Hoi,
When we indicate languages in interwiki links, we write the names of those languages as it is written in that language. So we get English, Nederlands, Deutsch, 日本語 etc. I think it is a nice feature.
Some languages however are not written as they are written in that language, think italiano, français or sicilianu. Basically, this is wrong. The only reason I can think of why you want this, is for "esthetic" reasons. These however take not into account the sensibilities that are often associated with language names.
Thanks, GerardM
Not sure I understand. Italian and French are listed among the interwiki links with their local name, exactly like German or English. So where is the difference?
Alfio
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
When we indicate languages in interwiki links, we write the names of those languages as it is written in that language. So we get English, Nederlands, Deutsch, 日本語 etc. I think it is a nice feature.
Some languages however are not written as they are written in that language, think italiano, français or sicilianu. Basically, this is wrong. The only reason I can think of why you want this, is for "esthetic" reasons. These however take not into account the sensibilities that are often associated with language names.
Thanks, GerardM
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Alfio Puglisi wrote:
Not sure I understand. Italian and French are listed among the interwiki links with their local name, exactly like German or English. So where is the difference?
Alfio
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) . Thanks, Gerard
Hoi,
When we indicate languages in interwiki links, we write the names of those languages as it is written in that language. So we get English, Nederlands, Deutsch, 日本語 etc. I think it is a nice feature.
Some languages however are not written as they are written in that language, think italiano, français or sicilianu. Basically, this is wrong. The only reason I can think of why you want this, is for "esthetic" reasons. These however take not into account the sensibilities that are often associated with language names.
Thanks, GerardM
You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) .
I am not in a primary school in Italy, never have been, and likely never will be. I suspect that many of the other list participants are in a similar situation.
Would it be too much to ask for you to explain your observation clearly enough so that this group of people may also follow your reasoning?
Skriptor [[de:Benutzer:Skriptor]]
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) . Thanks, Gerard
Hi as well, And where do you see the problem? I don't think this ought to be changed, as capitalized beginnings is one usual way of doing lists. If everything is kept with the first letter capitalized, then I don't see any problems. And I doubt that any Italian, Frenchman, etc. would either. ;)
Greetings, - André
André Müller wrote:
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) . Thanks, Gerard
Hi as well, And where do you see the problem? I don't think this ought to be changed, as capitalized beginnings is one usual way of doing lists. If everything is kept with the first letter capitalized, then I don't see any problems. And I doubt that any Italian, Frenchman, etc. would either. ;)
Greetings,
- André
Hoi, Capitalising beginnings is a "usual" way of doing lists. But here we do not have an ordinary list, this is a list where the intention is to have the language written as it is written in that language. We call my mother tongue "Nederlands" and not "Dutch" as a result. We have Arabic Japanese Korean in their own script. All things that are NOT usual in a list, stating that something is usually done in a certain way may be true in an English language environment, but does not need to be the done thing for this particular list.
When people ask what language I speak I say "ik ben Nederlands talig" Meaning "I use the Nederlandse language" I do not say "Ik spreek Nederlands" or "I speak Nederlands" my language is also spoken outside the Netherlands. So I do doubt that there are no people who think this policy is wrong; when I raised it on IRC someone said "I have always been wondering about that for the last three years". She was French. so maybe you find no Frenchman but it was no trouble at all to find a française to wonder about the current practise.
Thanks, GerardM.
The difference is that these are abbreviations of names of Wikipedias, thus Lèmburgse Wikipedia -> Lèmburgs, Wikipedia Galego (Galipedia) -> Galego, Wikipédia Français -> Français.
Mark
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:54:43 +0100, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
André Müller wrote:
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) . Thanks, Gerard
Hi as well, And where do you see the problem? I don't think this ought to be changed, as capitalized beginnings is one usual way of doing lists. If everything is kept with the first letter capitalized, then I don't see any problems. And I doubt that any Italian, Frenchman, etc. would either. ;)
Greetings,
- André
Hoi, Capitalising beginnings is a "usual" way of doing lists. But here we do not have an ordinary list, this is a list where the intention is to have the language written as it is written in that language. We call my mother tongue "Nederlands" and not "Dutch" as a result. We have Arabic Japanese Korean in their own script. All things that are NOT usual in a list, stating that something is usually done in a certain way may be true in an English language environment, but does not need to be the done thing for this particular list.
