Hello,
I wanted to revisit the issue that the red links brought up, and the Spanish fork before that: the non-English wikipedias often feel left out, snubbed, and/or ignored. I don't want to debate whether they should or not, because it's not productive and people never want to be told how they should feel anyway. That they do feel that way is a problem, regardless of whether we think it should be.
I've been talking with one of the contributors to the French wikipedia, and I think the other wikipedias feel isolated because of a general lack of communication about policy and software issues. I'd like to propose a few ideas we've come up with to deal with the problem:
1: we could ask for volunteer wikipedia diplomats: polyglots who are willing to inform various communities about policy and software discussions taking place that may affect them. This idea would require people willing to help and keep up on the issues, and probably be a burden. I can't imagine many people with enough zeal to do it: mav and the indefatigable Ram-Man, if s/he is bilingual, and not many others (including myself).
2: we could create a special page on each wikipedia to post relevant issues to, in English. This is not an ideal solution, even though many people speak English: it would be preferable to post fluently in that wiki's language, and also we'd have several pages to update each time and might forget one. However, this solution is better than the de facto one we have now, which is to take whatever action people on the list agree on, and then field complaints from people who aren't on the list (not everyone speaks English, of course, so please don't say that they should just sign up). :-)
3: We could create a page on the English wikipedia posting a summary of the current issues and pointing people towards wherever the discussion is taking place (talk pages, list, etc.). Then we could post a link to it in each wikipedia requesting that interested people follow the page. This would be burdensome for them, because they would have to visit the link periodically and check for pages, and because the people who do speak English would have to translate for the others.
4: we could create that page mentioned above but modify the "watch this page" function to allow people on any wiki to watch a page on any other wiki. That's a good idea, but I imagine people active on several wikipedias would eventually have their watch page turn into a confusing mess. So it might call for multiple watch lists, a less-than-great solution unless they're all available from any wikipedia. Also, it still requires translators.
5: we could post a link on each wikipedia labeled "policy discussion." Like "user talk:" at the top right, it could indicate when the page has changed since your last visit. Still requires translators.
6: we could install the software on the non-English wikipedias, explain how to change options, etc., and let them adminsitrate it themselves. Doesn't require English, does require ComputerSpeak.
I think a good general suggestion would be to change agreed-on options only on the English wikipedia, since it's typically only English-speaking people who agree to it, and then to post that the new option is available to the other wikipedias as well--but not mandatory.
I do not think I'm exaggerating the issue; and if you've ever spent much time in a place where you do not speak the language and others don't speak English, then I'm sure you'll agree. It's quite easy to feel frustrated. And, of course, a series of misunderstandings is what led to the Spanish fork.
I'm very interested in comments and other ideas.
kq
I think this is a very important issue. It is why I set up intlwiki-l in the first place, and I'm sorry that hasn't been used more by way of inter-wikipedia deliberations.
So, in addition to KQ's many good suggestions, I'd add:
* Cross post to Intlwiki-l more, if an issue has international importance.
--Larry
P.S. We also have to make it clear that *ALL* languages are acceptable on intlwiki-l.
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com wrote:
[cut]
I'm very interested in comments and other ideas.
kq
I am very happy that you understand that this is sensitive.
In your proposals thou have not used the most logical solution (of al least a part of the solution), Intlwiki-l Make a Wikipedia newsletter or somthing like that, an announcement and send it to Intwiki-l and give time for the responds. For every Wikipedia there should be at least 1 "diplomat" who can bring the information to the home-wikipedia and can give feedback. See also here, a recent posting from my about this; http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2002-September/005344.html
About translations; the best hope i think is that every wikipedia attempts to get hold of a speaker of Esperanto. If you have 1 and he/she/it is willing to do translations this can work very good. (I am learing it now but Wikipedia is a very big distraction)
Giskart
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com wrote:
That they do feel that way is a problem, regardless of whether we think it should be.
