On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:27:59 +0100, Lars Alvik larsal@stud.ntnu.no wrote:
The idea nowadays is to change the interwikicoding and provide a list of reasons why bokmål is no: (like Utne suggested). This would create a bokmål/riksmål wiki on no: and formalize the language situation. And yes, i see this as an permanent solution.
In other words, you propose to disregard the objection of the Nynorsk community, and want to collect arguments to do so.
I recon there are probably no more than 300 nynorsk arcticles on no:. These and new nynorsk articles on no: will not get deleted but will not get "protected" against translation either. We don't want no trouble with the nynorskpeople (eventhough we are indeed very tired of the debate in general). Just moving no: to nb: creates a lot of problem and establish an own nb: wiki idependantly of no: would kill the community and confuze new users (i for one don't think it's fun to move around 11 500 articles).
I don't see any problems that would be caused by my proposal, and I think the same holds for some other proposals. Moving the 11.5000 articles would happen "behind the screens" and not be noticeable except that you and up at nb.wikipedia.org next time you go to no:. Only those 300 Nynorsk articles would need to be 'moved around' - in this case meaning they have to be moved to nn.wikipedia.org.
Still, I feel that the discussion is starting to lose its value. It is time to get to a solution, or at least to appoint people to decide on the solution. Could someone step in in name of the foundation, and decide on a decision process? If we don't have that, there's three outcomes I find (in order of likelihood):
* This discussion ends, not because a solution has been found that satisfies all or most of those involved, but because people grow tired of it. * The discussion goes on and on for months without any hope of resolution. * Someone starts implementing their own solution singlehandedly, starting an edit war of unprecedented proportions.
Andre Engels
Andre Engels