Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
____________________________________________________ Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
I have nothing to add, except:
Approximately 33% of Moldovans believe there is, in fact, a Moldovan language. This is hundreds of thousands of people.
In my view, the NPOV is that "some people say a Moldovan language exists, others say it doesn't", because this is actually the case. (I personally believe that Moldovan and Romanian are the same language with two different names).
My accusations of them being Romanian extremist nationalists are not unsubstantiated. One person signs their messages as "Organizatia Romana Unionista" (Romanian Unionist Organisation, unionist refers to advocating the re-integration of Moldova into Romania).
Others have cited such reasons as the alleged ugliness of Cyrillic, or that anybody who uses Cyrillic to write Moldovan must be a Stalinist, and therefore should be ignored.
Danutz called me a "Japanese fag", as well. "Nationalist" is not an insult, just a label trying to indicate bias. However, I perceive both "stalinist" and "fag" as intentional insults.
So far, there have been a few actual people in Moldova who have visited: 1) Vertaler. He produced a great portion of the content that currently exists at mo.wiki. He left contact information, but doesn't seem to visit regularly anymore. He didn't make a statement about his position on whether the Wiki should exist, but he contributed a lot to it, so my guess is that he supports it. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. 2) Anonymous Moldovan user. He made some changes to the Moldovan on several pages, in Cyrillic. He has a Moldovan IP, but the timestamps on his edits indicate that he's probably not Vertaler or Dmitriid. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. 3) Dmitriid. He has expressed that the Wikipedia is "redundant", since the articles say the same thing as the Romanian version (they are written in a different alphabet, though, and there's probably about 3% original content). Originally he expressed a belief that the Wikipedia should be deleted, but about a day ago he revised his opinion to say that a Cyrillic version might be nessecary. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. (in Latin script; however other signs indicate that he can read Cyrillic)
There is also Landroni, who says he's a Moldovan man in France. He is diametrically opposed to the existance of the Wikipedia, and has said some pretty extreme stuff against it. However, he has not demonstrated fluency on even the most basic level because everything he said was in English.
The major Romanian participants (besides Ronline): Danutz. Originally, it seemed he was OK with the existance of mo.wiki in its present form. However, recently he began to oppose it, including calling me names. He is a sysop at ro.wiki. Duca. Originally, both myself and Danutz discussed with him why it was essential that mo.wiki exist. He labelled me as Stalinist and Russian, and asked why Danutz, a Romanian, was supporting a Stalinist. He also accused me of being a KGB agent. He seems to have disappeared a couple of days ago. He is not an established user on any Wikipedia. Domnu Goie. Domnu Goie entered the situation only in the last few days. His accusations are more alarming to me than Duca's. One of his main beliefs is that a mainpage that says "Moldovan Wikipedia" is extremely POV (and "stalinist propaganda"), and that to be "neutral" it must say "Moldovan (Romanian) Wikipedia". He has variously accused me of being a Russian, a Stalinist, a KGB agent... he is not, to my knowledge, an established user on any Wikipedia. Organizatia Romana Unionista. Only made a couple of posts. Vasile. I have no idea about this user.
Mark
On 22/06/05, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) rowikipedia@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
I feel I should also add something about my being a sysop.