I agree.
1: we could ask for volunteer wikipedia diplomats: polyglots who are willing to inform various communities about policy and software discussions taking place that may affect them.
I think this is a sensible suggestion, although like you, I wonder if many people have "enough zeal" to do this regularly.
I like most of your other suggestions, too, although I wonder if we would keep them up after a period of good intentions.
It seems likely to me that the software will stabilize in major respects on the current codebase. Policy almost never changes in any major ways.
--Jimbo
--- Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com wrote:
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com wrote:
That they do feel that way is a problem, regardless
of whether we think it should be.
I agree.
1: we could ask for volunteer wikipedia diplomats:
polyglots who are
willing to inform various communities about policy
and software
discussions taking place that may affect them.
I think this is a sensible suggestion, although like you, I wonder if many people have "enough zeal" to do this regularly.
I like most of your other suggestions, too, although I wonder if we would keep them up after a period of good intentions.
It seems likely to me that the software will stabilize in major respects on the current codebase. Policy almost never changes in any major ways.
--Jimbo
Hello Jimbo,
Rather true for software issues. I hope the switch to phase III software will help settle things down, in particular if it allows to fit better to regional or cultural differences. May sound ridiculous, but really it is not. Also, if we, for example, can easily change options ourselves, or add a sysop ourselves...that can make a difference
Rather true for policy issues. Your major rules are already set up and unlikely to change. We are still trying to agree on ours anyway. Minor issues are very much cultural. So unlikely to be shared. Still...maybe consistency would be interesting.
Not true for general information issues. I remember an exchange on the main list about copyright issues. We are concerned somehow...we share images no ? I found once the page you discussed money issues (tee-shirt stuff and so on). I say once, because I have no idea where to find it again. Hey, no surprise some got nervous reading it :-) Still, some questions arose on the fr.wiki about why *you* were .org and we were .com (ain't that funny retrospectively ?) Just this week, doing the php translation, we wonder over how to understand, and how to translate
"booksources"=> "Book sources", "booksourcetext" => "Below is a list of links to other sites that sell new and used books, and may also have further information about books you are looking for. Wikipedia is not affiliated with any of these businesses, and this list should not be construed as an endorsement."
not affiliated with these businesses ? construed as an endorsement ? a�e a�e a�e
what is that supposed to imply ??? somehow, just listing them, isnot that a "sort of" affiliation ? Er, I think here, when a site such as Amazon has a link on your site, it is clear to most you have a deal together. Especially on a dot com.
Oh well...whatever...
Have a good evening anyway
Anth�re
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Anthere wrote:
Still, some questions arose on the fr.wiki about why *you* were .org and we were .com (ain't that funny retrospectively ?)
That's just the simplest way to deal with moving the various wikis from the old server (which the developers don't have direct access to) to the new server (which the developers do have direct access to). As wikis get moved over, they get the .org address (which points always to the new server).
not affiliated with these businesses ? construed as an endorsement ? aïe aïe aïe
what is that supposed to imply ??? somehow, just listing them, isnot that a "sort of" affiliation ? Er, I think here, when a site such as Amazon has a link on your site, it is clear to most you have a deal together. Especially on a dot com.
That's exactly why we have the disclaimer: we _don't_ have any kind of deal with Amazon, or Barnes & Noble, or Pricescan, or the Library of Congress or whoever else Wikipedia unilaterally chooses to link to there.
We _aren't_ advertising their services in exchange for money, we _don't_ get a cut of the sale if you buy a book from them. We link to them because we think they might be useful to the reader, not because we (or is it Jimbo's Mercedes fund ;) are being paid to link them.
(And really, those links should be able to vary by language.)
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Brion VIBBER wrote:
(And really, those links should be able to vary by language.)
I did that already some days ago; look at the German site for an example (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin-Literatur has some).
I kept addall and pricescan, since they seem to cover German bookstores as well.
Magnus
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org