Hi,
I think Node is making a few misleading points here, most of all to do with this logo changing on the Romanian Wikipedia.
I have been at the Romanian Wikipedia since 2003, and I can say that there have been no conflicts so far with other Wikipedias (except this Moldovan one, perhaps) and that this logo-changing was not inspired by a dislike for Russians. It was rather changed by a desire to have a Romanian character on the logo of a Romanian-language encyclopedia. There was never any discussion of "we will particularly replace this symbol just because it's Cyrllic". I don't think it's right that Node use this to his advantage just because of what is in reality a coincidence.
As to automatic conversion, as Node said - it would cause a great deal of controversy, both in Romania and Moldova. In Moldova, it is seen as a symbol of Russian repression - perhaps Node doesn't see it as much because he hasn't lived through those times (neither have I - I'm not Moldovan), but a lot of Moldovans have said that so far. The controversy becomes increasingly significant when we're talking about a script that is no longer official (except for in the breakaway Transnistria, which is a dictatorship that still follows the Soviet ideals) and is in decline (in the sense that - all young Moldovans learn Latin only).
Overall, though, I'm not against the Wikipedia. It is officially biscriptal at the moment, in terms of interface, even though Latin content can't go there - instead, it is placed on the Romanian Wikipedia.
But it would be good to hear what international users think of this Wikipedia. Would it be correct to delete it? Or perhaps move the Cyrillic version to a more specific subdomain, rather than letting the mo: subdomain host only Cyrillic content?
Thanks,
Ronline
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com