The problem is not only with them. AFAIK there is a similar problem in the
Occitan wiki (just to name one). There the situation is closer to Low-Saxon,
though. There is a number of different "flavours" of the language, and only
one is represented in the sysop structure. When there is a small number of
people being able to read and write in the language (or a small number of
them has internet access), this may really end up in being a damage to the
edition's capability to collect and organize content.
Bèrto
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas Vilén" <andreas.vilen(a)gmail.com>
To: <wikipedia-l(a)wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Conflict re:Belarusan WP
As Marco Chiesa, I don't see how that argument is relevant... Let them
have two wikis, no harm done, right? Let's make information free for
more people!
/Andreas
On 5/13/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The main difference is that Nynorsk and Bokmål are
both official in
Norway; only Narkamauka is official in Belarus.
Mark
On 13/05/06, Andreas Vilén <andreas.vilen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/13/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12/05/06, Heiko Evermann <Heiko.Evermann(a)gmx.de> wrote:
> > > > New articles are supposedly allowed to be written in either
variety,
> > > > however the vast majority of
existing articles are written in the
> > > > alternative style. According to proponents of the official
> > > > orthography, this makes it intimidating to newcomers, and they
give
> > > > that as the reason why the
Belarusan Wikipedia is so small still.
> > > It does not make much sense to mix. We have been very unhappy with
mixed
> > > dialects in the Low Saxon wikipedia.
After a lot of discussion and a
lot of
> > > struggle agains a lone crusader
(node_ue :) )we finally managed to
have
are happy
and we are
happy and both wikipedias are flowrishing.
Not a lone crusader -- other people tried for unity as well, for
example User:Fidi, but they didn't know much about the inner workings
of Wikipedia and so when you silenced their voices, they simply left
instead of shouting louder.
You may not think it makes much sense to mix, but plenty of other
Wikipedias do it. The Norman Wikipedia mixes dialects and
orthographies. I don't really agree with that, Jerriais, Dgernesiais,
Serquiais, and Contentiais should, in my view, have separate WPs, but
they seem to be making it work, so it can't be said to be undoable.
The nds-nl Wikipedia mixes dialects and orthographies -- ask Servien
even. They don't use a single " Dutch Low Saxon" orthography, they use
different spelling systems depending on which dialect they are
writing.
The Alemannic WP also mixes dialects, I think; orthographies are mixed
in the Lombard Wikipedia; orthographies are mixed (to an extent) in
the Breton Wikipedia.
Mark
Cutting out the stuff I don't reply to. I just want to mention nnwiki
and nowiki, which are two Wikipedias for the two Norwegian
scripts/dialects/languages. They have existed for ages. Why can't we
do the same with other languages? It seems much more convenient than
to mix two different scripts in one Wikipedia.
/Andreas
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l