David's analysis of the state of the SE Wikipedia is quite an accurate one and I would agree with almost all of his arguments. And - like Mark - I do believe that a "rethink" should eventually result in the phasing out of the Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple: doesn't work well. Of course, that is a fact it shares with many existing but more or less dormant Wikipedias. More severe however is the "lack of focus and ... lack of direction", like David put. I would even dare to say it lacks a purpose altogether, at least one conforming with Wikipedia's general aims.
At http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia one reads that it "has been started as a response to the need for English learners". Fine, but Wikipedia was never meant as a language course. WP is an encyclopedia, i. e. a place where knowledge is gathered and can be accessed. Furthermore, Wikipedia is committed to providing knowledge in people's _native_languages_. Hence, there is no need for a Wikipedia for those with a limited command of English (or German, French, Spanish ...).
I just don't see why we should continue the Simple English Wikipedia.
Boris
wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org schrieb am 29.06.05 01:16:39:
The subject of Simple English Wikipedia has came to the mailing list before, but after reading talk pages there and seeing the dormancy of Recent Changes (bar a few persistent users, and the odd anon editor) I feel it is time to suggest a rethink, or at least look into the direction of Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple English Wikipedia currently has 4,157 articles, the vast majority of which fail to extend further than three sentences in length. There are a few administrators, Netoholic being the most active of them. There is a small user base, but unlike some language Wikipedias where this results in a small and persistent community, the small user base at Simple English often have their priorities understandably set on the main English Wikipedia.
The SE Wikipedia currently has a lack of focus, and a lack of direction. Indeed, it claims to cater for multiple groups of people, which simply isn't working:
"It is focused on readers who tend to be quite different people with different needs: students, children, and translators."
The description there, taken from http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia, is too ambiguous to encourage any regular contributors to the Wikipedia. Whereas with the main Wikipedias there is a ultimate cause of creator 'the sum of all human knowledge', Simple English doesn't have a goal, as its not aiming for anything specifically.
The aims of students, children and translators, to me, is wrong on all counts. I've read a few articles on Simple English, and the variation and way of writing is at times so belittiling that I wonder why such a project exists. This quote from the talk page sums it up perfectly:
"One thing that bothers me about this whole thing is that people act like this is supposed to writted towards children, talking down to them and such, when in fact Wikipedia Jr. is there to handle that - this should be aimed at just reposting English articles in a simplified and standardized version of English, as opposed to the "baby talk" many of the articles are crammed with. Simple: A problem I have with this website is that there is a website like it that is already here - Wikipedia Junior. I think that this website should be for people from another country who are learning English, not small children. This website talks to its people badly."
Simple English Wikipedia is, in reality, never going to be used by babies or small children - Infact, unleashing such persons onto Wikipedia is dangerous (as proven by our Recent Changes list :p ). Wikijunior, which is in development, caters for the young market and has a focus to not talk down to people. When I read Simple English trying to explain racism, I felt like it was dumbing me down. Anyone capable of using Wikipedia normally can use normal Wikipedia, whilst Simple English is not going to be used by 4 or 5 year olds. Children is a bad thing to aim at. Aiming at translators is similiarly odd, because a translator wouldn't be a translator if their English wasn't fluent. Simple English Wikipedia needs to, in my opinion, have a huge rethink. It should be aimed at persons wanting to practice their English by reading it, and should be an aid for those learning it as a foreign language. Simple English should read simply, but not so simply that it puts down the reader. People contribute to Wikipedias for a reason, and for a goal - Simple English has no goal, so theres no clear reason for editors to contribute to it. A look at recent changes shows that.
Without a rethink and a real discussion into the direction, policies and descriptions of Simple English Wikipedia, it had mayswell be deleted. Simple English was the second Wikipedia I visited, after main English, and I believe it will be the same for many others. It doesn't reflect well on Wikimedia Foundation to have a Wikipedia in such a bad state, and in the English language - Quality over quantity isn't necessarily always true, but in the case of having Wikimedia Foundation projects and Wikipedias, it is. Simple is way too out there to stay as it is; a rethink is needed.
Yours, David Hedley
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
__________________________________________________________ Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min. weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
I had a quick look at recent changes there and received the impression that they have an active community. Perhaps the best place for this discussion might be at their equivalent to a Village Pump.
