On the Moldavian Wikipedia it says for over a month "This wiki has been closed for now." Is there any outlook on whether 'for now' means 'for ever' or that it will be re-opened at some time? I am asking because I want to know what to do with the interwiki for the bot. If the wiki is closed down for good, I intend to remove them silently; if it will be opened up again some time soon, I want to keep them in the same way as to 'normal' Wikipedias.
Andre Engels schreef:
On the Moldavian Wikipedia it says for over a month "This wiki has been closed for now." Is there any outlook on whether 'for now' means 'for ever' or that it will be re-opened at some time? I am asking because I want to know what to do with the interwiki for the bot. If the wiki is closed down for good, I intend to remove them silently; if it will be opened up again some time soon, I want to keep them in the same way as to 'normal' Wikipedias.
Hoi, The closure was done without the consent of the board. The language committee was asked to formulate an opinion, it is not of the opinion that the current situation is good. We proposed that this wiki would be reopened and that discussions would start on how the Moldovan and the Romanian Wikipedia can work together. An essential part of the time frame that will exist before this merger is that any vandalism will result in a ban for all the projects that such a person is involved in.
It is particularly the vandalism that made the huha around the Moldovan Wikipedia so unpalatable.
Thanks, GerardM
Besides the idea of cooperation and potential (or even definite) eventual merger, I'm not sure what would be different about the proposed plan you have outlined.
Vandalism has always been a problem on mo.wp, yes, but thankfully there was recently appointed an admin, a German named Pill, who was very good at deleting vandalism and blocking the vandals.
In the past, vandalism has been done by various people through sockpuppet accounts, but within the last few months the only that anyone did who was not an anon was Bonaparte, who is banned permanently on en.wp, ro.wp, meta, as well as possibly other projects (I know he caused quite a disturbance at roa-rup.wp, I would not be surprised if he were to have been banned there too or other various Wikis), and the user Euthymios, however Euthymios is not a "bad user" so I am sure if given a warning he will back off (he was already banned from mo.wp anyways).
As long as Pill is still active and willing to temporarily admin for the mo.wp, I'm not sure what would prevent it from being re-opened today along with the release of a new policy regarding the Wiki.
Mark
On 30/01/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Andre Engels schreef:
On the Moldavian Wikipedia it says for over a month "This wiki has been closed for now." Is there any outlook on whether 'for now' means 'for ever' or that it will be re-opened at some time? I am asking because I want to know what to do with the interwiki for the bot. If the wiki is closed down for good, I intend to remove them silently; if it will be opened up again some time soon, I want to keep them in the same way as to 'normal' Wikipedias.
Hoi, The closure was done without the consent of the board. The language committee was asked to formulate an opinion, it is not of the opinion that the current situation is good. We proposed that this wiki would be reopened and that discussions would start on how the Moldovan and the Romanian Wikipedia can work together. An essential part of the time frame that will exist before this merger is that any vandalism will result in a ban for all the projects that such a person is involved in.
It is particularly the vandalism that made the huha around the Moldovan Wikipedia so unpalatable.
Thanks, GerardM
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hello,
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Andre Engels schreef:
On the Moldavian Wikipedia it says for over a month "This wiki has been closed for now." Is there any outlook on whether 'for now' means 'for ever' or that it will be re-opened at some time? I am asking because I want to know what to do with the interwiki for the bot. If the wiki is closed down for good, I intend to remove them silently; if it will be opened up again some time soon, I want to keep them in the same way as to 'normal' Wikipedias.
Hoi, The closure was done without the consent of the board. The language
I think that part of the problem is that the mess exists *because* the power-to-be (board, language committee, whatever...) let the situation deteriorates untill it got unmanageable. I hope that we will learn from this.
committee was asked to formulate an opinion, it is not of the opinion that the current situation is good. We proposed that this wiki would be reopened and that discussions would start on how the Moldovan and the Romanian Wikipedia can work together. An essential part of the time frame that will exist before this merger is that any vandalism will result in a ban for all the projects that such a person is involved in.
It is particularly the vandalism that made the huha around the Moldovan Wikipedia so unpalatable.
An agreement has to be found *before* the project to re-open. Some procedures, some admins / bureaucrats (I would suggest at least two native speakers, one using Latin script and one using Cyrillic script) and a mediation committee are needed before reopening.
I don't want to play Wikipedia task force again on a working project.
Thanks, GerardM
Regards,
Yann
I agree with Yann, simply reopening this encyclopedia until an agreement or a final decision is made will only bring back the chronic problems that haunted the project in the past (i.e. vandalism, trolling). Furthermore, I believe that the political question has to be removed from the discussion regarding practical considerations. What I mean is that unless sufficient support is garnered for the project, discussions regarding whether how to implement the new system are premature. I believe that this was the problem with the initial launch of the Mo project, there was too little constructive support in the beginning, and that as a result the portal served only as an arena for trolls. Therefore, I believe that this time it might be best to keep the projected isolated for some time (in the incubator perhaps) until there will be proof of enough support to demonstrate the potential for growth of the encyclopedia (i.e. more than one user).
Yann Forget yann@forget-me.net wrote: Hello,
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Andre Engels schreef:
On the Moldavian Wikipedia it says for over a month "This wiki has been closed for now." Is there any outlook on whether 'for now' means 'for ever' or that it will be re-opened at some time? I am asking because I want to know what to do with the interwiki for the bot. If the wiki is closed down for good, I intend to remove them silently; if it will be opened up again some time soon, I want to keep them in the same way as to 'normal' Wikipedias.
Hoi, The closure was done without the consent of the board. The language
I think that part of the problem is that the mess exists *because* the power-to-be (board, language committee, whatever...) let the situation deteriorates untill it got unmanageable. I hope that we will learn from this.
committee was asked to formulate an opinion, it is not of the opinion that the current situation is good. We proposed that this wiki would be reopened and that discussions would start on how the Moldovan and the Romanian Wikipedia can work together. An essential part of the time frame that will exist before this merger is that any vandalism will result in a ban for all the projects that such a person is involved in.
It is particularly the vandalism that made the huha around the Moldovan Wikipedia so unpalatable.
An agreement has to be found *before* the project to re-open. Some procedures, some admins / bureaucrats (I would suggest at least two native speakers, one using Latin script and one using Cyrillic script) and a mediation committee are needed before reopening.
I don't want to play Wikipedia task force again on a working project.
Thanks, GerardM
Regards,
Yann
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
Thursday, February 1, 2007, 12:49:01 AM, David wrote:
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but that nobody wants to use it anymore. It was used before 1989 in Moldova, but since, they switched back to Latin, so they're contributing to Romanian Wikipedia.
A small part of Moldova declared its independence and with the help of the Russian Army, they have a non-recognized government. A part of the schools in this region still use the same textbooks printed 20 years ago, in Cyrillic alphabet.
This usage is imposed by the region's government (whos human rights record is quite bad) and nobody wants to use the alphabet, there or elsewhere. An interesting fact on this is that there were *no* books or newspapers published in the last 15 years using this alphabet.
The international press usually ignored this subject from this corner of the earth, with just a few exceptions:
http://www.liberation.fr/actualite/monde/230766.FR.php?rss=true http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3936991.stm
I have yet to meet a Moldovan who wants to use Cyrillic alphabet in Wikipedia -- the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians and other panslavists.
As, such, with no actual native speaker, the Moldovan Wikipedia lived exclusively out of transliterations from Romanian Wikipedia.
Hi!
Once this thing will be aver I kind of think that we all miss the MO/RO flame wars... We will tell children about it in cold winter evenings, when they will ask us "Hey grandad, what was a wiki like?" jumping out of their favourite porn hologram player to make silly questions to us "the elder". :)))))))))))))))
Then our eyes will look somewhere in the distance and we will say "I've seen things you guys cannot even imagine. I've seen rumenian legions storming the mailing lists, I've seen the moldovian clone resisting behind its glagolitic barricades, fluctuating on the verge of alphabetic extinction...". It all will be SOOO romantic :))))))))))))))))
============================ Bogdan (but names mean nothing here, as MO-RO players are wondefully interchangeable) wrote:
The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but that nobody wants to use it anymore.
So what? Do you know many people wishing to speak latin? The question was about it "being EXACTLY a cyrillic transcritp for rumenian or not". Try and answer that, instead of serving us the n-th number of your "Pravda". Say YES/NO/A % VALUE and pleeeeease DO explain why you say so.
the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians and other panslavists.
Yeap! And those who oppose it are mainly pan-rumenians :)))) Never heard of an pan-eskimo giving a damn about this subject LOLOLOL. BTW, FMI shouldn't people who don't care about you be called pan-NO-nians? :)))))))) ===========================
Yeah... I will miss you guys. I used to hate you all, from both sides, but now that you are going to be terminated for good... I'd say this place will loose some of its individuality once you're gone. Like Paris with the River Seine turned into an awful although much needed parking lot...
A question to the pan-NO-nian community: what about adopting an interwiki MO-RO day, during which all wikipedians from all editions will be requested to hold ceremonial mock flamewars on this subject? :))))))) Think about it. Having common roots means a lot to community building :) A MO-RO carnival day? :)))))))))))))))
Hmm... Bogdan and others, is there any way in which people belonging to the RO tribe should dress up? MO people will have Stalin's moustache, a Red Army cap on their heads, eat pork fat as native ukrainians and will speak a funny fake-rumenian ending all words in -SKI (Bogdanuski, Romaniaski, Moldovoski, Steauaska, Bucurestska, etc), this is 100% clear. But what about YOUR political tribe? Please do enlight us, 'cause I'd hate to look unproper in my RO costume :)))))
Really, I know it's ridicolous, but I'll miss this political crap :)))) The funny thing about eastern europe is that nobody gives a damn about this rubbish. People care about money, sex and big cars, that's it. Nationalism is something that drunk young lads with no women may mention, but no more than that. Yet those 5 perverted anomalies who do care about nationalism will ALWAYS make it to our medias. As if the country was nothing but crazy extremists, ethnic trouble, criminals and/or exported prostitutes.
Pls, read about Eastern Europe in Wikipedia. Even better, come and see it with your own eyes. It's wonderful people, with a wonderful history, culture and fantastic places, and as soon as you'll see the real thing you'll find out that the actual number of MO-ROs is so small that it's not even worth mentioning them. This much I owe to the normal people of all involved countries.
And nevertheless... DO adopt the MO-RO interwiki carnaval day. :))))))) Otherwise I'll organize a campaign to bury under millions of protest emails the Board, the whole set of romanians and moldavians wikipedians, and YOU and your girl/boyfriend as individuals :)))))))))))
Your sincerely, 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
On 2/1/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra@ukr.net > wrote:
Hi!
Once this thing will be aver I kind of think that we all miss the MO/RO flame wars... We will tell children about it in cold winter evenings, when they will ask us "Hey grandad, what was a wiki like?" jumping out of their
favourite porn hologram player to make silly questions to us "the elder". :)))))))))))))))
Then our eyes will look somewhere in the distance and we will say "I've seen things you guys cannot even imagine. I've seen rumenian legions storming the mailing lists, I've seen the moldovian clone resisting behind its glagolitic barricades, fluctuating on the verge of alphabetic extinction...". It all will be SOOO romantic :))))))))))))))))
============================ Bogdan (but names mean nothing here, as MO-RO players are wondefully interchangeable) wrote:
The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but that nobody wants to use it anymore.
So what? Do you know many people wishing to speak latin? The question was about it "being EXACTLY a cyrillic transcritp for rumenian or not". Try and answer that, instead of serving us the n-th number of your "Pravda". Say YES/NO/A % VALUE and pleeeeease DO explain why you say so.
the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians and other panslavists.
Yeap! And those who oppose it are mainly pan-rumenians :)))) Never heard of an pan-eskimo giving a damn about this subject LOLOLOL. BTW, FMI shouldn't people who don't care about you be called pan-NO-nians? :)))))))) ===========================
Yeah... I will miss you guys. I used to hate you all, from both sides, but
now that you are going to be terminated for good... I'd say this place will loose some of its individuality once you're gone. Like Paris with the River Seine turned into an awful although much needed parking lot...
A question to the pan-NO-nian community: what about adopting an interwiki MO-RO day, during which all wikipedians from all editions will be requested to hold ceremonial mock flamewars on this subject? :))))))) Think about it. Having common roots means a lot to community building :) A MO-RO carnival day? :)))))))))))))))
Hmm... Bogdan and others, is there any way in which people belonging to the RO tribe should dress up? MO people will have Stalin's moustache, a Red Army cap on their heads, eat pork fat as native ukrainians and will speak a funny fake-rumenian ending all words in -SKI (Bogdanuski, Romaniaski, Moldovoski, Steauaska, Bucurestska, etc), this is 100% clear. But what about YOUR political tribe? Please do enlight us, 'cause I'd hate to look unproper in my RO costume :)))))
Really, I know it's ridicolous
It is; your message I mean. Ridiculously stupid. Something similar to another fine piece of art, written by Ronald Chmara on the "[Wikipedia-l] Harassment on wikipedia" thread.
, but I'll miss this political crap :)))) The
funny thing about eastern europe is that nobody gives a damn about this rubbish. People care about money, sex and big cars, that's it.
Who are you to judge on this matter?
Nationalism
is something that drunk young lads with no women may mention, but no more than that. Yet those 5 perverted anomalies who do care about nationalism will ALWAYS make it to our medias. As if the country was nothing but crazy
extremists, ethnic trouble, criminals and/or exported prostitutes.
Pls, read about Eastern Europe in Wikipedia. Even better, come and see it with your own eyes. It's wonderful people, with a wonderful history, culture and fantastic places, and as soon as you'll see the real thing you'll find out that the actual number of MO-ROs is so small that it's not even worth mentioning them. This much I owe to the normal people of all involved countries.
And nevertheless... DO adopt the MO-RO interwiki carnaval day. :))))))) Otherwise I'll organize a campaign to bury under millions of protest emails the Board, the whole set of romanians and moldavians wikipedians, and YOU and your girl/boyfriend as individuals :)))))))))))
Your sincerely, 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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
Mark
On 01/02/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/1/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra@ukr.net > wrote:
Hi!
Once this thing will be aver I kind of think that we all miss the MO/RO flame wars... We will tell children about it in cold winter evenings, when they will ask us "Hey grandad, what was a wiki like?" jumping out of their
favourite porn hologram player to make silly questions to us "the elder". :)))))))))))))))
Then our eyes will look somewhere in the distance and we will say "I've seen things you guys cannot even imagine. I've seen rumenian legions storming the mailing lists, I've seen the moldovian clone resisting behind its glagolitic barricades, fluctuating on the verge of alphabetic extinction...". It all will be SOOO romantic :))))))))))))))))
============================ Bogdan (but names mean nothing here, as MO-RO players are wondefully interchangeable) wrote:
The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but that nobody wants to use it anymore.
So what? Do you know many people wishing to speak latin? The question was about it "being EXACTLY a cyrillic transcritp for rumenian or not". Try and answer that, instead of serving us the n-th number of your "Pravda". Say YES/NO/A % VALUE and pleeeeease DO explain why you say so.
the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians and other panslavists.
Yeap! And those who oppose it are mainly pan-rumenians :)))) Never heard of an pan-eskimo giving a damn about this subject LOLOLOL. BTW, FMI shouldn't people who don't care about you be called pan-NO-nians? :)))))))) ===========================
Yeah... I will miss you guys. I used to hate you all, from both sides, but
now that you are going to be terminated for good... I'd say this place will loose some of its individuality once you're gone. Like Paris with the River Seine turned into an awful although much needed parking lot...
A question to the pan-NO-nian community: what about adopting an interwiki MO-RO day, during which all wikipedians from all editions will be requested to hold ceremonial mock flamewars on this subject? :))))))) Think about it. Having common roots means a lot to community building :) A MO-RO carnival day? :)))))))))))))))
Hmm... Bogdan and others, is there any way in which people belonging to the RO tribe should dress up? MO people will have Stalin's moustache, a Red Army cap on their heads, eat pork fat as native ukrainians and will speak a funny fake-rumenian ending all words in -SKI (Bogdanuski, Romaniaski, Moldovoski, Steauaska, Bucurestska, etc), this is 100% clear. But what about YOUR political tribe? Please do enlight us, 'cause I'd hate to look unproper in my RO costume :)))))
Really, I know it's ridicolous
It is; your message I mean. Ridiculously stupid. Something similar to another fine piece of art, written by Ronald Chmara on the "[Wikipedia-l] Harassment on wikipedia" thread.
, but I'll miss this political crap :)))) The
funny thing about eastern europe is that nobody gives a damn about this rubbish. People care about money, sex and big cars, that's it.
Who are you to judge on this matter?
Nationalism
is something that drunk young lads with no women may mention, but no more than that. Yet those 5 perverted anomalies who do care about nationalism will ALWAYS make it to our medias. As if the country was nothing but crazy
extremists, ethnic trouble, criminals and/or exported prostitutes.