My actions as a sysop (which I have been for about 3 days following an emergency request): 1) protecting both main pages. The NPOV notices on them were added by IP users, and I saw them as vandalism. In addition, one of these pages had only 1 sentence on it, so labelling it as POV is a bit extreme. It was also my view that NPOV notices belong on content pages, not the mainpage which should be kept clear to avoid confusion to new users. In addition, _the POV notice itself_ said "There is no such thing as a moldovan language. The fact that Romanian can and may be written in another alphabet does not make it a language other the..." which is obviously not NPOV. 2) making translations to the interface. 3) deleting a couple of pages. They were: 3a) "Hincesti" (title actually in Cyrillic). Contents: "super puper stadt- acolo verishoara mea traieshte, olea cebotaru" 3b) Kazahstan. Empty, title in Latin alphabet. 3c) Geschäftspartnern. Contents: "Siehe auch: MO, Gedanken, Schmiede, Übertragung, Bilder, Psychose, Hypnose". ie, it was in German. 3d) Template:POV. Contents: "content was: '{{Message_box|id =NPOV|backgroundcolor =AntiqueWhite|image =Stop_hand.png|heading =The neutrality of this arti..." (referred to template:message_box, which had a very POV message about the Moldovan speech, and also was used only on the main pages). 3e) Template:Messagebox. Contents: "There is no such thing as a moldovan language. The fact that Romanian can and may be written in another alphabet does not make it a language other the..." (irreparably POV)
Unlike the Stalinist I am accused of being, I have put Latin alphabet FIRST in all interface translations, and have banned nobody, and have not protected anything except the mainpage.
Although I'm not at all happy with all of the people who are accusing me of being a Stalinist, and at Danutz for calling me a "Japanese fag", I have not blocked any of them, and do not plan to.
Mark
On 22/06/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I have nothing to add, except:
Approximately 33% of Moldovans believe there is, in fact, a Moldovan language. This is hundreds of thousands of people.
In my view, the NPOV is that "some people say a Moldovan language exists, others say it doesn't", because this is actually the case. (I personally believe that Moldovan and Romanian are the same language with two different names).
My accusations of them being Romanian extremist nationalists are not unsubstantiated. One person signs their messages as "Organizatia Romana Unionista" (Romanian Unionist Organisation, unionist refers to advocating the re-integration of Moldova into Romania).
Others have cited such reasons as the alleged ugliness of Cyrillic, or that anybody who uses Cyrillic to write Moldovan must be a Stalinist, and therefore should be ignored.
Danutz called me a "Japanese fag", as well. "Nationalist" is not an insult, just a label trying to indicate bias. However, I perceive both "stalinist" and "fag" as intentional insults.
So far, there have been a few actual people in Moldova who have visited:
- Vertaler. He produced a great portion of the content that currently
exists at mo.wiki. He left contact information, but doesn't seem to visit regularly anymore. He didn't make a statement about his position on whether the Wiki should exist, but he contributed a lot to it, so my guess is that he supports it. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. 2) Anonymous Moldovan user. He made some changes to the Moldovan on several pages, in Cyrillic. He has a Moldovan IP, but the timestamps on his edits indicate that he's probably not Vertaler or Dmitriid. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. 3) Dmitriid. He has expressed that the Wikipedia is "redundant", since the articles say the same thing as the Romanian version (they are written in a different alphabet, though, and there's probably about 3% original content). Originally he expressed a belief that the Wikipedia should be deleted, but about a day ago he revised his opinion to say that a Cyrillic version might be nessecary. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. (in Latin script; however other signs indicate that he can read Cyrillic)
There is also Landroni, who says he's a Moldovan man in France. He is diametrically opposed to the existance of the Wikipedia, and has said some pretty extreme stuff against it. However, he has not demonstrated fluency on even the most basic level because everything he said was in English.
The major Romanian participants (besides Ronline): Danutz. Originally, it seemed he was OK with the existance of mo.wiki in its present form. However, recently he began to oppose it, including calling me names. He is a sysop at ro.wiki. Duca. Originally, both myself and Danutz discussed with him why it was essential that mo.wiki exist. He labelled me as Stalinist and Russian, and asked why Danutz, a Romanian, was supporting a Stalinist. He also accused me of being a KGB agent. He seems to have disappeared a couple of days ago. He is not an established user on any Wikipedia. Domnu Goie. Domnu Goie entered the situation only in the last few days. His accusations are more alarming to me than Duca's. One of his main beliefs is that a mainpage that says "Moldovan Wikipedia" is extremely POV (and "stalinist propaganda"), and that to be "neutral" it must say "Moldovan (Romanian) Wikipedia". He has variously accused me of being a Russian, a Stalinist, a KGB agent... he is not, to my knowledge, an established user on any Wikipedia. Organizatia Romana Unionista. Only made a couple of posts. Vasile. I have no idea about this user.
