Hello,
I feel that I need a clarification on wikipedia policies related to hobby wikipedias.
Consider the case of the Moldovan language. The Moldovan wikipedia has been created and administered by Mark Williamson, which does not speak the language correctly. He copied (and replaced the latin script with cyrillic) a lot articles from ro.wiki, just to create what looks like a viable wikipedia. I presume exotic languages are a hobby for him, I have no problem with this. Even originality is not a problem, given that the purpose of wiki is to inform.
However, the Moldovan language is not extinct, so the oppinion of native speakers should count. The problem being that no Moldovan-speaking wikipedia user supports Mark Williamson. And when I say no user, I really mean that there is none. Actually, most Moldovan users dislike the existence of this wiki, because the Moldovan language is actually a creation of the Soviet authorities. To support this affirmation, note that there is no registered Moldovan user on en.wiki, meta.wiki, and not even mo.wiki. :)
So, given that this hobby wikipedia actually hurts the very people it was intended to help, is it normal that it remains online? I remind you once more that no actual Moldovan supports it. By Moldovan speaker I mean a person able to write Moldovan correctly.
I mean, if wikipedia policy is to grant users hobby wikipedias, Mark should get his, but maybe not using the official ISO code.
Yours, Dpotop
PS: I am sorry for bugging you with this, but some things discussed here must be clearly said.
--------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
Jacky PB wrote:
Hello,
I feel that I need a clarification on wikipedia policies related to hobby wikipedias.
Consider the case of the Moldovan language. The Moldovan wikipedia has been created and administered by Mark Williamson, which does not speak the language correctly. He copied (and replaced the latin script with cyrillic) a lot articles from ro.wiki, just to create what looks like a viable wikipedia. I presume exotic languages are a hobby for him, I have no problem with this. Even originality is not a problem, given that the purpose of wiki is to inform.
However, the Moldovan language is not extinct, so the oppinion of native speakers should count. The problem being that no Moldovan-speaking wikipedia user supports Mark Williamson. And when I say no user, I really mean that there is none. Actually, most Moldovan users dislike the existence of this wiki, because the Moldovan language is actually a creation of the Soviet authorities. To support this affirmation, note that there is no registered Moldovan user on en.wiki, meta.wiki, and not even mo.wiki. :)
So, given that this hobby wikipedia actually hurts the very people it was intended to help, is it normal that it remains online? I remind you once more that no actual Moldovan supports it. By Moldovan speaker I mean a person able to write Moldovan correctly.
I mean, if wikipedia policy is to grant users hobby wikipedias, Mark should get his, but maybe not using the official ISO code.
Yours, Dpotop
PS: I am sorry for bugging you with this, but some things discussed here must be clearly said.
In the apparent absence of community support for mo:, and after watching the many comments on this list, I think the best short-term option is to start work on the transliteration software settings.
Then we can lock, rather than delete, the mo: Wikipedia, with a note saying why, what the planned changes are, and when they are expected to be carried out.
Then, when the automated transliteration software has been properly configured to support both Cyrillic and Latin scripts in both the content and user interface, the content of mo: can be deleted, perhaps after a period of a few weeks to allow for any valuable content to be archived, and transferred if necessary.
Whether mo: should simply redirect, or whether it should (for example) change the user interface or default language settings, would then be a matter for the Moldovan community. Liaison between the larger community and as many actual Moldovan speakers as possible would be very useful in getting this process going, and would also be useful in expanding the Moldovan Wikipedia community.
Given that someone has (I believe) already written some language-appropriate Latin <-> Cyrillic transliteration code, and given MediaWiki's support for automated transliteration (eg. in the traditional and modern Chinese Wikipedias), the only problem is the will to get the transliteration code set up.
If I've followed the debate properly, I hope this would be a win for both Latin and Cyrillic users.
Perhaps Jacky and Mark would like to help with getting the transliteration tables ready?
-- Neil
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
Caroline/secretlondon
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Neil Harris Sent: 12 March 2006 18:08 To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Hobby wikipedia policy
Jacky PB wrote:
Hello,
I feel that I need a clarification on wikipedia policies related to hobby
wikipedias.
Consider the case of the Moldovan language. The Moldovan wikipedia has
been created and administered by Mark Williamson, which does not speak the language correctly. He copied (and replaced the latin script with cyrillic) a lot articles from ro.wiki, just to create what looks like a viable wikipedia. I presume exotic languages are a hobby for him, I have no problem with this. Even originality is not a problem, given that the purpose of wiki is to inform.