Even accepting the premise that the project was initially ill conceived, one cannot treat it as a dormant project.. Ec
Boris Lohnzweiger wrote:
David's analysis of the state of the SE Wikipedia is quite an accurate one and I would agree with almost all of his arguments. And - like Mark - I do believe that a "rethink" should eventually result in the phasing out of the Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple: doesn't work well. Of course, that is a fact it shares with many existing but more or less dormant Wikipedias. More severe however is the "lack of focus and ... lack of direction", like David put. I would even dare to say it lacks a purpose altogether, at least one conforming with Wikipedia's general aims.
At http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia one reads that it "has been started as a response to the need for English learners". Fine, but Wikipedia was never meant as a language course. WP is an encyclopedia, i. e. a place where knowledge is gathered and can be accessed. Furthermore, Wikipedia is committed to providing knowledge in people's _native_languages_. Hence, there is no need for a Wikipedia for those with a limited command of English (or German, French, Spanish ...).
I just don't see why we should continue the Simple English Wikipedia.
Boris
wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org schrieb am 29.06.05 01:16:39:
The subject of Simple English Wikipedia has came to the mailing list before, but after reading talk pages there and seeing the dormancy of Recent Changes (bar a few persistent users, and the odd anon editor) I feel it is time to suggest a rethink, or at least look into the direction of Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple English Wikipedia currently has 4,157 articles, the vast majority of which fail to extend further than three sentences in length. There are a few administrators, Netoholic being the most active of them. There is a small user base, but unlike some language Wikipedias where this results in a small and persistent community, the small user base at Simple English often have their priorities understandably set on the main English Wikipedia.
The SE Wikipedia currently has a lack of focus, and a lack of direction. Indeed, it claims to cater for multiple groups of people, which simply isn't working:
"It is focused on readers who tend to be quite different people with different needs: students, children, and translators."
The description there, taken from http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia, is too ambiguous to encourage any regular contributors to the Wikipedia. Whereas with the main Wikipedias there is a ultimate cause of creator 'the sum of all human knowledge', Simple English doesn't have a goal, as its not aiming for anything specifically.
The aims of students, children and translators, to me, is wrong on all counts. I've read a few articles on Simple English, and the variation and way of writing is at times so belittiling that I wonder why such a project exists. This quote from the talk page sums it up perfectly:
"One thing that bothers me about this whole thing is that people act like this is supposed to writted towards children, talking down to them and such, when in fact Wikipedia Jr. is there to handle that - this should be aimed at just reposting English articles in a simplified and standardized version of English, as opposed to the "baby talk" many of the articles are crammed with. Simple: A problem I have with this website is that there is a website like it that is already here - Wikipedia Junior. I think that this website should be for people from another country who are learning English, not small children. This website talks to its people badly."
Simple English Wikipedia is, in reality, never going to be used by babies or small children - Infact, unleashing such persons onto Wikipedia is dangerous (as proven by our Recent Changes list :p ). Wikijunior, which is in development, caters for the young market and has a focus to not talk down to people. When I read Simple English trying to explain racism, I felt like it was dumbing me down. Anyone capable of using Wikipedia normally can use normal Wikipedia, whilst Simple English is not going to be used by 4 or 5 year olds. Children is a bad thing to aim at. Aiming at translators is similiarly odd, because a translator wouldn't be a translator if their English wasn't fluent. Simple English Wikipedia needs to, in my opinion, have a huge rethink. It should be aimed at persons wanting to practice their English by reading it, and should be an aid for those learning it as a foreign language. Simple English should read simply, but not so simply that it puts down the reader. People contribute to Wikipedias for a reason, and for a goal - Simple English has no goal, so theres no clear reason for editors to contribute to it. A look at recent changes shows that.
Without a rethink and a real discussion into the direction, policies and descriptions of Simple English Wikipedia, it had mayswell be deleted. Simple English was the second Wikipedia I visited, after main English, and I believe it will be the same for many others. It doesn't reflect well on Wikimedia Foundation to have a Wikipedia in such a bad state, and in the English language - Quality over quantity isn't necessarily always true, but in the case of having Wikimedia Foundation projects and Wikipedias, it is. Simple is way too out there to stay as it is; a rethink is needed.
I'll just direct you again to what Angela said. Obviously it's not inactive...
Mark
On 02/07/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
I had a quick look at recent changes there and received the impression that they have an active community. Perhaps the best place for this discussion might be at their equivalent to a Village Pump.