When people ask what language I speak I say "ik ben Nederlands talig" Meaning "I use the Nederlandse language" I do not say "Ik spreek Nederlands" or "I speak Nederlands" my language is also spoken outside the Netherlands. So I do doubt that there are no people who think this policy is wrong; when I raised it on IRC someone said "I have always been wondering about that for the last three years". She was French. so maybe you find no Frenchman but it was no trouble at all to find a française to wonder about the current practise.
Thanks, GerardM.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) .
If at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language you click the "Français" interwiki link, you will arrive at a page where "Français" is spelled with a capital F because it is a title. The first words of that article is "Le français est une langue romane...". In the fact box to the right, the "Organigramme classification" begins with "Indo-européen" and ends with "Français", once again with a capital "F", because it is an element in a list. Clearly, the name of the language *can* be written with a capital F, when it is a title or an element in a list.
If at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_language you click the "Italiano" interwiki link, you will arrive at a page where the title is "Lingua italiano", but where the first words of the article is "L'Italiano è una lingua...". In the fact box to the right, there is a "Famiglie linguistiche" list that begins with "Lingue indoeuropee" and ends with "Italiano". Clearly, Italiano can be spelled with a capital I if it begins a sentence or if it is a member of a list.
If you try to deny this, I think your primary school teacher will correct you.
Lars Aronsson wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) .
If at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language you click the "Français" interwiki link, you will arrive at a page where "Français" is spelled with a capital F because it is a title. The first words of that article is "Le français est une langue romane...". In the fact box to the right, the "Organigramme classification" begins with "Indo-européen" and ends with "Français", once again with a capital "F", because it is an element in a list. Clearly, the name of the language *can* be written with a capital F, when it is a title or an element in a list.
If at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_language you click the "Italiano" interwiki link, you will arrive at a page where the title is "Lingua italiano", but where the first words of the article is "L'Italiano è una lingua...". In the fact box to the right, there is a "Famiglie linguistiche" list that begins with "Lingue indoeuropee" and ends with "Italiano". Clearly, Italiano can be spelled with a capital I if it begins a sentence or if it is a member of a list.
If you try to deny this, I think your primary school teacher will correct you.
Lars, It is funny I was taught to be a primary school teacher so what can I say :)
However, your arguments deal with circumstances where a word might be written in a capitalised manner. When you look for the word in a dictionary it is not capitalised. The point is we use the name of the language as it is written and the word on its own is italiano. Typically we would not have an Japanese or a Georgian name in there but we do and it is written in in their own fashion. So why should we do it in a different way because the same script is used for Italian, French, etc ??
Thanks, GerardM
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
However, your arguments deal with circumstances where a word might be written in a capitalised manner. When you look for the word in a dictionary it is not capitalised. The point is we use the name of the language as it is written and the word on its own is italiano.
But now we were discussing whether the language names should be capitalized in the interwiki link list. There, they are not "on their own", but "members of a list". And apparantly, both the French and Italian Wikipedia capitalize list members. Exactly the same rules apply to the Scandinavian languages.
Another question is whether headwords (titles) in Wikipedia articles should always be capitalized, as they are now. This is not the case in dictionaries, and not in some encyclopedias. For example, in the Danish (1915) http://runeberg.org/salmonsen/2/1/0927.html "apostoliske Fædre" is not capitalized, but in the Swedish (1904) http://runeberg.org/nfba/0681.html "Apostoliska fäder" is capitalized.
LA> But now we were discussing whether the language names should be LA> capitalized in the interwiki link list. There, they are not "on their LA> own", but "members of a list". And apparantly, both the French and LA> Italian Wikipedia capitalize list members. Exactly the same rules LA> apply to the Scandinavian languages.
In the Polish language, language names are not capitalized, and neither are (for the most part) list members. And what about the language list on the main page?
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:44:22 +0100, Pawe³ 'Ausir' Dembowski fallout@lexx.eu.org wrote:
In the Polish language, language names are not capitalized, and neither are (for the most part) list members.
Well, I see that "Strona główna", "Portal wikipedystów", "Bieżące wydarzenia", "Ostatnie zmiany", "Losuj stronę", "Pomoc", "Dary pieniężne", "Zmiany w dolinkowanych", "Prześlij plik", "Strony specjalne" all are capitalised...