However, the Moldovan language is not extinct, so the oppinion of native speakers should count. The problem being that no Moldovan-speaking wikipedia user supports Mark Williamson. And when I say no user, I really mean that there is none. Actually, most Moldovan users dislike the existence of this wiki, because the Moldovan language is actually a creation of the Soviet authorities. To support this affirmation, note that there is no registered Moldovan user on en.wiki, meta.wiki, and not even mo.wiki. :)
So, given that this hobby wikipedia actually hurts the very people it was intended to help, is it normal that it remains online? I remind you
once more that no actual Moldovan supports it. By Moldovan speaker I mean a person able to write Moldovan correctly.
I mean, if wikipedia policy is to grant users hobby wikipedias, Mark
should get his, but maybe not using the official ISO code.
Yours, Dpotop
PS: I am sorry for bugging you with this, but some things discussed here
must be clearly said.
In the apparent absence of community support for mo:, and after watching the many comments on this list, I think the best short-term option is to start work on the transliteration software settings.
Then we can lock, rather than delete, the mo: Wikipedia, with a note saying why, what the planned changes are, and when they are expected to be carried out.
Then, when the automated transliteration software has been properly configured to support both Cyrillic and Latin scripts in both the content and user interface, the content of mo: can be deleted, perhaps after a period of a few weeks to allow for any valuable content to be archived, and transferred if necessary.
Whether mo: should simply redirect, or whether it should (for example) change the user interface or default language settings, would then be a matter for the Moldovan community. Liaison between the larger community and as many actual Moldovan speakers as possible would be very useful in getting this process going, and would also be useful in expanding the Moldovan Wikipedia community.
Given that someone has (I believe) already written some language-appropriate Latin <-> Cyrillic transliteration code, and given MediaWiki's support for automated transliteration (eg. in the traditional and modern Chinese Wikipedias), the only problem is the will to get the transliteration code set up.
If I've followed the debate properly, I hope this would be a win for both Latin and Cyrillic users.
Perhaps Jacky and Mark would like to help with getting the transliteration tables ready?
-- Neil
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 10/03/2006
Exactly! The situation is not really same as with Serbian Wikipedia. In the SR case, Cyrillic and Latin scripts are both equal and are both considered standard scripts. Therefore, an automatic transliterator makes sense. However, in RO/MO case, only a small percentage of speakers, let alone Wikipedians, use Cyrillics. It would make no sense for RO to have both scripts if one of them is virtually never going to be used. But, that can be avoided. SR Wikipedia now has the engine and 4 extra tabs for 4 written standards of the Serbian language and users can always see those tabs. However, if coded properly, one could make such an extension where the extra tab (for Cyrillic script) could be seen only if a user wanted it to be seen (which would basically require checking a box in user preferences). That way, Romanian users wouldn't have to know that the transliteration tool even existed, AND Moldavian speakers could turn the feature on if they wanted.
Filip
Caroline Ford wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
Caroline/secretlondon
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Neil Harris Sent: 12 March 2006 18:08 To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Hobby wikipedia policy
Jacky PB wrote:
Hello,
I feel that I need a clarification on wikipedia policies related to hobby
wikipedias.
Consider the case of the Moldovan language. The Moldovan wikipedia has
been created and administered by Mark Williamson, which does not speak the language correctly. He copied (and replaced the latin script with cyrillic) a lot articles from ro.wiki, just to create what looks like a viable wikipedia. I presume exotic languages are a hobby for him, I have no problem with this. Even originality is not a problem, given that the purpose of wiki is to inform.
However, the Moldovan language is not extinct, so the oppinion of native speakers should count. The problem being that no Moldovan-speaking wikipedia user supports Mark Williamson. And when I say no user, I really mean that there is none. Actually, most Moldovan users dislike the existence of this wiki, because the Moldovan language is actually a creation of the Soviet authorities. To support this affirmation, note that there is no registered Moldovan user on en.wiki, meta.wiki, and not even mo.wiki. :)
So, given that this hobby wikipedia actually hurts the very people it was intended to help, is it normal that it remains online? I remind you
once more that no actual Moldovan supports it. By Moldovan speaker I mean a person able to write Moldovan correctly.
I mean, if wikipedia policy is to grant users hobby wikipedias, Mark
should get his, but maybe not using the official ISO code.
Yours, Dpotop
PS: I am sorry for bugging you with this, but some things discussed here
must be clearly said.
