Ivan Krstic wrote:
After people are told how wikipedia works ("you mean EVERYONE can edit ANYTHING?" "yes" "clearly then it's completely useless"), convincing them of its value as a useful and convenient source of information is difficult enough as is. Adding an inexistent, overtly nerdy language to the list of translations is putting words in the mouth of the incredulous who will be ever so delighted to ask "Wikipedia? You mean the pretend-encyclopedia that is available in Klingon?"
That argument is speculative and alarmist. There is no evidence whatsoever to support any significant loss of support would result from having a Klingon Wikipedia. You seem to forget that the very thing which has made Wikipedia popular is that very right to allow "EVERYONE" to "edit ANYTHING". Counterintuitive as you may find it, it is a fact of life. I frequently mention Wikipedia to others, and I also am met with the same incredulous responses. I am, nevertheless, confident enough and patient enough to know that in time they will change their mind.
I do agree that Klingon to be completely useless. If it is that useless then after a flurry of initial activity people will just ignore it, and it can safely be allowed to die "not with a bang but a whimper." It is unlikely that I will ever participate in the Klingon project, but I can respect the desire of others to do so.
Wikipedia works best when the rights of people with useless ideas are respected. There is always ample opportunity to disagree with the ideas.
Don't give them the luxury. Jimbo - Wikipedia is a serious project and one that, I think, has a very bright future - don't taint it with this type of exercise in pointlessness (how many users do you think will use this?). I'd suggest this language is shut down immediately and relocated offsite (possibly to http://www.memory-alpha.org/ in this case, which also runs MediaWiki and is topically correct). A list of 'Non-endorsed, unofficial Wikipedia translations' may perhaps be kept at Wikipedia, but these borderline languages should in no way be mistakable for "official" Wikipedias.
There is a difference between a serious project, and taking one's view of the project too seriously. Your view is reminiscent of one who guides his views by what the neighbours think. It's like being intimidated by the old neighbourhood busybody who is always looking out of her window to see what everyone is doing just so she can have ammunition for her next session of hen cackling.
Wikipedia should not reduce itself to being solely a refuge for academic elitists.
Ec