Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited everything incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and I mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you have to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that you give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space where such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate and to find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited everything incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and I mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 30/03/07, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote: ...
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
...
Well, if you care to share your ideas on such options and possibilities, please do so (for starters I'd prefer private email).
---
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you have to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that you give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space where such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate and to find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited everything incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and I mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English .. all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
Hoi, Dismissing this whole thing as purely technical is something that might have worked in the past. In the present you have a conflict. This conflict needs a compromise. Dismissing all this as something "technical" is consequently not helpful. Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The
standard
is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place
in
the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not
bring
collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together
and
history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in
English
... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould
find a
solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the
representation of
Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the
sake
of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now,
OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles
to
get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical
orthography has
an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really
DO
speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that
most
forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being
hold
in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g
.,
be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for
editing
so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that
you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel
that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about
"your"
language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language
/
orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want
to
achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to
cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has
been
created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even
more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing
Belarusian
language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay,
your
right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your
case, it
can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a
pit
for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you
call
"proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and
Russian)
into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages
(and
I
mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages.
And...
grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming
in
"norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
Hoi!
We do the same in pms. What it takes is a good admin structure, though, one capable to addres the edit wars that sometimes happen (because they do happen, it's just inevitable).
What IMHO they may do is to make up a group of people from both parties and generate an internal ArbCom that will represent all basic trends and manage to calm down the worst events.
To get to that point they may simply try and meet in front of a beer a couple of times and get to know each other personally (people who can look into each other's face often have much less conflicts then people who just exchange emails).
The weather is getting better in Kyiv, so I guess fishing will soon be a good social option in Belarus', too. :)
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 Alexander Cajcyc Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 4:14 PM To: GerardM Cc: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The
standard
is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not
bring
collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together
and
history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in
English
... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find
a
solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation
of
Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the
sake
of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now,
OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography
has
an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really
DO
speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that
most
forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel
that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about
"your"
language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has
been
created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even
more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay,
your
right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case,
it
can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a
pit
for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you
call
"proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and
Russian)
into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages
(and
I
mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages.
And...
grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 17:13 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc піша:
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
As you can remember I've provided such a solution long time ago but there was a one big Ignore on the Main_Page on this solution talk. And now - when all is so bad - you tell us the same words. I don't want to think that you are making compromises only after the power-punch from Wikimedia authority. Are you speaking serious now?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that.
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
P.S. Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the indexing bots.
Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
I am bloody serious now!
I remember User:Alexander Gouk planning to introduce some solution, but I don't remember if he really did. Can you give a link to your proposal?
And I personnally was always for splitting into classical and official sectors within one and the same Wikipedia instead of splitting in two separate wikipedias or, especially, deleting the old wiki for the sake of a new one!
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: Ihar Hrachyshka ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com To: Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:10:10 +0300 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 17:13 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc п ша:
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
As you can remember I've provided such a solution long time ago but there was a one big Ignore on the Main_Page on this solution talk. And now - when all is so bad - you tell us the same words. I don't want to think that you are making compromises only after the power-punch from Wikimedia authority. Are you speaking serious now?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just insults and speculations.
> You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian > language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your > right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that. This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit for yourself by your own hands.
> P.S. > Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call > "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
> incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) > into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
> mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... > grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the > indexing bots. Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in "norm" if people just don't write in it?
Monk.
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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 21:55 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc піша:
I am bloody serious now!
I remember User:Alexander Gouk planning to introduce some solution, but I don't remember if he really did. Can you give a link to your proposal?
http://be-x-old.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B1%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA% D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B5:%D0%93%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%9E %D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0% B0#.D0.A1.D0.BF.D1.80.D0.BE.D0.B1.D0.B0_.D1.80.D1.8D.D1.84.D0.BB.D0.B5.D0.BA.D1.81.D1.96.D1.96_.D0.BD.D0.B0.D0.BA.D0.BE.D0.BD.D1.82_.D1.80.D1.8D.D0.B3.D1.96.D1.81.D1.82.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.86.D1.8B.D1.96_.D0.92.D1.96.D0.BA.D1.96.D0.BF.D0.B5.D0.B4.D1.8B.D1.96_.D0.B4.D0.BB.D1.8F_.D0.B0.D1.84.D1.96.D1.86.D1.8B.D0.B9.D0.BD.D0.B0.D0.B3.D0.B0_.D0.BF.D1.80.D0.B0.D0.B2.D0.B0.D0.BF.D1.96.D1.81.D1.83
Gouk was working on an "impossible-to-create" project - "convertor". You know that's impossible to implement.