Even accepting the premise that the project was initially ill conceived, one cannot treat it as a dormant project.. Ec
Boris Lohnzweiger wrote:
David's analysis of the state of the SE Wikipedia is quite an accurate one and I would agree with almost all of his arguments. And - like Mark - I do believe that a "rethink" should eventually result in the phasing out of the Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple: doesn't work well. Of course, that is a fact it shares with many existing but more or less dormant Wikipedias. More severe however is the "lack of focus and ... lack of direction", like David put. I would even dare to say it lacks a purpose altogether, at least one conforming with Wikipedia's general aims.
At http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia one reads that it "has been started as a response to the need for English learners". Fine, but Wikipedia was never meant as a language course. WP is an encyclopedia, i. e. a place where knowledge is gathered and can be accessed. Furthermore, Wikipedia is committed to providing knowledge in people's _native_languages_. Hence, there is no need for a Wikipedia for those with a limited command of English (or German, French, Spanish ...).
I just don't see why we should continue the Simple English Wikipedia.
Boris
wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org schrieb am 29.06.05 01:16:39:
The subject of Simple English Wikipedia has came to the mailing list before, but after reading talk pages there and seeing the dormancy of Recent Changes (bar a few persistent users, and the odd anon editor) I feel it is time to suggest a rethink, or at least look into the direction of Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple English Wikipedia currently has 4,157 articles, the vast majority of which fail to extend further than three sentences in length. There are a few administrators, Netoholic being the most active of them. There is a small user base, but unlike some language Wikipedias where this results in a small and persistent community, the small user base at Simple English often have their priorities understandably set on the main English Wikipedia.
The SE Wikipedia currently has a lack of focus, and a lack of direction. Indeed, it claims to cater for multiple groups of people, which simply isn't working:
"It is focused on readers who tend to be quite different people with different needs: students, children, and translators."
The description there, taken from http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia, is too ambiguous to encourage any regular contributors to the Wikipedia. Whereas with the main Wikipedias there is a ultimate cause of creator 'the sum of all human knowledge', Simple English doesn't have a goal, as its not aiming for anything specifically.
The aims of students, children and translators, to me, is wrong on all counts. I've read a few articles on Simple English, and the variation and way of writing is at times so belittiling that I wonder why such a project exists. This quote from the talk page sums it up perfectly:
"One thing that bothers me about this whole thing is that people act like this is supposed to writted towards children, talking down to them and such, when in fact Wikipedia Jr. is there to handle that - this should be aimed at just reposting English articles in a simplified and standardized version of English, as opposed to the "baby talk" many of the articles are crammed with. Simple: A problem I have with this website is that there is a website like it that is already here - Wikipedia Junior. I think that this website should be for people from another country who are learning English, not small children. This website talks to its people badly."
Simple English Wikipedia is, in reality, never going to be used by babies or small children - Infact, unleashing such persons onto Wikipedia is dangerous (as proven by our Recent Changes list :p ). Wikijunior, which is in development, caters for the young market and has a focus to not talk down to people. When I read Simple English trying to explain racism, I felt like it was dumbing me down. Anyone capable of using Wikipedia normally can use normal Wikipedia, whilst Simple English is not going to be used by 4 or 5 year olds. Children is a bad thing to aim at. Aiming at translators is similiarly odd, because a translator wouldn't be a translator if their English wasn't fluent. Simple English Wikipedia needs to, in my opinion, have a huge rethink. It should be aimed at persons wanting to practice their English by reading it, and should be an aid for those learning it as a foreign language. Simple English should read simply, but not so simply that it puts down the reader. People contribute to Wikipedias for a reason, and for a goal - Simple English has no goal, so theres no clear reason for editors to contribute to it. A look at recent changes shows that.
Without a rethink and a real discussion into the direction, policies and descriptions of Simple English Wikipedia, it had mayswell be deleted. Simple English was the second Wikipedia I visited, after main English, and I believe it will be the same for many others. It doesn't reflect well on Wikimedia Foundation to have a Wikipedia in such a bad state, and in the English language - Quality over quantity isn't necessarily always true, but in the case of having Wikimedia Foundation projects and Wikipedias, it is. Simple is way too out there to stay as it is; a rethink is needed.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Also, a quote from Angela from Wiktionary: "[...] the community on the Simple English Wikipedia has almost died out."
Mark
On 02/07/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I'll just direct you again to what Angela said. Obviously it's not inactive...