And what about the language list on the main page?
Yeah, what about it?
Andre Engels
Andre Engels pravi:
In the Polish language, language names are not capitalized, and neither are (for the most part) list members.
Well, I see that "Strona główna", "Portal wikipedystów", "Bieżące wydarzenia", "Ostatnie zmiany", "Losuj stronę", "Pomoc", "Dary pieniężne", "Zmiany w dolinkowanych", "Prześlij plik", "Strony specjalne" all are capitalised...
Those are article or page titles; anything in title role _is_ capitalized.
But they appear as members of a list. You can link to [[portal wikipedystów]] and it will give you the same page as if you linked to [[Portal wikipedystów]].
Mark
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 22:16:12 +0100, Roman Maurer roman.maurer@amis.net wrote:
Andre Engels pravi:
In the Polish language, language names are not capitalized, and neither are (for the most part) list members.
Well, I see that "Strona główna", "Portal wikipedystów", "Bieżące wydarzenia", "Ostatnie zmiany", "Losuj stronę", "Pomoc", "Dary pieniężne", "Zmiany w dolinkowanych", "Prześlij plik", "Strony specjalne" all are capitalised...
Those are article or page titles; anything in title role _is_ capitalized.
Pozdrav, Roman
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Lars Aronsson wrote:
If at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_language you click the "Italiano" interwiki link, you will arrive at a page where the title is "Lingua italiano", but where the first words of the article is "L'Italiano è una lingua...".
It was modified just a few hours ago to a lowercase "I" :-)
Alfio
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) .
If you look a the Italian main page, all links on the left bar are capitalized, not just the language list. Writing capitalized lists is OK, and no one would object to have:
*English *Italiano
on any list. The contrary would be difficult to read, with mixed capitalization.
Alfio
And Gerard, please note that Alfio, unlike you, is a native Italian speaker.
Mark
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:05:58 +0100 (MET), Alfio Puglisi puglisi@arcetri.astro.it wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) .
If you look a the Italian main page, all links on the left bar are capitalized, not just the language list. Writing capitalized lists is OK, and no one would object to have:
*English *Italiano
on any list. The contrary would be difficult to read, with mixed capitalization.
Alfio _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mark Williamson wrote:
And Gerard, please note that Alfio, unlike you, is a native Italian speaker.
Mark
Which is a totally irrelevant remark. fyi I asked Sabine, she thinks that having it as it is written is to be preferrred; her argument is that things that are "strange" atract more curiosity. Her credentials as to the Italian language are obvious and adequate.
Using this argument is rich when it comes from the "tireless warrior for more wikipedia's even though he does not speak all the languages he champions". It basically disqualifies you and if you apply this logic to yourself, we will not hear that much from you on the mailinglist.
Thanks, GerardM
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:05:58 +0100 (MET), Alfio Puglisi puglisi@arcetri.astro.it wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi, You find "Italiano" not "italiano" in the interwiki links. That is different. If you are in a primary school in Italy, your teacher will make you learn the difference :) .
If you look a the Italian main page, all links on the left bar are capitalized, not just the language list. Writing capitalized lists is OK, and no one would object to have:
*English *Italiano
on any list. The contrary would be difficult to read, with mixed capitalization.
Alfio _______________________________________________ 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
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Mark Williamson wrote:
And Gerard, please note that Alfio, unlike you, is a native Italian speaker.
Mark
Which is a totally irrelevant remark. fyi I asked Sabine, she thinks that having it as it is written is to be preferrred; her argument is that things that are "strange" atract more curiosity. Her credentials as to the Italian language are obvious and adequate.
Let's keep the tone relaxed, people. I'll just go on record saying that I couldn't care less if "Italiano" is capitalized or not, and I think that a vast majority of native speakers feel the same.
The old, formal rule was to always have language names and nationality adjectives ("the English people") always capitalized, like one can find in any book from, say, 50 years ago. Common use nowadays is less strict, one can find both forms. A capitalized nationality adjective feels slightly strange, a capitalized language name less so.
So the choice can be freely made on different grounds than language correctness.
Alfio
And Gerard, please note that Alfio, unlike you, is a native Italian speaker.
Mark
Which is a totally irrelevant remark. fyi I asked Sabine, she thinks that having it as it is written is to be preferrred; her argument is that things that are "strange" atract more curiosity. Her credentials as to the Italian language are obvious and adequate.