In the apparent absence of community support for mo:, and after watching the many comments on this list, I think the best short-term option is to start work on the transliteration software settings.
Then we can lock, rather than delete, the mo: Wikipedia, with a note saying why, what the planned changes are, and when they are expected to be carried out.
Then, when the automated transliteration software has been properly configured to support both Cyrillic and Latin scripts in both the content and user interface, the content of mo: can be deleted, perhaps after a period of a few weeks to allow for any valuable content to be archived, and transferred if necessary.
Whether mo: should simply redirect, or whether it should (for example) change the user interface or default language settings, would then be a matter for the Moldovan community. Liaison between the larger community and as many actual Moldovan speakers as possible would be very useful in getting this process going, and would also be useful in expanding the Moldovan Wikipedia community.
Given that someone has (I believe) already written some language-appropriate Latin <-> Cyrillic transliteration code, and given MediaWiki's support for automated transliteration (eg. in the traditional and modern Chinese Wikipedias), the only problem is the will to get the transliteration code set up.
If I've followed the debate properly, I hope this would be a win for both Latin and Cyrillic users.
Perhaps Jacky and Mark would like to help with getting the transliteration tables ready?
-- Neil
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 10/03/2006
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Caroline Ford wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
Caroline/secretlondon
Okay, then.
Let the ro: and mo: Wikipedias be interfaces to the same underlying data, then but let the Wikipedia be a Cyrillic-free zone, both in terms of content and interface, and mo: Wikipedia be the same as ro:, only with interface and content optionally presented in Cyrillic, with two-way transliteration for editing, as per the Chinese and Serbian Wikipedias.
-- Neil
That's already been proposed, and it seems like a good idea.
The only troubling part of your proposal is that data could be stored in the database in Cyrillic, which I think might anger some Romanians.
Mark
On 12/03/06, Neil Harris usenet@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:
Caroline Ford wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
Caroline/secretlondon
Okay, then.
Let the ro: and mo: Wikipedias be interfaces to the same underlying data, then but let the Wikipedia be a Cyrillic-free zone, both in terms of content and interface, and mo: Wikipedia be the same as ro:, only with interface and content optionally presented in Cyrillic, with two-way transliteration for editing, as per the Chinese and Serbian Wikipedias.
-- Neil
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
So? For example the entire concept of an article about the country of Macedonia angers many Greek people. Since when was the fact that someone could get angry about something an argument not to do something?
/Andreas
On 3/13/06, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
That's already been proposed, and it seems like a good idea.
The only troubling part of your proposal is that data could be stored in the database in Cyrillic, which I think might anger some Romanians.
Mark
On 12/03/06, Neil Harris usenet@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:
Caroline Ford wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
Caroline/secretlondon
Okay, then.
Let the ro: and mo: Wikipedias be interfaces to the same underlying data, then but let the Wikipedia be a Cyrillic-free zone, both in terms of content and interface, and mo: Wikipedia be the same as ro:, only with interface and content optionally presented in Cyrillic, with two-way transliteration for editing, as per the Chinese and Serbian Wikipedias.
-- Neil
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
...Again, I personally don't care.
But while the idea of an article about (FYRO) Macedonia might anger some Greeks, it fits directly in to Wikipedia according to rules, no doubt about it. Along the same lines, we have articles about autofellatio, holocaust denial, neonaziism, etc.
In those cases, there are only two clear options: Either the articles exist, or they don't.
In this case, however, there are many potential solutions to the same problem, so I think it's worth adding to an overall evaluation of each option whether or not it is likely to repell people from any certain country or region from using or editing Wikipedia in the future.
Although ideally, we should be able to do whatever is most logical for any given situation, the human component is something that if left unconsidered can have a devastating effect on any project.
Mark
On 12/03/06, Andreas Vilén andreas.vilen@gmail.com wrote:
So? For example the entire concept of an article about the country of Macedonia angers many Greek people. Since when was the fact that someone could get angry about something an argument not to do something?
/Andreas
On 3/13/06, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
That's already been proposed, and it seems like a good idea.
The only troubling part of your proposal is that data could be stored in the database in Cyrillic, which I think might anger some Romanians.
Mark
On 12/03/06, Neil Harris usenet@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:
Caroline Ford wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
Caroline/secretlondon
Okay, then.
Let the ro: and mo: Wikipedias be interfaces to the same underlying data, then but let the Wikipedia be a Cyrillic-free zone, both in terms of content and interface, and mo: Wikipedia be the same as ro:, only with interface and content optionally presented in Cyrillic, with two-way transliteration for editing, as per the Chinese and Serbian Wikipedias.
