Sorry mac, but you can't ignore the fact that bokmål is written by the
largest share of the norwegian population, around 90-80%. If no: could
be a serverside redirect to nb: but with a portal frontpage, sure i
would go for that, but i don't think it's technicaly possible.
And i don't see the point in involving a english mailinglist, that
probably don't care about the situation. Hell even i'm getting tired of
it.
On the other hand one of the admins at no: had a good idea that could
probably heal some of the unfairness felt by nynorskusers. To use the
main page on "no" as a multilingual focal point, with the nynorsk
featured article of the week, and the bokmål one, side by side.
Another impotant note, we shuldn't dream up different technical
solutions that is probably not viable. Sure, it would be great if all
text on the internett appared in your own language (like an oversized
babelfish translating everything) but in our present time this isn't
possible
With no: being the de facto bokmål wiki, there has been a wish among
the no: users to formalize this.
As for an third norwegian wiki (nb) this would only serve to divert
ressurces and manpower.
I have no oppresion agenda against nynorsk, my goal for wikipedia is
only to create a NPOV wiki in the language i know, and that being the
language closest to my oral language, bokmål. I agree, even if nynorsk
isn't my language it's no less norwegian than bokmål. But on the other
hand, i think we should represent the majority of the norwegian people
on no: and the majority use bokmål as their language. The only other
solution would be to move no: to nb: and create a serverside redirect
(this is accualy technicaly possible).
mvh. Lars Alvik (who is growing tried of being represented as a
ignorant fool and a "jævela austlending")
På 10. mar. 2005 kl. 11:28 skrev Ulf Lunde:
Here we go again! :-)
There are several issues here.
One is the question of *discrimination or equality between the
variants*
of the Norwegian language. This has been pointed out by Mark
Williamson earlier in this thread, but seems to be largely overlooked.
On Fri Mar 4 01:30:40 UTC 2005, Lars Alvik said:
forexample the
www.google.no is on bokmål, you
have to
click an extra link to get to the nynorsk version. This is more or
less
what i think no: should be, on bokmål but with a well placed link to
nynorsk.
The above remark by Lars Alvik is discriminating and offensive
towards nynorsk users. Why should it be like that and not
the other way around? Is bokmål a superior language?
To better explain the offensiveness of such statements of
superiority, I risk a provocative analogy. To say:
Bokmål is the default Norwegian language, so
asking for "Norwegian" should give you bokmål,
but we can put a link to nynorsk there;
is tantamount to saying something like:
*Men* are the default human beings, so looking up
"human being" should redirect you to "man", but
we can have a well placed link to "woman" on that page!
(The Sami languages are a different kind of problem, because
although they are official languages in some regions of Norway,
the Sami languages do not call themselves "Norwegian", and so
probably do not want to claim the name "Norwegian Wikipedia".)
Incidentally, Lars Alvik's description of the Google interface is not
true.
The address
www.google.no will give you whichever Norwegian variant
you selected on your previous visit. This is a good model for how the
address
no.wikipedia.org can be made to work, too!
A second issue is *which names the inter-wiki links should show*.
To Olve Utne this is a major issue, while who gets to use the
language code "no" is a minor issue.
I see it differently.
In the name of fairness, a wiki which excludes one of the two
official forms of Norwegian, should not be given *exclusive* rights
to the language code for Norwegian. To display the inter-wiki link
"no" as "norsk (bokmål)" is simply incorrect.
To me, it is as simple as this:
"no" is "norsk"
"nb" is "norsk (bokmål)"
"nn" is "norsk (nynorsk)"
This is how the links are displayed in Wikipedia today, and it
looks good to me.
Olve proposes that we change it to be like this:
"no" is "norsk (bokmål)"
"nb" is also "norsk (bokmål)"
"nn" is "norsk (nynorsk)"
I don't see any reason to make such a change. In fact, the
case of equality vs. discrimination is a strong argument *against*
such a change.
A third issue is whether or not to *exclude nynorsk Norwegian*
from the current Norwegian Wikipedia at
no.wikipedia.org.
That Wikipedia has so far been a mixed Norwegian Wikipedia,
with a user interface in bokmål, but allowing articles in any
written form of the language. Last year a separate nynorsk
Norwegian Wikipedia appeared at
nn.wikipedia.org, so now
there are two completely separate wikipedias which allow
articles written in nynorsk Norwegian. Since nynorsk now
has its own "home", several people have proposed to disallow
it in the hitherto "Norwegian" Wikipedia, effectively changing
the older Wikipedia into a pure bokmål encyclopedia.
A vote is going on about this right now in
http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:M%C3%A5lform
If that vote decides to turn that Wikipedia database into an
exclusively bokmål encyclopedia, I say that from that moment on
it loses its exclusive right to the language code "no", and all
links to it should thenceforth use the code "nb".
If the vote decides to keep the mixture of written forms, that
wikipedia shall of course stay at
no.wikipedia.org. I have tried
to create a separate, pure bokmål wikipedia at
nb.wikipedia.org
to achieve symmetry with the nynorsk one at
nn.wikipedia.org,
but so far there has been little support for such an addition.
There are also other issues, related to *non-official written forms*
of Norwegian, but I won't go into those here, as I feel those can
wait until the main issues have been resolved once and for all.
Ulf Lunde
(user and appreciator of both Norwegian written forms
and of both Norwegian wikipedias)
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l