On 1/11/06, Dejan Cabrilo dcabrilo@gmail.com wrote:
Milos, you first said that nobody tagged POV articles as such, and that I should've. We concluded that I did. Now you are saying that I didn't attempt to improve them, but did tag them. I did try to improve some, but I was constantly reverted and even rolled back by some admins (I can look into those). So, don't tell me I am not saying truth again, please.
Try it again with ONE article, first (please, use some which where you are more familiar) and if you would have some problems, they will be solved. But, please, don't behave aggressive.
It doesn't matter if our edition is called Serbo-Croatian, or Neo-Shtokavian, or "our language". It's about not being country, or ethno-centric, but information centric.
Do you think that building one more community is a right way to make differences smaller? I don't think so. In this moment the right way is, as I see, to work inside of present communities. When sh: grows up to 10 people, we would have a lot more difficult situation because the space for possible merging would be filled with one more community.
However, as I said, one of the important reasons why I am not for closing sh: in this way is a possibility of deactivating couple of active sh: Wikipedians.
In other words, the only possible way for relocking of sh: is your (i.e. sh: Wikipedians) intention to do so; as well as your start to work in all of other three encyclopedias/communities on the long process of merging content. Is it possible?