-- Neil
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
On 12/03/06, Caroline Ford caroline@secretlondon.me.uk wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
In that case, the obvious solution is to have it elsewhere (if it is wanted by anyone, of course). Why anybody would object to any language being written by somebody else in a particular alphabet, is beyond my understanding. Nobody is being forced to use it.
All in all - if someone wants to recreate dawiki in Devanagari or enwiki in the Hebrew alphabet, why should I care? It may be a waste of resources, but not ground for hissyfits as we have seen here.
Ole (User:Palnatoke on several WPs)
-- http://palnatoke.org * Ole Andersen, Copenhagen, DK * CV: http://palnatoke.org/CV.doc * h:+45 36 47 31 59 w: +45 35 45 44 29 Triskelion 2. april: http://palnatoke.org/Triskelion.htm
Because they are motivated by a burning hatred for anything "Russian", including Cyrillic.
Mark
On 13/03/06, Ole Andersen palnatoke@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/03/06, Caroline Ford caroline@secretlondon.me.uk wrote:
There seems to be no way that Romanians will tolerate cyrillic language (even via a software setting) on their wikipedia.
In that case, the obvious solution is to have it elsewhere (if it is wanted by anyone, of course). Why anybody would object to any language being written by somebody else in a particular alphabet, is beyond my understanding. Nobody is being forced to use it.
All in all - if someone wants to recreate dawiki in Devanagari or enwiki in the Hebrew alphabet, why should I care? It may be a waste of resources, but not ground for hissyfits as we have seen here.
Ole (User:Palnatoke on several WPs)
-- http://palnatoke.org * Ole Andersen, Copenhagen, DK
h:+45 36 47 31 59 w: +45 35 45 44 29 Triskelion 2. april: http://palnatoke.org/Triskelion.htm _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
On 3/13/06, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Because they are motivated by a burning hatred for anything "Russian", including Cyrillic.
Mark
I feel that's a very inaccurate representation of the Romanian point of view on this proposed transliteration. What must be understood is that Cyrillic is controversial for Romanian simply because of historical context. This can't be discounted, and I think people should a bit more sensitive to this issue. It doesn't compare with Devanagari for English or, say, Arabic script for Swedish. But the point is that even those Wikipedias would never be accepted.
In any case - Mark seems to believe that Romanians have a "burning hatred" for anything Russian, including Cyrillic. This is definitely not the case. Rather, the writing of Romanian in Cyrillic is something that is not performed by any Romanians, bar a series of people who declare themselves ethnic Moldovans in an unrecognised state. For that reason, implementing a conversion script touches on people's sensitivities. The Latin script is a link that Romania has to the rest of the Western world. Using a Cyrillic script that would be treated on par with Latin implies a sort of Cyrillic hegemony for most of Romanians and Moldovans, and serves as a painful reminder for the times when people in the Moldovan SSR were forced to learn the language using Cyrillic characters.
For that reason, I think if there really is demand for such a project, then a new subdomain should be set up for it.
Overall, however, I think Wikipedia needs to develop a script policy, not only a language policy. So far, we have got by on this half-hearted notion of "script doesn't matter, we only have Wikipedias for languages". However, there are many grey areas:
* The Kurdish Wikipedia uses both Arabic and Latin script, but there is no conversion. This, IMO, is quite a messy approach. Either have two separate Wikipedias (there's nothing wrong with that), or imply automatic conversion. * The Tatar Wikipedia uses the Latin script, which is non-official, yet there is no content at all in Cyrillic. There is no clear policy on this (ideally, conversion should be implemented). * Automatic conversion is messy. For example, the Serbian Wikipedia continues to be Cyrillic-default, and one must switch to Latin everytime ( i.e. when a link is clicked from a Latin page, it still takes you to the Cyrillic version). AFAIK, pages also can't be edited in Latin. I presume this is the case for the Chinese WP as well.
Don't get me wrong, automatic conversion is a potentially very powerful process that can solve a lot of POV disputes regarding script. At the time, however, it is technically imperfect. Meanwhile, kudos to Vikimedija SCG, who are doing a *great* job in promoting the Serbian Wikipedia. You guys are an example.
Ronline
I feel that's a very inaccurate representation of the Romanian point of view on this proposed transliteration. What must be understood is that Cyrillic is controversial for Romanian simply because of historical context. This can't be discounted, and I think people should a bit more sensitive to this issue. It doesn't compare with Devanagari for English or, say, Arabic script for Swedish. But the point is that even those Wikipedias would never be accepted.
