Hello fellow Wikipedians,
This is my first posting to this mailing list; my name is André and in the Wikipedias you might either know me as N-true or André Müller.
Okay, well... you created the Klingon Wikipedia yesterday. Today you suspended it again. I dont quite understand why you did the latter. The Wikipedia project is to create an encyclopedia in many languages. Also artificial are included, such as Esperanto, Interlingua and Volapük. Even dead languages like Latin or Sanskrit (which remains unused though). Theres even a Wikipedia in Toki Pona, another artificial language even known to much fewer people than Klingon, for instance. I dont see how Toki Pona stayed up and Klingon didnt? If this is because you think thered be too few contribuents, youre wrong therell be many enough. If its because the Wikipedia might lose credibility when it adds silly languages no. The Klingon language community is a growing one, just like the one of Toki Pona. I dont think this would offend anyone out there. Wikipedia might just get some more famous. And speaking about credibility... I dont know if some validated languages are more realistic than Klingon; theres Plattdüütsch, which is indeed considered a language, but it doesnt have a orthographic norm its written as you speak it, and thus may differ from speaker to speaker.
As you have probably seen, I had already started to work on the Klingon Wikipedia. Dont get me wrong Im not trying to make you suspend Plattdüütsch or Toki Pona. Its just that I and many other Klingon speakers/learners and future contribuents would like to have our wIqIpeDIya back.
- André
André-
Okay, well... you created the Klingon Wikipedia yesterday. Today you suspended it again.
It had been created without discussion. We can have this discussion now. You may also want to read previous threads on the subject from the archive.
However, given that all notable arguments have already been exchanged, I think the best way to go about this is to simply start a vote on Meta on whether we want a Klingon Wikipedia. I suggest you do it.
Regards,
Erik
Erik Moeller wrote:
André-
Okay, well... you created the Klingon Wikipedia yesterday. Today you suspended it again.
It had been created without discussion. We can have this discussion now. You may also want to read previous threads on the subject from the archive.
However, given that all notable arguments have already been exchanged, I think the best way to go about this is to simply start a vote on Meta on whether we want a Klingon Wikipedia. I suggest you do it.
I don't see what a vote there would accomplish. The criterion for acceptance should be the presence of a significant minority in support. A majority vote of only those who visit Meta seems like an attempt to stack a vote against.
Ec
On 5/28/04 1:43 PM, "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
Ray-
I don't see what a vote there would accomplish. The criterion for acceptance should be the presence of a significant minority in support.
We are not a wiki hosting provider.
Sure we are.
Erik Moeller wrote:
Ray-
I don't see what a vote there would accomplish. The criterion for acceptance should be the presence of a significant minority in support.
We are not a wiki hosting provider.
Please define the following words:
* wiki * hosting * provider
Additional homework:
* we * not
:)
"EM" == Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de writes:
>> I don't see what a vote there would accomplish. The criterion >> for acceptance should be the presence of a significant minority >> in support.
EM> We are not a wiki hosting provider.
Amen. It's just too easy to start a wiki on your own. There are a few Wiki farm providers who give free or paid service.
~ESP
Evan Prodromou wrote:
It's just too easy to start a wiki on your own. There are a few Wiki farm providers who give free or paid service.
That's a very lame excuse to support a fork.
(OK, it's not really a "fork", but the Walloon Wikipedia has shown how undesirable such a situation can become.)
"T" == Timwi timwi@gmx.net writes:
Me> It's just too easy to start a wiki on your own. There are a few Me> Wiki farm providers who give free or paid service.
T> That's a very lame excuse to support a fork.
T> (OK, it's not really a "fork", but the Walloon Wikipedia has T> shown how undesirable such a situation can become.)
Well, if the goal of Wikimedia is to host _all_ wikis, I think things are going to get reeaaaal hard.
As someone who participates in a number of non-Wikimedia wikis, and sysadmins for one, I'd say that there's a vibrant, interesting world out there beyond the walls. I'd highly recommend that anyone participating in Wikimedia projects take some time and work on other wikis, too.