Mark
On 02/07/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
I had a quick look at recent changes there and received the impression that they have an active community. Perhaps the best place for this discussion might be at their equivalent to a Village Pump.
Even accepting the premise that the project was initially ill conceived, one cannot treat it as a dormant project.. Ec
Boris Lohnzweiger wrote:
David's analysis of the state of the SE Wikipedia is quite an accurate one and I would agree with almost all of his arguments. And - like Mark - I do believe that a "rethink" should eventually result in the phasing out of the Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple: doesn't work well. Of course, that is a fact it shares with many existing but more or less dormant Wikipedias. More severe however is the "lack of focus and ... lack of direction", like David put. I would even dare to say it lacks a purpose altogether, at least one conforming with Wikipedia's general aims.
At http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia one reads that it "has been started as a response to the need for English learners". Fine, but Wikipedia was never meant as a language course. WP is an encyclopedia, i. e. a place where knowledge is gathered and can be accessed. Furthermore, Wikipedia is committed to providing knowledge in people's _native_languages_. Hence, there is no need for a Wikipedia for those with a limited command of English (or German, French, Spanish ...).
I just don't see why we should continue the Simple English Wikipedia.
Boris
wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org schrieb am 29.06.05 01:16:39:
The subject of Simple English Wikipedia has came to the mailing list before, but after reading talk pages there and seeing the dormancy of Recent Changes (bar a few persistent users, and the odd anon editor) I feel it is time to suggest a rethink, or at least look into the direction of Simple English Wikipedia.
Simple English Wikipedia currently has 4,157 articles, the vast majority of which fail to extend further than three sentences in length. There are a few administrators, Netoholic being the most active of them. There is a small user base, but unlike some language Wikipedias where this results in a small and persistent community, the small user base at Simple English often have their priorities understandably set on the main English Wikipedia.
The SE Wikipedia currently has a lack of focus, and a lack of direction. Indeed, it claims to cater for multiple groups of people, which simply isn't working:
"It is focused on readers who tend to be quite different people with different needs: students, children, and translators."
The description there, taken from http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_English_Wikipedia, is too ambiguous to encourage any regular contributors to the Wikipedia. Whereas with the main Wikipedias there is a ultimate cause of creator 'the sum of all human knowledge', Simple English doesn't have a goal, as its not aiming for anything specifically.
The aims of students, children and translators, to me, is wrong on all counts. I've read a few articles on Simple English, and the variation and way of writing is at times so belittiling that I wonder why such a project exists. This quote from the talk page sums it up perfectly:
"One thing that bothers me about this whole thing is that people act like this is supposed to writted towards children, talking down to them and such, when in fact Wikipedia Jr. is there to handle that - this should be aimed at just reposting English articles in a simplified and standardized version of English, as opposed to the "baby talk" many of the articles are crammed with. Simple: A problem I have with this website is that there is a website like it that is already here - Wikipedia Junior. I think that this website should be for people from another country who are learning English, not small children. This website talks to its people badly."
Simple English Wikipedia is, in reality, never going to be used by babies or small children - Infact, unleashing such persons onto Wikipedia is dangerous (as proven by our Recent Changes list :p ). Wikijunior, which is in development, caters for the young market and has a focus to not talk down to people. When I read Simple English trying to explain racism, I felt like it was dumbing me down. Anyone capable of using Wikipedia normally can use normal Wikipedia, whilst Simple English is not going to be used by 4 or 5 year olds. Children is a bad thing to aim at. Aiming at translators is similiarly odd, because a translator wouldn't be a translator if their English wasn't fluent. Simple English Wikipedia needs to, in my opinion, have a huge rethink. It should be aimed at persons wanting to practice their English by reading it, and should be an aid for those learning it as a foreign language. Simple English should read simply, but not so simply that it puts down the reader. People contribute to Wikipedias for a reason, and for a goal - Simple English has no goal, so theres no clear reason for editors to contribute to it. A look at recent changes shows that.
Without a rethink and a real discussion into the direction, policies and descriptions of Simple English Wikipedia, it had mayswell be deleted. Simple English was the second Wikipedia I visited, after main English, and I believe it will be the same for many others. It doesn't reflect well on Wikimedia Foundation to have a Wikipedia in such a bad state, and in the English language - Quality over quantity isn't necessarily always true, but in the case of having Wikimedia Foundation projects and Wikipedias, it is. Simple is way too out there to stay as it is; a rethink is needed.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM POSSIT MATERIARI ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org