Pls, read about Eastern Europe in Wikipedia. Even better, come and see it with your own eyes. It's wonderful people, with a wonderful history, culture and fantastic places, and as soon as you'll see the real thing you'll find out that the actual number of MO-ROs is so small that it's not even worth mentioning them. This much I owe to the normal people of all involved countries.
And nevertheless... DO adopt the MO-RO interwiki carnaval day. :))))))) Otherwise I'll organize a campaign to bury under millions of protest emails the Board, the whole set of romanians and moldavians wikipedians, and YOU and your girl/boyfriend as individuals :)))))))))))
Your sincerely, 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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 2/1/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you want. Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he came in there.
Liviu Andronic schreef:
On 2/1/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you want. Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he came in there.
Hoi, Would you not agree that because Berto lives in "your" country, a country where you do not live, is in a better position to observe. Would you not agree that as he chooses to live there he may know the people, the country, the region and love them as well? Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
The fact that I do not live in "my" country does not mean that I do not live with its realities. I'm concerned with these as much as anyone living in there, as they touch my parents, family and friends - people dear to me. As better a position he may be in for day-to-day observations, I'm quite suited for periodical ones. Which may not necessarily be "worse", especially when backed by previous, relatively recent, day-to-day ones. As for his feelings - he would most definitely have some. Positive or negative. In either case, he has no right to speak so easily over an issue deemed serious and important by a group of people. Even under the widely accepted freedom of speech right.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/4/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Liviu Andronic schreef:
On 2/1/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you
want.
Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he
came
in there.
Hoi, Would you not agree that because Berto lives in "your" country, a country where you do not live, is in a better position to observe. Would you not agree that as he chooses to live there he may know the people, the country, the region and love them as well? Thanks, GerardM
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
I have said it before and I will say it again: you live in France.
Mark
On 03/02/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
The fact that I do not live in "my" country does not mean that I do not live with its realities. I'm concerned with these as much as anyone living in there, as they touch my parents, family and friends - people dear to me. As better a position he may be in for day-to-day observations, I'm quite suited for periodical ones. Which may not necessarily be "worse", especially when backed by previous, relatively recent, day-to-day ones. As for his feelings
- he would most definitely have some. Positive or negative. In either case,
he has no right to speak so easily over an issue deemed serious and important by a group of people. Even under the widely accepted freedom of speech right.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/4/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Liviu Andronic schreef:
On 2/1/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you
want.
Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he
came
in there.
Hoi, Would you not agree that because Berto lives in "your" country, a country where you do not live, is in a better position to observe. Would you not agree that as he chooses to live there he may know the people, the country, the region and love them as well? Thanks, GerardM
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 2/4/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I have said it before and I will say it again: you live in France.
You're welcome to say it as long as you wish.
Mark
On 03/02/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
The fact that I do not live in "my" country does not mean that I do not
live
with its realities. I'm concerned with these as much as anyone living in there, as they touch my parents, family and friends - people dear to me.
As
better a position he may be in for day-to-day observations, I'm quite
suited
for periodical ones. Which may not necessarily be "worse", especially
when
backed by previous, relatively recent, day-to-day ones. As for his
feelings
- he would most definitely have some. Positive or negative. In either
case,
he has no right to speak so easily over an issue deemed serious and important by a group of people. Even under the widely accepted freedom
of
speech right.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/4/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Liviu Andronic schreef:
On 2/1/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you
want.
Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he -
he
came
in there.
Hoi, Would you not agree that because Berto lives in "your" country, a country where you do not live, is in a better position to observe.
Would
you not agree that as he chooses to live there he may know the people, the country, the region and love them as well? Thanks, GerardM
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ 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
Hi
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you want. Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he came in there.
No, I did not. I live in Kiev, not in Romania. Anyway, there is but one problem in what you say: you keep confusing a language with a country. And from WMF's POV they are 2 different things. Here it's WMF, it's WMF laws working, not your own or the Romanian laws.
WMF will never tell Romania how its street signs should look like, Romania cannot tell WMF how a wiki page should look like. Failure to understand this is... the soviet encyclopedia. A place where, instead of being a SUBJECT for classification, politics become the SOURCE of classification. It's fascism in its purest form (whether red or black fascism it's absolutely irrelevant).
You may not like this, okay, that's your right. Then download the software it takes and make yourself an independent wiki. Because here pillars are pillars and they cannot be discussed. Over.
I sometimes hate these pillars myself. That's why Wikipedia is not a monopolist to my spare time and yes I do start my own projects. I have my own stupid personality and I love to show it (as anyone else). Even in the most extreme fashion. Fantastic, that's what forums are for, for example. Go find yourself one and have fun. And when you are here either be a wikipedian, or quit coming here at all.
It's called context (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context), I add a link in case you have doubts on the meaning. The usual problem with dictatorships and fundamentalism is that they do no understand what context is. They cannot adapt, they are absolute in their essence. There's no such a thing as a private space to them. EVERYTHING on earth must either be their way or vanish. Ok, you are free to love that, yet the fact that one may love Securitate does not make Securitate's ways acceptable to wikipedia.
WMF is WMF, you are yourself, it always was and it always shall be two different things. Learn to live with this, as we all did.
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 Liviu Andronic Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 3:32 AM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Conspicuous only in its absence (was Moldavian)
On 2/1/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue@gmail.com > wrote:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.
On 2/4/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra@ukr.net > wrote:
Hi
Hello
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you want.
Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he
came
in there.
No, I did not. I live in Kiev, not in Romania. Anyway, there is but one problem in what you say: you keep confusing a language with a country.
I don't. I understood quite well that you were in Ukraine. In previous posts on this thread, it was "that" country we - Gerard and I - were talking about. A bit vague a notion,
something between country and region.
And
from WMF's POV they are 2 different things.
I am aware of this.
Here it's WMF, it's WMF laws
working, not your own or the Romanian laws.
I never intended to apply or impose any laws to WMF. I'm playing by its own.
WMF will never tell Romania how its street signs should look like, Romania
cannot tell WMF how a wiki page should look like.
Romania doesn't. Romanians do. And more important, perhaps, Moldovans do.
Failure to understand this
is... the soviet encyclopedia. A place where, instead of being a SUBJECT for classification, politics become the SOURCE of classification. It's fascism in its purest form (whether red or black fascism it's absolutely irrelevant).
You may not like this, okay, that's your right. Then download the software it takes and make yourself an independent wiki. Because here pillars are pillars and they cannot be discussed. Over.
I do not discuss Wikipedia's pillars. I am quite OK with the committees stance that decisions concerning linguistics are to be independent of political decisions (or reality).
I sometimes hate these pillars myself. That's why Wikipedia is not a
monopolist to my spare time and yes I do start my own projects. I have my own stupid personality and I love to show it (as anyone else). Even in the
most extreme fashion. Fantastic, that's what forums are for, for example. Go find yourself one and have fun.
Do you really think that it is for fun that I am doing all this? Explaining the realities of Moldova, advocating for the closing of this Moldovan Wikipedia, voting for it, getting involved in endless and often fruitless or senseless debates? Do you consider that I'm enjoying all this?
And when you are here either be a
wikipedian, or quit coming here at all.
I don't see how my doing all this has anything to do with my being a Wikipedian. As a Wikipedian, I contribute to the English and French Wikipedias, mainly. Expressing by convictions on the Wikipedia-l mailing list does not take way this from me.
It's called context (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context), I add a link in
case you have doubts on the meaning. The usual problem with dictatorships and fundamentalism is that they do no understand what context is. They cannot adapt, they are absolute in their essence. There's no such a thing as a private space to them. EVERYTHING on earth must either be their way or vanish. Ok, you are free to love that
What makes you think that I accept that, or - more interesting - love that? Are my arguments in a "my way or the highway" style? I would be OK with the situation, if a conversion script were installed on the Romanian Wikipedia,
or if mo domain got renamed to something less confusing like mo-cyr (I understand that this one is hardly implementable). But WMF doesn't seem to intend any such compromise steps.
And if it is context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context we are talking about, I believe that the WMF fails to realize certain circumstances surrounding the Moldovan language. And the following is addressed to the Language Committee, mainly.
First of all, how come does the WMF still consider Moldovan.. a language? A separate, independent language? At best, it is a dialect of the Romanian language; at worst - a script used for writing the same Romanian language. It was deemed as a language by the Soviet authorities, from political considerations, for political purposes, through a political decision and with the help of a customized scripthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet_created_ in the 1930s (different from the original script http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Cyrillic_alphabet used for writing the Romanian language). And currently there is onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasile_Statiscientist supporting this POV, which happens - by the mere existance of the Moldovan Wikipedia - to be WMF's POV.
In other words, the WMF simply takes over a Soviet time political decision. On this point, I find the wordshttp://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User_talk:Robert_Horning#A_technical_questionof Robert Horning http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Roberth particularly relevant: "the mere act of creating this language version of Wikipedia is making a political statement that the WMF should stay out of and away from. I don't know how you can create a NPOV Wikipedia in a language whose very existance is expressing a political point of view."
So, why does this Moldovan Wikipedia exist? As far as I am aware of the WMF policies, WMF does not create wikipedias for dialects or scripts. Nor does it create these from political considerations. Which - unintendedly - is the case here.
What I am doing here is trying to persuade the WMF decision makers that it is not sensible http://www.wordreference.com/definition/sensible for the WMF to tolerate the existance of this Wikipedia. It is not reasonable to keep a Wikipedia based on a "language" that is a political emanation. It is not reasonable to keep a language version Wikipedia whose natives are against it. It is not reasonable to expect much future of this Wikipedia, if contributions are made by one authentic Moldovanhttp://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilizator:Node_ue supporting it, Mark Williamson. One argument to which I cannot retort much is that this writing is still in use (at a limited scale). However, the usage of a writing script is not a viable argument for dedicating an entire Wikipedia to it.
These are my arguments.
, yet the fact that one may love
Securitate does not make Securitate's ways acceptable to wikipedia.
WMF is WMF, you are yourself, it always was and it always shall be two different things.
I don't confuse this either.
Liviu
Learn to live with this, as we all did.
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
Hoi, Appreciate that Romanian and Montenegrin are understood as the names for linguistic entities. In your reply you relate to people. You forget to name the people living in Transnistria. Thanks, Gerard
On 2/12/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/4/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra@ukr.net > wrote:
Hi
Hello
This is the point. It is my language, my country, my region - if you
want.
Some things that are important to me. I come from there. While he - he
came
in there.
No, I did not. I live in Kiev, not in Romania. Anyway, there is but one problem in what you say: you keep confusing a language with a country.
I don't. I understood quite well that you were in Ukraine. In previous posts on this thread, it was "that" country we - Gerard and I - were talking about. A bit vague a notion,
something between country and region.
And
from WMF's POV they are 2 different things.
I am aware of this.
Here it's WMF, it's WMF laws
working, not your own or the Romanian laws.
I never intended to apply or impose any laws to WMF. I'm playing by its own.
WMF will never tell Romania how its street signs should look like, Romania
cannot tell WMF how a wiki page should look like.
Romania doesn't. Romanians do. And more important, perhaps, Moldovans do.
Failure to understand this
is... the soviet encyclopedia. A place where, instead of being a SUBJECT for classification, politics become the SOURCE of classification. It's
fascism
in its purest form (whether red or black fascism it's absolutely irrelevant).
You may not like this, okay, that's your right. Then download the
software
it takes and make yourself an independent wiki. Because here pillars are pillars and they cannot be discussed. Over.
I do not discuss Wikipedia's pillars. I am quite OK with the committees stance that decisions concerning linguistics are to be independent of political decisions (or reality).
I sometimes hate these pillars myself. That's why Wikipedia is not a
monopolist to my spare time and yes I do start my own projects. I have
my
own stupid personality and I love to show it (as anyone else). Even in
the
most extreme fashion. Fantastic, that's what forums are for, for
example.
Go find yourself one and have fun.
Do you really think that it is for fun that I am doing all this? Explaining the realities of Moldova, advocating for the closing of this Moldovan Wikipedia, voting for it, getting involved in endless and often fruitless or senseless debates? Do you consider that I'm enjoying all this?
And when you are here either be a
wikipedian, or quit coming here at all.
I don't see how my doing all this has anything to do with my being a Wikipedian. As a Wikipedian, I contribute to the English and French Wikipedias, mainly. Expressing by convictions on the Wikipedia-l mailing list does not take way this from me.
It's called context (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context), I add a link in
case you have doubts on the meaning. The usual problem with
dictatorships
and fundamentalism is that they do no understand what context is. They cannot adapt, they are absolute in their essence. There's no such a
thing
as a private space to them. EVERYTHING on earth must either be their way or vanish. Ok, you are free to love that
What makes you think that I accept that, or - more interesting - love that? Are my arguments in a "my way or the highway" style? I would be OK with the situation, if a conversion script were installed on the Romanian Wikipedia,
or if mo domain got renamed to something less confusing like mo-cyr (I understand that this one is hardly implementable). But WMF doesn't seem to intend any such compromise steps.
And if it is context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context we are talking about, I believe that the WMF fails to realize certain circumstances surrounding the Moldovan language. And the following is addressed to the Language Committee, mainly.
First of all, how come does the WMF still consider Moldovan.. a language? A separate, independent language? At best, it is a dialect of the Romanian language; at worst - a script used for writing the same Romanian language. It was deemed as a language by the Soviet authorities, from political considerations, for political purposes, through a political decision and with the help of a customized scripthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet_created_ in the 1930s (different from the original script http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Cyrillic_alphabet used for writing the Romanian language). And currently there is onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasile_Statiscientist supporting this POV, which happens - by the mere existance of the Moldovan Wikipedia - to be WMF's POV.
In other words, the WMF simply takes over a Soviet time political decision. On this point, I find the words< http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User_talk:Robert_Horning#A_technical_question
of
Robert Horning http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Roberth particularly relevant: "the mere act of creating this language version of Wikipedia is making a political statement that the WMF should stay out of and away from. I don't know how you can create a NPOV Wikipedia in a language whose very existance is expressing a political point of view."
So, why does this Moldovan Wikipedia exist? As far as I am aware of the WMF policies, WMF does not create wikipedias for dialects or scripts. Nor does it create these from political considerations. Which - unintendedly - is the case here.
What I am doing here is trying to persuade the WMF decision makers that it is not sensible http://www.wordreference.com/definition/sensible for the WMF to tolerate the existance of this Wikipedia. It is not reasonable to keep a Wikipedia based on a "language" that is a political emanation. It is not reasonable to keep a language version Wikipedia whose natives are against it. It is not reasonable to expect much future of this Wikipedia, if contributions are made by one authentic Moldovanhttp://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilizator:Node_ue supporting it, Mark Williamson. One argument to which I cannot retort much is that this writing is still in use (at a limited scale). However, the usage of a writing script is not a viable argument for dedicating an entire Wikipedia to it.
These are my arguments.
, yet the fact that one may love
Securitate does not make Securitate's ways acceptable to wikipedia.
WMF is WMF, you are yourself, it always was and it always shall be two different things.
I don't confuse this either.
Liviu
Learn to live with this, as we all did.
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
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hello,
[I will assume that in your previous post it was Moldovan that you mentioned, and not Montenegrin.]
Romanian, yes. But Moldovan - a linguistic entity? It depends on what you mean by "linguistic entity". If it is "language" that you mean, this is more than disputable http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language (as mentioned earlier, one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasile_Statilinguist supports this thesis). Current content on the Moldovan Wikipedia (for examplehttp://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8F%D1%81%D0%BA%D1%8D) cannot qualify as belonging to a Moldovan language. It is _not_ the Moldovan dialect written in Cyrillic. It is standard Romanian written in Cyrillic(with stylistic faults, in the previous example). How can the Language Committee consider standard Romanian written in Cyrillic as a separate, distinct linguistic entity? This content might qualify as belonging to a Moldovan language, but this is a pure Soviet times POV taken directly from the Central Committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Committee. And I don't think the WMF would agree accepting such a stance.
What concerns the people.. The people living in Transnistria now and Moldovans before share the same "Moldovan language" (probably with certain differences during years, due to political changes). This is irrelevant to my arguments concerning the linguistic aspects of the issue.
WMF will never tell Romania how its street signs should look like, Romania cannot tell WMF how a wiki page should look like.
Romania doesn't. Romanians do. And more important, perhaps, Moldovans do.
If you pointed out this remark, I most definitely hope that someone from Transnistria speak up on the Wikipedia mailing-list in some near future.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/12/07, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Appreciate that Romanian and Montenegrin are understood as the names for linguistic entities. In your reply you relate to people. You forget to name the people living in Transnistria. Thanks, Gerard
Hi!
If it is "language" that you mean
FYI, the upcoming ISO 639 standard has totally abandoned your terminology. There are NOT anymore languages and dialects, all that we have is "Linguistic entities". (thank God, just think of the millions of hours people like you spent on edit wars to decide whether code X was actually a dialet, a language, a local variant of a dialect that needed to be regarded as a language, etc etc etc...).
