Hi all,
Cunctator moved 'Wikipedia:Non-English Wikipedias' to 'Wikipedia:Multilingual coordination'.
One might think that there are no Wikipedias in other languages anymore. Are we destinied to be just a division of Wikipedia for Multilingual coordination ?
It seems to be rather unfair to people involved in Wikipedias in other languages.
1. some contributors of Wikipedias in other languages have put a lot of effort and passion into creating "their" Wikipedias. They may or may not care much about the English WP 2. Non-English Wikipedias have only recently been given more attention by Wikipedia community at large which is dominated by English speaking crowd 3. we always wanted help and coordination but we felt put aside a little
I suppose there is a general consensus in non-English Wikipedias about the current policies and plans towards ONE Wikipedia in different languages but I don't think we can agree to "the smaller have to subdue" rule.
Regards, Kpjas
I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of that change Kpjas
First notice what the top of that page is saying in terms of description
"We use Intlwiki-L, to coordinate Wikipedia across different languages. Please take a look at the Wikipedia Embassy and join if you're interested in the future of these projects"
It is about *coordination*, not so much stating the *existence of other languages*, fact that is already stated otherwise.
Second : that change should not be a surprise. A couple of days ago, tc wrote in the talk page
"I'd like to redirect this page to Wikipedia:Multilingual coordination. I think that better expresses the intent of this page, and doesn't carry any nationalistic baggage. It's also an active name--describes an ongoing process, rather than a fuzzy entity of unclear definition."
I don't think I saw any no-wait answer to his comment, but only support from Mav.
I think using the word "international wikipedias" is not a good idea, because 1) it stress out the "national" part of the wiki, which is wrong since our wikis are defined by langage rather than by nationalities 2) it set up by default two groups, the international one and the english one 3) as Mav said, it excludes Esperanto
The choice of the "non-english page" is better, for it focuses back on the language. But it still maintain a two groups settings.
This new page title is imho better for it removes that separation, and, yes, insists on the evolution most of us desire.
No, it does not make us a subproject, notice the en.wiki is also in the list.
This said, I think our stats have nothing to do on this page. They should be on another page. They have nothing to do with coordination.
I don't think we can agree to "the smaller have to subdue" rule.
I don't understand why this new title makes you think that.
If there is something to complain about, let me give you an example.
It seems that from the fr.wiki, I can link an english article with [[w:blabla]] or a meta article with [[m.blabla]]. Is there any way I can directly link a french article on the en.wiki ? I don't think so. Maybe I am wrong. If I am, please somebody explain to me how I do that. If I am not, why is it that a link can only go one way, and not the other?
That is a coordination issue. The fact it is between english language and a non-english language is irrelevant. It should just work between a language and another, whatever the language.
--- "Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz" kpj@gower.pl wrote:
Hi all,
Cunctator moved 'Wikipedia:Non-English Wikipedias' to 'Wikipedia:Multilingual coordination'.
One might think that there are no Wikipedias in other languages anymore. Are we destinied to be just a division of Wikipedia for Multilingual coordination ?
It seems to be rather unfair to people involved in Wikipedias in other languages.
- some contributors of Wikipedias in other
languages have put a lot of effort and passion into creating "their" Wikipedias. They may or may not care much about the English WP 2. Non-English Wikipedias have only recently been given more attention by Wikipedia community at large which is dominated by English speaking crowd 3. we always wanted help and coordination but we felt put aside a little
I suppose there is a general consensus in non-English Wikipedias about the current policies and plans towards ONE Wikipedia in different languages but I don't think we can agree to "the smaller have to subdue" rule.
Regards, Kpjas _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
Anthere wrote:
I think using the word "international wikipedias" is not a good idea, because
- it stress out the "national" part of the wiki,
which is wrong since our wikis are defined by langage rather than by nationalities
Hence "*inter*national wikipedia", not "a collection of national wikipedias".
- it set up by default two groups, the international
one and the english one 3) as Mav said, it excludes Esperanto
Esperanto is "the international language"; it would seem perfectly ideal.
It seems that from the fr.wiki, I can link an english article with [[w:blabla]] or a meta article with [[m.blabla]]. Is there any way I can directly link a french article on the en.wiki ? I don't think so. Maybe I am wrong. If I am, please somebody explain to me how I do that. If I am not, why is it that a link can only go one way, and not the other?
[[w:title]] is a historical usage from meta to English wikipedia, and it's an accident that it works anywhere else. [[m:title]] is from any language wikipedia to meta. [[<language code>:title]] works from meta to any language. I would _like_ for [[<language code>:title]] to work from any language to any language, but since we already use that syntax for the magic language links instead of regular inline links, we may need some other syntax.