I don't see how it's irrelevant. Alfio's opinion here is a great deal more valuable regarding Italian punctuation and capitalisation than is yours because so far you have shown no knowledge of Italian.
Using this argument is rich when it comes from the "tireless warrior for more wikipedia's even though he does not speak all the languages he champions". It basically disqualifies you and if you apply this logic to yourself, we will not hear that much from you on the mailinglist.
OK, first of all, this is the 7th or 8th time you've used "rich" towards me when you meant "outrageous" or something along those lines.
Second of all, the difference is that I do not argue finer points of these languages as do you. I do not say "Not only should the Friulian Wikipedia exist, but its capitalisation rules should be thus and its punctuation rules should be thus!!!".
You arguing finer points for Dutch and even English (and perhaps Lèmburgs - I don't know if you know it or not, but there is FYI a thriving Wikipedia in Lèmburgse taol now which not long ago was proposed for locking as an inactive Wikipedia) is extremely credible because you claim and even demonstrate fluency and experience with these languages, but when you argue finer points of languages such as Italian without saying directly "I was told by..." or "According to..." it is much, much, less credible.
Mark
Hello,
For more than a week we have collected signatures for the Wikipedia in Ossetic -- see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages#Ossetian.2FOssetic... -- then I've turned myself to this list. I never received my letter back, so I am not sure if it ever had appeared here, but it was answered and the answer was positive. They promised, that the Ossetic Wikipedia will have it place at http://os.wikipedia.org/
Still lots of time have passed, the enthusiasm is fading, but there is no place to start the Ossetic wikipedia.
Will somebody help at last? My special notepad-file is full of stubs allready! :)
Here is more information about the Ossetic: http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=OSE
ISO 639-1: os Speakers: about 500,000 Language name to appear elsewhere: Иронау Script: Russian Cyrillic + letter æ Starting language file: Russian.
Respectfully yours, [[:eo:Vikipediisto:Slavik_IVANOV]]
V. Ivanov (amikeco@gmail.com) [050202 00:06]:
Still lots of time have passed, the enthusiasm is fading, but there is no place to start the Ossetic wikipedia. Will somebody help at last? My special notepad-file is full of stubs allready! :)
Who's starting new wikipedias now?
Here is more information about the Ossetic: http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=OSE ISO 639-1: os Speakers: about 500,000 Language name to appear elsewhere: ???????????? Script: Russian Cyrillic + letter æ Starting language file: Russian.
A question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetic_language says that Ossetic can use Latin script as well as Cyrillic script. Does anyone still use Latin? Are there important texts in Latin? Is there a one-to-one correspondence between the Cyrillic and Latin spellings in Ossetic, so that you change one to the other automatically?
- d.
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:54:23 +1100, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
A question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetic_language says that Ossetic can use Latin script as well as Cyrillic script.
...been using it in 1920s. There was a general Soviet policy of the 1920s to use Latin script in local languages, and even Russian was planned to latinization. But then Stalin came to rule, having other points of view.
Does anyone still use Latin?
Noone ever, except situations when Cyrillic keyboard is not available. When it's not available, they use "translit" -- a horrible intuitive latinization. :)
Are there important texts in Latin?
I have never seen any Latin script book in Ossetic in all my life. I only know, that they have existed.
Is there a one-to-one correspondence between the Cyrillic and Latin spellings in Ossetic, so that you change one to the other automatically?
Yes. Still human post-edition might be needed after such change.
Sl.
V. Ivanov (amikeco@gmail.com) [050202 01:09]:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:54:23 +1100, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
A question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetic_language says that Ossetic can use Latin script as well as Cyrillic script. Does anyone still use Latin?
Noone ever, except situations when Cyrillic keyboard is not available. When it's not available, they use "translit" -- a horrible intuitive latinization. :)
Are there important texts in Latin?
I have never seen any Latin script book in Ossetic in all my life. I only know, that they have existed.
I was just wondering :-) It occurred to me that we have some wikis in two scripts, e.g. Kurdish (ku.wikipedia.org), which is the same words in Latin and Arabic. But if Latin use is negligible, it's probably not worth special effort.
- d.