The industry says *linguistic entity*, so that's what we all have to manage. Languages and dialects are dead. What we have is linguistic carriers that we use to deliver information. What we have is "human bandwidth". How these carriers maybe (or may not) related to anybody's flag/passport/religion/sexual inclinations/etc is none of our business.
We want to deliver a service and we will deliver it in all possible linguistic entities. Full stop.
I would be OK with the situation, if a conversion script were installed on the Romanian Wikipedia,
That's good news. Because this might really happen, if you guys stop making this all thing look as an international terrorist act against the sacred Romanian Flag and simply start to be constructive. You mean that RO.wiki would accept having on ALL of its pages a link saying "this page in cyrillic", or something like that? That's interesting, and no, on this paragraph I'm absolutely not joking. Never been this serious in my life.
Now do me a favour, will you tell me how we can verify that the ro.wiki admin structure will respect users and content coming from the cyr interface? It's no provocation, it's a serious question, and I want a VERY serious answer.
Pls no dramas, tears, emotions, etc. Let's talk business. I live in the east myself and I can give all this drama a proper weight. Sit down, show your money and be concrete. All sorts of lyric rubbish are nice for tourists, but here we have a real problem and need a real solution, okay?
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
Hello
[..] but here we have a real problem and need a real solution, okay?
Now that's good. This is definitively a more constructive approach than organizing carnivals.
If it is "language" that you mean
FYI, the upcoming ISO 639 standard has totally abandoned your terminology. There are NOT anymore languages and dialects, all that we have is "Linguistic entities".
This "linguistic entity" term is still a mystery to me. There is no word about it on Wikipedia and Google doesn't say much (maybe someone has a pertinent link?). So that for the purpose of this email, I'll hold to my old-fashioned terminology.
You mean that RO.wiki would accept having on ALL of its pages a link saying "this page in cyrillic", or something like that?
Before answering this, I hope that the Language Committee agrees on the following two points.
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included). This would be completely stupid and trolls would be the only serious contributors.
Secondly, the "Moldovan language" in its standard form is standard Romanian. You might look herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language#Controversy, herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_reliable_sources_say_about_Moldovan_Languageand herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_decision_makers_need_to_knowfor more information. "Even the loudest defender of the Moldovan language concept, Vasile Stati, has agreedhttp://www.vremea.net/news/2005-01-13/18:45:35.htmlthat Moldovan and Romanian are identical in their literary forms".
With these two points cleared out, the situation becomes less confusing. As said in my previous email, the current content on the Moldovan Wikipedia is standard Romanian written in Cyrillic, Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet (of course with stylistic and grammar faults, and bad transliterations). It is not reasonable to dedicate an entire Wikipedia section to this content, when the Romanian Wikipedia exists.
The best solution would probably be installing a conversion script over the Romanian Wikipedia with, as Berto mentioned, a link on all pages "in Moldovan alphabet" or something similar (special attention should be paid to the name of this link, as there has to be a contrast between the Moldovan alphabet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet and the Romanian Cyrillic alphabet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Cyrillic_alphabet; on a side note: personally, I would like a lot if a conversion script of Latin Romanian to Cyrillic Romanian were also created, but technically this would be more than a challenge).
The good news is that there already is a partially functional conversion script http://mcworld.org/McChirilic/?pagina=Limba_moldoveneasc%25C4%2583(you may change "Limba_moldovenească" to any relevant article on ro.wiki). To my knowledge, it was created by Bogdan Giuscahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bogdangiusca, and as he says himself, "It's not yet perfect, but it can be improved". And it definitely needs improvements. It might get implemented in the way it is on the Serbian Wikipediahttp://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-ec/%D0%91%D1%83%D0%BA%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%88%D1%82, with Latin being the storage content and Cyrillic conversion performed on demand by clicking the link. Two reasons: nowadays Latin is, somewhat, the "standard" for the Romanian language and you've already seen how many people are willing to contribute in Cyrillic. Taking into consideration that the main objective here is for people still using this script to be able to access content in Cyrillic, this is acceptable.
Now, I do not say that the Romanian Wikipedia would accept this. It is, however, a reasonable solution to this controversial issue. Romanian was historically written in three different scripts, so it would be logical to have *one* Wikipedia section dealing with all the three writing systems. I do not know the position of the Romanian Wikipedia admins, but I would suppose that they'd need to be persuaded in a similar way that I am trying to persuade the Language Committee. In any case, it would be better if someone more familiar with the Romanian Wikipedia shed more light on this point.
Now do me a favour, will you tell me how we can verify that the ro.wiki admin structure will respect users and content coming from the cyr interface? It's no provocation, it's a serious question, and I want a VERY
serious answer.
I seriously doubt that such problems arise. Romanian speaking persons from Moldova are contributing to the Romanian Wikipedia for some time, already. And, to this day, I've never heard of flag-based conflicts. As long as content added is in line with NPOV and the rest of Wikipedia's principles, there should be no persecution. There is no hatred between Moldovans and Romanians. Frictions, yes. Maybe a bit of disrespect, randomly. But no hatred. From personal experience, I would say that Romanians are generally more friendly-intentioned towards Moldovans than the vice-verse. And they don't really care if you come from Transnistria or not. In the sense that in their eyes, Moldovans coming from the East of the Pruth river are their Romanian brothers.
However, if you want to set some system of control (and there should be one, for the beginning at least), there'd be two ways. Either name one-two Moldovan nationals as Romanian Wikipedia admins (according to the rules, of course, that I personally am not familiar with) that would be empowered to intervene into relevant conflicts. Or simply - and probably better - empower some existing respectable Romanian Wikipedia admins, that - in case conflicts arise - will not act based on flag, but with respect to neutrality and a given situation. Furthermore, upon account creation, users could get informed on the admins dealing with different abuse problems.
Regards, Liviu
I'm not sure how naming random Moldovan nationals as admins would help with the script issue.
What is needed here is input from bona-fide Transnistrians, or at lthe very least from Moldovans who prefer Cyrillic. Given the circumstances, I'm not sure which is more likely -- foreign internet websites aren't widely visited in Transnistria, on the other hand preference for Cyrillic in Moldova proper is limited to middle-aged rural farmers and others who are unlikely to have internet access.
Mark
On 15/02/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
[..] but here we have a real problem and need a real solution, okay?
Now that's good. This is definitively a more constructive approach than organizing carnivals.
If it is "language" that you mean
FYI, the upcoming ISO 639 standard has totally abandoned your terminology. There are NOT anymore languages and dialects, all that we have is "Linguistic entities".
This "linguistic entity" term is still a mystery to me. There is no word about it on Wikipedia and Google doesn't say much (maybe someone has a pertinent link?). So that for the purpose of this email, I'll hold to my old-fashioned terminology.
You mean that RO.wiki would accept having on ALL of its pages a link saying "this page in cyrillic", or something like that?
Before answering this, I hope that the Language Committee agrees on the following two points.
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included). This would be completely stupid and trolls would be the only serious contributors.
Secondly, the "Moldovan language" in its standard form is standard Romanian. You might look herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language#Controversy, herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_reliable_sources_say_about_Moldovan_Languageand herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_decision_makers_need_to_knowfor more information. "Even the loudest defender of the Moldovan language concept, Vasile Stati, has agreedhttp://www.vremea.net/news/2005-01-13/18:45:35.htmlthat Moldovan and Romanian are identical in their literary forms".
With these two points cleared out, the situation becomes less confusing. As said in my previous email, the current content on the Moldovan Wikipedia is standard Romanian written in Cyrillic, Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet (of course with stylistic and grammar faults, and bad transliterations). It is not reasonable to dedicate an entire Wikipedia section to this content, when the Romanian Wikipedia exists.
The best solution would probably be installing a conversion script over the Romanian Wikipedia with, as Berto mentioned, a link on all pages "in Moldovan alphabet" or something similar (special attention should be paid to the name of this link, as there has to be a contrast between the Moldovan alphabet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet and the Romanian Cyrillic alphabet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Cyrillic_alphabet; on a side note: personally, I would like a lot if a conversion script of Latin Romanian to Cyrillic Romanian were also created, but technically this would be more than a challenge).
The good news is that there already is a partially functional conversion script http://mcworld.org/McChirilic/?pagina=Limba_moldoveneasc%25C4%2583(you may change "Limba_moldovenească" to any relevant article on ro.wiki). To my knowledge, it was created by Bogdan Giuscahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bogdangiusca, and as he says himself, "It's not yet perfect, but it can be improved". And it definitely needs improvements. It might get implemented in the way it is on the Serbian Wikipediahttp://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-ec/%D0%91%D1%83%D0%BA%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%88%D1%82, with Latin being the storage content and Cyrillic conversion performed on demand by clicking the link. Two reasons: nowadays Latin is, somewhat, the "standard" for the Romanian language and you've already seen how many people are willing to contribute in Cyrillic. Taking into consideration that the main objective here is for people still using this script to be able to access content in Cyrillic, this is acceptable.
Now, I do not say that the Romanian Wikipedia would accept this. It is, however, a reasonable solution to this controversial issue. Romanian was historically written in three different scripts, so it would be logical to have *one* Wikipedia section dealing with all the three writing systems. I do not know the position of the Romanian Wikipedia admins, but I would suppose that they'd need to be persuaded in a similar way that I am trying to persuade the Language Committee. In any case, it would be better if someone more familiar with the Romanian Wikipedia shed more light on this point.
Now do me a favour, will you tell me how we can verify that the ro.wiki admin structure will respect users and content coming from the cyr interface? It's no provocation, it's a serious question, and I want a VERY
serious answer.
I seriously doubt that such problems arise. Romanian speaking persons from Moldova are contributing to the Romanian Wikipedia for some time, already. And, to this day, I've never heard of flag-based conflicts. As long as content added is in line with NPOV and the rest of Wikipedia's principles, there should be no persecution. There is no hatred between Moldovans and Romanians. Frictions, yes. Maybe a bit of disrespect, randomly. But no hatred. From personal experience, I would say that Romanians are generally more friendly-intentioned towards Moldovans than the vice-verse. And they don't really care if you come from Transnistria or not. In the sense that in their eyes, Moldovans coming from the East of the Pruth river are their Romanian brothers.
However, if you want to set some system of control (and there should be one, for the beginning at least), there'd be two ways. Either name one-two Moldovan nationals as Romanian Wikipedia admins (according to the rules, of course, that I personally am not familiar with) that would be empowered to intervene into relevant conflicts. Or simply - and probably better - empower some existing respectable Romanian Wikipedia admins, that - in case conflicts arise - will not act based on flag, but with respect to neutrality and a given situation. Furthermore, upon account creation, users could get informed on the admins dealing with different abuse problems.
Regards, Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi!
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included).
Right the opposite. ANY encyclopedic content in an ISO recognized entity (thus including the Moldovan Linguistic Entity) is desirable. It's about the planet, not about you and your country, in case you ain't clear with it.
You either cope with linguistic/political/ethnical diversity yourselves or content will have to be hosted elsewhere. So, WHERE are you warranties about democracy and NPOV if and when Moldavian/Transdnistrian content comes in?
I won't read the second part of your email since it's conditional and your first condition is not acceptable. Also, FMI, is your position in anyway an official position from Ro.wiki?
Bèrto ‘d Sèra Personagi dl’ann 2006 për l’arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Hi!
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included).
Right the opposite. ANY encyclopedic content in an ISO recognized entity (thus including the Moldovan Linguistic Entity) is desirable. It's about the planet, not about you and your country, in case you ain't clear with it.
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to split Wikipedias into separate ones for each dialect, as much as possible. Therefore nobody would support splitting the English Wikipedia into American-English and British-English and Australian-English Wikipedias, and similarly a *lot* of effort was put into keeping the Chinese Wikipedia from splitting into Simplified and Traditional Chinese Wikipedias, and efforts to split off a Cantonese Wikipedia have also been consistently opposed.
-Mark
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to split Wikipedias into separate ones for each dialect, as much as possible.
As you say. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. That is, we will try our best to have a self translating system, if that is not possible because of local political extremism we will be left with two chances: 1) impose our will over ro.wiki with pure strength 2) have 2 separate wikies
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 Delirium Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 12:59 AM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Conspicuous only in its absence (was Moldavian)
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Hi!
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included).
Right the opposite. ANY encyclopedic content in an ISO recognized entity
(thus including the Moldovan Linguistic Entity) is desirable. It's about the planet, not about you and your country, in case you ain't clear with it.
Therefore nobody would support splitting the English Wikipedia into American-English and British-English and Australian-English Wikipedias, and similarly a *lot* of effort was put into keeping the Chinese Wikipedia from splitting into Simplified and Traditional Chinese Wikipedias, and efforts to split off a Cantonese Wikipedia have also been consistently opposed.
-Mark
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to split Wikipedias into separate ones for each dialect, as much as possible.
As you say. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. That is, we will try our best to have a self translating system, if that is not possible because of local political extremism we will be left with two chances:
- impose our will over ro.wiki with pure strength
- have 2 separate wikies
I think the case of "local political extremism" is actually the most clear-cut case in which we *must not* have two separate Wikipedias. That is a recipe for a non-neutral encyclopedia, akin to having an encyclopedia for a particular political party, which is contrary to our basic goals.
-Mark
Hi!
I think the case of "local political extremism" is actually the most clear-cut case in which we *must not* have two separate Wikipedias. That is a recipe for a non-neutral encyclopedia, akin to having an encyclopedia for a particular political party, which is contrary to our basic goals.
In principle I can only agree. I'm currently studying a number of eastern European wikies and I hope to publish some first results pretty soon. They are quite scary, indeed.
Anyway, as a matter of fact, we do have but two ways out this: 1) two separate independent and opposed fields 2) brute force (an international "protectorate"?)
As for WMF, principles are principles, too bad we also have facts, of which reality is made. And reality is that WMF hosts: 1) sr.wikipedia.org 2) hr.wikipedia.org 3) sh.wikipedia.org
Which one(s) should be deleted, redirected, enclosed in another, if any?
We are also hosting a be.wiki.org whose graphic conventions are not corresponding to the ISO code it uses (actually there is no ISO code for the version we host, since it's not even the pre-revolutionary graphic convention, and an ad-hoc code should be requested for it), while we keep waiting until forever in the incubator the version in the official graphic convention.
It's lots of interesting things we do, apart from having MO-RO carnivals... What we mostly miss is a policy regarding our pillars. We do have wikies that publish calls to racial hatred and we do absolutely nothing about it. As a result, we have full admin structures taking up a totalitarian control of entire cultures (within wmf). Why? The answer is simple: because we don't care.
All that is interesting to us is whether we are the 6th or the 7th place in the Alexa bar, and how much money Coca Cola will give us for that. So it's no wonder if in the end such embarrassing things happen and never get solved. It's not about single people; this is what is interesting to the community itself, as it becomes evident by analyzing what is DONE, and not just what is said.
It's normal. A wiki reflects the culture writing it. Most westerners do not give a damn about anyone but themselves. And this is the outcome. Can't see why one should be astonished this...
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
Hi again!
for each dialect
I also have to remind you that the use of the expressions "Langiage" and "Dialect" is not going to be an ISO standard anymore, and therefore your assertion is... 100% political.
Sorry, it's not me making the ISO codes. If you're not happy with ISO, then you should write to ISO, not to me or to this list.
Also, I'm busy with important things in my life (your mood is not), so I will not answer anymore on this subject, until there is an interesting *realistic* position.
Bye 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 Delirium Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 12:59 AM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Conspicuous only in its absence (was Moldavian)
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Hi!
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included).
Right the opposite. ANY encyclopedic content in an ISO recognized entity
(thus including the Moldovan Linguistic Entity) is desirable. It's about the planet, not about you and your country, in case you ain't clear with it.
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to split Wikipedias into separate ones for each dialect, as much as possible. Therefore nobody would support splitting the English Wikipedia into American-English and British-English and Australian-English Wikipedias, and similarly a *lot* of effort was put into keeping the Chinese Wikipedia from splitting into Simplified and Traditional Chinese Wikipedias, and efforts to split off a Cantonese Wikipedia have also been consistently opposed.
-Mark
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi again!
Sorry for the previous mail about "moods". Everyday I have a number of stupid sophistic emails from a person using a nick similar to yours and I was pretty upset by the fact that "you" had made it thru my spam filter by writing direct to the list.
It was just a similar nick and the same boring subject, in the end :) Thank God I check email addresses before deleting them.
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
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to split Wikipedias into separate ones for each dialect, as much as possible. Therefore nobody would support splitting the English Wikipedia into American-English and British-English and Australian-English Wikipedias, and similarly a *lot* of effort was put into keeping the Chinese Wikipedia from splitting into Simplified and Traditional Chinese Wikipedias, and efforts to split off a Cantonese Wikipedia have also been consistently opposed.