Mark
On 22/06/05, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) rowikipedia@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ 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
Actually, it appears that Domnu Goie is the same user as "Organizatia Romana Unionista".
So this "majority" is really just a couple of users who shout and make their voices loud so that they can _seem_ like a lot more people?
And what does it say about Domnu Goie that his first edit was to a talkpage and said "This is supposed to be of some intelectual value but instead the Moldovan Encyclopedia serves Stalinist interests in Chishinau and Tiraspol. Having a Moldovan encyclopedia would suggest that it is a sepparete language from Romanian which we cannot accept. Cu respect, Organizatia Romana Unionista".
In fact, I would not be surprised if Domnu Goie and Duca are also the same user, since Domnu showed up at around the same time Duca disappeared.
So that leaves it at, given that I'm right:
Want mo.wiki to be deleted, or whatever: Domnu/Duca/ORU (in fact, conditional on whether the Wikipedia calls itself the "Moldovan Wikipedia" or "Moldovan (Romanian) Wikipedia"!), Landroni, Danutz(?) Unclear, or in between: Ronline, Dmitriid, Vertaler, Anon. Moldovan User For keeping the status quo, with the exception of changing Interwikis: Node, possibly OldakQuill.
Dmitriid's ideas seem to hinge on the importance that Cyrillic is secondary, rather than that it needs to be stated explicitly that the language is the same (which is the case with Domnu), and he supports moving it out to mo-cyr.wikipedia, leaving mo: as a portal only.
Mark
On 22/06/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I have nothing to add, except:
Approximately 33% of Moldovans believe there is, in fact, a Moldovan language. This is hundreds of thousands of people.
In my view, the NPOV is that "some people say a Moldovan language exists, others say it doesn't", because this is actually the case. (I personally believe that Moldovan and Romanian are the same language with two different names).
My accusations of them being Romanian extremist nationalists are not unsubstantiated. One person signs their messages as "Organizatia Romana Unionista" (Romanian Unionist Organisation, unionist refers to advocating the re-integration of Moldova into Romania).
Others have cited such reasons as the alleged ugliness of Cyrillic, or that anybody who uses Cyrillic to write Moldovan must be a Stalinist, and therefore should be ignored.
Danutz called me a "Japanese fag", as well. "Nationalist" is not an insult, just a label trying to indicate bias. However, I perceive both "stalinist" and "fag" as intentional insults.
So far, there have been a few actual people in Moldova who have visited:
- Vertaler. He produced a great portion of the content that currently
exists at mo.wiki. He left contact information, but doesn't seem to visit regularly anymore. He didn't make a statement about his position on whether the Wiki should exist, but he contributed a lot to it, so my guess is that he supports it. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. 2) Anonymous Moldovan user. He made some changes to the Moldovan on several pages, in Cyrillic. He has a Moldovan IP, but the timestamps on his edits indicate that he's probably not Vertaler or Dmitriid. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. 3) Dmitriid. He has expressed that the Wikipedia is "redundant", since the articles say the same thing as the Romanian version (they are written in a different alphabet, though, and there's probably about 3% original content). Originally he expressed a belief that the Wikipedia should be deleted, but about a day ago he revised his opinion to say that a Cyrillic version might be nessecary. He demonstrated fluency by posting a bit of content in the language. (in Latin script; however other signs indicate that he can read Cyrillic)
There is also Landroni, who says he's a Moldovan man in France. He is diametrically opposed to the existance of the Wikipedia, and has said some pretty extreme stuff against it. However, he has not demonstrated fluency on even the most basic level because everything he said was in English.
