I won't read the second part of your email since it's conditional and your
first condition is not acceptable. Also, FMI, is your
position in anyway an
official position from Ro.wiki?
You might have.. The two are more or less complementary.
Also, FMI, is your position in anyway an official position from Ro.wiki?
In no way. I am speaking on behalf of the Moldovan Community on Wikimedia
(sort of: I've never been delegated or anything). The same community that
twice voted for the deletion of the Moldovan Wikipedia.
Right the opposite. ANY encyclopedic content in an ISO recognized entity
(thus including the Moldovan Linguistic Entity) is
I don't know what were ISOs criteria to decide on this (and I don't have
time to write complaints to them). But the content present on
is *not* a separate linguistic entity. It is a
transliteration of Romanian, standard Romanian, exactly as present on
Before answering this, I hope that the Language Committee agrees on the
following two points.
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan
dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which
would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with
Transnistria included). This would be completely stupid and trolls would be
the only serious contributors.
Secondly, the "Moldovan language" in its standard form is standard
Romanian. You might look
more information. "Even the loudest defender of the Moldovan language
concept, Vasile Stati, has
Romanian are identical in their literary forms".
Now, I'll try to reformulate this. And in doing this, I am obliged to stick
to my old-fashioned terminology; otherwise, this is a dead-end (I still
trimed this message off of this terminology). And please read to the end:
I'll try to elaborate as clear as possible my ideas.
I still hope that he language committee agrees that Wikipedia deals
forms of linguistic entities. Not spoken varieties of standard forms. In my
previous email, the idea was as follows: there is a Romanian linguistic
entity, spoken in at least 6 different
included). I sincerely doubt that the WMF intends to
support 6 different Wikipedias next to the Romanian one. This would be more
than similar to the situation of the English linguistic entity used all
around the world. It is spoken in at least 14 different countries, with
differences far greater than those of Romanian and its spoken varieties (not
to consider grammar and so on differences in written forms). My opinion is
that there is no way that the Board will start opening different Wikipedia
sections for all these varieties (consider the post of Delirium <
delirium(a)hackish.org>)t;). And as said previously, if the WMF opens another
section of Wikipedia dealing with this spoken variety of Romanian, not only
would it be absurd, this would be not serious. On a side note: current
content on mo.wikipedia.org
is not spoken Romanian in the historic region of
So, we get to my second idea : the Moldovan linguistic entity in its
standard form is standard Romanian. More information is available
Now, still hoping that the Language Committee agrees that it is standard
form that Wikipedia deals with, we have the following situation: the
Romanian linguistic entity, spoken in six different varieties and -
historically - written with three different scripts.
I really don't know how does ISO decide that Moldovan is a distinct
linguistic entity. This is a Soviet time POV. And I stress again the
following: the content present on mo.wikipedia.org
is a mere transliteration
of standard Romanian. And I don't know how are you going to get content in this
linguistic entity, as deemed by ISO, when even a native doesn't understand
what exactly is ISO talking about.
So, WHERE are you warranties about democracy and NPOV if and when
Moldavian/Transdnistrian content comes in?
Berto, I'd also want a serious answer. How can I possibly offer ANY
*warranties* on this? I do not have any administrative power inside the
Wikimedia structure. All that I'm offering you is arguments. That are
reasonable enough - IMO, of course - and that I am doing my best to keep in
line with objectiveness. More, I'm doing my best in keeping them free of
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to
into separate ones for each dialect, as much as
As you say. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. That is, we will try our best to have a
self translating system, if that is not possible because of local
extremism we will be left with two chances:
1) impose our will over ro.wiki with pure strength
2) have 2 separate wikies
1. Brute force is not necessary. Arguments can
2. In this situation it is *possible* to have one single wiki with both
writing systems. There should simply be a "political" will from the WMF
and/or Language Committee to solve the situation
As much as it starts to bore me too, this is not why I will probably not
answer the rest of the emails (present and future, if they come in). I am
out for a weak so I cannot keep up with this discussion.