American, British, and Australian English can hardly be termed dialects. They're better termed as standard varieties of the same language, because each of them has several "acceptable" accents, and the differences are almost entirely limited to terminological differences. (for example, is someone "in hospital" or "in THE hospital"? are they "in the OR" or "in theatre"? did they get food poisoning from "rotten eggplant" or "dessicated aubergine"?
Also, perhaps you've been hiding in a cave for the past year -- the Cantonese Wikipedia's been around for a while now, and the vote on whether or not it should exist showed a clear and strong majority of supporters, while the opposers were a vocal few (read: Andrew Lih).
Also, you might check the two other Sinitic "dialect" wikis created since then:
http://wuu.wikipedia.org/ http://cdo.wikipedia.org/
and of course, http://zh-classical.wikipedia.org/
Mark
Hello
I won't read the second part of your email since it's conditional and your
first condition is not acceptable. Also, FMI, is your position in anyway an official position from Ro.wiki?
You might have.. The two are more or less complementary.
Also, FMI, is your position in anyway an official position from Ro.wiki?
In no way. I am speaking on behalf of the Moldovan Community on Wikimedia (sort of: I've never been delegated or anything). The same community that twice voted for the deletion of the Moldovan Wikipedia.
Right the opposite. ANY encyclopedic content in an ISO recognized entity
(thus including the Moldovan Linguistic Entity) is desirable.
I don't know what were ISOs criteria to decide on this (and I don't have time to write complaints to them). But the content present on mo.wikipedia.org is *not* a separate linguistic entity. It is a transliteration of Romanian, standard Romanian, exactly as present on ro.wikipedia.org.
Before answering this, I hope that the Language Committee agrees on the
following two points.
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included). This would be completely stupid and trolls would be the only serious contributors.
Secondly, the "Moldovan language" in its standard form is standard Romanian. You might look herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language#Controversy, herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_reliable_sources_say_about_Moldovan_Languageand herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_decision_makers_need_to_knowfor more information. "Even the loudest defender of the Moldovan language concept, Vasile Stati, has agreedhttp://www.vremea.net/news/2005-01-13/18:45:35.htmlthat Moldovan and Romanian are identical in their literary forms".
Now, I'll try to reformulate this. And in doing this, I am obliged to stick to my old-fashioned terminology; otherwise, this is a dead-end (I still trimed this message off of this terminology). And please read to the end: I'll try to elaborate as clear as possible my ideas.
I still hope that he language committee agrees that Wikipedia deals with standard forms of linguistic entities. Not spoken varieties of standard forms. In my previous email, the idea was as follows: there is a Romanian linguistic entity, spoken in at least 6 different wayshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_dialects(the Moldovan way included). I sincerely doubt that the WMF intends to support 6 different Wikipedias next to the Romanian one. This would be more than similar to the situation of the English linguistic entity used all around the world. It is spoken in at least 14 different countries, with differences far greater than those of Romanian and its spoken varieties (not to consider grammar and so on differences in written forms). My opinion is that there is no way that the Board will start opening different Wikipedia sections for all these varieties (consider the post of Delirium < delirium@hackish.org>). And as said previously, if the WMF opens another section of Wikipedia dealing with this spoken variety of Romanian, not only would it be absurd, this would be not serious. On a side note: current content on mo.wikipedia.org is not spoken Romanian in the historic region of Moldavia.
So, we get to my second idea : the Moldovan linguistic entity in its standard form is standard Romanian. More information is available herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language#Controversy, herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_reliable_sources_say_about_Moldovan_Languageand herehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia#What_decision_makers_need_to_know .
Now, still hoping that the Language Committee agrees that it is standard form that Wikipedia deals with, we have the following situation: the Romanian linguistic entity, spoken in six different varieties and - historically - written with three different scripts.
I really don't know how does ISO decide that Moldovan is a distinct linguistic entity. This is a Soviet time POV. And I stress again the following: the content present on mo.wikipedia.org is a mere transliteration of standard Romanian. And I don't know how are you going to get content in this linguistic entity, as deemed by ISO, when even a native doesn't understand what exactly is ISO talking about.
So, WHERE are you warranties about democracy and NPOV if and when
Moldavian/Transdnistrian content comes in?
Berto, I'd also want a serious answer. How can I possibly offer ANY *warranties* on this? I do not have any administrative power inside the Wikimedia structure. All that I'm offering you is arguments. That are reasonable enough - IMO, of course - and that I am doing my best to keep in line with objectiveness. More, I'm doing my best in keeping them free of politics.
Wikimedia already has a longstanding preference not to split Wikipedias
into separate ones for each dialect, as much as possible.
As you say. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. That is, we will try our best to have a self translating system, if that is not possible because of local political extremism we will be left with two chances:
- impose our will over ro.wiki with pure strength
2) have 2 separate wikies
1. Brute force is not necessary. Arguments can replace it. 2. In this situation it is *possible* to have one single wiki with both writing systems. There should simply be a "political" will from the WMF and/or Language Committee to solve the situation
As much as it starts to bore me too, this is not why I will probably not answer the rest of the emails (present and future, if they come in). I am out for a weak so I cannot keep up with this discussion.
Regards, Liviu
Hi!
In no way. I am speaking on behalf of the Moldovan Community on Wikimedia
I stop reading exactly here. What DOES exist is: - WMF - RO.wiki - MO.wiki
As you perfectly understand, even supposing that we will ever reach the point in which you and I will say "Ok, deal", there will be NO WARRANTY whatsoever that ro.wiki will accept what you and I propose. Because what we are talking about is a radical change in the existence of Ro.wiki, in the first place.
If and when ro.wiki will want to host cyrillic on their pages they will issue an official claim for it. In the meantime... I will NOT continue on this subject, since it's leading absolutely nowhere.
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
Hello
As you perfectly understand, even supposing that we will ever reach the
point in which you and I will say "Ok, deal", there will be NO WARRANTY whatsoever that ro.wiki will accept what you and I propose.
This is true. However, a poll organized somewherehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projectson meta might help. Even if the outcome were negative, this would at least sensitize the Romanian Wikipedia community of the existence of such a possibility. And who knows? Maybe in a year or two, installing a conversion script would actually be acceptable for the community..
If and when ro.wiki will want to host cyrillic on their pages they will
issue an official claim for it.
Again, a poll might be helpful..
In the meantime... I will NOT continue on
this subject, since it's leading absolutely nowhere.
Agreed. In the meantime, I'll see what can be done about the script, so as to get it to a working condition.
And hopefully there'll be some reaction to the issues you've recently raised regarding the Eastern European wikis.
Regards, Liviu
This is true. However, a poll organized somewhere
No it might not. One of the reasons why the Committee for language was born is that we are all tired of bogus voting made by calling up on meta everyone's cousins, sisters and pet dogs. It's all people that NEVER ever edited a single line on a wiki and simply enjoy wasting our time.
So no more crap on meta. You want to change Ro.wiki, so: 1) You (or someone else, that's your choice) go to ro.wiki and organize whatever will suit ro.wiki as a vote for registered users with a minimum of edits (say 1000, definitely no less than this, because otherwise we simply will NOT believe that the vote is not bogus) 2) You propose a detailed plan about making ro.wiki fully bi-scripted and ask for a mandate as an official technical representative for this matter 3) RO.wiki defines a tech representative who will explain us what warranties ro.wiki will give about minority POVs to be duly represented (as minorities, if and when they are such)
Unless you do THIS, it's no point for the both of you to come back here with this issue.
would at least sensitize the Romanian Wikipedia community
You mean you DO send us all tons of emails and never even cared to tell the Romanians about your will to turn their edition upside down, right??????
So, as it turns out: 1) You don't have time to ask ISO why there's a MO code (requested by the Moldavians, who did not ask for a RO_MO code, as they could have done, if they were "good patriots" in your perception), 2) You do not have the time to ask the Romanians whether they want you in or not, 3) You gracefully DO have the time to flood this list in order to impose your will over the Romanian community.
Fantastic. Have my best compliments for your open arrogance about it.
YOU have all those online forms and international campaigns. Go use them on the Romanians and pls, DO find the time to let us know how many Romanian F* OFFs you get as an answer. Bogdan Giusca knows all about lobbying, so ask HIM. I am serious and deadly upset, take my word on it.
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
On 2/18/07, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Unless you do THIS, it's no point for the both of you to come back here with this issue.
Wait a second, Bèrto.
What you tell me is that you, as a Language Committeehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Langcommember and on its behalf, waive the Committee's competence in initiating a solution to a problem concerning one of the Wikimedia Foundation fundamental principles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars, Neutral Point of View http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view? Basically, what you want is that a certain wikipedian X sensitise an entire admin structure (ro.wiki ) so that they ask you (the LC) to allow them to regulate themselves in a way that the LC might deem correct. And all this over a domain that falls directly under the competence of the Board of Trustees - Wikipedia's pillar, Neutral Point of View. That's an interesting stance.
Now, let us go back to context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context.
The circumstances surrounding the Moldovan Wikipediahttp://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%87%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8Dare more interesting than they look like: again, mo.wiki does *not* contain a distinct linguistic entity (no matter what ISO says). Instead it has content that represents a transliteration of the Romanian http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagina_principal%C4%83 linguistic entity.
At this point, by the mere hosting of *this content* on *this domain* the Wikimedia Foundation makes a political statement, and specifically (the following is a quotation): "the Moldovian people were somehow a distinctly different people from Romanians before WWII and were liberated from Romania by the USSR."
The Foundation also states that Moldovan is a linguistic entity distinct from the Romanian linguistic entity. This is equivalent to stating that Moldovans and Romanians represent two distinct nations. In this specific case, the confusion between language and nationality is inevitable: all this Moldovan language/linguistic entity stuff is pure politics taken directly from the Central Committee'shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Committee_of_the_CPSUoffice. But that's nothing.
By hosting mo.wiki, the Wikimedia Foundation keeps perfectly in line with the ideology promoted by the Soviet authorities of the MASSRhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavian_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republicbeginning with 1924. At that moment a script http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet - not even a language as such - was invented and a new name was conferred to the Romanian language. The Foundation also holds for linguistic reality (if it might be called so and as opposed to a political reality) what happened in 1938 in MASSR and beginning with 1944 in MSSRhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavian_SSR, when - at the latter date - all of a sudden the entire population of the re-annexed Bessarabia started to speak Moldovan (please consider thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Moldovan_language#Beginnings_of_the_Moldovan_languagearticle). But that's history.
More interesting is the position of the Wikimedia Foundation towards nowadays politics. Actually, the Foundation keeps perfectly in line with the ideology promoted by the Party of Communistshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_Communists_of_the_Republic_of_Moldovagoverning Moldova and the Transnistrian authorities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Transnistria, and - specifically - with their efforts to affirm and prove the existence of a Moldovan language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language and of a Moldovan nation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovenism (no linguistic entity notion exists at that level). However, the funniest thing about all this is the Moldovan Wiktionary http://mo.wiktionary.org/wiki/Main_Page: in case the project un-freezes, the Foundation will de facto support the linguist and politician Vasile Stati http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasile_Stati in his efforts to create/develop a Moldovan-Romanian dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan-Romanian_dictionary. The circumstances are as follows: both dictionaries - Wikimedia's and Stati's - have appeared after a ten-fifteen years of vacuum in the field - Moldovan--any-other-language dictionaries. And this is to stress one point: it is absurd to translate Moldovan; you can do this only with the help of a Romanian--any-other-language dictionary.
If this is what the Wikimedia Foundation wants to promote.. Well, this is a choice of the Board. However, know that this is exactly what the Foundation is promoting at the moment.
If this clear case of biased Point Of View of an entire Wikipedia is not enough an incentive for the LC/WMF to do something about the situation, I don't know what else could be. And here I am not talking about the feelings of the Romanians or Moldovans, nor about the position of the Moldovan Community, nor about the feelings of the Moldovan community, nor about _my_ reasons for wanting a change. I am talking about something supposed to be sacred for the Foundation: Neutral Point of Viewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view.
At this moment - even though frozen - the Board of Trustees tolerates a Wikipedia that is openly against one of its fundamental pillars. You "want to deliver a service [..] in all possible linguistic entities". I am most definitely for this. Still, taking into consideration the context, you can readily stop promoting a Neutral Point of View on the Moldovan Wikipedia. If the Board, now through its Language Committee, decides to continue to ignore the existence of a politically biased Wikipedia, again, it's a choice. But then, the NPOV principle is of no use around there.
[On a side note: considering a Romanian linguistic entity with three different writing systems may be my point of view, but it has one advantage: it is apolitical. And it considers the situation from a linguistic/historical perspective, and not a political one].
.... Now I'll pass to petty arguments that don't deserve much of your or my attention, but just for their sake..
tired of bogus voting made by calling up on meta everyone's cousins, sisters and pet dogs.
For the pet dogs I most definitely agree. But then, why didn't you, on meta, impose conditions for voting (like 400 edits somewhere)? I recall that it was on meta simply because you asked for legitimacy.
It's all people that NEVER ever edited a single line on a wiki and simply enjoy wasting our time.
Have you personally verified the "never" part? Even the lines that I've never contributed? And the books that Roberth has not contributed? And many other's non-existent contributions? Again, what makes you think that I _enjoy_ doing all this?
and never even cared to tell the Romanians about your will to turn their edition upside down, right??????
Wrong. On two points: this ain't the first time this is discussed and I do not want to turn the Romanian Wikipedia upside down.
First of all, I am not suggesting anything radically new. This ain't the first time this alternative is proposed. It was under discussion on this list back in 2005 (please consider the Re: [Wikipedia-l] Moldovan Wikipediahttp://www.nabble.com/Re%253A-Moldovan-Wikipedia-tf1266140.htmlthread and especially the contributionhttp://www.nabble.com/Re%253A-Moldovan-Wikipedia-tf1266140.html#a3362441of Matt Brown). Ronline - on behalf of the Romanian Wikipedia - wasn't too enthusiastic about this (consider the above thread for his arguments). It would be up to the LC to decide whether the WMF wants a politically biased Wikipedia or a compromise solution (that, by definition, should not please entirely each and every one).
Secondly, I do not want to turn the Romanian Wikipedia upside down. I want the issue around the Moldovan Wikipedia to be solved. You refuse deletion. I suggested, better said repeated an alternative solution. I see not one reason why I should have contacted the Romanian structure before repeating to the LC an already existing alternative solution proposal.
- You don't have time to ask ISO why there's a MO code
I don't. You are not the only one having important issues to attend to in real life. Mine are getting less time than they deserve. And I have no intent what-so-ever to get into a parallel most-of-the-time fruitless debate over the same tiring issue. If ISO cares about the position of Moldovans and Romanians - natives - on this issue, they can simply browse the wikipedia-l archives.
"good patriots" in your perception
Please explain me what does this mean in my perception, and maybe I'll get the point.
- You do not have the time to ask the Romanians whether they want you in
or not, It's useless to ask the Romanian structure anything on this matter unless there is a decision from the Board. They'd be an infinite times more reticent than you are. And such a change is made at a Board of Trustees level, not at an Admin structure one.
- You gracefully DO have the time to flood this list in order to impose
your will over the Romanian community.
Romanian admins have not stepped down into this current discussion. I am not imposing anything over them. You may call this flooding. I would call this having a *discussion*, a normal and *somewhat constructive* discussion.
your open arrogance about it.
Where do you find "aggressively assertive" my _reasoning_ and arguments?
YOU have all those online forms and international campaigns.
I don't give a damn about them. I care that Wikipedia represent correctly my country.
let us know how many Romanian F* OFFs you get as an answer.
Is this an official statement issued on behalf of the Language Committee?
I am serious and deadly upset, take my word on it.
Now, Bèrto. I ain't sure who should be upset. You over my presenting the LC/Board with an alternative solution to a problem. Me over your hardly-constructive attitude and arrogance (this ain't no attack; simply take a look at the number of aggressive assertions - Oxford American dictionary - you have made during this last discussion). Or the Moldovan and Romanian communities over the open rigidity from the part of the Board and over a decent period on an issue concerning Wikipedia's principles.
And to finish, a citation: "Support - Mainly on the basis that Wikimedia projects should always have NPOV standards, and merely having a language that by itself is expressing a POV should not be allowed to exist. I get the arguments about the Russian occupation of Romania, together with the Russian occupation of East Prussia (still under Russian control). It surprises me that anybody takes seriously political disinformation arguments from a government that no longer exists. Keeping this project expresses support for a clear POV for what scholarly research suggests is merely a variant of an established language. My support for this is similar to opposition of the pt-br.wikipedia --Roberth 18:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)."
Regards, Liviu
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at this moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects. Given that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect that the language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover that you do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why things are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
Liviu Andronic schreef:
On 2/18/07, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Unless you do THIS, it's no point for the both of you to come back here with this issue.
Wait a second, Bèrto.
