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