And I personnally was always for splitting into classical and official sectors within one and the same Wikipedia instead of splitting in two separate wikipedias or, especially, deleting the old wiki for the sake of a new one!
So where were you all recently? I've heard lots of times for the last few days that "millions" of people "didn't know about the problem" or "always supported our solutions":)
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: Ihar Hrachyshka ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com To: Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:10:10 +0300 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 17:13 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc п ша:
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
As you can remember I've provided such a solution long time ago but there was a one big Ignore on the Main_Page on this solution talk. And now - when all is so bad - you tell us the same words. I don't want to think that you are making compromises only after the power-punch from Wikimedia authority. Are you speaking serious now?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote: > > Hi, > > How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about > language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just > insults and speculations. > > > You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian > > language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your > > right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that. > This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it > can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you > understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit > for yourself by your own hands. > > > P.S. > > Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call > > "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
> > incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) > > into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
> > mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... > > grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the > > indexing bots. > Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in > "norm" if people just don't write in it? > > Monk. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 21:55 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc піша:
I am bloody serious now!
I remember User:Alexander Gouk planning to introduce some solution, but I don't remember if he really did. Can you give a link to your proposal?
And I personnally was always for splitting into classical and official sectors within one and the same Wikipedia instead of splitting in two separate wikipedias or, especially, deleting the old wiki for the sake of a new one!
And by the way, there were much more easier solutions of this conflict and they were provided on the Main_Page of be-x-old but they were either blamed or ignored. We just needed categorization, changes in edit rules and main page in official orthography. But be-x-old community (especially admins) were against any "concessions" for official orthography. I think it's not realistic now too:(
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: Ihar Hrachyshka ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com To: Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:10:10 +0300 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 17:13 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc п ша:
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
As you can remember I've provided such a solution long time ago but there was a one big Ignore on the Main_Page on this solution talk. And now - when all is so bad - you tell us the same words. I don't want to think that you are making compromises only after the power-punch from Wikimedia authority. Are you speaking serious now?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote: > > Hi, > > How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about > language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just > insults and speculations. > > > You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian > > language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your > > right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that. > This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it > can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you > understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit > for yourself by your own hands. > > > P.S. > > Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call > > "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
> > incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) > > into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
> > mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... > > grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the > > indexing bots. > Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in > "norm" if people just don't write in it? > > Monk. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
So where were you all recently?
Na svoj soram, I left the discussion for reasons of laziness and relied on the good will of other wikipedians. I shouldn't have done that ;(
We just needed categorization, changes in edit rules and main page in official orthography.
Yes, yes. Maybe a main page with two links to main pages in the relevant orthography
I think it's not realistic now too:(
Every solution that would satisfy us all IS realistic, as the technical possibility to implement a segmentation is still there, as far as I understand. So why not doing it?
-----Original Message----- From: Ihar Hrachyshka [mailto:ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:26 PM To: Alexander Cajcyc Cc: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; GerardM Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 21:55 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc піша:
I am bloody serious now!
I remember User:Alexander Gouk planning to introduce some solution, but I don't remember if he really did. Can you give a link to your proposal?
And I personnally was always for splitting into classical and official sectors within one and the same Wikipedia instead of splitting in two separate wikipedias or, especially, deleting the old wiki for the sake of a new one!
And by the way, there were much more easier solutions of this conflict and they were provided on the Main_Page of be-x-old but they were either blamed or ignored. We just needed categorization, changes in edit rules and main page in official orthography. But be-x-old community (especially admins) were against any "concessions" for official orthography. I think it's not realistic now too:(
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: Ihar Hrachyshka ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com To: Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:10:10 +0300 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 17:13 +0400, Alexander Cajcyc п ша:
In that case a solution has already been found long ago, and the question is purely a technical one: one and the same Wiki, but with articles separated into "classical" and "official". As far as I know, this has already been implemented in other Wikis (e.g. Serbian?). So why not just doing the same with Belarusian Wikipedia?
