Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old

> So where were you all recently?

>We just needed categorization, changes in edit rules and main page in official orthography.

> I think it's not realistic now too:(

I am bloody serious now! I remember User:Alexander Gouk planning to introduce some solution, but I don't remember if he really did. Can you give a link to your proposal? And I personnally was always for splitting into classical and official sectors within one and the same Wikipedia instead of splitting in two separate wikipedias or, especially, deleting the old wiki for the sake of a new one!

czalex -----Original Message----- From: Ihar Hrachyshka <ihar.hrachyshka(a)gmail.com> To: Alexander Cajcyc <czalex(a)bk.ru>ru>, wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:10:10 +0300 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old > > У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 17:13 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc п ша: > > In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia? > > > As you can remember I've provided such a solution long time ago but > there was a one big Ignore on the Main_Page on this solution talk. And > now - when all is so bad - you tell us the same words. > I don't want to think that you are making compromises only after the > power-punch from Wikimedia authority. Are you speaking serious now? > > > > czalex > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> > > To: "Alexander Cajcyc" <czalex(a)bk.ru>ru>, wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 > > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old > > > > > > > > Hoi, > > > There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard > > > is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in > > > the label. > > > > > > Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring > > > collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and > > > history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been > > > indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English > > > ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > GerardM > > > > > > On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc <czalex(a)bk.ru> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi everybody > > > > > > > > I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a > > > > solution that would satisfy all of us. > > > > > > > > Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of > > > > Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake > > > > of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical > > > > orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some > > > > compromise. > > > > > > > > I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK. > > > > > > > > But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to > > > > get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in > > > > Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has > > > > an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO > > > > speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most > > > > forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold > > > > in... Russian [what is not bad itself]. > > > > > > > > So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., > > > > be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing > > > > so that it could coutinue its effective functioning. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > czalex > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> > > > > To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hoi, > > > > > Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you > > > > have > > > > > to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that > > > > you > > > > > give more than what you get. > > > > > > > > > > There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space > > > > where > > > > > such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" > > > > > language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / > > > > > orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to > > > > > achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate > > > > and to > > > > > find some coexistence. > > > > > > > > > > When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been > > > > > created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Gerard > > > > > > > > > > On 3/30/07, Monk <monkbel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about > > > > > > language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just > > > > > > insults and speculations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian > > > > > > > language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your > > > > > > > right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that. > > > > > > This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it > > > > > > can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you > > > > > > understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit > > > > > > for yourself by your own hands. > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. > > > > > > > Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call > > > > > > > "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited > > > > everything > > > > > > > incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) > > > > > > > into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and > > > > I > > > > > > > mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... > > > > > > > grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the > > > > > > > indexing bots. > > > > > > Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in > > > > > > "norm" if people just don't write in it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Monk. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list > > > > > > Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list > > > > > Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list > > > > Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikipedia-l mailing list > > Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l >