What you tell me is that you, as a Language Committeehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Langcommember and on its behalf, waive the Committee's competence in initiating a solution to a problem concerning one of the Wikimedia Foundation fundamental principles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars, Neutral Point of View http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view? Basically, what you want is that a certain wikipedian X sensitise an entire admin structure (ro.wiki ) so that they ask you (the LC) to allow them to regulate themselves in a way that the LC might deem correct. And all this over a domain that falls directly under the competence of the Board of Trustees - Wikipedia's pillar, Neutral Point of View. That's an interesting stance.
Now, let us go back to context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context.
The circumstances surrounding the Moldovan Wikipediahttp://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D3%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%87%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8Dare more interesting than they look like: again, mo.wiki does *not* contain a distinct linguistic entity (no matter what ISO says). Instead it has content that represents a transliteration of the Romanian http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagina_principal%C4%83 linguistic entity.
At this point, by the mere hosting of *this content* on *this domain* the Wikimedia Foundation makes a political statement, and specifically (the following is a quotation): "the Moldovian people were somehow a distinctly different people from Romanians before WWII and were liberated from Romania by the USSR."
The Foundation also states that Moldovan is a linguistic entity distinct from the Romanian linguistic entity. This is equivalent to stating that Moldovans and Romanians represent two distinct nations. In this specific case, the confusion between language and nationality is inevitable: all this Moldovan language/linguistic entity stuff is pure politics taken directly from the Central Committee'shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Committee_of_the_CPSUoffice. But that's nothing.
By hosting mo.wiki, the Wikimedia Foundation keeps perfectly in line with the ideology promoted by the Soviet authorities of the MASSRhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavian_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republicbeginning with 1924. At that moment a script http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet - not even a language as such - was invented and a new name was conferred to the Romanian language. The Foundation also holds for linguistic reality (if it might be called so and as opposed to a political reality) what happened in 1938 in MASSR and beginning with 1944 in MSSRhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavian_SSR, when - at the latter date - all of a sudden the entire population of the re-annexed Bessarabia started to speak Moldovan (please consider thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Moldovan_language#Beginnings_of_the_Moldovan_languagearticle). But that's history.
More interesting is the position of the Wikimedia Foundation towards nowadays politics. Actually, the Foundation keeps perfectly in line with the ideology promoted by the Party of Communistshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_Communists_of_the_Republic_of_Moldovagoverning Moldova and the Transnistrian authorities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Transnistria, and - specifically - with their efforts to affirm and prove the existence of a Moldovan language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language and of a Moldovan nation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovenism (no linguistic entity notion exists at that level). However, the funniest thing about all this is the Moldovan Wiktionary http://mo.wiktionary.org/wiki/Main_Page: in case the project un-freezes, the Foundation will de facto support the linguist and politician Vasile Stati http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasile_Stati in his efforts to create/develop a Moldovan-Romanian dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan-Romanian_dictionary. The circumstances are as follows: both dictionaries - Wikimedia's and Stati's - have appeared after a ten-fifteen years of vacuum in the field - Moldovan--any-other-language dictionaries. And this is to stress one point: it is absurd to translate Moldovan; you can do this only with the help of a Romanian--any-other-language dictionary.
If this is what the Wikimedia Foundation wants to promote.. Well, this is a choice of the Board. However, know that this is exactly what the Foundation is promoting at the moment.
If this clear case of biased Point Of View of an entire Wikipedia is not enough an incentive for the LC/WMF to do something about the situation, I don't know what else could be. And here I am not talking about the feelings of the Romanians or Moldovans, nor about the position of the Moldovan Community, nor about the feelings of the Moldovan community, nor about _my_ reasons for wanting a change. I am talking about something supposed to be sacred for the Foundation: Neutral Point of Viewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view.
At this moment - even though frozen - the Board of Trustees tolerates a Wikipedia that is openly against one of its fundamental pillars. You "want to deliver a service [..] in all possible linguistic entities". I am most definitely for this. Still, taking into consideration the context, you can readily stop promoting a Neutral Point of View on the Moldovan Wikipedia. If the Board, now through its Language Committee, decides to continue to ignore the existence of a politically biased Wikipedia, again, it's a choice. But then, the NPOV principle is of no use around there.
[On a side note: considering a Romanian linguistic entity with three different writing systems may be my point of view, but it has one advantage: it is apolitical. And it considers the situation from a linguistic/historical perspective, and not a political one].
.... Now I'll pass to petty arguments that don't deserve much of your or my attention, but just for their sake..
tired of bogus voting made by calling up on meta everyone's cousins, sisters and pet dogs.
For the pet dogs I most definitely agree. But then, why didn't you, on meta, impose conditions for voting (like 400 edits somewhere)? I recall that it was on meta simply because you asked for legitimacy.
It's all people that NEVER ever edited a single line on a wiki and simply enjoy wasting our time.
Have you personally verified the "never" part? Even the lines that I've never contributed? And the books that Roberth has not contributed? And many other's non-existent contributions? Again, what makes you think that I _enjoy_ doing all this?
and never even cared to tell the Romanians about your will to turn their edition upside down, right??????
Wrong. On two points: this ain't the first time this is discussed and I do not want to turn the Romanian Wikipedia upside down.
First of all, I am not suggesting anything radically new. This ain't the first time this alternative is proposed. It was under discussion on this list back in 2005 (please consider the Re: [Wikipedia-l] Moldovan Wikipediahttp://www.nabble.com/Re%253A-Moldovan-Wikipedia-tf1266140.htmlthread and especially the contributionhttp://www.nabble.com/Re%253A-Moldovan-Wikipedia-tf1266140.html#a3362441of Matt Brown). Ronline - on behalf of the Romanian Wikipedia - wasn't too enthusiastic about this (consider the above thread for his arguments). It would be up to the LC to decide whether the WMF wants a politically biased Wikipedia or a compromise solution (that, by definition, should not please entirely each and every one).
Secondly, I do not want to turn the Romanian Wikipedia upside down. I want the issue around the Moldovan Wikipedia to be solved. You refuse deletion. I suggested, better said repeated an alternative solution. I see not one reason why I should have contacted the Romanian structure before repeating to the LC an already existing alternative solution proposal.
- You don't have time to ask ISO why there's a MO code
I don't. You are not the only one having important issues to attend to in real life. Mine are getting less time than they deserve. And I have no intent what-so-ever to get into a parallel most-of-the-time fruitless debate over the same tiring issue. If ISO cares about the position of Moldovans and Romanians - natives - on this issue, they can simply browse the wikipedia-l archives.
"good patriots" in your perception
Please explain me what does this mean in my perception, and maybe I'll get the point.
- You do not have the time to ask the Romanians whether they want you in
or not, It's useless to ask the Romanian structure anything on this matter unless there is a decision from the Board. They'd be an infinite times more reticent than you are. And such a change is made at a Board of Trustees level, not at an Admin structure one.
- You gracefully DO have the time to flood this list in order to impose
your will over the Romanian community.
Romanian admins have not stepped down into this current discussion. I am not imposing anything over them. You may call this flooding. I would call this having a *discussion*, a normal and *somewhat constructive* discussion.
your open arrogance about it.
Where do you find "aggressively assertive" my _reasoning_ and arguments?
YOU have all those online forms and international campaigns.
I don't give a damn about them. I care that Wikipedia represent correctly my country.
let us know how many Romanian F* OFFs you get as an answer.
Is this an official statement issued on behalf of the Language Committee?
I am serious and deadly upset, take my word on it.
Now, Bèrto. I ain't sure who should be upset. You over my presenting the LC/Board with an alternative solution to a problem. Me over your hardly-constructive attitude and arrogance (this ain't no attack; simply take a look at the number of aggressive assertions - Oxford American dictionary - you have made during this last discussion). Or the Moldovan and Romanian communities over the open rigidity from the part of the Board and over a decent period on an issue concerning Wikipedia's principles.
And to finish, a citation: "Support - Mainly on the basis that Wikimedia projects should always have NPOV standards, and merely having a language that by itself is expressing a POV should not be allowed to exist. I get the arguments about the Russian occupation of Romania, together with the Russian occupation of East Prussia (still under Russian control). It surprises me that anybody takes seriously political disinformation arguments from a government that no longer exists. Keeping this project expresses support for a clear POV for what scholarly research suggests is merely a variant of an established language. My support for this is similar to opposition of the pt-br.wikipedia --Roberth 18:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)."
Regards, Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
As a side note, I'd like to know what's expected of people who are the human outcome, sort of, stemming from the events 80 years apart. In wikipedia context, too.
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
If, at a given moment, the Board wishes to reconsider its position on the Moldovan Wikipedia, please regard the following points:
1. In its current form, mo.wiki is promoting an ideology. There is a slight difference between "not being of a neutral point of view" and promoting an ideology.
2. According to the recently adopted Language proposal policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be verified: a valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
The Moldovan Wikipedia fails on all three. The valid ISO code and the code used for its domain are a coincidence, simply because ISO requires a separate linguistic entity while the domain doesn't host such content. There is no uniqueness since it is standard Romanian written in a different script. There is no viable community and audience.
3. A basic objective of providing high-quality content to writers of the "Moldovan language" will be hardly achieved, if you expect contributions written in the Moldovan alphabet to "flow in" (when an un-freeze happens). The script is mainly a reality of the past, while this objective could be easier achieved if the two relevant projects were merged.
You may consider some of these arguments as personal POVs. I believe that these are backed up by different sources that are supposed to be western-neutral and academic (the links in my messages are not for making it prettier), while others on logical reasoning.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/28/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at this moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects. Given that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect that the language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover that you do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why things are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
Umm... we've been over this a thousand times, Liviu. You have hashed and rehashed the same arguments. People see through your lies and distortion every time, so trying again isn't going to do anything for you.
Mark
On 02/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
If, at a given moment, the Board wishes to reconsider its position on the Moldovan Wikipedia, please regard the following points:
- In its current form, mo.wiki is promoting an ideology. There is a slight
difference between "not being of a neutral point of view" and promoting an ideology.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be verified: a valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
The Moldovan Wikipedia fails on all three. The valid ISO code and the code used for its domain are a coincidence, simply because ISO requires a separate linguistic entity while the domain doesn't host such content. There is no uniqueness since it is standard Romanian written in a different script. There is no viable community and audience.
- A basic objective of providing high-quality content to writers of the
"Moldovan language" will be hardly achieved, if you expect contributions written in the Moldovan alphabet to "flow in" (when an un-freeze happens). The script is mainly a reality of the past, while this objective could be easier achieved if the two relevant projects were merged.
You may consider some of these arguments as personal POVs. I believe that these are backed up by different sources that are supposed to be western-neutral and academic (the links in my messages are not for making it prettier), while others on logical reasoning.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/28/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at this moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects. Given that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect that the language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover that you do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why things are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 3/2/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Umm... we've been over this a thousand times, Liviu. You have hashed and rehashed the same arguments. People see through your lies and distortion
Who's accusing others about lies and distortion, if not the master himself.. :)
every time, so trying again isn't going to do anything for
you.
Mark
On 02/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
If, at a given moment, the Board wishes to reconsider its position on
the
Moldovan Wikipedia, please regard the following points:
- In its current form, mo.wiki is promoting an ideology. There is a
slight
difference between "not being of a neutral point of view" and promoting
an
ideology.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
The Moldovan Wikipedia fails on all three. The valid ISO code and the
code
used for its domain are a coincidence, simply because ISO requires a separate linguistic entity while the domain doesn't host such content.
There
is no uniqueness since it is standard Romanian written in a different script. There is no viable community and audience.
- A basic objective of providing high-quality content to writers of the
"Moldovan language" will be hardly achieved, if you expect contributions written in the Moldovan alphabet to "flow in" (when an un-freeze
happens).
The script is mainly a reality of the past, while this objective could
be
easier achieved if the two relevant projects were merged.
You may consider some of these arguments as personal POVs. I believe
that
these are backed up by different sources that are supposed to be western-neutral and academic (the links in my messages are not for
making it
prettier), while others on logical reasoning.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/28/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at this moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects.
Given
that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect that
the
language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover that
you
do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why
things
are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
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
You saying over and over that Moldovans say they speak Romanian. Check http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limba_moldoveneasca please where census results indicate clearly that in fact the majority claimed their native language as "Moldovan" (especially in rural areas).
You are also saying over and over that all Moldovans hate Cyrillic, or that nobody uses it today. It is still taught in schools in Transnistria. You say this is something that kids don't want. Honestly, when I was in primary school or secondary school, I would not have cared if they taught us English in the Hebrew alphabet and told us we were Martians. Since when do kids care so much about school?
The bottom line is that there are people who use Cyrillic, as well as many many people who still call their native tongue "Moldovan", both of which you constantly try to negate using lies and distortion. It is an undeniable fact.
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/2/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Umm... we've been over this a thousand times, Liviu. You have hashed and rehashed the same arguments. People see through your lies and distortion
Who's accusing others about lies and distortion, if not the master himself.. :)
every time, so trying again isn't going to do anything for
you.
Mark
On 02/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
If, at a given moment, the Board wishes to reconsider its position on
the
Moldovan Wikipedia, please regard the following points:
- In its current form, mo.wiki is promoting an ideology. There is a
slight
difference between "not being of a neutral point of view" and promoting
an
ideology.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
The Moldovan Wikipedia fails on all three. The valid ISO code and the
code
used for its domain are a coincidence, simply because ISO requires a separate linguistic entity while the domain doesn't host such content.
There
is no uniqueness since it is standard Romanian written in a different script. There is no viable community and audience.
- A basic objective of providing high-quality content to writers of the
"Moldovan language" will be hardly achieved, if you expect contributions written in the Moldovan alphabet to "flow in" (when an un-freeze
happens).
The script is mainly a reality of the past, while this objective could
be
easier achieved if the two relevant projects were merged.
You may consider some of these arguments as personal POVs. I believe
that
these are backed up by different sources that are supposed to be western-neutral and academic (the links in my messages are not for
making it
prettier), while others on logical reasoning.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/28/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at this moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects.
Given
that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect that
the
language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover that
you
do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why
things
are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
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
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mark,
talking about *lies* - you, the moldovanest of Moldovans, have you ever been to Moldova? Listened to the way people talk? Do you know how Romanian sounds like? Or the Moldovan dialect? My POV, and in real life (as opposed to this list) I'm definitely not alone with it: in Moldova people speak and write Romanian. In Latin or sometimes Cyrillic. They may call it Moldovan (as the Constitution deems) or Romanian. I don't care: they all make use of Romanian grammar and vocabulary. And about *distortions*: FYI, "mainly a reality of the past" doesn't equal "nobody uses it today". And for the "hate" part, I'd have appreciated a quotation.
On 3/9/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
You saying over and over that Moldovans say they speak Romanian. Check http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limba_moldoveneasca please where census results indicate clearly that in fact the majority claimed their native language as "Moldovan" (especially in rural areas).
You are also saying over and over that all Moldovans hate Cyrillic, or that nobody uses it today. It is still taught in schools in Transnistria. You say this is something that kids don't want. Honestly, when I was in primary school or secondary school, I would not have cared if they taught us English in the Hebrew alphabet and told us we were Martians. Since when do kids care so much about school?
The bottom line is that there are people who use Cyrillic, as well as many many people who still call their native tongue "Moldovan", both of which you constantly try to negate using lies and distortion. It is an undeniable fact.
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/2/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Umm... we've been over this a thousand times, Liviu. You have hashed and rehashed the same arguments. People see through your lies and distortion
Who's accusing others about lies and distortion, if not the master
himself..
:)
every time, so trying again isn't going to do anything for
you.
Mark
On 02/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood.
Otherwise
these are simply skipped.
If, at a given moment, the Board wishes to reconsider its position
on
the
Moldovan Wikipedia, please regard the following points:
- In its current form, mo.wiki is promoting an ideology. There is a
slight
difference between "not being of a neutral point of view" and
promoting
an
ideology.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
The Moldovan Wikipedia fails on all three. The valid ISO code and
the
code
used for its domain are a coincidence, simply because ISO requires a separate linguistic entity while the domain doesn't host such
content.
There
is no uniqueness since it is standard Romanian written in a
different
script. There is no viable community and audience.
- A basic objective of providing high-quality content to writers of
the
"Moldovan language" will be hardly achieved, if you expect
contributions
written in the Moldovan alphabet to "flow in" (when an un-freeze
happens).
The script is mainly a reality of the past, while this objective
could
be
easier achieved if the two relevant projects were merged.
You may consider some of these arguments as personal POVs. I believe
that
these are backed up by different sources that are supposed to be western-neutral and academic (the links in my messages are not for
making it
prettier), while others on logical reasoning.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/28/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at
this
moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects.
Given
that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect
that
the
language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover
that
you
do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why
things
are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
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
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ 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
Liviu,
I am perfectly willing to answer all of those questions for you, but it does not belong on-list because at this point it is a personal discussion. If you really wanted an answer to any of those, feel free to send me a private e-mail and I will answer those questions, but I have a feeling you asked them for the point of debate rather than out of genuine curiousity, and I am going to ask you to read my previous e-mail wherein I stated I am disengaging from this debate.