As you can remember I've provided such a solution long time ago but there was a one big Ignore on the Main_Page on this solution talk. And now - when all is so bad - you tell us the same words. I don't want to think that you are making compromises only after the power-punch from Wikimedia authority. Are you speaking serious now?
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: "Alexander Cajcyc" czalex@bk.ru, wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:43 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English ... all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/30/07, Alexander Cajcyc czalex@bk.ru wrote:
Hi everybody
I agree with Gerard that we must not deepen the conflict and hould find a solution that would satisfy all of us.
Are we all, no matter the orthography, interested in the representation of Belarusian language in Wikipedia and in the usage of this tool for the sake of all Belarusian speakers no matter whether they prefer the classical orthography or the official one? Yes, we all are. So let's find some compromise.
I propose to leave the official orthography wikipedia where it is now, OK.
But you just CAN'T allow the 6000 classical Belarusian Wiki articles to get lost! The fact that the Belarusian Wiki was created as a Wiki in Taraskievica is a illustrative example to that the classical orthography has an important place in Belarus now, especially amoung people who really DO speak the language on an every-day basis, while you can even see that most forum conversations in the official-orthography Wikipedia are being hold in... Russian [what is not bad itself].
So an ideal solution would be to rename be-x-old.wikipedia.org to, e.g., be-classic.wikipedia.org or bel.wikipedia.org and to open it for editing so that it could coutinue its effective functioning.
regards,
czalex
-----Original Message----- From: GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:23:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
Hoi, Please consider that if you have an option to work together, that you
have
to talk. That you have to give and take. That you will always feel that
you
give more than what you get.
There are two groups of people who have fought each other in a space
where
such fights are not appreciated. Assertions have been made about "your" language, "your" orthography, by trash talking the "other" language / orthography. You do not get any sympathy in this way. When you want to achieve something, it will be more beneficial to be seen to cooperate
and to
find some coexistence.
When this coexistence is hard to get because of the enmity that has been created in the past, it only means that you will have to give even more.
Thanks, Gerard
On 3/30/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote: > > Hi, > > How can anybody say that Yury Tarasievich and his project is about > language, not about politics, after such a letter? No facts, just > insults and speculations. > > > You are an entity, yes, set out to destroy the existing Belarusian > > language and culture and replace it with your version -- okay, your > > right. But get yourself your own blessed language code for that. > This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it > can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you > understand that your outrageous insults are absurd. You just dig a pit > for yourself by your own hands. > > > P.S. > > Some years ago I witnessed a creation of one of such sites you call > > "proofs". So, there was 1 tech and 1 editor, who re-edited
everything
> > incoming (like 90+% or even 99% in standard Belarusian and Russian) > > into his flavour of "classic". It was politics. Thousands pages (and
I
> > mean real thousands, there was sort of 4800 or so) of pages. And... > > grant money. I could add -- near to zero interest, excepting the > > indexing bots. > Another great example of lies. Where could they get any incoming in > "norm" if people just don't write in it? > > Monk. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 30/03/07, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The standard is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not bring collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together and history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in English .. all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
If the differences are fewer than those between British and American English (!), the committee was right to step in to prevent the manipulative exertion of one over the entire project. Is it right to dictate how the project should continue from here (apart from insisting that the alternative orthography shouldn't be exerted again)?
Is it right to dictate how the project should continue from here (apart from insisting that the alternative orthography shouldn't be exerted again)?
No, and it's not happening. The Committee (as such) has started and ended its functions within this affair by writing its recommendations. After that there is nothing going on but private emails from people who happen to also be LangCom members.
Nevertheless, as a private individual, I will report whatever I perceive as a blatant NPOV project. I believe we all should.
IMHO what's needed here is simply a bit of personal advice and time to have everyone calm down and get back to a practically oriented mindset.
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 Oldak Quill Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 4:38 PM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Be-x-old
On 30/03/07, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, There is no choice when it comes to the names of the projects. The
standard
is explicit; a private label is indicated by an -x- at the right place in the label.
Having two projects is also something I would be against; it does not
bring
collaboration, it does not bring NPOV. You have to get your act together
and
history shows that you now have to compromise big time. It has been indicated that the actual differences are less than what you find in
English
.. all the more reason to insist on collaboration.
