I think as long as it's pretty obvious from the context that Wikimedia is not establishing a sovereign socialist nation, we should be fine with the current terminology.
*-- * *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015 Major in Computer Science www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo@gmail.com
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 7:48 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
On 04/06/2013 09:16 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
By the way, it would be lovely not to call communication like nationalization... sometimes I see people coming to communities saying they're socializing something and it feels weird. ;-) (Especially as it's false good news.)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/socialize (transitive) To take into collective or governmental ownership
Nemo
Nemo, I have sympathy for you here -- it took a while for me to get used to the use of "socialize" in the way the Wikimedia communities use it. [...]
I don't have much sympathy. Looking at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/socialization:
- The process of learning one's culture
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/culture and how to live within it.
The act of interacting with others, of being social.
Taking under government control as implementing socialism.
Given the precedence here (the definition having to do with governments and socialism is third), I don't think it's very reasonable to call the usage within Wikimedia wrong or even noteworthy.
My local dictionary (New Oxford American Dictionary) also lists the socialism definition third.
So, yes, if you choose to ignore the primary and secondary definitions, the tertiary definition isn't a great fit. This is why it's the tertiary definition, of course.
MZMcBride
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l