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 01:19:26 +1100, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
I was just wondering :-) It occurred to me that we have some wikis in two scripts, e.g. Kurdish (ku.wikipedia.org), which is the same words in Latin and Arabic. But if Latin use is negligible, it's probably not worth special effort.
Certainly Cyrillic-only Wikipedia for Ossetic will do. Moreover, because the most part of speakers are bilingual (the second language being Russian), we'd like to start from the Russian language file, translating little by little all technical things as well as writing articles.
I've talked already to .:Ajvol:., who is the chief worker on the Russian language file, and he agrees to help.
Slavik IVANOV
we'd like to start from the Russian language file, translating little by little all technical things as well as writing articles.
By the way, Russian language file at http://meta.wikipedia.org/LanguageRu.php recently was updated to rev. 1.423 of Language.php
But in CVS we can not update it MORE THEN YEAR!!!
See: * http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1416 * http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_languageXX.php_update
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Alexander Sigachov wrote: | By the way, Russian language file at | http://meta.wikipedia.org/LanguageRu.php recently was updated to rev. | 1.423 of Language.php | | But in CVS we can not update it MORE THEN YEAR!!!
Updating the language files is a big pain in the butt. The vast majority of submitted updates have not been valid PHP source and do not even _compile_ as provided, and further are generally do not correctly take account of differences between the open release and development branches. Very frequently, submitted language files contain outright incorrect code such as cut-and-pastes of code from Language.php which should not be duplicated in child classes.
Checking for validity, fixing the errors, testing basic functioning, glancing through to make sure there's not a security hole slipped in or other oddities takes time and isn't particularly fun. 'Language files' written in pages on meta are particularly likely to be ignored due to this past history, and will probably *never* be imported into the code base if simply left up there.
So, don't be surprised if there is not speedy (or much of any) progress on getting submissions integrated. Sorry if it's annoying; that's the primary reason we set up the MediaWiki: namespace system.
Updates to any file in MediaWiki should be submitted as a unified diff against the files in CVS (cvs diff -u) FOR EACH AFFECTED BRANCH (the REL1_4 release branch is not the same as the current development work in HEAD), posted as a file attachment to a bug report in Bugzilla. Assurances that it's been tested are helpful.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Brion:
So, don't be surprised if there is not speedy (or much of any) progress on getting submissions integrated. Sorry if it's annoying; that's the primary reason we set up the MediaWiki: namespace system.
However, that only works on single Wikis. If you want to change something on various wikis, the MediaWiki-namespace should be edited on all of them. If you want to change it for people using a different-language interface, even that does not work.
Could not some system be developed to enable people to submit these? As things are now, language files will only continue to drag further and further behind the rest of MediaWiki. Go on this way, and soon we might not need language files at all any more. Because the difference isn't that big between going through the MediaWiki namespace to translate half of it, and going through the MediaWiki namespace to translate all of it. Except perhaps that a half-English half-chosen-language interface on a third language is still better than an all-English one.
Andre Engels
Updates to any file in MediaWiki should be submitted as a unified diff against the files in CVS (cvs diff -u) FOR EACH AFFECTED BRANCH (the REL1_4 release branch is not the same as the current development work in HEAD), posted as a file attachment to a bug report in Bugzilla. Assurances that it's been tested are helpful.
Thanks. I'll do it today.
Can I post you answer to Meta:Requests_for_languageXX.php_update page?
Do you not realise that because of this, these changes will not be viewable to people trying to use the Russian interface on other Wikipedias? For the single reason that you people don't update the language files much at all (obviously it IS your choice, but it's not like anybody else has the ability), some people are deprived entirely of the function of multilingual interface capability, and some people are deprived ENTIRELY of interface capabilities in their language (the entire Panjabi language file has been translated, but there are currently no sysops who can commit them to the MediaWiki namespace.)
Mark
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:46:58 -0800, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Alexander Sigachov wrote: | By the way, Russian language file at | http://meta.wikipedia.org/LanguageRu.php recently was updated to rev. | 1.423 of Language.php | | But in CVS we can not update it MORE THEN YEAR!!!
Updating the language files is a big pain in the butt. The vast majority of submitted updates have not been valid PHP source and do not even _compile_ as provided, and further are generally do not correctly take account of differences between the open release and development branches. Very frequently, submitted language files contain outright incorrect code such as cut-and-pastes of code from Language.php which should not be duplicated in child classes.