Mark
On 13/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Mark,
talking about *lies* - you, the moldovanest of Moldovans, have you ever been to Moldova? Listened to the way people talk? Do you know how Romanian sounds like? Or the Moldovan dialect? My POV, and in real life (as opposed to this list) I'm definitely not alone with it: in Moldova people speak and write Romanian. In Latin or sometimes Cyrillic. They may call it Moldovan (as the Constitution deems) or Romanian. I don't care: they all make use of Romanian grammar and vocabulary. And about *distortions*: FYI, "mainly a reality of the past" doesn't equal "nobody uses it today". And for the "hate" part, I'd have appreciated a quotation.
On 3/9/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
You saying over and over that Moldovans say they speak Romanian. Check http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limba_moldoveneasca please where census results indicate clearly that in fact the majority claimed their native language as "Moldovan" (especially in rural areas).
You are also saying over and over that all Moldovans hate Cyrillic, or that nobody uses it today. It is still taught in schools in Transnistria. You say this is something that kids don't want. Honestly, when I was in primary school or secondary school, I would not have cared if they taught us English in the Hebrew alphabet and told us we were Martians. Since when do kids care so much about school?
The bottom line is that there are people who use Cyrillic, as well as many many people who still call their native tongue "Moldovan", both of which you constantly try to negate using lies and distortion. It is an undeniable fact.
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/2/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Umm... we've been over this a thousand times, Liviu. You have hashed and rehashed the same arguments. People see through your lies and distortion
Who's accusing others about lies and distortion, if not the master
himself..
:)
every time, so trying again isn't going to do anything for
you.
Mark
On 02/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood.
Otherwise
these are simply skipped.
If, at a given moment, the Board wishes to reconsider its position
on
the
Moldovan Wikipedia, please regard the following points:
- In its current form, mo.wiki is promoting an ideology. There is a
slight
difference between "not being of a neutral point of view" and
promoting
an
ideology.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
The Moldovan Wikipedia fails on all three. The valid ISO code and
the
code
used for its domain are a coincidence, simply because ISO requires a separate linguistic entity while the domain doesn't host such
content.
There
is no uniqueness since it is standard Romanian written in a
different
script. There is no viable community and audience.
- A basic objective of providing high-quality content to writers of
the
"Moldovan language" will be hardly achieved, if you expect
contributions
written in the Moldovan alphabet to "flow in" (when an un-freeze
happens).
The script is mainly a reality of the past, while this objective
could
be
easier achieved if the two relevant projects were merged.
You may consider some of these arguments as personal POVs. I believe
that
these are backed up by different sources that are supposed to be western-neutral and academic (the links in my messages are not for
making it
prettier), while others on logical reasoning.
Regards, Liviu
On 2/28/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, According to what Erik wrote the other day, the pillars are, at
this
moment, not part of a "must have" doctrine for Wikipedia projects.
Given
that the WMF it self is not on firm grounds, how can you expect
that
the
language committee is more firm. Having said that, you will fully misunderstand Bèrto's position. Your verbiage is just to cover
that
you
do not want to address what is in front of you.
Your whole argument is yet another political inspired tirade why
things
are as you see them. Again, political arguments do not wash.
Thanks, GerardM
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
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ 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
-- Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Liviu Andro nic schreef:
Hello,
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
.... Really ? ...
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be verified: a valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in applying the policy in this way. The policy determines how new languages are to be accepted. The Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it does have a valid ISO 639 code. Thanks, GerardM
On 3/5/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
.... Really ? ...
At times, this is the feeling that I have. At any rate, verbosity is necessary to make my arguments clear.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in applying the policy in this way. The policy determines how new languages are to be accepted. The Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it does have a valid ISO 639 code. Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
I have no intent to renew this debate. This is simply to say that my view over the entire issue has not radically changed. For the following (same) reasons:
From what I know, the tiny wikipedias (like the Moldovan one) were created à partir de a "list" with no formal voting and without following any specific guidelines or policy. On this basis, I believe that the newly adopted policy could be used for determining the "correctness" of wikipedias that were created in "obscure" ways. In any case, it is not up to me to decide such a usage.
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid indeed in the eyes of the ISO, but also according to the official POV of the Party of Communists in RM (I suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and might have been in the eyes of the Soviet Authorities. [On a side note: I do not understand how you expect my arguments to be completely apolitical over an issue that is pure politics: considering Moldovan as a linguistic entity.]
However, scholarly research - Western included - disputes this. A lot of linguists - if not most - do (with the notable exception of Vasile Stati; notable, because he is the one). The regulating body of the "Moldovan language" - with regard to the Constitution - disputes this. Less important in the eyes of the WMF, natives dispute this (though still waiting for someone from Transnistria here). Please follow the links in my previous messages if you are not persuaded by this paragraph.
And, probably most important for the Board, the mo.wiki domain does not host content in a linguistic entity different from the Romanian one. It simply hosts transliterated Romanian content. I honestly believe that it is wrong for the Foundation to blindly follow the ISO specifications over this issue. It is also wrong for the Board to adopt - from the NPOV perspective, which should be respected even if certain flexibility is endorsed - a political POV over a linguistic/historical fact: at a given period, in a given region, Romanian was written with a different script.
Regards, Liviu
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid indeed in the eyes of the ISO, but also according to the official POV of the Party of Communists in RM (I suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and might have been in the eyes of the Soviet Authorities.
And I bet they drive on autobahns too. Bastards!
I think you just extended Godwin's Law.
- d.
Hoi!
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid indeed in the eyes of the ISO, but also according to the official POV of the Party of Communists in RM (I suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and might have been in the eyes of the Soviet Authorities.
That's where his mask fell... He is a bloody communist!!!! The Gravity Law was valid for the Soviets and... Liviu DOES NOT FLY!!!!!!!!!!! Now THIS is a proof!
Shoot the red bastard and let's be over with it.
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
I think this is a big misunderstanding on your part. The existance of a Wikipedia in a linguistic entity does not indicate any level of difference from other Wikipedias' languages. It does not claim that it is a "language" or a "dialect".
We have Wikipedias in Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, and Serbo-Croatian. It's a bit of a paradox, if we have Wikipedias in the first 3, we shouldn't have one in the fourth logically.
But this problem is non-existant from a linguistic standpoint precisely for the reason I stated above. All four are linguistic entities, despite the fact that Serbo-Croatian is an "umbrella" entity that allows for the use of the other three. As long as there is a reason to have these Wikis separate (ie, unless BCS people can agree to a merger), they will be separate.
Now, I think everybody here knows by now that you would be willing to merge mo and ro Wikipedias with a script conversion system on ro.wikipedia. That is fine. Nobody here objects to such a system. What we do object to is that at this very moment, the proposal has very little support from the Romanian Wikipedian community. You have been told many times that you are welcome to try to test the waters, organize a poll at ro.wp, try to convince people of the utility and validity of such a system, but you keep complaining to this list about how it's not your responsibility and about how WE need to do something.
How can you have not figured out by now that with hundreds of e-mails repeating the exact same thing in so many words, you are not only failing to change anything, you are actually making people more and more firmly against the position you represent?
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments to be understood. Otherwise these are simply skipped.
.... Really ? ...
At times, this is the feeling that I have. At any rate, verbosity is necessary to make my arguments clear.
- According to the recently adopted Language proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP- that I suppose can be applied to existing wikipedias to determine their "validity" - there are three "essential" requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a viable community and audience.
Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in applying the policy in this way. The policy determines how new languages are to be accepted. The Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it does have a valid ISO 639 code. Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
I have no intent to renew this debate. This is simply to say that my view over the entire issue has not radically changed. For the following (same) reasons:
From what I know, the tiny wikipedias (like the Moldovan one) were created à partir de a "list" with no formal voting and without following any specific guidelines or policy. On this basis, I believe that the newly adopted policy could be used for determining the "correctness" of wikipedias that were created in "obscure" ways. In any case, it is not up to me to decide such a usage.
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid indeed in the eyes of the ISO, but also according to the official POV of the Party of Communists in RM (I suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and might have been in the eyes of the Soviet Authorities. [On a side note: I do not understand how you expect my arguments to be completely apolitical over an issue that is pure politics: considering Moldovan as a linguistic entity.]
However, scholarly research - Western included - disputes this. A lot of linguists
- if not most - do (with the notable exception of Vasile Stati; notable,
because he is the one). The regulating body of the "Moldovan language" - with regard to the Constitution - disputes this. Less important in the eyes of the WMF, natives dispute this (though still waiting for someone from Transnistria here). Please follow the links in my previous messages if you are not persuaded by this paragraph.
And, probably most important for the Board, the mo.wiki domain does not host content in a linguistic entity different from the Romanian one. It simply hosts transliterated Romanian content. I honestly believe that it is wrong for the Foundation to blindly follow the ISO specifications over this issue. It is also wrong for the Board to adopt - from the NPOV perspective, which should be respected even if certain flexibility is endorsed - a political POV over a linguistic/historical fact: at a given period, in a given region, Romanian was written with a different script.
Regards, Liviu _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--- Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a big misunderstanding on your part. The existance of a Wikipedia in a linguistic entity does not indicate any level of difference from other Wikipedias' languages. It does not claim that it is a "language" or a "dialect".
I think there's no misunderstanding here. You do have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Bosniac, Croatian, Sebian, or Serbo-Croatian. You don't have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Moldovan. That makes all the difference.
:en:Dpotop
We have Wikipedias in Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, and Serbo-Croatian. It's a bit of a paradox, if we have Wikipedias in the first 3, we shouldn't have one in the fourth logically.
But this problem is non-existant from a linguistic standpoint precisely for the reason I stated above. All four are linguistic entities, despite the fact that Serbo-Croatian is an "umbrella" entity that allows for the use of the other three. As long as there is a reason to have these Wikis separate (ie, unless BCS people can agree to a merger), they will be separate.
Now, I think everybody here knows by now that you would be willing to merge mo and ro Wikipedias with a script conversion system on ro.wikipedia. That is fine. Nobody here objects to such a system. What we do object to is that at this very moment, the proposal has very little support from the Romanian Wikipedian community. You have been told many times that you are welcome to try to test the waters, organize a poll at ro.wp, try to convince people of the utility and validity of such a system, but you keep complaining to this list about how it's not your responsibility and about how WE need to do something.
How can you have not figured out by now that with hundreds of e-mails repeating the exact same thing in so many words, you are not only failing to change anything, you are actually making people more and more firmly against the position you represent?
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments
to be understood. Otherwise
these are simply skipped.
.... Really ? ...
At times, this is the feeling that I have. At any
rate, verbosity is
necessary to make my arguments clear.
- According to the recently adopted Language
proposal
that I suppose can be
applied to existing wikipedias to determine
their
"validity" - there are three "essential"
requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a
viable community and
audience.
Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in
applying the policy in this
way. The policy determines how new languages are
to be accepted. The
Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it does
have a valid ISO 639 code.
Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
I have no intent to renew this debate. This is simply to say that my view over the entire issue has not radically changed. For
the following (same)
reasons:
From what I know, the tiny wikipedias (like the
Moldovan one) were created à
partir de a "list" with no formal voting and
without following any specific
guidelines or policy. On this basis, I believe
that the newly adopted policy
could be used for determining the "correctness"
of wikipedias that were
created in "obscure" ways. In any case, it is not
up to me to decide such a
usage.
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid indeed
in the eyes of the ISO,
but also according to the official POV of the
Party of Communists in RM (I
suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and
might have been in the eyes
of the Soviet Authorities. [On a side note: I do
not understand how you
expect my arguments to be completely apolitical
over an issue that is pure
politics: considering Moldovan as a linguistic
entity.]
However, scholarly research - Western included -
disputes this. A lot
of linguists
- if not most - do (with the notable exception of
Vasile Stati; notable,
because he is the one). The regulating body of the
"Moldovan language" -
with regard to the Constitution - disputes this.
Less important in the eyes
of the WMF, natives dispute this (though still
waiting for someone from
Transnistria here). Please follow the links in
my previous messages if
you are not persuaded by this paragraph.
And, probably most important for the Board, the
mo.wiki domain does not
host content in a linguistic entity different from
the Romanian one. It
simply hosts transliterated Romanian content. I
honestly believe that it
is wrong for the Foundation to blindly follow the
ISO specifications over
this issue. It is also wrong for the Board to
adopt - from the NPOV
perspective, which should be respected even if
certain flexibility is
endorsed - a political POV over a
linguistic/historical fact: at a given
period, in a given region, Romanian was written
with a different script.
Regards, Liviu _______________________________________________ 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
____________________________________________________________________________________ No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
Hoi, In what the WMF aims to do it reserves no place on what wikipedia editors do and do not do. It says that we aim to provide information to people. For the language committee it is nor necessarily relevant what language people identify with as it has brought us an un-ending amount of people who do not want to communicate with others and create new "languages" for political reasons.
If you are so happy denying the use of Moldovan, be constructive and promote the use of the ro.wikipedia with the Cyrillic script. If all you can do is deny this option as well as deny the existence of a mo.wikipedia, please refrain from posting unless you have something positive to say.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/10/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a big misunderstanding on your part. The existance of a Wikipedia in a linguistic entity does not indicate any level of difference from other Wikipedias' languages. It does not claim that it is a "language" or a "dialect".
I think there's no misunderstanding here. You do have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Bosniac, Croatian, Sebian, or Serbo-Croatian. You don't have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Moldovan. That makes all the difference.
:en:Dpotop
We have Wikipedias in Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, and Serbo-Croatian. It's a bit of a paradox, if we have Wikipedias in the first 3, we shouldn't have one in the fourth logically.
But this problem is non-existant from a linguistic standpoint precisely for the reason I stated above. All four are linguistic entities, despite the fact that Serbo-Croatian is an "umbrella" entity that allows for the use of the other three. As long as there is a reason to have these Wikis separate (ie, unless BCS people can agree to a merger), they will be separate.
Now, I think everybody here knows by now that you would be willing to merge mo and ro Wikipedias with a script conversion system on ro.wikipedia. That is fine. Nobody here objects to such a system. What we do object to is that at this very moment, the proposal has very little support from the Romanian Wikipedian community. You have been told many times that you are welcome to try to test the waters, organize a poll at ro.wp, try to convince people of the utility and validity of such a system, but you keep complaining to this list about how it's not your responsibility and about how WE need to do something.
How can you have not figured out by now that with hundreds of e-mails repeating the exact same thing in so many words, you are not only failing to change anything, you are actually making people more and more firmly against the position you represent?
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my arguments
to be understood. Otherwise
these are simply skipped.
.... Really ? ...
At times, this is the feeling that I have. At any
rate, verbosity is
necessary to make my arguments clear.
- According to the recently adopted Language
proposal
that I suppose can be
applied to existing wikipedias to determine
their
"validity" - there are three "essential"
requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity and a
viable community and
audience.
Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in
applying the policy in this
way. The policy determines how new languages are
to be accepted. The
Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it does
have a valid ISO 639 code.
Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
I have no intent to renew this debate. This is simply to say that my view over the entire issue has not radically changed. For
the following (same)
reasons:
From what I know, the tiny wikipedias (like the
Moldovan one) were created à
partir de a "list" with no formal voting and
without following any specific
guidelines or policy. On this basis, I believe
that the newly adopted policy
could be used for determining the "correctness"
of wikipedias that were
created in "obscure" ways. In any case, it is not
up to me to decide such a
usage.
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid indeed
in the eyes of the ISO,
but also according to the official POV of the
Party of Communists in RM (I
suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and
might have been in the eyes
of the Soviet Authorities. [On a side note: I do
not understand how you
expect my arguments to be completely apolitical
over an issue that is pure
politics: considering Moldovan as a linguistic
entity.]
However, scholarly research - Western included -
disputes this. A lot
of linguists
- if not most - do (with the notable exception of
Vasile Stati; notable,
because he is the one). The regulating body of the
"Moldovan language" -
with regard to the Constitution - disputes this.
Less important in the eyes
of the WMF, natives dispute this (though still
waiting for someone from
Transnistria here). Please follow the links in
my previous messages if
you are not persuaded by this paragraph.
And, probably most important for the Board, the
mo.wiki domain does not
host content in a linguistic entity different from
the Romanian one. It
simply hosts transliterated Romanian content. I
honestly believe that it
is wrong for the Foundation to blindly follow the
ISO specifications over
this issue. It is also wrong for the Board to
adopt - from the NPOV
perspective, which should be respected even if
certain flexibility is
endorsed - a political POV over a
linguistic/historical fact: at a given
period, in a given region, Romanian was written
with a different script.
