There is no list of rules for Wikipedia-l.
Thus, there is no rule that says we must stay on topic.
We have a little fun every once in a while because we don't have rules -- we can make jokes, stray a little from the topic, things like that.
So, while you may prefer that we stay on topic, it is by no means a rule.
Mark
On 15/07/05, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Like the posting that this is a reply to, it is not relevant to what the thread was about. Please stay on topic. Thanks, GerardM
Mark Williamson wrote:
A Wikipedia was requested for Cantonese. That was simple they requested a language because it's too different from Mandarin, and people would only benefit.
It didn't need to be complicated.
Besides, they would've had two sides to choose from, whichever they preferred -- and yet it has not been created because there have been issues, even though Cantonese has many more native speakers than Low Saxon.
Regardless of actual differences, people are going to be a bit hesitant to oblige a request that appears on the surface to be dividing by country. Even if you do not believe it divides by country, you must admit that it looks this way on the surface. Anybody who reads the topic will see "nds-nl", and if they know that "nl" is a country code will say "That doesn't sound right".
Also, in this case, as in any case, if the Wikipedia /is/ going to be created, it will likely be a while. Scots and Võro were in a similar situation -- actually better -- they had a few native speakers, a few extra supporters, and growing test Wikipedias. Nobody seemed to believe that the new Wikipedias shouldn't be created. And yet, it took a long time between when they became such popular requests, and their actual creation.
All I can suggest is to be patient.
Mark
On 15/07/05, Servien Ilaino servien@gmail.com wrote:
Okay are we now gonna have an endless discussion about endless discussions? It's simple we requested a language because it's too different from the other dialects used in Germany, people will only benefit, so I don't understand the whole thing. Why be complicated if you don't have to? (besides then they'll 2 to choose from, which ever they prefer)
Servien
2005/7/15, Angela beesley@gmail.com:
On 7/15/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
That's all fine with me, but for a problem like this there's still no end in sight.
True. That's why this policy needs to be moved out of its "proposed" stage into something real. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_policy_for_wikis_in_new_languages
I don't think we should definite cases where a Wikipedia *will* be created, but I think we should define those cases in which it won't, to reduce confusion and keep people aware of what not to do.
I agree. Perhaps cases where it won't could be documented at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_policy_for_wikis_in_new_languag... in an attempt to find some sort of consensus on this issue. I would rather have a vote on the general policy than a vote on every new proposal.
Angela.