The major Romanian participants (besides Ronline): Danutz. Originally, it seemed he was OK with the existance of mo.wiki in its present form. However, recently he began to oppose it, including calling me names. He is a sysop at ro.wiki. Duca. Originally, both myself and Danutz discussed with him why it was essential that mo.wiki exist. He labelled me as Stalinist and Russian, and asked why Danutz, a Romanian, was supporting a Stalinist. He also accused me of being a KGB agent. He seems to have disappeared a couple of days ago. He is not an established user on any Wikipedia. Domnu Goie. Domnu Goie entered the situation only in the last few days. His accusations are more alarming to me than Duca's. One of his main beliefs is that a mainpage that says "Moldovan Wikipedia" is extremely POV (and "stalinist propaganda"), and that to be "neutral" it must say "Moldovan (Romanian) Wikipedia". He has variously accused me of being a Russian, a Stalinist, a KGB agent... he is not, to my knowledge, an established user on any Wikipedia. Organizatia Romana Unionista. Only made a couple of posts. Vasile. I have no idea about this user.
Mark
On 22/06/05, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) rowikipedia@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ 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
Hiya.
I have no personal opinion to give as of now regarding the current conflict (I seem to remember I had to make a couple of comments regarding this topic several months ago);
However, you raise a side, but important point.
You wrote
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Unless I am proven wrong, it is very likely Node asked to be sysop on this project when there were no editors (to do precisely what he mentionned, interface, main page protection....).
It is a habit amongst stewards to give sysophood very liberally on small wikis, as editors who are unique, or only a couple... can't expect to be elected "democratically". However, there is also a provision saying that if necessary, someone apppointed sysop before there is a community, has to be confirmed sysop later if the then build community does wish to start elections.
I guess we are in this kind of configuration.
I consequently invite you to organise elections for sysophood and mo. According to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions, there is no current page for admins. Could you add one and invite editors to candidate then vote ?
Naturally, from the moment you start these elections, Node will be considered a temporary sysop and will need to be supported by current community in order to keep a status which was given to him before there was one.
I hope he will stay one as I do not think he did anything wrong... but that way, things will be clearer :-)
What do you think ?
Ant
Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) a écrit:
Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
____________________________________________________ Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
Hi Anthere,
Unfortunately, there isn't really a mo.wiki "community".
It's more like, a group of two or three core individuals working on the project, and another 2 or 3 "mo.wiki hagglers" -- people who keep complaining on talkpages that the Wikipedia should be deleted.
Incidentally, the "hagglers" also believe that "there is no such thing as a Moldovan language", and until recently they were all editing anonymously. None of them has any edits to content pages.
The current problem is, what rights should go to what users? If we let the "hagglers" vote, they will possibly nominate one of themselves, vote him in, and then sabotage the Wikipedia using their newfound sysop privelages.
If we let the "core" vote only, then we run the risk of being "undemocratic".
Also, according to Ronline's proposal, I will remain a sysop "temporarily" to translate the interface, whether or not I am voted in.
Mark
On 22/06/05, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Hiya.
I have no personal opinion to give as of now regarding the current conflict (I seem to remember I had to make a couple of comments regarding this topic several months ago);
However, you raise a side, but important point.
You wrote
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Unless I am proven wrong, it is very likely Node asked to be sysop on this project when there were no editors (to do precisely what he mentionned, interface, main page protection....).
It is a habit amongst stewards to give sysophood very liberally on small wikis, as editors who are unique, or only a couple... can't expect to be elected "democratically". However, there is also a provision saying that if necessary, someone apppointed sysop before there is a community, has to be confirmed sysop later if the then build community does wish to start elections.
I guess we are in this kind of configuration.
I consequently invite you to organise elections for sysophood and mo. According to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions, there is no current page for admins. Could you add one and invite editors to candidate then vote ?
Naturally, from the moment you start these elections, Node will be considered a temporary sysop and will need to be supported by current community in order to keep a status which was given to him before there was one.
I hope he will stay one as I do not think he did anything wrong... but that way, things will be clearer :-)
What do you think ?
Ant
Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) a écrit:
Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mark Williamson a écrit:
Hi Anthere,
Unfortunately, there isn't really a mo.wiki "community".
It's more like, a group of two or three core individuals working on the project, and another 2 or 3 "mo.wiki hagglers" -- people who keep complaining on talkpages that the Wikipedia should be deleted.
