Angela wrote:
On 4/15/05, Wouter Steenbeek musiqolog@hotmail.com wrote:
… the existance of a Simple English wikipedia justifies a Simple German wikipedia anyway.
That might be the case if the Simple English Wikipedia had been a success, but, in my opinion, it has not. The project still has very unclear goals, and few guidelines about which level editors should be writing at. It is not even clear whether the wiki is meant for children or learners of English as an additional language. The majority of articles are stubs and there has been little interest in extending them. Very little, if any, community has ever formed at the site. Suggesting the Simple English wiki be closed seems a better option to me than using its existence to justify the creation of other projects.
If enough people believe the Simple German one can work, then that could be trialed, but the existence of the failing English version should not be used as the reason for creating this.
I agree with this, having occasionally peered over at simple: but never really having gotten interested in it enough to edit significantly.
I do think the idea is admirable, but perhaps some of the same goals could be accomplished by making the existing Wikipedias somewhat easier to read. I've run across quite a few en: articles that use diction not in common use since the 19th century (and I don't just mean the ones imported from EB1911). That has a certain charm, but more people being able to read our encyclopedia has greater benefits, IMO.
I don't necessarily mean to reduce the writing level to that of a typical American newspaper (which are purposely targetted to a 7th-to-8th-grade level to maximize the potential audience), but I think there is some reasonable middle ground.
-Mark