Cunc, as I understand it, you have three points to your argument: 1. it's a disruption 2. it's a minor fix to a larger problem 3. why should the largest wikipedia have to move anyway? 1 has been adressed earlier. we've moved domain name before. 2 -- yes, I agree. The problem is larger than this. But this is a significant move. Like mav said, it's *symbolic*. it's not the solution, but it's part of it. It shows that the other languages are siblings -- younger siblings, yes, -- but not subordinates. I fear I cannot answer point 3. I seems to me to stem from a fundamentally different view of life. But I trust that should the German Wikipedia ever grow larger than the English, you will be in favour of it acquiring the coveted www. domain, with the English being demoted to en: ? Anyway, if we're talking numbers, we should save www. for the Chinese Wikipedia ;-) An older post of yours says: perhaps with some automatic dictionary translations. Yes. But please please please can we drop this idea of "automatic dictionary translations". Try it sometime. Computers cannot translate. The Cunctator wrote:

Are you considering only the spanish wiki issue here (so a soothing option to make them come back) or all non-english wikis when you raise illegitimate grievance ? __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com

Given all the good comments made here and Ed message of a couple of days ago, here's my position (I asked other french-sp, dunno what they think yet) on the www.wikipedia.org amha (french translation for imho, nicely provided by our french linguist) 1)There's a need for a portal page stating the existence of all the wikis, a few infos about each, and a direct link to each. This page should be at wikipedia.org. 2)A very new comer *should* transit at least once through that page. This is very important. I remember it took me quite a while to find out there were other langages. It might seem obvious to english-native-sp., but the main page on the en.wiki is showing quite a lot of information, and many foreign words at the same place don't make it easy to find out the little link that could help toward one's langage. Directly sending readers to the en.wiki might make us loose all those who don't know english or feel inconfortable with it. 3)However, given that most actual users are english-native-sp, given that most users understand english, and *mostly* given that the fewer links to get to the information the better (one click less is a win-win option :-)), I think it essential to track that first passage and to give direct passage to the right encyclopedia as soon as preferences are given (in other words, at the second session) This mean either/or/and 3a) Cookie. After the first visit, the second-time visiting user is automatically redirected to the encyclopedia chosen the first time (most likely, the english one). 3b) Preferences options : choice of the preferred encyclopedia in the settings. Once a user is known (with login), typing wikipedia.org should lead him to the appropriate link (en. in most cases). This may allow to change the settings of a person who has first visited, say polish wiki, but now wants english as default. 4) On all wikis, the link to wiki.org should be *very* visible, especially since it is possible the direct links to other wikis on main pages will maybe be removed. In this case, there should be no redirection of course :-) This way, it should not happen very often that a user has to transit more than once by the main wiki. I will add of course, for those multilingal, that prefs should allow a prime choice, and secondary choices for wikis direct access. The secondary choice should provide a direct link to the second prefered wiki any time whatever wiki she/he is on and whatever page. My opinion is that this main page is mostly important to unknown users to choose the right directions. It is not important to us, who know the project, and know how to navigate between the various places. A relogin issue is amha *not* a argument for deciding the move or not. The Wikipedia evolution should not only go forward our *convenience* but the final user *convenience* (us AND others). However, I can't figure what the problem of keeping links on both address is. This issue is certainly more important. Oh ! on that login issue ! I have a technical question along those lines. I am always recognised on the fr.wiki.org and fr.wiki.com, so I never need to connect myself. I am NEVER RECOGNISED on the meta.com, meta.org, wiki.com and wiki.org. I NEED TO LOGIN for each session (not once a month). Often I start on the fr.wiki, then jump through the link on the main page. I always have to relogin. This is mildly annoying. What are the differences between these cases ? (same on opera and netscape) That would be my only answer to comments such as "logging in one time is gonna be a terrible inconvenience" In the past month, given that I have to work with at least one window in these 3 adresses (now 4), often 2 windows in each wiki for copy and pasting here and there, I believe I can evaluate the number of time I have been logging in to about 10 times per days, that would make about 300 TIMES IN THE MONTH. I certainly don't need the mailing list to remind me my password ! I have already asked a couple of time for an idea of why it was so....Thanks for any idea anybody could provide to solve that. Gareth maybe ?? --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, & more faith.yahoo.com

Unfortunately, the portal page is just about the most bankrupt concept possible in terms of usability, and online, usability is just about all you've got. The harm of adding one more click to users, both new and old, is measurable and huge. One more click *only once* does not look like *huge* to me. Only once. And one more login *only once* even less. Maybe there is a confusion here. Right now, the www.wikipedia.org is the english wikipedia. Right now, on the actual www.wikipedia.org, there is *little way* a user not fluent in english, will have the idea to scroll and look everywhere, down to the bottom of the page, inside a crowded list of international links, to find the link to a latin wikipedia. Right now, the www.wikipedia.org introduction text is entirely in english. So how does the actual www.wikipedia.org page could be considered a portal ??? Sorry I don't get it. Maybe, we should then think about what a portal is, because we obviously are not talking about the same thing. The www.wikipedia.org portal page I am talking about is something inspired from the one Tarquin and Mav and others have been working on at meta. Are we on the same line of understanding here, or are we just talking of two different things ? I would personnaly highly prefer interlinguage links are improved, before any portal page. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, & more faith.yahoo.com

