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