Checking for validity, fixing the errors, testing basic functioning, glancing through to make sure there's not a security hole slipped in or other oddities takes time and isn't particularly fun. 'Language files' written in pages on meta are particularly likely to be ignored due to this past history, and will probably *never* be imported into the code base if simply left up there.
So, don't be surprised if there is not speedy (or much of any) progress on getting submissions integrated. Sorry if it's annoying; that's the primary reason we set up the MediaWiki: namespace system.
Updates to any file in MediaWiki should be submitted as a unified diff against the files in CVS (cvs diff -u) FOR EACH AFFECTED BRANCH (the REL1_4 release branch is not the same as the current development work in HEAD), posted as a file attachment to a bug report in Bugzilla. Assurances that it's been tested are helpful.
- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCAJOBwRnhpk1wk44RAhIyAJ91qx5aMDLLorVGo7QRQd3K5aeKsQCfcI80 zLt1OX6seqWK8Irxzc14iYo= =5D+I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mark Williamson wrote:
Do you not realise that because of this, these changes will not be
[snip]
Do you not realize that actual human beings have to expend time and effort to make the software work at all? It doesn't happen by magic. It's not as though the default state of the software is constant change, and there's a bunch of nasty people sitting there stopping it from moving. There is a limited amount of available developer time, and time spent on one thing comes out of time that could be spent on another (bug fixes, performance tweaks, maintenance, adding new wikis).
Unfortunately in this situation not everything gets done as quickly as we might hope. Yes, that fact sucks, but it's a fact. One alternative would be to slap up any old file and have things constantly break completely because the files are wrong. When this happens people complain at us, so we don't generally do that.
I'm sorry if explaining this fact and giving tips on how to get a language file update accepted and installed faster has offended you.
Unfortunately I don't see you doing anything to help, like testing files and checking them against the CVS branches. And I certainly don't see you coding up an alternative message store system that would eliminate most of the need to update syntax-sensitive code files (which is the painful part). When you can do that, please post again and include something helpful.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 11:48:10 -0800, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
Mark Williamson wrote:
Do you not realise that because of this, these changes will not be
[snip]
Do you not realize that actual human beings have to expend time and effort to make the software work at all? It doesn't happen by magic. It's not as though the default state of the software is constant change, and there's a bunch of nasty people sitting there stopping it from moving. There is a limited amount of available developer time, and time spent on one thing comes out of time that could be spent on another (bug fixes, performance tweaks, maintenance, adding new wikis).
While I realize all of this, I'm not the one who is in control of the system, and I have already suggested that the MediaWiki namespace be automatically updated to a LanguageXX.php file. However, my coding skills are limited to HTML and qbasic, and it takes quite a while to learn a new language.
Unfortunately in this situation not everything gets done as quickly as we might hope. Yes, that fact sucks, but it's a fact. One alternative would be to slap up any old file and have things constantly break completely because the files are wrong. When this happens people complain at us, so we don't generally do that.
According to you, not only does it not get done as quickly as we might hope, but apparently it may never happen at all. Not getting done quickly is fine with me, I understand that people are busy, but not getting done at all isn't a good thing at all.
I'm sorry if explaining this fact and giving tips on how to get a language file update accepted and installed faster has offended you.
I don't remember you doing that.
Unfortunately I don't see you doing anything to help, like testing files and checking them against the CVS branches. And I certainly don't see you coding up an alternative message store system that would eliminate most of the need to update syntax-sensitive code files (which is the painful part). When you can do that, please post again and include something helpful.
1. That's because any code I ever write for you or anybody else, at least in the near future, could only be HTML or very rusty qbasic. 2. I have already recommended an alternative message-store system.
Mark
Hello, Brion,
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 11:48:10 -0800, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
moving. There is a limited amount of available developer time, and time spent on one thing comes out of time that could be spent on another (bug fixes, performance tweaks, maintenance, adding new wikis).
I do realise that developers have lots of things to do, but I'd like to know the approximate date, when the Ossetic wikipedia could be started. While the full application is already there -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages -- I've never received any confirmation as "don't worry, we have noticed your request and the work will be done by, say, March 2005".
Thank you in advance for your attention and concern,
Slavik IVANOV
Brion's remarks were about updating language files, not about starting an Ossetic Wikipedia. I hope that that will be created soon, as I think it's one of the most major candidates among those that do not yet exist.