Incidentally, the "hagglers" also believe that "there is no such thing as a Moldovan language", and until recently they were all editing anonymously. None of them has any edits to content pages.
The current problem is, what rights should go to what users? If we let the "hagglers" vote, they will possibly nominate one of themselves, vote him in, and then sabotage the Wikipedia using their newfound sysop privelages.
Well, I am not sure what "haggler" mean, but I guess this is not a gentle term :-)
I'd say only those with an account can vote. And a rule such as at least 1 month and a certain number of real articles can make the trick.
However, I must confess, as one external to your conflict, this sounds like "all those agreeing with me are good editors, all others are hagglers".
If we let the "core" vote only, then we run the risk of being "undemocratic".
Also, according to Ronline's proposal, I will remain a sysop "temporarily" to translate the interface, whether or not I am voted in.
Mark
This strikes me as reasonably democratic solution ;-)
Hmmm, a question... does the issue of whether to use Cyrillic as an influence in any way in the translation of the interface ?
Ant
On 22/06/05, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Hiya.
I have no personal opinion to give as of now regarding the current conflict (I seem to remember I had to make a couple of comments regarding this topic several months ago);
However, you raise a side, but important point.
You wrote
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Unless I am proven wrong, it is very likely Node asked to be sysop on this project when there were no editors (to do precisely what he mentionned, interface, main page protection....).
It is a habit amongst stewards to give sysophood very liberally on small wikis, as editors who are unique, or only a couple... can't expect to be elected "democratically". However, there is also a provision saying that if necessary, someone apppointed sysop before there is a community, has to be confirmed sysop later if the then build community does wish to start elections.
I guess we are in this kind of configuration.
I consequently invite you to organise elections for sysophood and mo. According to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions, there is no current page for admins. Could you add one and invite editors to candidate then vote ?
Naturally, from the moment you start these elections, Node will be considered a temporary sysop and will need to be supported by current community in order to keep a status which was given to him before there was one.
I hope he will stay one as I do not think he did anything wrong... but that way, things will be clearer :-)
What do you think ?
Ant
Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) a écrit:
Hi to all,
This is Ronline from the Romanian Wikipedia. We have currently (in the past week especially) had quite a lot of controversy about the Moldovan Wikipedia at http://mo.wikipedia.org.
The reason I'm raising the issue here is to gauge the response of the wider community towards my proposal and also what's happening over at mo:
Mo.wikipedia.org was founded a while ago, but until about this year, it basically had no content and simply contained a redirect link to the Romanian Wikipedia, since Moldovan is identical to Romanian, renamed for political reasons (I won't go into the whole story now, you can see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language).
Anyway, so a few months ago, a user called Vertaler came and added some Cyrillic content to the Moldovan Wikipedia. Cyrillic is a script used by a minority of Moldovans. Node_ue (Mark Williamson) supported that and said that he wishes to convert mo.wikipedia.org into a Cyrillic-Moldovan Wikipedia, with all Latin content being placed at ro.wikipedia.org in order to avoid duplication.
After negotation with Node, I have come forward with a proposal that he has agreed with, which seeks to establish mo.wikipedia.org as a biscriptal Latin/Cyrillic Wikipedia in interface, and a biscriptal portal, but with Cyrillic content hosted on mo.wikipedia in order to avoid duplication with ro.wiki.
The entire proposal is at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere, in English and Romanian.
Now, the reason I've come here is because some users from the Romanian Wikipedia do not agree with keeping a Moldovan Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, because they believe that a Moldovan language doesn't exist (most linguists agree with this) and that since Wikipedia is neutral, it shouldn't have a Wikipedia in a language renamed for political reasons like Moldovan. Also, since Cyrillic is no longer the official script in Moldova (it used to be during Communist times), there is no place for it as mo.wiki. Other users agree to Cyrillic content, but not under the "Moldovan language" name.