If the differences are fewer than those between British and American English (!), the committee was right to step in to prevent the manipulative exertion of one over the entire project. Is it right to dictate how the project should continue from here (apart from insisting that the alternative orthography shouldn't be exerted again)?
Hoi!
the committee was right to step in
The Committee never did "step in" as such. Private individuals signalled this and other evident conflict situations to the Board. Since this particular problem had linguistic implications we were requested to give a recommendation, which we 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,
Habemus 10k. It's but a small article about a ligurian city called Taggia http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggia Anyway, it's manmade, as the most of what we have :)
Can't believe it's happening :)
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
That's excellent. Congrats!
On 10/2/07, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi,
Habemus 10k. It's but a small article about a ligurian city called Taggia http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggia Anyway, it's manmade, as the most of what we have :)
Can't believe it's happening :)
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
Seems awfully civil for the 'pms' wiki. I expected more yelling and hostility ;) bad jokes aside, congratulations, it's quite a nice collaboration.
On 10/2/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
That's excellent. Congrats!
On 10/2/07, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hoi,
Habemus 10k. It's but a small article about a ligurian city called Taggia http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggia Anyway, it's manmade, as the most of what we have :)
Can't believe it's happening :)
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
-- Toward Peace, Love & Progress: Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Hoi,
Habemus 10k. It's but a small article about a ligurian city called Taggia http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggia Anyway, it's manmade, as the most of what we have :)
Can't believe it's happening :)
Congratulations! Cruccone
Congratiogefeliciflapstartulations!
I should hope it is human made ..... bot operators are humans to though ;)
Waerth
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Hoi,
Habemus 10k. It's but a small article about a ligurian city called Taggia http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggia Anyway, it's manmade, as the most of what we have :)
Can't believe it's happening :)
Congratulations! Cruccone
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi! Thanks everybody :)
Well, I'm not against bots in principle. But I do think there's a limit, over which a botpedia fails to be a real project. IMHO, it's better to have a small and slow community, but still a community, than making a lot of quick articles without actually having a structure to support it.
Anyway, this is absolutely IMHO.
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 Waerth Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 4:30 PM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] pms wiki 10k milestone
Congratiogefeliciflapstartulations!
I should hope it is human made ..... bot operators are humans to though ;)
Waerth
Berto 'd Sera wrote:
Hoi,
Habemus 10k. It's but a small article about a ligurian city called Taggia http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggia Anyway, it's manmade, as the most of what we have :)
Can't believe it's happening :)
Congratulations! Cruccone
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 02/10/2007, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Well, I'm not against bots in principle. But I do think there's a limit, over which a botpedia fails to be a real project. IMHO, it's better to have a small and slow community, but still a community, than making a lot of quick articles without actually having a structure to support it.
It depends if it's part of a project. When I joined en:wp in late 2003, 1/6 of all articles were still Rambot-generated US place articles, most unedited except by the robot. It was very annoying. However, we could claim *complete* coverage of *every place in the US*. And if a bot could assist en:wp with covering other countries to that level of detail, that would be a good thing as well, for the same reason.
- d.
Sorry, just pair of strictly technical questions.
Are all of these 6000+ articles or are there redirs, too? (I don't know how that counter macro works, in incubator we counted our texts with special bot-like prog)
The last version of rules I know of didn't allow for "mixing" of the lang.versions. So, are *all* of the articles in the be-x-old done in the alternative lang.version? If not, what percentage is there?
---
On 30/03/07, Monk monkbel@gmail.com wrote: ...
This speculation with such aggressive words doesn't help your case, it can only make your case worse. I don't even hope any more that you
... There's no my *case*, as I'm not on trial here.
And there's no *my* case as there were a lots of folks since the very beginning of the be:wp in 2004, who were asking the same question.
This all very water under the bridge, still, anybody can browse the archives.
It always went like: "Why the exclusive version of language on wiki calling itself Belarusian" and answered like: "Tough luck guys, we were here first, and with your Communist language you just scram to wikia or to wherever you please! The narkamautsy this days!".
Oh, right, you were retaining some token presence of the articles in the normative version of language, "kindly tolerating" like, but nobody is stranger these days to the Theory of Symbolic Representation and to the concept of Live Shield.
And you've lost some good editors because of that. As if you cared.
Aha, and don't forget to tell good folks that in the Belarusian lingual context "pravapis" may denote not only "orthography" but also "grammar" in general.
---
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org