Regards, Liviu _______________________________________________ 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
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
My constructive position (made clear a long time ago in a discussion here, and in other discussions on various Wikipedia fora) is the following: * Given that no Cyrillic script Moldovan editor exists on Wikipedia, it is only important *for the time being* that reading capability is provided for Cyrillic readers. * This reading capability can already be provided using the transliteration script of :en:User:Bogdangiusca. I have tried it, and it provides decent results. This script should be the only content of a mo-cyr.wiki, transliterating pages of ro.wiki. For the script, please contact its author. * When/if Cyrillic-script Moldovan editors ask for their wikipedia, then (and only then) the mo-cyr.wiki should be given to them. * Why mo-cyr? Because there are 2 Moldovan languages at the time being: - the guys that declared themselves Moldovan in the Moldovan census are a very large majority, and their Latin-scripted version of Moldovan is regulated by the Moldovan Academy of Sciences. - the guys that (are forced to) use the Cyrillic script in Transnistria probably use the last language standard of the Soviet times (I know of no existent regulating body). You see that you just can't let a minority take exclusive use of the ISO code mo/mol. OTOH, the Latin-scripted language is identical with Romanian, as stated by its regulatory body.
As you see, this *is* constructive, and the elements of the solution (and the agreement of Romanians) are here for a very long time now.
Dpotop1
--- GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, In what the WMF aims to do it reserves no place on what wikipedia editors do and do not do. It says that we aim to provide information to people. For the language committee it is nor necessarily relevant what language people identify with as it has brought us an un-ending amount of people who do not want to communicate with others and create new "languages" for political reasons.
If you are so happy denying the use of Moldovan, be constructive and promote the use of the ro.wikipedia with the Cyrillic script. If all you can do is deny this option as well as deny the existence of a mo.wikipedia, please refrain from posting unless you have something positive to say.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/10/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a big misunderstanding on your
part.
The existance of a Wikipedia in a linguistic entity does not
indicate
any level of difference from other Wikipedias' languages. It
does
not claim that it is a "language" or a "dialect".
I think there's no misunderstanding here. You do have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Bosniac, Croatian, Sebian,
or
Serbo-Croatian. You don't have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Moldovan. That makes all the difference.
:en:Dpotop
We have Wikipedias in Bosnian, Croatian,
Serbian,
and Serbo-Croatian. It's a bit of a paradox, if we have Wikipedias
in
the first 3, we shouldn't have one in the fourth logically.
But this problem is non-existant from a
linguistic
standpoint precisely for the reason I stated above. All
four
are linguistic entities, despite the fact that Serbo-Croatian
is an
"umbrella" entity that allows for the use of the other three. As
long
as there is a reason to have these Wikis separate (ie, unless
BCS
people can agree to a merger), they will be separate.
Now, I think everybody here knows by now that
you
would be willing to merge mo and ro Wikipedias with a script
conversion
system on ro.wikipedia. That is fine. Nobody here objects
to
such a system. What we do object to is that at this very moment, the proposal has very little support from the Romanian Wikipedian community. You have been told many times that you are welcome to try to
test
the waters, organize a poll at ro.wp, try to convince people
of
the utility and validity of such a system, but you keep
complaining
to this list about how it's not your responsibility and about how
WE
need to do something.
How can you have not figured out by now that
with
hundreds of e-mails repeating the exact same thing in so many words,
you
are not only failing to change anything, you are actually
making
people more and more firmly against the position you represent?
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic
wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Verbosity is a prerequisite for my
arguments
to be understood. Otherwise
these are simply skipped.
.... Really ? ...
At times, this is the feeling that I have. At
any
rate, verbosity is
necessary to make my arguments clear.
- According to the recently adopted
Language
proposal
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP-
that I suppose can be
applied to existing wikipedias to
determine
their
"validity" - there are three "essential"
requisites that can be
verified: a
valid ISO-639 code, language singularity
and a
viable community and
audience.
Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in
applying the policy in this
way. The policy determines how new languages
are
to be accepted. The
Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it
does
have a valid ISO 639 code.
Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
I have no intent to renew this debate. This is simply to say that my view
over
the entire issue has not radically changed.
For
the following (same)
reasons:
From what I know, the tiny wikipedias (like
the
Moldovan one) were created �
partir de a "list" with no formal voting and
without following any specific
guidelines or policy. On this basis, I believe
that the newly adopted policy
could be used for determining the
"correctness"
of wikipedias that were
created in "obscure" ways. In any case, it is
not
up to me to decide such a
usage.
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid
indeed
in the eyes of the ISO,
but also according to the official POV of the
Party of Communists in RM (I
suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and
might have been in the eyes
=== message truncated ===
____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather
Hoi, A regulatory body can only regulate within its sphere of influence. What is called "Moldovan" does not necessarily relate to the Moldovan country and thereby the relation does not necessarily exist. This has been explained to you before.
There are plenty of languages that do not have a regulatory body associated with them. It is therefore not really necessary to differentiate languages based on the fact if such a body exists or not. This has been explained to you before.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/10/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
My constructive position (made clear a long time ago in a discussion here, and in other discussions on various Wikipedia fora) is the following:
- Given that no Cyrillic script Moldovan editor exists
on Wikipedia, it is only important *for the time being* that reading capability is provided for Cyrillic readers.
- This reading capability can already be provided
using the transliteration script of :en:User:Bogdangiusca. I have tried it, and it provides decent results. This script should be the only content of a mo-cyr.wiki, transliterating pages of ro.wiki. For the script, please contact its author.
- When/if Cyrillic-script Moldovan editors ask for
their wikipedia, then (and only then) the mo-cyr.wiki should be given to them.
- Why mo-cyr? Because there are 2 Moldovan languages
at the time being:
- the guys that declared themselves Moldovan in
the Moldovan census are a very large majority, and their Latin-scripted version of Moldovan is regulated by the Moldovan Academy of Sciences.
- the guys that (are forced to) use the Cyrillic
script in Transnistria probably use the last language standard of the Soviet times (I know of no existent regulating body). You see that you just can't let a minority take exclusive use of the ISO code mo/mol. OTOH, the Latin-scripted language is identical with Romanian, as stated by its regulatory body.
As you see, this *is* constructive, and the elements of the solution (and the agreement of Romanians) are here for a very long time now.
Dpotop1
--- GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, In what the WMF aims to do it reserves no place on what wikipedia editors do and do not do. It says that we aim to provide information to people. For the language committee it is nor necessarily relevant what language people identify with as it has brought us an un-ending amount of people who do not want to communicate with others and create new "languages" for political reasons.
If you are so happy denying the use of Moldovan, be constructive and promote the use of the ro.wikipedia with the Cyrillic script. If all you can do is deny this option as well as deny the existence of a mo.wikipedia, please refrain from posting unless you have something positive to say.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/10/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a big misunderstanding on your
part.
The existance of a Wikipedia in a linguistic entity does not
indicate
any level of difference from other Wikipedias' languages. It
does
not claim that it is a "language" or a "dialect".
I think there's no misunderstanding here. You do have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Bosniac, Croatian, Sebian,
or
Serbo-Croatian. You don't have Wikipedia editors identifying their linguistic identity as Moldovan. That makes all the difference.
:en:Dpotop
We have Wikipedias in Bosnian, Croatian,
Serbian,
and Serbo-Croatian. It's a bit of a paradox, if we have Wikipedias
in
the first 3, we shouldn't have one in the fourth logically.
But this problem is non-existant from a
linguistic
standpoint precisely for the reason I stated above. All
four
are linguistic entities, despite the fact that Serbo-Croatian
is an
"umbrella" entity that allows for the use of the other three. As
long
as there is a reason to have these Wikis separate (ie, unless
BCS
people can agree to a merger), they will be separate.
Now, I think everybody here knows by now that
you
would be willing to merge mo and ro Wikipedias with a script
conversion
system on ro.wikipedia. That is fine. Nobody here objects
to
such a system. What we do object to is that at this very moment, the proposal has very little support from the Romanian Wikipedian community. You have been told many times that you are welcome to try to
test
the waters, organize a poll at ro.wp, try to convince people
of
the utility and validity of such a system, but you keep
complaining
to this list about how it's not your responsibility and about how
WE
need to do something.
How can you have not figured out by now that
with
hundreds of e-mails repeating the exact same thing in so many words,
you
are not only failing to change anything, you are actually
making
people more and more firmly against the position you represent?
Mark
On 09/03/07, Liviu Andronic
wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
> Verbosity is a prerequisite for my
arguments
to be understood. Otherwise
> these are simply skipped. > .... Really ? ...
At times, this is the feeling that I have. At
any
rate, verbosity is
necessary to make my arguments clear.
- According to the recently adopted
Language
proposal
>
policyhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP-
that I suppose can be
> applied to existing wikipedias to
determine
their
> "validity" - there are three "essential"
requisites that can be
verified: a > valid ISO-639 code, language singularity
and a
viable community and
> audience. > Hoi, You are plain wrong. You are also wrong in
applying the policy in this
way. The policy determines how new languages
are
to be accepted. The
Moldovan Wikipedia already exists and it
does
have a valid ISO 639 code.
Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
I have no intent to renew this debate. This is simply to say that my view
over
the entire issue has not radically changed.
For
the following (same)
reasons:
From what I know, the tiny wikipedias (like
the
Moldovan one) were created �
partir de a "list" with no formal voting and
without following any specific
guidelines or policy. On this basis, I believe
that the newly adopted policy
could be used for determining the
"correctness"
of wikipedias that were
created in "obscure" ways. In any case, it is
not
up to me to decide such a
usage.
As to the valid ISO 639 code.. It is valid
indeed
in the eyes of the ISO,
but also according to the official POV of the
Party of Communists in RM (I
suspect), of the Transnistrian authorities and
might have been in the eyes
=== message truncated ===
Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hoi!
My constructive position
So... It was told to Liviu, it gets told to YOU. It will be duly copied to all of you, as an auto answer. 1) WHO of you spammers has found the time to call up a regular vote on RO.wiki on becoming fully bilingual and giving warranties of acceptance of articles by the Transdnistrian minority? 2) Who of you will prove clever enough to do that BEFORE littering our mailboxes with your carnival?
Until you answer to that ANY Moldavian position (pro Cyrillic/anti-cyrillic/Acyrillic or whatever) will be just low quality toilet paper for my house. Or do you guys seriously think that we want to start a big internal war in RO.wiki just to please a couple of hysterical kids?
You want to make a change in someone else's house. You go there and ask the landlord for permission, before coming up here with your emotional scenes. It's called "respect" and "private property" in case you aren't familiar with the terms.
All the tears in the universe won't make a difference. GO TO WORK! No work, no consideration.
Bèrto d Sèra Personagi dlann 2006 për larvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Concerning your invitation to work, which is insulting: 1. Don't you working guys have civility rules around here any more? 2. Does your work consist in giving uncivil answers to messages you didn't read, sent by a user that did not send messages on this forum in the last 3 months? Because both you and GerardM answered my message without reading it. Or, if you read it, it may be useful to interrupt working for thinking a bit.
Dpotop
--- Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi!
My constructive position
So... It was told to Liviu, it gets told to YOU. It will be duly copied to all of you, as an auto answer.
- WHO of you spammers has found the time to call up
a regular vote on RO.wiki on becoming fully bilingual and giving warranties of acceptance of articles by the Transdnistrian minority? 2) Who of you will prove clever enough to do that BEFORE littering our mailboxes with your carnival?
Until you answer to that ANY Moldavian position (pro Cyrillic/anti-cyrillic/Acyrillic or whatever) will be just low quality toilet paper for my house. Or do you guys seriously think that we want to start a big internal war in RO.wiki just to please a couple of hysterical kids?
You want to make a change in someone else's house. You go there and ask the landlord for permission, before coming up here with your emotional scenes. It's called "respect" and "private property" in case you aren't familiar with the terms.
All the tears in the universe won't make a difference. GO TO WORK! No work, no consideration.
Bèrto d Sèra Personagi dlann 2006 për larvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
____________________________________________________________________________________ No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
Perhaps you have not been following this list.
Do you think Gerard or Bèrto really care who it is making these arguments? To them, you and Liviu may as well be the same person because you are saying the same things. Over and over.
They have said over and over that the position that they have already described is FINAL. They did not "misunderstand" anything, they did not miss any of the facts or the evidence.
Just because they do not agree with your personal interpretation of reality does not mean they need you to "tell them the facts". They have already heard what you have to say, and it has already been evaluated. Many times.
The suggestion was, originally made to Liviu: Go to ro.wp and start a poll there about adding an option to convert to Cyrillic. In the mean time, stop complaining. Their idea is that eventually such an option MIGHT exist, but only if ro.wp community successfully integrates it of its own free will, NOT on the decision of some random single user.
If you can get the majority of Ro.wp'ians to agree to a converter in the style of sr.wp (meaning that content may be edited and added in Cyrillic as well), then this discussion may proceed. If you cannot, it is over.
Nobody wants to hear any of this anymore. Haven't you understood that by now?
Mark
On 10/03/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
Concerning your invitation to work, which is insulting:
- Don't you working guys have civility rules around
here any more? 2. Does your work consist in giving uncivil answers to messages you didn't read, sent by a user that did not send messages on this forum in the last 3 months? Because both you and GerardM answered my message without reading it. Or, if you read it, it may be useful to interrupt working for thinking a bit.
Dpotop
--- Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi!
My constructive position
So... It was told to Liviu, it gets told to YOU. It will be duly copied to all of you, as an auto answer.
- WHO of you spammers has found the time to call up
a regular vote on RO.wiki on becoming fully bilingual and giving warranties of acceptance of articles by the Transdnistrian minority? 2) Who of you will prove clever enough to do that BEFORE littering our mailboxes with your carnival?
Until you answer to that ANY Moldavian position (pro Cyrillic/anti-cyrillic/Acyrillic or whatever) will be just low quality toilet paper for my house. Or do you guys seriously think that we want to start a big internal war in RO.wiki just to please a couple of hysterical kids?
You want to make a change in someone else's house. You go there and ask the landlord for permission, before coming up here with your emotional scenes. It's called "respect" and "private property" in case you aren't familiar with the terms.
All the tears in the universe won't make a difference. GO TO WORK! No work, no consideration.
Bèrto 'd Sèra Personagi dl'ann 2006 për l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mark, We are quite capable to say what we have to say. It is not helpful if you repeat after us. You make it seem as if we agree with a side in this affair. We have not considered if we would accept it as a new project. What is at issue here is very much that the mo.wikipedia is an existing project, there are some people who care for it and the arguments used for its closure are not really acceptable.
The optimal solution from our pov is that the mo.wikipedia is cleaned up and that the data of both ro and mo are merged. The first step for this to happen is to coexist peacefully. Your behaviour does not help.
There is the option of a transliteration engine. This is however not available at this time. Optimally it should allow for round trip conversion.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/12/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps you have not been following this list.
Do you think Gerard or Bèrto really care who it is making these arguments? To them, you and Liviu may as well be the same person because you are saying the same things. Over and over.
They have said over and over that the position that they have already described is FINAL. They did not "misunderstand" anything, they did not miss any of the facts or the evidence.
Just because they do not agree with your personal interpretation of reality does not mean they need you to "tell them the facts". They have already heard what you have to say, and it has already been evaluated. Many times.
The suggestion was, originally made to Liviu: Go to ro.wp and start a poll there about adding an option to convert to Cyrillic. In the mean time, stop complaining. Their idea is that eventually such an option MIGHT exist, but only if ro.wp community successfully integrates it of its own free will, NOT on the decision of some random single user.
If you can get the majority of Ro.wp'ians to agree to a converter in the style of sr.wp (meaning that content may be edited and added in Cyrillic as well), then this discussion may proceed. If you cannot, it is over.
Nobody wants to hear any of this anymore. Haven't you understood that by now?
Mark
On 10/03/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
Concerning your invitation to work, which is insulting:
- Don't you working guys have civility rules around
here any more? 2. Does your work consist in giving uncivil answers to messages you didn't read, sent by a user that did not send messages on this forum in the last 3 months? Because both you and GerardM answered my message without reading it. Or, if you read it, it may be useful to interrupt working for thinking a bit.
Dpotop
--- Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi!
My constructive position
So... It was told to Liviu, it gets told to YOU. It will be duly copied to all of you, as an auto answer.
- WHO of you spammers has found the time to call up
a regular vote on RO.wiki on becoming fully bilingual and giving warranties of acceptance of articles by the Transdnistrian minority? 2) Who of you will prove clever enough to do that BEFORE littering our mailboxes with your carnival?
Until you answer to that ANY Moldavian position (pro Cyrillic/anti-cyrillic/Acyrillic or whatever) will be just low quality toilet paper for my house. Or do you guys seriously think that we want to start a big internal war in RO.wiki just to please a couple of hysterical kids?
You want to make a change in someone else's house. You go there and ask the landlord for permission, before coming up here with your emotional scenes. It's called "respect" and "private property" in case you aren't familiar with the terms.
All the tears in the universe won't make a difference. GO TO WORK! No work, no consideration.
Bèrto 'd Sèra Personagi dl'ann 2006 për l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
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
Hoi!
We are quite capable to say what we have to say.
Sometimes I feel we are not :) I get the recurrent impression that whatever we say both sides just hit the "reply" button and copy back what they had said before...