The controversy, which can be viewed at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0; принчипалэ, has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been mutual distrust between Node on one hand, and a series of Romanian users, on the other. Node has blamed the Romanian users for being "nationalist" and "radical" and "anti-Moldovan", this being the reason why they don't support a Moldovan Wikipedia. The Romanian users have labelled Node a "Stalinist" and claim that he is not listening to them even though they are in the majority.
Danutz, a Romanian user, pointed out that it is unfair that Node is the only user which supports the Moldovan Wikipedia, when he does not even speak Moldovan/Romanian very well (it seems he has some Moldovan roots, though) and has placed himself as sysop undemocratically (without any community consensus - note, though, that at that time the Romanian visitors weren't yet aware of the mo.wiki). They therefore feel that an abuse of power is taking place, especially since Node is saying that the Romanian users shouldn't be able to have a say because they aren't Moldovan (in which case, the Romanian users claim that Node also doesn't have a right because he can "barely" speak Romanian/Moldovan).
Now, personally, I have taken a very neutral stance and compelled both sides to argue more rationally and stop the criticism. I also am entirely committed to hearing both sides out and acting in a professional manner.
We have made some headway recently, and I have struck an agreement with Node over my proposal, which he seems to support. Some of the Romanian users, however, still do not agree with all parts of the proposal, some of them asking for a separate subdomain for a Moldovan-Cyrillic wiki. What do people say to that? I would personally agree to that, meaning a mo.wiki which is simply a portal, and a mo-cyr.wikipedia.org which hosts only Cyrillic content.
I have presented my case here in order to gauge public response. I have also opened a consultation period with the community to allow for any complaints to the proposal, at http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ronline/Propunere. I'd just like to hear some opinions of people which aren't involved in this case so we can get more neutral, unaffiliated viewpoints.
Thanks,
Ronline
Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 22/06/05, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Mark Williamson a écrit:
Hi Anthere,
Unfortunately, there isn't really a mo.wiki "community".
It's more like, a group of two or three core individuals working on the project, and another 2 or 3 "mo.wiki hagglers" -- people who keep complaining on talkpages that the Wikipedia should be deleted.
Incidentally, the "hagglers" also believe that "there is no such thing as a Moldovan language", and until recently they were all editing anonymously. None of them has any edits to content pages.
The current problem is, what rights should go to what users? If we let the "hagglers" vote, they will possibly nominate one of themselves, vote him in, and then sabotage the Wikipedia using their newfound sysop privelages.
Well, I am not sure what "haggler" mean, but I guess this is not a gentle term :-)
Now that I think about it again, I meant a sort of combination of "haggler" (somebody who aggressively argues to try to reach an agreement, often related to the price of merchandise), and "heckler", meaning "to challenge aggressively" in a sense, to sort of jab and harass and embarass...
Neither of them is exactly an "unkind" word, though.
I'd say only those with an account can vote. And a rule such as at least 1 month and a certain number of real articles can make the trick.
However, I must confess, as one external to your conflict, this sounds like "all those agreeing with me are good editors, all others are hagglers".
This isn't really the case. Danutz aims for deletion of mo.wiki, yet he has been registered for a long time, and has edited content pages a few times. Ronline strives for neutrality in his own ideas; he has been registered for a while, and has contributed some content in Cyrillic even though he didn't learn it in school (for him, it is a fun activity).
Vertaler has been registered for a while, and edited content pages a lot. His position is not entirely clear, but he hasn't been active for a long time now.
Other than this, I can't think of any "core" users. So, the variances in opinion among the "core" users are extreme, Danutz is inclined to vote against me in any circumstance.
If we let the "core" vote only, then we run the risk of being "undemocratic".
Also, according to Ronline's proposal, I will remain a sysop "temporarily" to translate the interface, whether or not I am voted in.
Mark
This strikes me as reasonably democratic solution ;-)
Hmmm, a question... does the issue of whether to use Cyrillic as an influence in any way in the translation of the interface ?
I don't think so. Currently, the plan is to use both Cyrillic and Latin in the interface, ie with a separate translation for each script.
My changes to the interface didn't seem at all controversial.
Mark
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org