~ESP
--- Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote: >
However, given that all notable arguments have already been exchanged, I think the best way to go about this is to simply start a vote on Meta on whether we want a Klingon Wikipedia. I suggest you do it.
I think the users not on the mailing lists should have a chance to discuss this as well before a vote is started. There is an ongoing discussion at http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_languages, formerly at the English Wikipedia's Village Pump.
Angela.
____________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
Angela wrote:
I think the users not on the mailing lists should have a chance to discuss this as well before a vote is started. There is an ongoing discussion at http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_languages, formerly at the English Wikipedia's Village Pump.
Interesting. Quick skim shows a two-line objection statement, and two screensful of support for a Klingon Wikipedia.
Please can you un-suspend it now? Please may I remind you that there are people waiting to be able to ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE to it?
Thanks. Timwi
For the benefit of community building... if there is a Klingon language using community and they wish to use Wikimedia supported space and software, then what is the real obstacle to their being able establish and maintain their own language wiki? The benefit is that it provides yet another hangout for Klingon language enthusiasts to meet, collaborate and exchange pats on the back... Not to mention the interstellar goodwill that it promotes ;-) But that aside, Klingon is as much a part of the American culture as Valley Girl Speak, or Basic English as spoken in the old Radio Free Europe.
The omission of Klingon, despite the existence of a Klingon language using community who are willing to maintain their own wikipedia language space, that would be a suppression of the openness goals that the Wikipedia and Wikimedia were founded on.
Let's have Klingon back and on good terms. The addition of Klingon language to Wikipedia is similar to its presence in Google. Does it do Google any harm? Will it harm Wikipedia? The only harm is in the exclusion of folks who are very motivated and could be a support for Wikipedia. And their exclusion would be a regrettable and bad example. Let's get those 'Wiki-klingers' back.
Sincerely, Jay B. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timwi" timwi@gmx.net To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 11:34 PM Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Klingon Wikipedia
Angela wrote:
I think the users not on the mailing lists should have a chance to discuss this as well before a vote is started. There is an ongoing discussion at http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_languages, formerly at the English Wikipedia's Village Pump.
Interesting. Quick skim shows a two-line objection statement, and two screensful of support for a Klingon Wikipedia.
Please can you un-suspend it now? Please may I remind you that there are people waiting to be able to ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE to it?
Thanks. Timwi
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Erik Moeller wrote:
However, given that all notable arguments have already been exchanged, I think the best way to go about this is to simply start a vote on Meta on whether we want a Klingon Wikipedia. I suggest you do it.
There was never a vote on Meta on whether to start a Wikipedia in German, Polish, Swedish or Norwegian. They were just started, and then it turned out that they attracted volunteers. I fail to see the harm in starting a Klingon Wikipedia. If it fails to attract volunteers, it is no worse than a Wikipedia in Latvian (96 articles) or Volapuk (44 articles) that also fail to attract volunteers. Nobody says Wikipedia as a whole is a fiasco because it has a Lativan "encyclopedia" that only contains 96 articles. (For comparison, the Kashubian Wikipedia started on April 1st already has 130 articles, apparently written by 3 volunteers.) On the other hand, if the Klingon Wikipedia does attract volunteers, it can develop into a unique resource for people who are interested in that language, just like the Esperanto Wikipedia has become.
In this case I don't want a vote, so I guess I'm "not a democrat", right?
--- Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
However, given that all notable arguments have already been exchanged, I think the best way to go about this is to simply start a vote on Meta on whether we want a Klingon Wikipedia. I suggest you do it.
There was never a vote on Meta on whether to start a Wikipedia in German, Polish, Swedish or Norwegian.
Those are natural languages that are used by many millions of people every day. There is *absolutely* no question whatsoever that we should have encyclopedias for those languages and that there are enough people interested in working on such encyclopedias to make them viable projects.
Artificial languages are not so clear cut. Some like Esperanto are obvious candidates for inclusion since they have regular international conferences and their own published literature. But for the less obvious cases I do think that a set of criteria should be followed and if the creation is still controversial, then a vote should be held to settle the issue.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org