You will be using the Russian language time for the time being, I suppose?
Andre Engels
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:55:35 +0300, V. Ivanov amikeco@gmail.com wrote:
I do realise that developers have lots of things to do, but I'd like to know the approximate date, when the Ossetic wikipedia could be started. While the full application is already there -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages -- I've never received any confirmation as "don't worry, we have noticed your request and the work will be done by, say, March 2005".
Thank you in advance for your attention and concern,
Slavik IVANOV
That is, other than the Chinese vernacular requests, which appear to be quite popular.
Mark
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:08:00 +0100, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com wrote:
Brion's remarks were about updating language files, not about starting an Ossetic Wikipedia. I hope that that will be created soon, as I think it's one of the most major candidates among those that do not yet exist.
You will be using the Russian language time for the time being, I suppose?
Andre Engels
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:55:35 +0300, V. Ivanov amikeco@gmail.com wrote:
I do realise that developers have lots of things to do, but I'd like to know the approximate date, when the Ossetic wikipedia could be started. While the full application is already there -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages -- I've never received any confirmation as "don't worry, we have noticed your request and the work will be done by, say, March 2005".
Thank you in advance for your attention and concern,
Slavik IVANOV
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
we'd like to start the Wikipedia in Ossetic from the Russian language
Russian language file recently was updated
Updates to any file in MediaWiki should be submitted as a unified diff against the files in CVS (cvs diff -u) FOR EACH AFFECTED BRANCH (the REL1_4 release branch is not the same as the current development work in HEAD), posted as a file attachment to a bug report in Bugzilla. Assurances that it's been tested are helpful.
Completed.
See http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1455
Brion Vibber wrote:
Updates to any file in MediaWiki should be submitted as a unified diff against the files in CVS (cvs diff -u) FOR EACH AFFECTED BRANCH (the REL1_4 release branch is not the same as the current development work in HEAD), posted as a file attachment to a bug report in Bugzilla. Assurances that it's been tested are helpful.
I added brions text above to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Locales_for_the_Wikimedia_projects put a deprecated note on the page and removed all red links.
For creating clean locales, I propose to set up a wiki only for this purpose where a team of volunteers can translate the locales via the mediawiki namespace in a coordinate effort (doing this via the mediawiki namespace has the advantage that you can test the stuff live and see formatting errors instantly). At a certain deadline these translations could be all converted at once into the according Language files and released together with mediawiki. If that's sounds feasible to you and someone sets up a wiki for this, I'm willing to maintain the german language version.
greetings, elian
Yes, I was going to ask Brion but I didn't see him online for the last few days.
And as regards Latin vs Cyrillic (vs Arabic), I totally agree on Ossetic, HOWEVER:
Recent growth in the Chuvash and Bashkir Wikipedias has been a sort of low-key duel between Latin and Cyrillic. It was my impression that Cyrillic was the /only/ script used now for these languages. Similarly, the Tatar Wikipedia is written entirely in Latin, while it was my impression that today Tatar is written /only/ in Cyrillic (and Arabic in China). The beginnings of the Uyghur Wikipedia have also been conflicting, since in Chinese Turkestan where most Uyghur speakers are, the official script is Arabic, but elsewhere some people use Cyrillic and some people use Latin... it looks like it may become a problem.
I may be wrong about any of these, but if my impressions are right it would seem that some or all of these Wikipedias are being written by activists in a script not used by very many people at all.
Mark
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:09:40 +0300, V. Ivanov amikeco@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:54:23 +1100, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
A question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetic_language says that Ossetic can use Latin script as well as Cyrillic script.
...been using it in 1920s. There was a general Soviet policy of the 1920s to use Latin script in local languages, and even Russian was planned to latinization. But then Stalin came to rule, having other points of view.
Does anyone still use Latin?
Noone ever, except situations when Cyrillic keyboard is not available. When it's not available, they use "translit" -- a horrible intuitive latinization. :)
Are there important texts in Latin?
I have never seen any Latin script book in Ossetic in all my life. I only know, that they have existed.
Is there a one-to-one correspondence between the Cyrillic and Latin spellings in Ossetic, so that you change one to the other automatically?
Yes. Still human post-edition might be needed after such change.
Sl.
Esperu cxiam! _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org