tarquin a écrit:
Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
Green-
I like the logo too. I saw it on FR and thought,
"wow, too bad en isn't
this liberal."
We're liberal. We just don't like kitsch.
Regards,
We? I'm sure many English-speaker like kitsch ;o)
Put colors on the main page was also consider as kitsch in the past,
now it is a standard for almost all Wikipedias.
Yes, and it's a great pity.
The colours on the main page are more than kitsch, they are revolting.
The community on fr: seem far more concerned with style over content. I
understand that there is a natural desire to make our environment
"pretty", but this xmas logo is a step too far.
I will no longer be working on fr: until this situation is resolved.
I am switching to style over content because I am getting tired to see
content discussion going *no where*, or going directly in the arena.
I like very much the new year eve logo, and I think the idea of putting
a bit of fun on the logo (or on the project) from time to time is a GOOD
idea.
At the same time, I understand Tarquin position.
Just as Tarquin would put it (and put it on fr actually), the french
wikipedia is very much French, not french speaking. Some outside call it
Wikipedia Française :-( Because it is essentially poved by France culture.
Some articles on french cities, do not mention the city is in France,
because it is obvious :-)
Date articles, current events, are focused on french events
When two words are used, one canadian, one french, some think the
*correct* one is the french (see previous discussion about gay and gai,
and what is "correct" anyway)
And this is not even mentionning that the proper way to write is the one
suggested by the French Academy or the French Typographic Code. Perhaps
Canada has a chance as well here, but I doubt a decree in Algeria about
how to use french would be given much consideration :-)
We seek to have images legal issues respect the "french" legislation.
The association will be set in France.
A hosting server would be in France likely.
The idea of local association is good. But here, it will just add a
layer of cultural weight.
France culture is already *so* heavy, that a Christmas logo, which in
itself *could be* npov if other celebrations were respected as well, is
*smelling* culture dominency again.
It is just another step. Dominancy over content, over style, logo :-)))
Of course, many editors are french, so that is not so surprising. But
that does not mean we should not try to compensate our bias.
Not a long time ago, on ml, there was a discussion over how to reach
npov on international wikipedias, given that the variety of participants
is more limited than on en. This is worrying me deeply as well. We are
not currently trying to work toward npov I fear, we are still trying to
understand the concept. Of course, some will disagree with that opinion
of mine :-)
18 months ago, I thought that if I could attract more french speaking
people on the french wikipedia, from the en: stock, they could help us
to fight France cultural dominancy.
I also thought that if some french users could also work on the english
wikipedia, that would help, if they could see how people were doing in
another place. That is what I did, even if I am not really part of the
english wikipedia.
That is why I hoped so much for mixing all of us.
That, if it was hard for some of us to understand npov, international
mixing could help.
That, if it was hard for some of us, to accept the one different,
international mixing could help.
That, if it was hard for us to solve conflict resolution, because we
have no expert on this, international cooperation, mediation, where
international would be welcome in english commitee, even at observers,
to learn, it would help. Or if international commitee could be set, that
would help.
But yeah, right, no. There is here, and there. No confusion. One belongs
here, or belongs there.
I do not know what to think of what is going on. Except that each time
there is a discussion on something on fr, it can't stay polite.
So when Tarquin says he wants to talk about it on the international
list, one answer is "that he should keep his ridiculous threats for
himself". This is how disagreement and willingness to talk with other
members of the same project is interpretated : a threat.
As a matter of interest, I would be curious to know how those
internationals, that are split between wikipedias assume that. I find
extremely disconcerting to see two parts of a "common" project being so
different. It is a bit like that psychological disorder :-)
I hope this issue be solved Tarquin, because fr needs you badly.