Hello, Brion
Unless a better count system is proposed, I will replace
the comma check
with a greater-than-zero-size check within twelve hours.
You have a good point. Every one knows current counting system is silly and need overwhole. I have no objection at all.
Only my concern is that we should not make a decision in the place where people can't participate. Yes, every one can discuss here but only if they speak English. It seems most of wikipedians in ja.wikipedia knows almost nothing about what is going on the administration stage like here or village pump in en.wikipedia.
If you are talking about only en.wikipedia (since this mailing list is in English), forgive me about my misunderstanding.
My suspecion is that we should stop using universal system for all of editions. Different languages need different coordination. The couting artciels should depend on the language of edition. Therefore, the discussion here should be irrelevant and we should move this to each wikipedia's village pump.
------- Takuya Murata takusi@manjiro.net
--- Takuya Murata takusi@manjiro.net wrote:
Hello, Brion
Hello Takuya
Unless a better count system is proposed, I will
replace the comma check
with a greater-than-zero-size check within twelve
hours.
You have a good point. Every one knows current counting system is silly and need overwhole. I have no objection at all.
Only my concern is that we should not make a decision in the place where people can't participate. Yes, every one can discuss here but only if they speak English. It seems most of wikipedians in ja.wikipedia knows almost nothing about what is going on the administration stage like here or village pump in en.wikipedia.
If you are talking about only en.wikipedia (since this mailing list is in English), forgive me about my misunderstanding.
Hum, you are very right with language issue But, even if this list is in english, it is the main list, so issues discussed here are likely to impact all wikipedias Besides, that the french silliness with comma hunting that has been going on for about a month, that explain this subject being raised again. But the issue is not new :-)
My suspecion is that we should stop using universal system for all of editions. Different languages need different coordination. The couting artciels should depend on the language of edition. Therefore, the discussion here should be irrelevant and we should move this to each wikipedia's village pump.
Yes and no. It is not irrelevant, for some people thrive on monitoring the number of articles, and many internationals are eager to go up in the rank. For those, it is important that the numbering technique be the same, for the comparison to stay valid.
On the other hand, it would be interesting that discussions go in parallele in pump (of coffee shop :-)) for everyone to feel involved
My feeling is that counting technique should maybe be related to the language family.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Takuya Murata wrote:
Only my concern is that we should not make a decision in the place where people can't participate. Yes, every one can discuss here but only if they speak English. It seems most of wikipedians in ja.wikipedia knows almost nothing about what is going on the administration stage like here or village pump in en.wikipedia.
If you are talking about only en.wikipedia (since this mailing list is in English), forgive me about my misunderstanding.
My suspecion is that we should stop using universal system for all of editions. Different languages need different coordination. The couting artciels should depend on the language of edition. Therefore, the discussion here should be irrelevant and we should move this to each wikipedia's village pump.
There are very few rules that should apply across all language Wikipedias. Perhaps some very serious things like NPOV or not insulting each other, but in most areas I agree with your intent.
At the same time, the much larger number of participants in the English Wikipedia means that more subjects get discussed with a wider range of opinions.
When much later an issue arises in one of the other languages it would be a good idea for somebody to translate a summary of the English discussion with a fair representation of all sides. After that there is no need to come to the same conclusion as the English speakers.
Eclecticology
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org