it was very unfair pace to remove Belarusian Wikipedia to the domain be-x-old, because
1) it is the result of 3yrs volunteers work. it would be hard task to change interwikis, to renew medias 2) Belarusian Wikipedia isn't written in old grammar. both grammars are allowed to use in that variant of wikipedia. the difference between grammars is less than between American and British English 3) creators of wikipedia only in official belarusian grammar have insisted on getting three-letters ISO-code domain bel.wp.org, leaving two-letters ISO-code for Belarusian wikipedia. Belarusian language is one.
so, i strongly reccomend: - to move Belarusian Wikipedia back to be.wikipedia.org - to give for belarusian wikipedia in official grammar domain bel.wikipedia.org and move it there
waiting for your kind reply
On 28/03/07, Ян Марозаў janmarozau@gmail.com wrote:
it was very unfair pace to remove Belarusian Wikipedia to the domain be-x-old, because
- it is the result of 3yrs volunteers work. it would be hard task to
change interwikis, to renew medias 2) Belarusian Wikipedia isn't written in old grammar. both grammars are allowed to use in that variant of wikipedia. the difference between grammars is less than between American and British English
If you want to get any support on this, don't give us such hype.
Even alphabets are different in these two versions of Belarusian language. And to tell about "difference of less than of British and American" is just insulting to the intelligence of the readers.
*However*, I support the motion that the previously existing interwiki links to the articles media etc. should be retained somehow.
---
2007/3/28, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com:
Even alphabets are different in these two versions of Belarusian language. And to tell about "difference of less than of British and American" is just insulting to the intelligence of the readers.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
You mean letter ґ, don't you? But it's not used widely by belarusian wikipedians, who write in tarashkevica. The difference is really quite small. Mostly in usage of ь, declension of nouns and some other trifles. The point is that both grammars are used in old variant of wikipedia.
On 28/03/07, Jan Marozau janmarozau@gmail.com wrote:
2007/3/28, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com:
...
You mean letter ґ, don't you? But it's not used widely by belarusian wikipedians, who write in tarashkevica.
It's used quite widely. Anyway, it's there, and it's introduced in the places even the Belarusian phonology doesn't know about.
The difference is really quite small. Mostly in usage of ь, declension of nouns and some other trifles.
Oh yeah. People study for years to get all those "trifles" right, and you forget revamping half the vocabulary, anyway.
The point is that both grammars are used in old variant of wikipedia.
No, they are not. Standard version was from beginning kept as the second grade language. No categories, no interface, no rules etc.
Rules imposing maintaining of the version of the language article's written in, with clause mandating asking the permission of the previous author -- in Wikipedia, good grief! That was the whole point of the 2006 yeras discussions on Meta and be: -- see archives.
Ah, sorry forgot to add. You know, of course, I'm one if the inititative group of the standard language Belarusian wiki.
So, *personally* I wouldn't mind if the alternative version Be:WP would retain its previous be.wikipedia.org, AS LONG AS the standard language Belarusian wiki gets ISO standard code, with no tails or suffixes, too, -- here it would be *bel.wikipedia.org*. Shouldn't be too hard to organise making of this small exception??
---
2007/3/28, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com:
So, *personally* I wouldn't mind if the alternative version Be:WP would retain its previous be.wikipedia.org, AS LONG AS the standard language Belarusian wiki gets ISO standard code, with no tails or suffixes, too, -- here it would be *bel.wikipedia.org*. Shouldn't be too hard to organise making of this small exception??
Thanks, Yury, for that remark! I hope foundators would make such an exception.
and i really strongly appreciate an idea of re-uniting. it seems to be useful for Belarusian common cause.
On 28/03/07, Jan Marozau janmarozau@gmail.com wrote:
2007/3/28, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com:
...
So, *personally* I wouldn't mind if the alternative version Be:WP would retain its previous be.wikipedia.org, AS LONG AS the standard language Belarusian wiki gets ISO standard code, with no tails or suffixes, too, -- here it would be *bel.wikipedia.org*. Shouldn't be too hard to organise making of this small exception??
Thanks, Yury, for that remark! I hope foundators would make such an exception.
and i really strongly appreciate an idea of re-uniting. it seems to be useful for Belarusian common cause.
Now this is day-dreaming, no such re-uniting is possible of course. I won't go into tedious culturological details now.
But re-iterating, *as long the standard language version gets clean standard code (in this case, it would be bel:), I personally wouldn't mind.*
I don't see how such non-major exception would hurt, given this particular situation. The starting-up of our project from incubator was made in a bit of a rush, some info was lost in the transfer. Small correction then would be in order?
Not that we aren't grateful of course for that cutting the Gordian tie in the first place! --- ---
What is so /horrible/ about the official orthography that you can't use it?
Your language needs help. I think at this point you need to forget your divisions, and do whatever is necessary to keep above water, which for me seems to be adopting official orthography and pitching in tothe new be.wp.
Mark
On 28/03/07, Jan Marozau janmarozau@gmail.com wrote:
2007/3/28, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com:
So, *personally* I wouldn't mind if the alternative version Be:WP would retain its previous be.wikipedia.org, AS LONG AS the standard language Belarusian wiki gets ISO standard code, with no tails or suffixes, too, -- here it would be *bel.wikipedia.org*. Shouldn't be too hard to organise making of this small exception??
Thanks, Yury, for that remark! I hope foundators would make such an exception.
and i really strongly appreciate an idea of re-uniting. it seems to be useful for Belarusian common cause. _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 29/03/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
What is so /horrible/ about the official orthography that you can't use it?
Your language needs help. I think at this point you need to forget your divisions, and do whatever is necessary to keep above water, which for me seems to be adopting official orthography and pitching in tothe new be.wp.