Ronline, you're speaking from a very idealistic place. In your world, gays, gypsies, and Jews are all accepted as equals by Romanians. But the reality is, many Romanians do not share these ideals with you. *You* may not have a burning hatred for anything Russian, but it's clear many Romanians do.
Case in point -- if there were an English WP in Devanagari, no Americans would go to the lengths Romanians have gone to to campaign for its closure. The attitude would be, "It's a bit ridiculous, but why should we care?"
So much time has been spent on the Moldovan Wikipedia that it's apparent many Romanians do care about the issue, and it's also very clear that they have a burning hatred for anything Russian, considering the fact that I have been called "Russian" (in Romanian) as an insult by Romanians, which doesn't make a lot of sense -- I'm certainly not Russian, but I'm not sure why it should be used as an insult. Are Russians evil demons or something??
In any case - Mark seems to believe that Romanians have a "burning hatred" for anything Russian, including Cyrillic. This is definitely not the case. Rather, the writing of Romanian in Cyrillic is something that is not performed by any Romanians, bar a series of people who declare themselves ethnic Moldovans in an unrecognised state. For that reason, implementing a conversion script touches on people's sensitivities. The Latin script is a link that Romania has to the rest of the Western world. Using a Cyrillic script that would be treated on par with Latin implies a sort of Cyrillic hegemony for most of Romanians and Moldovans, and serves as a painful reminder for the times when people in the Moldovan SSR were forced to learn the language using Cyrillic characters.
"Forced to learn the language using Cyrillic characters" is a phrase I have seen used almost exclusively by Romanians. Moldovans just speak of a script change, of reversion to Latin script. These people had much more important things to worry about at the time than what script they wrote in. Even during perestroica, there were no protests to revert to Latin -- the MSSR gov't simply did that without any sort of popular outcry.
- The Kurdish Wikipedia uses both Arabic and Latin script, but there is no
conversion. This, IMO, is quite a messy approach. Either have two separate Wikipedias (there's nothing wrong with that), or imply automatic conversion.
The main problem is Kurdish dialects. They are largely mutually unintelligible, and are also divided along the lines of script. Sorani and Gorani usually use Arabic, Kurmanji and Zazaki usually use Latin.
- The Tatar Wikipedia uses the Latin script, which is non-official, yet
there is no content at all in Cyrillic. There is no clear policy on this (ideally, conversion should be implemented).
Actually, while I was troubled by this for a while, I found out that Latin is the official script for Tatar in Tatarstan. This is in conflict with the fact that Cyrillic is, by a recent national law, the official script for all languages of the Russian Federation, however, the Tatar law still exists and Tatars themselves seem to be embracing Latin.
- Automatic conversion is messy. For example, the Serbian Wikipedia
continues to be Cyrillic-default, and one must switch to Latin everytime ( i.e. when a link is clicked from a Latin page, it still takes you to the Cyrillic version). AFAIK, pages also can't be edited in Latin. I presume this is the case for the Chinese WP as well.
When you edit, the existing content is not converted, no. However, you can add new content in Latin. Same at zh.wp, except that it chooses one script or the other based on your IP range and cookies.
Mark
Ronline, you're speaking from a very idealistic place. In your world, gays, gypsies, and Jews are all accepted as equals by Romanians.
I try to make it that way :)
But the reality is, many Romanians do not share these ideals with you.
*You* may not have a burning hatred for anything Russian, but it's clear many Romanians do.
That's not true. Not in the way you see it least. The dislike for Russian elements is due to historical context, not to any intrinsic burning hatred. You don't see Romanians burning Russian flags in the street like Arabs burn Israeli flags. In fact, in comparison to, say, Poland or the Baltic states, Romanians are quite neutral towards Russia (at least in my part of Romania, the attitude is more Russia-ignorant, people really don't care what's happening east of Romania anymore).
I think the main reason why so much outcry over this Wikipedia has been made is due to an ingrained fear to return to the past, even symbolically, in post-Communist Europe in general. Trying to promote the Cyrillic script for the Moldovan language was seen as going "back to the past" and it is only natural that this be opposed by people who have particularly bitter memories of the past (it would be like proposing to reintroduce Russian as the second state language in Estonia just because there's a significant Russian minority there).
