Now... I live in Kiev, I am NOT ethnically russian, slavian or whatever, and I could not care less for anyone's national feelings. Actually I suppose the NPOV policy should simply BAN anyone even just mentioning them as a decision criteria. If politics are allowed to be a decision criteria, then you can expect a LOT of such quarrels coming up. We all have political opinions, and I cannot think of any country in in this planet that has never had pretty good reasons for them to feel offended by (at the very least) some of their neighbouring peoples, religions, cultures, scripts, miniskirts, trolleybuses, etc. Do you want to open this pandora's box? Go on. Only pls rename this list into Wikipedia-h (H is for hooligans), because that's what it's going to be.
So... living here I meet a number of moldavian (not transdnistrian) residents on the net. Bear in mind, I say *residents* because I simply do not give a damn about their blood, religion, DNA, etc. And I believe that nobody should. This people speak BOTH russian and moldavian. Since my use of rumenian languages is limited (I speak IT-4, which is enough to read most RO, but definitely not enough to write even just at RO-1), I usually use my RU-3 with them. And it works perfectly. Now, RU-3 happens to be written in cyrillic and so are most of their answers, too (just a small number of them using a latin transliteration). Which in turn means that they either use a russian interface or type by some sort of charmap.
I read enough *weird* reports about Ukraine at the time of the "orange revolution" to know how western journalists that come here should be valued. It really depends on which side of the conflict buys them sex partners, wine etc. In the most honest cases they sincerely believe to what their translators tell them, but simply do not have any way for them to check anything of what they are told. Such western reports have supported all possible conflicting sides in regional hot spots in the recent past, mostly because of this. So I'm really asking myself whether the press should be used as a source, when contemporary politics are even remotely a part of the issue. Reality is usually much wider and more complex than the canonic 8.000 symbols a redactor is giving to his journalists for them to describe an event.
I don't mean to offend BBC's reputation, actually they are one of my favourite and most reliable news sources. I simply wonder whether the news *as such* can be used to make a decision at all, no matter what the source. After some 6 years in eastern Europe I came to understand that most of what we think of it is simply absurd. It is actually impossible to judge a foreign culture unless you dont' spend *many* years in it.
From all practical POVs, moldavians of all kinds do know cyrillic scripting.
This is because of the trade they have with Ukraine and Russia, that are ONLY using cyrillic script(s). The situation will only get to a further integration into using cyrillic once Rumenia steps in the EU and more strict border checking between Rumenia and Moldavia will be in place. Many moldavian products already bear mixed latin/cyrillic labels for them to be easily exported here (wine, mainly). The most world wide known moldavian band (Zdub si zdob, I believe BTW, they are GREAT) made a fortune by singing (also) russian songs and maintains an internet site in both russian and moldavian. So it's simply absurd to claim that one of the two scripts (no matter which one) could be unknown to the locals, who definitely have much more urgent life problems than writing a wiki, but undoubtedly do trade and listen to the radio.
Choosing a script or another is mainly a thing at official level, a thing dealing with politics only. In reality, people will simply use them both, no matter what the local war games end up in deciding, because BOTH are needed in practical and economical life, and even the most radical guys need money to make a living. Same applies to the (many) rumenian minorities in Ukraine.
From a practical POV having a latin script is nice for bringing people
closer to the undisputable source of the rumenian culture, that is Rumenia. But on the other hand there are many minorities in Ukraine that never really had a formal instruction in the latin script (and probably never will), but still speak some rumenian dialect. And the only script they can manage is ukrainian and russian cyrillic.
My fivepence worth, because I got to understand that most people in here simply does not know what the issue is about. And as long as we deal with facts and information on cold NPOV basis I am happy to help. IMHO the sooner we manage to detach geopolitics from languages, and get to speak about content accessibility in instead, the better we will work.
Bèrto
----- Исходное сообщение ----- От: "ScottL" scott@mu.org Кому: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Отправлено: 4 июля 2006 г. 15:07 Тема: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Where are the decision makers?
From the BBC article posted way way back on this thread it appears that the schools for ethnically Moldavian children in Transdniester actually use the Latin script if they can, and some times they do it when they are officially being persecuted. At least that is what the article said. As far as I can tell the (non-moldavian speaking) people in power are trying (unsuccessfully) to impose this script. Now it probably is likely older people in the region still use it and its probably in public use but I am not sure you can say that its in many schools. At least not to a point where students are learning it to the exclusion of the Latin based script.
SKL
Mark Williamson wrote:
It incorrectly represents Moldova? Come on!
Wikipedia uses language as a MEDIUM. If somebody wants to know about the language, they would go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language or http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldau or whichever language they speak article.
They will NOT go to mo.wikipedia.
And you are clearly not in touch with reality. In schools east of the Dniestr river, which teach Moldovan, the Cyrillic alphabet is taught. This fact is a fact and you cannot contest it. This is the usual script.
Now, unless you want to challenge the territorial integrity of Moldova, it seems reasonable to accept that Moldova is, in fact, a biscriptal nation.
As Gerard noted, mo-cyr is not acceptable because it violates conventions.
