Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) wrote:
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?
I don't think that you will hear much from people who are not directly
involved in Romanian/Moldovan issues. Node has a history of being very
interested in language issues from all around the world, not just this
one. With the volume of mail that goes through this mailing list it's
understandable that most of us would prefer to avoid commenting on
topics about which we know very little.
I'm not commenting o the logo issue, because I haven't seen the details.
My first impression would be to let the Cyrillicists use the mo:
domain. Nostalgia for Soviet Stalinist days or the current
Transnistrian dictatorship should have nothing to do with it.
Propaganda only works when people listen to it, and the people whom they
are trying to convince pay less attention to it than the opponents.
Arguing against the Cyrillic mo: project helps to keep it alive more
than anything else.
There really should be no objection to maintaing that use for mo: unless
someone else has a use for that domain. I realize that some Latin
script writing Moldovans like to consider their language as different
from Romanian, but that the difference is not recognized at all on the
Romanian side. As long as an all Cyrillic mo: is alive it will make it
more difficult for those who want a Latin mo: distinct from Romanian.
If you leave it alone it will probably die off eventually anyway.
Ec