Ideas: 1) Like linking image description pages: "see [[:fr:Page français|some french page]]", "vois [[:en:English page|une page anglaise]]"
2) I notice that DeWikiPedia is available as an InterWiki suffix to the German wikipedia in the UseMod-style InterWiki InterMap. We could add the rest to this list, and start using it, and you could link eg [[FrWikiPedia:Page Français|a french page]]
3) The 'magic' links probably shouldn't be magic on talk pages, where you're more likely to be explicitly referencing a page under discussion.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
I just wrote [[Metapedia]], and I tried to link to <metapedia.org>, which of course is wrong, so I fixed it when I figured it out. But neither <metapedia.org> nor <metapedia.com> seems to be owned now, so would it be more trouble than it's worth to get them?
-- Toby
PS: The <title>s of Metapedia pages say "Wikipedia" in them. That should be "Metapedia" too, don't you think?
I wrote:
I just wrote [[Metapedia]], and I tried to link to <metapedia.org>, which of course is wrong, so I fixed it when I figured it out. But neither <metapedia.org> nor <metapedia.com> seems to be owned now, so would it be more trouble than it's worth to get them?
I guess that "Metapedia" is just an abbreviation for "Meta-Wikipedia", so this seems less reasonable than before, since we certainly do have <meta.wikipedia.org>.
The <title>s of Metapedia pages say "Wikipedia" in them. That should be "Metapedia" too, don't you think?
However, this could still use changing, one way or another, so that I can distinguish the [[Main Page]]s of each wiki in the titles on my web browser's minimised windows.
-- Toby
Toby Bartels wrote:
I just wrote [[Metapedia]], and I tried to link to <metapedia.org>, which of course is wrong, so I fixed it when I figured it out. But neither <metapedia.org> nor <metapedia.com> seems to be owned now, so would it be more trouble than it's worth to get them?
Well, since we don't have a site called "Metapedia"...
PS: The <title>s of Metapedia pages say "Wikipedia" in them. That should be "Metapedia" too, don't you think?
That's probably because they're Meta-Wikipedia pages, not Metapedia pages. They _ought_ be to explicitly linked to the Wikipedia name, because they're explicitly part of the Wikipedia project. However, they shouldn't say "Encyclopedia article from", as they are not part of the _encyclopedia_ Wikipedia, but are meta-discussion about the _project_ Wikipedia.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
--- Brion VIBBER brion@pobox.com wrote:
Anthere wrote:
I think using the word "international wikipedias"
is
not a good idea, because
- it stress out the "national" part of the wiki,
which is wrong since our wikis are defined by
langage
rather than by nationalities
Hence "*inter*national wikipedia", not "a collection of national wikipedias".
I hear inter*national* in the word. Maybe is that a cultural biais.
Ideas:
- Like linking image description pages: "see
[[:fr:Page fran�ais|some french page]]", "vois [[:en:English page|une page anglaise]]"
Yes. Or [[fr:une page fran�aise]] would do for the magic link, and [fr:une page francaise|une page fran�aise] would do for a link in the text. That way, it could be *very quick to write *more similar to regular links *could make a distinction between - internal links (see also) in blue - external links in green - int-ext links in....well...grey
Ultimately, it should be clear when a link is really making people quit wikipedia, or just jump in another chapter of the book.
- I notice that DeWikiPedia is available as an
InterWiki suffix to the German wikipedia in the UseMod-style InterWiki InterMap. We could add the rest to this list, and start using it, and you could link eg [[FrWikiPedia:Page Fran�ais|a french page]]
Amha, the prefix is too long :-)
- The 'magic' links probably shouldn't be magic on
talk pages, where you're more likely to be explicitly referencing a page under discussion.
lol, I agree.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
On 11/2/02 9:34 AM, "Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz" kpj@gower.pl wrote:
Hi all,
Cunctator moved 'Wikipedia:Non-English Wikipedias' to 'Wikipedia:Multilingual coordination'.
Actually, I moved 'Wikipedia:International Wikipedia' to 'Wikipedia:Multilingual coordination'.
I renamed the "Non-English Wikipedias" link on the Main Page (which pointed to Wikipedia:International Wikipedia through a redirect) to "Coordination between languages".
One might think that there are no Wikipedias in other languages anymore.
I hope not. This is to put every language on a level playing field.
Are we destinied to be just a division of Wikipedia for Multilingual coordination ?
It seems to be rather unfair to people involved in Wikipedias in other languages.
- some contributors of Wikipedias in other languages have put a lot of
effort and passion into creating "their" Wikipedias. They may or may not care much about the English WP 2. Non-English Wikipedias have only recently been given more attention by Wikipedia community at large which is dominated by English speaking crowd 3. we always wanted help and coordination but we felt put aside a little
The phrase "Multilingual coordination" means "coordination between languages", exactly what you say people want.
I suppose there is a general consensus in non-English Wikipedias about the current policies and plans towards ONE Wikipedia in different languages but I don't think we can agree to "the smaller have to subdue" rule.
I certainly was not trying to imply that. I don't think the smaller have to subdue.
Are you upset because I made the change, and not someone else?
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org