Hoi It was already specifically stated that this code is final. 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Cajcyc Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:11 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki By the way, when will the wikipedia prefix for Classical Belarusian changed to something reasonable from the temporary "be-x-old"? A good proposal was "be-classic", "be-class" or similar. A.C. -----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Ihar Hrachyshka Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 10:56 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki У Няд, 29/04/2007 у 09:08 +0200, Andre Engels піша: be-x-old should be named like "Беларуская (тарашкевіца)" _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

But "-x-" codes are per definition provisional. This prefix can definitely not be final! -----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Berto 'd Sera Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 2:18 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki Hoi It was already specifically stated that this code is final. 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Cajcyc Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:11 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki By the way, when will the wikipedia prefix for Classical Belarusian changed to something reasonable from the temporary "be-x-old"? A good proposal was "be-classic", "be-class" or similar. A.C. -----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Ihar Hrachyshka Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 10:56 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki У Няд, 29/04/2007 у 09:08 +0200, Andre Engels піша: be-x-old should be named like "Беларуская (тарашкевіца)" _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

Hoi, The names you suggest are not what I would consider good proposals. Given that this orthography is based on a paper in 2005 it hardly qualifies as classic. Thanks, Gerard On 4/29/07, Alexander Cajcyc <czalex(a)bk.ru> wrote:

Hoi, By using terminology like "Soviet-orthography" you are part of the problem. By excusing yourself in such a way you are not part of a solution. Having two Belarusian Wikipedia is a blemish on both projects, how can you pretend to have a NPOV resource when you are so much at each others throat ? Thanks, GerardM On 4/29/07, Alexander Cajcyc <czalex(a)bk.ru> wrote:

Oh my God... Define "intelligentsiya". I did not know we had "cultural level codes"... Listen you guys cannot one day come here and claim that "there are less differences than between EN_US and EN_UK" and the other come here and tell us that it's a tragedy because we censor you as a unique language. It's either TWO languages or not. If yes: - yours hasn't got an ISO code and shouldn't be hosted here If no: - the only thing that changed is minor things like "neighbor=neighbour" AND the admin structure. That is, you lost your internal mafia and cry for that. I can understand that power is often a matter in human societies, yet... what do you get from being an admin in a wiki? Do you become popular? Do you have more sexual partners? Or do you get money to allow this or that article to be published? I don't know... Start from defining "intelligentsiya", I'm really curious. 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Cajcyc Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:35 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki The 2005 paper bases on pre-reformed orthography used in emigrant communities and among intelligentsiya. It sums it up and standartises it. Soviet-orthography wikipedians refused to compromise, so there will be two Belarusian wikipedias :( -----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of GerardM Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 2:22 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki Hoi, The names you suggest are not what I would consider good proposals. Given that this orthography is based on a paper in 2005 it hardly qualifies as classic. Thanks, Gerard On 4/29/07, Alexander Cajcyc <czalex(a)bk.ru> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

Hoi! Internal power structure = The complex set of personal friendships, hidden solidarities, private phone calls, etc PLUS the administrative roles and the power to ban people and protect articles PLUS control over the interface. Is that clear enough? Your turn with definitions, now, I'm still waiting to know who is "respectable" in Belarus'. 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Cajcyc Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 2:20 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki Dear Berto, I personally did not loose any admin privileges in "be" as I actually never had ones.. I'm glad that being wiki admin and feeling power this way seems to be something sexual and so much valuable to you. The "classical orthography" Wikipedia was - read my lips - the FIRST to be there on wikipedia.org. It was created TWO YEARS before the official orthography supporters organised their initiative. It had and has a developed structure, rules etc. The path could only be creating parallel "classical"-official interfaces and article versions within one Wiki - and the work was going that way, the problem was purely technical. But once upon a time the brave Wikimedia administration just came in and put the whole project on a discriminating "-x-old" domain and gave the be-wiki to the official orthography initiative. Thanks for not deleting it, really. AC -----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Berto 'd Sera Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 2:48 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki Oh my God... Define "intelligentsiya". I did not know we had "cultural level codes"... Listen you guys cannot one day come here and claim that "there are less differences than between EN_US and EN_UK" and the other come here and tell us that it's a tragedy because we censor you as a unique language. It's either TWO languages or not. If yes: - yours hasn't got an ISO code and shouldn't be hosted here If no: - the only thing that changed is minor things like "neighbor=neighbour" AND the admin structure. That is, you lost your internal mafia and cry for that. I can understand that power is often a matter in human societies, yet... what do you get from being an admin in a wiki? Do you become popular? Do you have more sexual partners? Or do you get money to allow this or that article to be published? I don't know... Start from defining "intelligentsiya", I'm really curious. 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Cajcyc Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:35 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki The 2005 paper bases on pre-reformed orthography used in emigrant communities and among intelligentsiya. It sums it up and standartises it. Soviet-orthography wikipedians refused to compromise, so there will be two Belarusian wikipedias :( -----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of GerardM Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 2:22 PM To: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] be: and be-x-old: interwiki Hoi, The names you suggest are not what I would consider good proposals. Given that this orthography is based on a paper in 2005 it hardly qualifies as classic. Thanks, Gerard On 4/29/07, Alexander Cajcyc <czalex(a)bk.ru> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

I'm taking some exception to some of the comments here. Creating WP in your own native language can't be considered "being at the somebody's throat". In fact, when you get down to it, there actually *are* *two* Belarusian languages currently: * One is standard, denoted by iso 639, state sponsored for 80+ years, taught at schools in the fairly unchanging way for 70+ years (well, excepting the 3 years of German occupation), state language since 1991, etc. etc. etc. Not much to add here, really. * Another is stemming from pre-reform tradition, brought on, in many variations, by emigrants, put forward, in many variations, in end 1980s by *some* people "dissatisfied" with the standard one, and trying to make the state switch the standard one for "pure tarashkyevitsa", as heralded by them. This was then in-group dubbed "classic" in c.1994, in-group standardised in 2005 (for what it's worth, I hear there are again splinterings over it -- inside the group -- unsurprising), and contains now extra letter in alphabet, bulk of the pre-reform orthography features, different declensions, different standard vocabularies, lexics in constant re-invention flux. This is clearly another language (or dialect?), being in the formative phase, with its supporters claiming the names "Belarusian" and "Classic", and, it seems, still cherishing the hope to impose their creation on everybody in Belarus -- or from Belarus, when on Internet. Getting back to the wiki matters, the question of the language chosen for the be:wiki, was *first time* raised like a week after its opening (c.Sep 2004), and first b*dy row "over the orthography" happened after 4 months (Jan 2005). To bunch together two entities so different is utopia -- and possibly falsehood. On the whole, I hardly see how all this, or, specifically, two wikipedias in two versions of language, would qualify as "disgrace", though. Just a different wikipedia in a different language of a different folks. That the language is authored by a fraction group, isn't a basis for disqualification. There are, e.g., plenty of wikis in dialects or artificial languages, with no-one's the worse for it. Of course, it hardly can be called "just Belarusian" or "Classic". ---

On 29/04/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: Different alphabet, orthography, morphology, lexics do not make, between them, "even a dialect"? What, then? ---