Hello,
I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is preferred by a Romanian minority.
Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which remains as a redirect.
Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?
--Gutza
Hi,
Le Saturday 31 July 2004 11:52, Gutza a écrit :
Hello,
I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is preferred by a Romanian minority.
Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which remains as a redirect.
Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?
--Gutza
We had one such issue on fr: recently about [[Action directe (...)]].
Some wanted to say "(terrorist group)", some "(left-extremist group)", and some other "(armed group)" and the last "(revolutionary group)". And any other combinations of the above.
The issue is not settled yet.
Yann
Yann Forget wrote:
We had one such issue on fr: recently about [[Action directe (...)]].
Some wanted to say "(terrorist group)", some "(left-extremist group)", and some other "(armed group)" and the last "(revolutionary group)". And any other combinations of the above.
How about just "group"? :-p
Gutza wrote:
Hello,
I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is preferred by a Romanian minority.
Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which remains as a redirect.
Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?
Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...
Magnus
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:42:34PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...
It's completely different matter depending on whether it's just a spelling issue, or some ideological issue.
And in neither case is Google going to be the one who tells the truth, really.
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:58:59PM +0200, Ralesk Ne'vennoyx wrote:
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:42:34PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...
It's completely different matter depending on whether it's just a spelling issue, or some ideological issue.
And in neither case is Google going to be the one who tells the truth, really.
Rarely one of the options is "more true" than the other in any meaningful way.
Gutza wrote:
Hello,
I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is preferred by a Romanian minority.
Well, if it’s an issue with a city name or anything like that, it may be just as appropriate to call Temesvár Timişoara as it is to call Wien Bécs or Kraków Krakkó on the Hungarian wikipedia or Wien Vienna on the English one simply because the host language calls it that way.
It’s a matter of language, I think, not a matter of what country the language is spoken. If they want a Hungarian article (I guess this is just another Székely vs. Romanian “trouble”), they could always come to the Hungarian Wikipedia and write the article there with a Hungarian title and Hungarian contents.
Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which remains as a redirect.
Otherwise, I’d be really interested to know what article this is about.
Gutza (gutza@moongate.ro) [040731 19:53]:
Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which remains as a redirect. Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?
The answer in en is "whatever's the common spelling in English." If it basically doesn't have one, then it really is strictly case by case, and impossible to answer without knowing what article you're talking about.
- d.
--- Gutza gutza@moongate.ro wrote:
Hello,
I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is preferred by a Romanian minority.
On the English Wikipedia we go with what most people who speak English (our readers) would expect to find (with caveats for ambiguity and offensiveness). So placing the article you talk about where most Romanian speakers would expect to find it in the Romanian Wikipedia makes a great deal of sense to me. But caveats for ambiguity and offensiveness may apply.
An example from the English Wikipedia were common usage is overruled by offensiveness: 'Eskimo' is a very common name for a people who live in the North American Arctic. In fact it is probably the most common name for them (at least in the U.S.). But they consider it to be highly offensive. Therefore our article about them is at [[Inuit]] (a widely used alternate name - esp in Canada).
-- mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
An example from the English Wikipedia were common usage is overruled by offensiveness: 'Eskimo' is a very common name for a people who live in the North American Arctic. In fact it is probably the most common name for them (at least in the U.S.). But they consider it to be highly offensive. Therefore our article about them is at [[Inuit]] (a widely used alternate name - esp in Canada).
Unfortunately for this example, not all Eskimo are Inuit, and by and large anthropologists still stick with the more accurate definition, regardless of social stigma. (Thankfully, Nelson Mandella hasn't been re-styled an "African-American" on en yet. I'm waiting for the day...)
-- mav
Austin Hair wrote:
An example from the English Wikipedia were common usage is overruled by offensiveness: 'Eskimo' is a very common name for a people who live in the North American Arctic. In fact it is probably the most common name for them (at least in the U.S.). But they consider it to be highly offensive. Therefore our article about them is at [[Inuit]] (a widely used alternate name - esp in Canada).
Unfortunately for this example, not all Eskimo are Inuit, and by and large anthropologists still stick with the more accurate definition, regardless of social stigma. (Thankfully, Nelson Mandella hasn't been re-styled an "African-American" on en yet. I'm waiting for the day...)
Ah ! See the interesting debate on fr, about how we should call americans people from the united states
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia%3APrise_de_d%C3%A9cision_Am%C3%A...
Current options are
Américain, Américaine
États-Unien, États-Unienne
Étatsunien, Étatsunienne
Étasunien, Étasunienne
États-Unisien, États-Unisienne
États-Unis d'Américain, États-Unis d'Américaine
Unistatique, Unistatique
Unistatien, unistatienne
Bushmen
Unistaçais, unistaçaises
-------
Admitedly, the last couple ones might be jokes
Perhaps...
Leonard Vertighel wrote:
Am Samstag, 31. Juli 2004 17:20 schrieb Anthere:
See the interesting debate on fr, about how we should call americans people from the united states [...] Bushmen
Will they be called Kerrymen after the next election?
I doubt Mr Kerry could *ever* reach Mr Bush reputation :-)
(now, I run away before troubles begin...)
Daniel Mayer wrote:
On the English Wikipedia we go with what most people who speak English (our readers) would expect to find (with caveats for ambiguity and offensiveness).
And the additional caveat of trying as hard as possible to just relax about British versus American spelling. :-) (Resulting in complete inconsistency on the matter, for the most part, as both are accepted equally, usually.)
--Jimbo
Gutza wrote:
Hello,
I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is preferred by a Romanian minority.
Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which remains as a redirect.
Whatever the choice you finally agree upon, I would recommand that you do not start naming things based on attempts to follow politically correct considerations.
We are not here to be politically correct, but to be factual, or adapted to our readers.
Respecting a minority point of view is not attempting to pretend that this is the majority point of view, but only acknowledging that this minority view exist.
If you put a redirect from the minor to the general, and if you mention clearly in the general spelling that there are also other spellings used, and possibly also use that alternate spelling in a few carefully chosen articles (such as those about that minority in particular), I guess you could come to an agreement with reasonable people.
Anthere
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org