Check the German and Dutch Wikipedias; they already use the 'native' name for other languages. Andre Engels

Paul Ebermann wrote: I've got a partial list, I'm changing them over as I get around to them. -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Anthere <anthere5(a)yahoo.com> writes: What the hell *is* a portal (besides a internet buzzword from about 1997) -- Gareth Owen "Wikipedia does rock. By the count on the "brilliant prose" page, there are 14 not-bad articles so far" -- Larry Sanger (12 Jan 2001)

What language do I get if I click on Canada? What language do I get if I click on mainland China? (You of course know that there is no such language as "Chinese.") Where do I click if I want Esperanto or Latin?

Well we can assume people have a certain level of intelligence I imagine. And can look at the bottom in the text links if they dont see their language, besides if the map is done right the whole map + text links should be able to be seen without scrolling to most everyone. (aim for 640x480). Oh and if you putt your mouse over the map most browsers display whatever is on the alt tag, or a tooltip thing, you can have that say the name of the language in its own laguage how bout that.... sounds reasonable.. anyone that argues with that is just being a pain in the ass in my opinion. there's no reason to be so picky and people really dont take such offense to that.. I mean if you really want to stretch it, maybe Quebec point to french... seriously people... this whole political correctness stuff is getting to a ridiculous level... people have a certain ammount of intelligence and understanding... you cant please everyone Lightning

Well, I guess I owe it to you. English in most of canada, french in quebec, or maybe it takes you to a page that furthermore narrows it down. I think this is unneccessary, most people can figure this out and IMSHO, its really not offensive if you dont please every last person... Whatever language we have that chinese people read. I think right now, there is none. The text links would list all the available languages, so you would look under, or on top, (or both) of the map, and click on the language of your choice if your language is not represented in the map

My suggestion called for a map AND text links.. here's a wack looking diagram of how it might look: [English|Espanol|Francais|Deutch....] --------------------------- | | THIS IS A MAP :-) | --------------------------- [English|Espanol|Francais|Deutch....] and ideally should be compact enough to be displayed without scrolling at all

--- Gareth Owen <wiki(a)gwowen.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: Is this type of question designed to make me sound as if I had absolutely no idea what I am talking about, or not worth listening because not using the best word, or designed to slow down any thinking process by drawing out a *detail*, or what ?? If such is your concern, explain *yourself* what *you* think is a portal, or better, explain what should be www.wikipedia.org page to your opinion. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com

Anthere <anthere5(a)yahoo.com> writes: No. Its the sort of question designed to make me sound as if I had absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I don't know what a "portal" is in this context. -- Gareth Owen "Wikipedia does rock. By the count on the "brilliant prose" page, there are 14 not-bad articles so far" -- Larry Sanger (12 Jan 2001)

Magnus Manske <magnus.manske(a)epost.de> writes: I think you mean GB / US / AUS / NZ / CAN ... well, you get the picture. Either the Flag of St. George (yuck), or nothing, I'd say.

"Magnus Manske" skribis: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/flags.html Paul

I don't like flags, and I guess many others also don't like them. If we really need some kind picture to represent a language, then please let's coose an image of a famous person who used this language to produce something important/famous/extraordinary/... (and who could represent our NPOV somehow). I don't know if we really need images, but if so than please not flags. Kurt

At 03:11 PM 10/12/02 -0700, Toby wrote: The problem is that most people won't recognize the English flag, which is rarely used outside of an international sports context, so it doesn't serve the purpose of "click here for the English version". I'm not British either (though I have been to England (and to Wales and Scotland)), but I'm used to clicking on the UK flag to get English Web pages, not the English flag. Of course, by sheer numbers it would properly be the flag of India, which I suspect would confuse most non-Indians. -- Vicki Rosenzweig vr(a)redbird.org http://www.redbird.org

[Note: The post that I'm replying to didn't appear on <intl-wiki>. Or perhaps it appeared separately; I'm not sure.] Jimmy Wales wrote: But not Latin, Frisian, .... "Español", "Deutsch", "Français". They don't seem at all prominent to me. They're in with a bunch of header material that my eye naturally ignores; I'm drawn to the beginning of paragraphed text further down. -- Toby

The Cunctator wrote: Maybe that could be compensated by placing a big (=central, visible) search function on top of the"www" main page, with a dropdown box for the different languages, with the browser-preferred language pre-selected. I guess that's what the random bypasser (the one-click guy;) wants from an encyclopedia: search for some topic. People who are interested in the project itself won't mind an additional click, IMHO. Magnus

[Note: The post that I'm replying to didn't get sent to <intlwiki-l>. Or perhaps it was sent separately; I'm not sure.] The Cunctator wrote in last part: O, is *that* what it means? I've always wondered. Well, if you think so, then perhaps you should read it. Because it (at least on [[en:]]) doesn't say what you just said. -- Toby