So, for all who are blind/deaf: I have said it and will repeat it all over again: no consensus = no nothing. We will not go and impose a new script on a place where a civil war just ended simply to make the nerves of a couples of extremists happier. If and when there is a clear signal that the communities as a whole are in favor of the merge we can start to talk about tech details.
This "clear signal" includes stopping idiot mumbling about why any of the two sides has no right to exist and how you are going to tell the teacher that my mom was a nazist/communist if we don't buy you candies. We all have been kids and we all know what blackmailing is. Well, it won't work.
Just as it won't work hiding behind someone else and shouting "see? I told you you'd be punished!" (this one's for Mark, in case it's not clear). Since lots of people behave as 4 y.o. kids, I'll try the language lil' babies usually understand.
IS THAT CLEAR NOW? Or should we publish it in a multimedia hyerogliphic text with the Bangles playing underneath??
Now I switch my waiting mode on and keep waiting for a message beginning with: "My constructive position is <add MO-RO ideological crap here>".
Bèrto ‘d Sèra Personagi dl’ann 2006 për l’arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri) 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 GerardM Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 10:14 PM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Conspicuous only in its absence (was Moldavian)
Mark, It is not helpful if you repeat after us. You make it seem as if we agree with a side in this affair. We have not considered if we would accept it as a new project. What is at issue here is very much that the mo.wikipedia is an existing project, there are some people who care for it and the arguments used for its closure are not really acceptable.
The optimal solution from our pov is that the mo.wikipedia is cleaned up and that the data of both ro and mo are merged. The first step for this to happen is to coexist peacefully. Your behaviour does not help.
There is the option of a transliteration engine. This is however not available at this time. Optimally it should allow for round trip conversion.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/12/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps you have not been following this list.
Do you think Gerard or Bèrto really care who it is making these arguments? To them, you and Liviu may as well be the same person because you are saying the same things. Over and over.
They have said over and over that the position that they have already described is FINAL. They did not "misunderstand" anything, they did not miss any of the facts or the evidence.
Just because they do not agree with your personal interpretation of reality does not mean they need you to "tell them the facts". They have already heard what you have to say, and it has already been evaluated. Many times.
The suggestion was, originally made to Liviu: Go to ro.wp and start a poll there about adding an option to convert to Cyrillic. In the mean time, stop complaining. Their idea is that eventually such an option MIGHT exist, but only if ro.wp community successfully integrates it of its own free will, NOT on the decision of some random single user.
If you can get the majority of Ro.wp'ians to agree to a converter in the style of sr.wp (meaning that content may be edited and added in Cyrillic as well), then this discussion may proceed. If you cannot, it is over.
Nobody wants to hear any of this anymore. Haven't you understood that by now?
Mark
On 10/03/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
Concerning your invitation to work, which is insulting:
- Don't you working guys have civility rules around
here any more? 2. Does your work consist in giving uncivil answers to messages you didn't read, sent by a user that did not send messages on this forum in the last 3 months? Because both you and GerardM answered my message without reading it. Or, if you read it, it may be useful to interrupt working for thinking a bit.
Dpotop
--- Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi!
My constructive position
So... It was told to Liviu, it gets told to YOU. It will be duly copied to all of you, as an auto answer.
- WHO of you spammers has found the time to call up
a regular vote on RO.wiki on becoming fully bilingual and giving warranties of acceptance of articles by the Transdnistrian minority? 2) Who of you will prove clever enough to do that BEFORE littering our mailboxes with your carnival?
Until you answer to that ANY Moldavian position (pro Cyrillic/anti-cyrillic/Acyrillic or whatever) will be just low quality toilet paper for my house. Or do you guys seriously think that we want to start a big internal war in RO.wiki just to please a couple of hysterical kids?
You want to make a change in someone else's house. You go there and ask the landlord for permission, before coming up here with your emotional scenes. It's called "respect" and "private property" in case you aren't familiar with the terms.
All the tears in the universe won't make a difference. GO TO WORK! No work, no consideration.
Bèrto 'd Sèra Personagi dl'ann 2006 për l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
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
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
I'm not sure where you get off to characterizing what I'm saying as "see! I told you you'd be punished". This goes for Gerard's message, too.
If you think I was somehow delighted by the solutions you have presented, you are very wrong. I have things I would have much rathered to have happened which I shall not outline here. The idea of a "cleanup" (cleanup of what?) or of the possibility of an eventual merger are not ideal to me. But in the spirit of compromise, I accept them.
What neither of you seem to realize so far is that this is not just tiring, it is useless at this point. Nobody is listening to anyone anymore, so it would be wise, I think, for ALL of us to say "I will not write any more messages to you on this topic unless you provide NEW information or come up with a NEW idea for a compromise solution", because this is really only marginally better than the previously existing shouting match between MO proponents and MO detractors.
Obviously you guys don't pick either "side", if you did, things would be much different (if you picked anti-MO side, it would be gone already, if you picked pro-MO side, it would not be locked anymore and questions about its future would be closed)
The only reason I have jumped in here is because neither Liviu nor Jacky seems to be listening to you and I felt it might help if someone rehashed what you had said in more concise, clear terms. Obviously, it has not.
So it is for that reason that I am going to retire from this discussion. If you want to reply to what I have said here, fine, I am willing to discuss that, but I am not willing to discuss the actual Moldovan Wikipedia in this or any thread anymore as long as you four keep repeating yourselves over and over because frankly, it is not worth my time anymore (and there is a lot of complete and utter crap that is, in fact, "worth my time", because I have quite a bit of time on my hands).
I think everyone else here should do the same because this situation has not changed (let alone improved) since the very beginning of this thread. If you want to continue your futile discussions off-list, all the more power to you, but they no longer seem even slightly constructive so I am hoping you don't keep them up here, because I know I will not be able to keep myself from reading them (it's like a train wreck - you can't stop it, but you can't stop watching it either even if you want to)
And Gerard, a transliteration system is already very technically feasible, Bogdan Giusca had a system set up and working for demonstration, although it was very poor (apparently he was unwilling to make the necessary improvements so that words would be spelt correctly in Cyrillic) and did not convert round-trip, this could be done with our existing software.
The issue is not technical but human - as both you and Bèrto have stated repeatedly, it is currently unlikely to be supported by the ro.wp community.
Mark
On 12/03/07, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi!
We are quite capable to say what we have to say.
Sometimes I feel we are not :) I get the recurrent impression that whatever we say both sides just hit the "reply" button and copy back what they had said before...
So, for all who are blind/deaf: I have said it and will repeat it all over again: no consensus = no nothing. We will not go and impose a new script on a place where a civil war just ended simply to make the nerves of a couples of extremists happier. If and when there is a clear signal that the communities as a whole are in favor of the merge we can start to talk about tech details.
This "clear signal" includes stopping idiot mumbling about why any of the two sides has no right to exist and how you are going to tell the teacher that my mom was a nazist/communist if we don't buy you candies. We all have been kids and we all know what blackmailing is. Well, it won't work.
Just as it won't work hiding behind someone else and shouting "see? I told you you'd be punished!" (this one's for Mark, in case it's not clear). Since lots of people behave as 4 y.o. kids, I'll try the language lil' babies usually understand.
IS THAT CLEAR NOW? Or should we publish it in a multimedia hyerogliphic text with the Bangles playing underneath??
Now I switch my waiting mode on and keep waiting for a message beginning with: "My constructive position is <add MO-RO ideological crap here>".
Bèrto 'd Sèra Personagi dl'ann 2006 për l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri) 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 GerardM Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 10:14 PM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Conspicuous only in its absence (was Moldavian)
Mark, It is not helpful if you repeat after us. You make it seem as if we agree with a side in this affair. We have not considered if we would accept it as a new project. What is at issue here is very much that the mo.wikipedia is an existing project, there are some people who care for it and the arguments used for its closure are not really acceptable.
The optimal solution from our pov is that the mo.wikipedia is cleaned up and that the data of both ro and mo are merged. The first step for this to happen is to coexist peacefully. Your behaviour does not help.
There is the option of a transliteration engine. This is however not available at this time. Optimally it should allow for round trip conversion.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/12/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps you have not been following this list.
Do you think Gerard or Bèrto really care who it is making these arguments? To them, you and Liviu may as well be the same person because you are saying the same things. Over and over.
They have said over and over that the position that they have already described is FINAL. They did not "misunderstand" anything, they did not miss any of the facts or the evidence.
Just because they do not agree with your personal interpretation of reality does not mean they need you to "tell them the facts". They have already heard what you have to say, and it has already been evaluated. Many times.
The suggestion was, originally made to Liviu: Go to ro.wp and start a poll there about adding an option to convert to Cyrillic. In the mean time, stop complaining. Their idea is that eventually such an option MIGHT exist, but only if ro.wp community successfully integrates it of its own free will, NOT on the decision of some random single user.
If you can get the majority of Ro.wp'ians to agree to a converter in the style of sr.wp (meaning that content may be edited and added in Cyrillic as well), then this discussion may proceed. If you cannot, it is over.
Nobody wants to hear any of this anymore. Haven't you understood that by now?
Mark
On 10/03/07, Jacky PB dpotop1@yahoo.com wrote:
Concerning your invitation to work, which is insulting:
- Don't you working guys have civility rules around
here any more? 2. Does your work consist in giving uncivil answers to messages you didn't read, sent by a user that did not send messages on this forum in the last 3 months? Because both you and GerardM answered my message without reading it. Or, if you read it, it may be useful to interrupt working for thinking a bit.
Dpotop
--- Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi!
My constructive position
So... It was told to Liviu, it gets told to YOU. It will be duly copied to all of you, as an auto answer.
- WHO of you spammers has found the time to call up
a regular vote on RO.wiki on becoming fully bilingual and giving warranties of acceptance of articles by the Transdnistrian minority? 2) Who of you will prove clever enough to do that BEFORE littering our mailboxes with your carnival?
Until you answer to that ANY Moldavian position (pro Cyrillic/anti-cyrillic/Acyrillic or whatever) will be just low quality toilet paper for my house. Or do you guys seriously think that we want to start a big internal war in RO.wiki just to please a couple of hysterical kids?
You want to make a change in someone else's house. You go there and ask the landlord for permission, before coming up here with your emotional scenes. It's called "respect" and "private property" in case you aren't familiar with the terms.
All the tears in the universe won't make a difference. GO TO WORK! No work, no consideration.
Bèrto 'd Sèra Personagi dl'ann 2006 për l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojàotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Liviu Andronic schreef:
Before answering this, I hope that the Language Committee agrees on the following two points.
First of all, the WMF does *not* want to have any content in the Moldovan dialect (Romanian as *spoken* in the historic region of Moldavia, which would currently comprise Eastern part of Romania and Moldova with Transnistria included). This would be completely stupid and trolls would be the only serious contributors.
Hoi, The language committee does not agree on the first. As to the second point, in ISO-639-6 there will be the notion of linguistic entities. It makes perfect sense to change the terminology because of its scope. The beauty is that it negates even the notion of something being a language or a dialect.
Given that we are not inclined to listen to political arguments and given that this mess was very much created in a period when Moldova was at war with itself. Given that the numerically greater party uses its position trying to determine the outcome I do not think that this is a convincing ploy.
The notion that "It is not reasonable to dedicate an entire Wikipedia section to this content, when the Romanian Wikipedia exists." is your POV. There is a mo.wikipedia.org. When the people who contribute to the Romanian language Wikipedia find it in themselves to leave the mo,wikipedia be, when it is allowed to clean its content, there may be a moment when a merge may happen. This means that articles in Cyrillic may be translated in Latin and vice versa. Pre conceived ideas that the Cyrillic content is not worth the hassle are tantamount to preventing a merge which would be the optimal solution.
As there will be a period of time needed to do all this, it is a perfect opportunity to improve the Cyrillic to Latin conversion and the Latin to Cyrillic conversion.
When the contributors of the Romanian language Wikipedia do not accept this, they have to accept the existence of a mo.wikipedia. They cannot have their cake and eat it.
Thanks, GerardM
Hoi!
When the contributors of the Romanian language Wikipedia do not accept this, they have to accept the existence of a mo.wikipedia.
IMHO, it's also time to consider whether clearly politically predetermined prejudices towards other linguistic entities/cultures should be formally reported to the Board. That's in case they should prove to be an official position from ro.wiki, and not just a single person's POV.
If this is not the case, than it should not be a problem for RO.wiki to express an immediate formal condemn of all forms of racial/sexual/political/social/religious AND linguistic intolerance and to express its absolute readiness to ensure democracy and respect for minorities.
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
On 31/01/07, Bogdan Giusca liste@dapyx.com wrote:
Thursday, February 1, 2007, 12:49:01 AM, David wrote:
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but that nobody wants to use it anymore. It was used before 1989 in Moldova, but since, they switched back to Latin, so they're contributing to Romanian Wikipedia.
True.
A small part of Moldova declared its independence and with the help of the Russian Army, they have a non-recognized government. A part of the schools in this region still use the same textbooks printed 20 years ago, in Cyrillic alphabet.
Not entirely true, and full of your own POV.
This usage is imposed by the region's government (whos human rights record is quite bad) and nobody wants to use the alphabet, there or elsewhere. An interesting fact on this is that there were *no* books or newspapers published in the last 15 years using this alphabet.
The human rights record of the PMR is debatable, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria
Also, it's not true that nobody wants to use the alphabet. If they didn't, they could either: 1) Move to Moldova and send their kids to schools there so they would learn Latin alphabet 2) Send their kids to Romanian-medium schools in Transnistria, although their capacity is limited so this is not necessarily an option 3) Send their kids to Russian- or Ukrainian-medium schools so that they don't have to use that alphabet for that language. Parents sending their kids to Moldovan-medium schools in PMR is equivalent to an explicit endorsement of the Cyrillic script. May I remind you that the majority of ethnic Moldavians in PMR support its continued independence?
Regarding books or newspapers, I was pretty sure there was a small-circulation newspaper in PMR in Moldavian, and I know that the books of the legal proceedings of the constitutional court of the PMR are published trilingually.
The international press usually ignored this subject from this corner of the earth, with just a few exceptions:
http://www.liberation.fr/actualite/monde/230766.FR.php?rss=true http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3936991.stm
...much to the contrary, you and yours were up in arms, constantly citing BBC and CNN articles.
I have yet to meet a Moldovan who wants to use Cyrillic alphabet in Wikipedia -- the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians and other panslavists.
That's because the one or two that ever came, you scared them away with your polemics.
As, such, with no actual native speaker, the Moldovan Wikipedia lived exclusively out of transliterations from Romanian Wikipedia.
This is an outright lie. Somewhere between 5% and 10% of the articles on that WP are original, you know that yourself because one of them you "corrected".
Mark
David Monniaux schreef:
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
Hoi, This argument is totally irrelevant. There is no place for politics in answering the question if a language is used and if so in which way. What is relevant is that there are people still writing in Cyrillic. This has been expressed before. On previous occasions we have expressed quite strongly that political arguments have no place in deciding if a language in one of its manifestations is used or not. This is the point of view of the language committee.
Thanks, GerardM for the language committee
On 2/1/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
David Monniaux schreef:
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
Hoi, This argument is totally irrelevant. There is no place for politics in answering the question if a language is used and if so in which way.
There is one relevant point in this argument. Writing Moldovan with Cyrillic was and is imposed. By politics, but imposed. And as such, there are no (apart for minoritary and exceptional cases) persons freely willing to write Romanian in Cyrillic script.
Thus, I do not really understand what does Wikipedia - and the language committee, in particular - hope for the future of the Moldovan Wikipedia when there are _no_ native _writers_ willing to contribute. This "no" is evident, taking into account the two recent votes (on mo.wiki and on meta), where no Moldovan supported the existance of the Moldovan Wikipedia. This Wikipedia cannot advance much if it is to be driven by - in most of the cases - approximate transliterations made by Mark Williamson of Romanian Wikipedia articles.
What is relevant is that there are people still writing in Cyrillic.
This has been expressed before. On previous occasions we have expressed quite strongly that political arguments have no place in deciding if a language in one of its manifestations is used or not. This is the point of view of the language committee.
Thanks, GerardM for the language committee
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
David Monniaux wrote:
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
In fact, there seems to be an organized campaign, with a form letter.
I wonder who organized that... I'm sure we can all guess. It's the same guy who has been searching for any mention of teh Moldavian Wikipedia he can find online, and "informing" people about it (telling them that it's a Wikipedia started by a dumb kid from America that was planned to be deleted until the Russians interfered).
Mark
On 01/02/07, David Monniaux David.Monniaux@free.fr wrote:
David Monniaux wrote:
OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the issue, I'm just reporting.)
In fact, there seems to be an organized campaign, with a form letter.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Bogdan Giusca schreef:
Thursday, February 1, 2007, 1:45:20 PM, David wrote:
In fact, there seems to be an organized campaign, with a form letter.
As long as there is no one protesting in front of the Wikimedia Foundation's headquarters, it's ok. :-)
Hoi, Is it ? Thanks, GerardM
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org