionary until the 1900s, and it's been around for quite some time. O'odham still doesn't have a good dictionary (though it has a dictionary, it's small and of poor quality), yet it's still going strong.
Wikipedias ensure the presence of a language on the Internet. According to some, languages will only survive if they have a presence on the Internet.
Anyhow, back to intlwiki-l vs wikipedia-l...
A few months ago, I suggested that the two be re-split. There was a lot of support for the idea, obviously much of it from people tired of being flooded with messages they didn't care for.
Gerard felt I was trying to evade him in some way; that wasn't discussed much though.
However, the reason I didn't pursue it was Anthere. She didn't "forbid" me from doing anything, she just expressed that there was a reason for the merger and she is against them splitting again, and I felt that since it's not a big deal to me, I would just let it go.
...but, if people really do feel that there needs to be a separate intlwiki-l once again, it may need to be created.
But, I don't see why people are so annoyed reading about languages, even discussions and sometimes arguments regarding them. I am not particularly interested in German history, yet I would find mildly interesting any argument about the specifics of it...
People like Tim Starling have shown a similar attitude towards language in the past -- they don't seem to be especially interested in it, yet they do seem to find some of the issues discussed here at least somewhat interesting, and aren't afraid of doing a little research.
Mark
On 10/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger BorisLohnzweiger@web.de wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
You write that the subscribers at this list are all language entheuasiasts.
I phrased it wrongly. Of course, it's not a language list in the first place.
The idea of people who do not speak a language want to have a Wikipedia so that they can dabble in it is not what I like to see, I do not think it enhances Wikipedia's reputation.
Fully agreed. That's exactly what I was trying to point out. Fortunately, the rule that you need five native speakers to start a new Wikipedia seems to gain more and more supporters lately. That could prevent a lot of futile discussion in the future.
When I heard that Nauruans walked away disgusted with what we brought to the table I was apalled.
na: is in fact more like a parody than like a real encyclopedia. I wish someone stop that hanky-panky there for the sake of the project's reputation.
Sorry Boris nothing personal this has been building up for some time.
That's alright. Thanks for reminding us/me.
Boris
Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail können Sie eine SMS an alle Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l