Node, Jimbo simply said, "your comments should be considered in that full context."
I tend to agree with Jiaqing Bao, that a Cantonese Wikipedia would be an interesting curiosity, but as with Min-nan, it seems destined to whither on the vine. The norm in Guangdong and Hong Kong is to use baihua for formal writing. It's better to have their efforts poured into the "traditional Chinese" content of ZH. It works both ways too - as HK and others learn to adapt to simplified and doing business in the mainland, folks in the PRC are rekindling interest in traditional Chinese characters too.
The Cantonese dialect does have unique colorful phrases and a different linguistic culture that manifests itself in Cantopop, film and cartoons. Some would seem foreign to "Mandarin" speakers. It would be great to have these Cantonese-isms captured in some way that could be done in a combined ZH Wikipedia.
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:53:06 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Excuse me? Yes, I want to split up the Chinese Wikipedia into multiple projects, no matter what lines it's upon! Mwahahahahaha!!!
Actually, no. With the upgrade to 1.4, most previous problems on zh.wikipedia have been fixed. I did submit a request to Wikicities for a separate project focused more on anthropology but still an encyclopedia in Traditional Chinese, but the two are unrelated.
Perhaps you should actually consider that I have /given you some evidence/?
This issue has been discussed in a little bit of depth here, by not just me but others as well. And you're basically ignoring what I'm saying and labelling it as activist because I like to fork zh: (again, wth!?), and you're also ignoring what some other people are saying.
If a new Wikipedia *is* created for Cantonese (remember, this *was* requested by a Cantonese speaker, not me), I think ultimately it should be in Chinese characters but it should have the same Traditional-Simplified solution zh.wikipedia now uses as there are speakers of Cantonese on the mainland who use the Simplified alphabet too.
As far as I can tell, you have considered NONE of the evidence I have presented and simply skipped over it for whatever reason and then labelled it for others as "activism for forking Chinese into multiple projects".
Well, I have news for YOU, Jimbo. Check your inbox. Stirling Newberry agrees with me. And what he said is largely the same as what I said. So where does that put things?
Mark
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:17:48 -0800, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
André Müller wrote:
I completely agree with Alex Kwan. Having a Wikipedia in both Mandarin/simplified Chinese and Cantonese/traditional Chinese seems redundant to me as well. One could perhaps compare it with setting up extra Wikipedias for British and American English (I doubt that the differences are much bigger; except for the trad/simp issue).
I tend to agree. Node is well known as an activist for forking Chinese into multiple projects, and so his comments should be considered in that full context.
--Jimbo _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l