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 :) .

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

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 :) .

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.

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?

Andre Engels pravi: Those are article or page titles; anything in title role _is_ capitalized. -- Pozdrav, Roman _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

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 :) .

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(a)arcetri.astro.it> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

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.

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: ???????????? Script: Russian Cyrillic + letter æ Starting language file: Russian.

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:54:23 +1100, David Gerard <fun(a)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.

we'd like to start from the Russian language file, translating little by little all technical things as well as writing articles.

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.

-----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) _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

Mark Williamson wrote: [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.

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

>> 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.

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:54:23 +1100, David Gerard <fun(a)thingy.apana.org.au> wrote: ...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. Noone ever, except situations when Cyrillic keyboard is not available. When it's not available, they use "translit" -- a horrible intuitive latinization. :) I have never seen any Latin script book in Ossetic in all my life. I only know, that they have existed. Yes. Still human post-edition might be needed after such change. Sl. -- Esperu cxiam! _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l