Mark
On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
This is what would reasonably happen, Mark. In my opinion, of course.
Currently people "give a damn" because it represents incorreclty Moldova. Personally, I cannot stand when my country is represented n'*importe
comment
- on Wikipedia.
We don't use this writing, Mark. Apart from exceptions, nowhere. This writing, for all areas of life, is a reality of the past. And do not try
to
discredit my words stating that "he is not in Moldova". I lived my whole life in Moldova, which makes, roughly, 20 years. I read news. I return to Moldova at least one time per year. I know what happens there. We don't
use
this writing. Other Moldovans that are currently in Moldova could easily backup this.
If you want to write articles, I have nothing against it. Moving all you have done on mo.wikipedia.org to mo-cyr.wikipedia.org would in no way interrupt your work. And your work would cease disturbing people concerned.
But enough on this. Let's see the way the current
votehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects#Closure_o f_Moldovan_Wikipediaon
meta ends.
On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Is that a threat?
Why should anyone "give a damn" now? What reason is there for people to not just ignore it and work on the Romanian Wikipedia? Really, there is no good reason. Any good Wikipedian should focus on fixing articles, writing new articles, etc., instead of fussing about something like this.
I just want to write articles, but you and your friends insist on interrupting.
Mark
On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Everyone will start ignoring it, as soon as the Moldovan Wikipedia gets
out
of the mo.wikipedia.org domain. No one would give a damn about it.
On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Would it really make everyone happy?
No.
There would still be people whinging endlessly that it should be closed and/or deleted.
Mark
On 03/07/06, Liviu Andronic < landronimirc@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree that simple ignoring of this project would make it disappear
in
a
one-two year time.
What the you do not get is that there is one simple solution: move
mo to
mo-cyr. And everyone gets happy.
Is this so difficult?
On 7/2/06, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote: > Hoi, > You do not get it. > > It is an annoyance. One of the points made is that the Moldovan > wikipedia is just trolling. Consider what makes a troll thrive; > attention. The more attention that you give it, ANY attention the
more
> it will get entrenched. There is this saying: "I do not care what
they
> say about me as long as they write my name correctly", all this > attention makes the mo.wikipedia "relevant". If it is not
relevant,
> refrain from giving it attention and at some time it will just > evaporate. If it does not, it cannot be considered trolling and
you
are
> plain wrong. > > The best thing for you to do: shut up. Ignore this project.
Everybody
> will be happier and maybe you will be proven to be right. > > Thanks, > GerardM > > > Liviu Andronic wrote: >> I would have to object to the position taken by people who can
make
a
>> difference. >> >> IMHO, all this Moldovan issue annoys you as much as it does me.
I do
not
>> want to dispute on this, as much as you do not want to read all
this
> junk. >> I am wondering if the Moldovan Wikipedia is such unimportant an
issue. I
>> agree that it is a rarely used Wikipedia. And still, for an
unimportant
>> Wikipedia, it does create a lot of headache to the entire
community.
If
> this >> issue flames every three months on this mailing list and on all
possible
>> Talk pages and triggers revert-wars on related English and
Moldovan
>> Wikipedia articles, then I believe that there is obviously a
problem.
>> Not that this entire dispute be fair or ethical - it is a dirty
war
that
> I >> personally detest -, but is it an ethically correct position for
those
> who >> can make a difference to just ignore? >> >> Is it so unimportant that a whole Wikipedia section could create > confusion >> and desinformation? Isn't Wikipedia supposed to provide a "free > encyclopedia >> of the highest possible quality"? >> >> Personally for me, it is strange how people with the ability to
take
and
>> implement a decision, simply choose to ignore. All possible and > impossible >> arguments were already presented here, on the mailing list, and
all
over
>> the English and Moldovan Wikipedia, and on Metawiki. What rests
to
do is
> use >> common sense to decide on this issue. >> >> It is even stranger for me the way a decision already taken by
stewards
> and >> bureaucrats was simply ignored and not implemented. >> >> But, then, it is up to the decision-makers to decide the stance
to
> adopt. I >> still hope that they will choose as soon as possible to stop > deliberately >> ignoring this issue. The problem is that this issue will not
cease
>> re-appearing on this mailing-list. My reason for this is that an
entire
>> country and population (this makes an approximate 3.5 million
persons)
> are >> incorrectly represented on Wikipedia. And one of these, or me -
if
no
> one >> else does it -, will certainly re-open this discussion in a
two-three
> months >> time. >> >> If you managed to read till this point, thank you. >> >> Liviu >> >> On 6/30/06, Brion Vibber < brion@pobox.com> wrote: >> >>> Jacky PB wrote: >>> >>>> Where are the decision makers? Isn't there nobody >>>> >>> No one else is interested in this issue, and getting involved
would
> mean >>> wasting >>> a lot of time with people fighting a lot over something
unimportant.
> The >>> safest >>> course is thus to leave a rarely-used wiki sitting there, same
as
we do
>>> with >>> dozens of other rarely-used wikis and nobody minds. >>> >>> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com) >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikipedia-l mailing list >>> Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org >>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l >
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@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@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@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@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l