That's exactly what I'm preaching to those guys for years. It's not that the standard (official) version is that good, it's just the language. But it's widely accepted, and that's the very final "it".
---
Apparently, it's more important to them to use their own spelling rules.
Perhaps we should start a new English Wikipedia for hXc kids who want to TyPe In AlTcApS tO mAkE a PoLiTiCaL sTaTeMeNt? (which is exactly what it seems like people using nas^a niva are trying to do)
Mark
On 28/03/07, Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/03/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
What is so /horrible/ about the official orthography that you can't use it?
Your language needs help. I think at this point you need to forget your divisions, and do whatever is necessary to keep above water, which for me seems to be adopting official orthography and pitching in tothe new be.wp.
That's exactly what I'm preaching to those guys for years. It's not that the standard (official) version is that good, it's just the language. But it's widely accepted, and that's the very final "it".
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 29/03/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps we should start a new English Wikipedia for hXc kids who want to TyPe In AlTcApS tO mAkE a PoLiTiCaL sTaTeMeNt? (which is exactly what it seems like people using nas^a niva are trying to do)
lol i thk we nd txt.wp.org 2 nabl kids 2 wrt wkpda in thr own lang :)
- d.
zomg ur rite davd, ths is actuly my natve language + i demnd a wkpdia in it nw
On 29/03/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/03/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps we should start a new English Wikipedia for hXc kids who want to TyPe In AlTcApS tO mAkE a PoLiTiCaL sTaTeMeNt? (which is exactly what it seems like people using nas^a niva are trying to do)
lol i thk we nd txt.wp.org 2 nabl kids 2 wrt wkpda in thr own lang :)
- d.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
AOL!!!1!!!
(i stop now)
- d.
On 29/03/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
zomg ur rite davd, ths is actuly my natve language + i demnd a wkpdia in it nw
On 29/03/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/03/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps we should start a new English Wikipedia for hXc kids who want to TyPe In AlTcApS tO mAkE a PoLiTiCaL sTaTeMeNt? (which is exactly what it seems like people using nas^a niva are trying to do)
lol i thk we nd txt.wp.org 2 nabl kids 2 wrt wkpda in thr own lang :)
- d.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
??????!
From our POV the issue is closed.
1) LangCom gave its recommendations, 2) the Board made a decision, 3) the domains have been renamed according to Board decision, 4) as per Board decision we wait for the setup of a Committee that will decide whether be-x-old shall be shutdown or not.
LangCom scope of activity ended at step 1. We are currently at step 4.
IMHO, you should all stop considering this thing as an internal Byelorussian fight, because it has long stopped being such. After 4) will come 5) and the time you waste in internal quarrels is time you should use in preparing a proper defense for be-x-old, if you care for it.
Let's be very clear: there is a suspect that political misuse *might* have been larger than just a "stolen ISO code". If this is proved (archives are archives, checking is easy) then the result of the process is obvious. If ANY political party/group/sect in ANY linguistic entity needs a wiki for their propaganda they are welcome to open one AT THEIR OWN EXPENSES but well away from wmf trademark/resources.
In instead, step 5) might find that be-x-old is just a regular encyclopedia (IMHO that's what it is, at least as far as I could read myself). Add to this a peaceful end for this stupid everlasting civil war and although it won't be me judging I believe that the conclusion would sound like "forget it, false alarm".
Only do not expect codes to be used improperly. LangCom will oppose ANY descriptive code; I'd rather drop dead than issuing one. If we issue one for you today, tomorrow we will have all the separatist groups of the planet standing in line to get a wiki and a code that will give them some sort of international recognition + free propaganda. Are you crazy or what!? We will apply just ANY ISO decision without discussing it, but we are not going to issue/modify ANYTHING AT ALL ourselves.
My personal wish is that all this will end well and that we will eventually hold a great social gathering of all Byelorussian wikipedians to share a beer and celebrate a new period of friendship :) Life's too short to make a tragedy of it, let's start to see things with a positive stance.
If everything ends well (and we all know that it will probably end well, after all) both editions will have had 100 times more traffic than they ever got before just because of this "scandal", which means some 10-15 new users for both of them. Be positive ;)
DISCLAIMER: this is not a collective LangCom statement, but just my own individual mail.
Berto 'd Sera Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yury Tarasievich Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 4:41 PM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] belarusian wikipedia (be and be-x-old)
Ah, sorry forgot to add. You know, of course, I'm one if the inititative group of the standard language Belarusian wiki.
So, *personally* I wouldn't mind if the alternative version Be:WP would retain its previous be.wikipedia.org, AS LONG AS the standard language Belarusian wiki gets ISO standard code, with no tails or suffixes, too, -- here it would be *bel.wikipedia.org*. Shouldn't be too hard to organise making of this small exception??
---
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
2007/3/28, Ян Марозаў janmarozau@gmail.com:
- it is the result of 3yrs volunteers work. it would be hard task to
change interwikis, to renew medias
Regarding the interwikis, once I hear the interwiki under which be-x-old can be received, I will be setting up bots to do the task, and ask others to do the same.
Actually, there *is* one interesting way to retain both work and interwikis:
People come here and tell us that this alternative version has fewer differences than British-American. Well, why then have a separate language version at all? If it's "all one Belarusan", why not merge the be-x-old: into be: with conversion of the language to the standard form? Why retain the artificial wantonly separation from the standard version of the language which gets the iso 639 etc.? All links hold then, content multiplies, etc etc.
And now, by the ensuing uproar will you know how small are the differences, really, and how one is Belarusan. :)))
However, my motion holds, that it's no good to cancel people's work just like that and interwiki must function too. ---
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org