Case in point -- if there were an English WP in Devanagari, no
Americans would go to the lengths Romanians have gone to to campaign for its closure. The attitude would be, "It's a bit ridiculous, but why should we care?"
Well that's exactly my point. The Devanagari case cannot be compared to the Romanian/Moldovan case because of historical context. If there would be a proposal to launch a Romanian Wikipedia in Devanagari, I don't think any Romanians would care either. Cyrillic, however, is politically-sensitive. Just try getting Estonian WP to accept a Cyrillic version and you'll see the result (my Estonian comparison again - Estonian was never written in Cyrillic, but Moldovan was forcibly converted, that's a double standard).
"Forced to learn the language using Cyrillic characters" is a phrase I
have seen used almost exclusively by Romanians. Moldovans just speak of a script change, of reversion to Latin script. These people had much more important things to worry about at the time than what script they wrote in. Even during perestroica, there were no protests to revert to Latin -- the MSSR gov't simply did that without any sort of popular outcry.
Well, even though there may not have been a public outcry, it was publicly imposed. It's not as if Moldovans voluntarily switched to Cyrillic. They were forced (i.e. involuntarily made) to accept a script that was foreign to the language they knew.
Actually, while I was troubled by this for a while, I found out that
Latin is the official script for Tatar in Tatarstan. This is in conflict with the fact that Cyrillic is, by a recent national law, the official script for all languages of the Russian Federation, however, the Tatar law still exists and Tatars themselves seem to be embracing Latin.
Yes, I knew that Tatar people preferred Latin, but not that the Tatar Government actually saw that script as official. In any case, the Wikipedia should be biscriptal.
Hello again, and thanks for your interest in the problem.
Here is my views on a possible transliteration engine on ro.wiki.
Personaly, I have nothing against having it. However, as the vote on mo.wiki shows, only few share my position. And the two reasons are quite straightforward: 1. Historically speaking, the cyrillic script is a remnant of Soviet colonial policies, only maintained (by force) in Transnistria. 2. No request for moldovan in cyrillic came from a Moldovan speaker.
Given than, I believe that the best solution is Mark installing the script in his private space, or maybe in the test wikipedia area, pending the arrival on wikipedia of actual Moldovan users interested in the issue.
What do you believe? Dpotop
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Dpotop ignored the users I listed. It doesn't matter WHY a script is present, only that it IS.
Mark
On 13/03/06, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello again, and thanks for your interest in the problem.
Here is my views on a possible transliteration engine on ro.wiki.
Personaly, I have nothing against having it. However, as the vote on mo.wiki shows, only few share my position. And the two reasons are quite straightforward:
- Historically speaking, the cyrillic script is a
remnant of Soviet colonial policies, only maintained (by force) in Transnistria. 2. No request for moldovan in cyrillic came from a Moldovan speaker.
Given than, I believe that the best solution is Mark installing the script in his private space, or maybe in the test wikipedia area, pending the arrival on wikipedia of actual Moldovan users interested in the issue.
What do you believe? Dpotop
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
Yes, there have in fact been Moldovan users who have either been supportive of this project or neutral. At the moment, however, there are no native users of Moldovan Cyrillic that are contributing, or intend to contribute, to this project.
It doesn't matter WHY a script is present, only that it IS.
I don't think it does this case any good to look at it from a political vacuum. I think that's a problem with Wikipedian approaches in general - things are deconstructed, recontextualised and looked at in what is a political-cultural vacuum. The point is that although NPOV is important, the connotations that a certain script has and its reason for coming about are important in considering its legitimacy. This is of course regarding conversion. There would be nothing wrong is setting up a subdomain (mo-cyr) for this Wikipedia. It would set a precedent, and it would be a unique case, but then again the case of Moldovan is quite unique anyway.
On 3/13/06, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Dpotop ignored the users I listed. It doesn't matter WHY a script is present, only that it IS.
Mark
On 13/03/06, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello again, and thanks for your interest in the problem.
Here is my views on a possible transliteration engine on ro.wiki.
Personaly, I have nothing against having it. However, as the vote on mo.wiki shows, only few share my position. And the two reasons are quite straightforward:
- Historically speaking, the cyrillic script is a
remnant of Soviet colonial policies, only maintained (by force) in Transnistria. 2. No request for moldovan in cyrillic came from a Moldovan speaker.
Given than, I believe that the best solution is Mark installing the script in his private space, or maybe in the test wikipedia area, pending the arrival on wikipedia of actual Moldovan users interested in the issue.
What do you believe? Dpotop
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org