我的英文不好，谁能帮助回答一下？
[[zh:user:shizhao]]
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wikimedia Foundation board@wikimedia.org Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:52:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Ticket#: 114198-FW] Simplified versus Traditional [...] To: shizhao@gmail.com
Hello ShiZhao. This email was sent to the board address, but I don't fully understand why George Herzog believes traditional Chinese is being eliminated from the Chinese Wikipedia. Do you know what might be the cause of this complaint? I havw enclosed the emails below.
I hope you can help.
Thanks.
Angela Beesley -- Board of Trustees Wikimedia Foundation http://wikimediafoundation.org/
---- Forwarded message from "George Herzog" goldy@ms19.hinet.net ----
Date: From: "George Herzog" goldy@ms19.hinet.net To: board@wikimedia.org Cc: Reply-To: Subject: [Ticket#: 114198-FW] Simplified versus Traditional [...]
Initially I supported Wikipedia amongst my university students in Taiwan [I teach at two Kaohsiung universities] and urged them to contribute translations to and from English. The technological entries were of great interest to many of my students.
But, you have eliminated our language - Traditional Chinese.
This is not a simple matter of duplication of resources.
Traditional Chinese provides a wealth of information and a cultural point of view that cannot be found in Simplified Chinese. Chairman Mao Tse Dung chose to simplify Chinese as a means to control freedom of speech and freedom of press. It made it easy for the Cultural Revolution to burn books at a glance because all Traditional publications were taboo. Also, the two forms do not easily exchange meaning as the isolation of 50 years with the Cultural Revolution on the mainland and the technological advancement in Taiwan have more and more divided the two.
Consider you editorial policy carefully. Not all material that goes into an encyclopedia is objective and both multiple language and cultural perspectives are necessary to provide a balanced and genuine portrayal of the world we live in. Mainland China will often organize and pay people to put pressure on companies, countries, and institutions outside of China as a way to isolate Taiwan. It appears that they have been successful with Wikipedia [they did force Project Gutenberg to abandon support of its Taipei mirror site].
By eliminating Traditional Chinese support, you have eliminated the freest and most democratic portion of Chinese culture from you archives. You have begun to support a government that might happily demand that you exclude all references to Taiwan in exchange for reaching their population. And, you may find yourself supporting a revisionist form of Chinese history. I just don't see how you can abide by your principles and not support both languages.
For your information, Taiwan was a charter member of the United Nations and is currently only one of two countries that are excluded (the other is the Vatican by it's own choice). And, I am sure you know where most, if not all, of your hardware comes from. While it did indeed suffer corruption under the KMT rule, it finally managed to overcome long-term martial law in the 1980s and finally had a democratically elected president [Lee Dung Hwei] in about 1996. The current struggle for Taiwan is much akin to the struggle of Berlin during the Cold War. I have been in Kaohsiung when Mainland China dropped ballistic missiles 15km offshore during Lee Dung Hwei's presidential campaign as a source of intimidation.
Sadly you seem to have naively fallen in with China's organized and continual efforts to isolate and force Taiwan to become like Hong Kong and Macao. If you look at the recent history, you can easily see that people there have less freedom than prior to 1997. I have been to China and Hong Kong [before and after the turn over] and I can provide detailed examples of how much less freedom exists there than in Taiwan.
As it stands, most Taiwanese are either unable [because of language barrier] or unwilling to contribute to your efforts.
Of course, if you reinstated Traditional Chinese and were will to stay the course, you might not only gain a readership.
You might find yourself with one or several benefactors. But as it stands, you have closed the door.
In the beginning you offered great potential as a tool for bilingual education, but your credibility is being deeply challenged.
Respectfully,
George Herzog
An American English teacher in Kaohsiung, Taiwan
---- End forwarded message ----
From: Wikimedia Foundation board@wikimedia.org To: "George Herzog" goldy@ms19.hinet.net Subject: [Ticket#: 114198] Simplified versus Traditional Chinese Created: 03/07/2005 10:00:45 Dear George,
Thank you for your mail.
But, you have eliminated our language - Traditional Chinese.
There are no attempts to remove Traditional Chinese from Wikipedia to my knowledge.
http://zh.wikipedia.org includes articles in both simplified and traditional Chinese. Every logged in user had the option of setting their interface to traditional Chinsese, not only the Chinese Wikipedia, but on any MediaWiki site.
The only difference I am aware of is that the home page for traditional Chinese has been redirected to the simple one in this edit: http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E9%A6%96%E9%A0%81&diff=0&...
I don't know why this is the case, but it may be best to discuss it with the community of that wiki on their mailing list at http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikizh-l
Are there other traditional Chinese pages which are no longer accessible or is it only the home page you have noticed this problem?
Angela
Angela Beesley -- Board of Trustees Wikimedia Foundation http://wikimediafoundation.org/
From: "George Herzog" goldy@ms19.hinet.net To: "'Wikimedia Foundation'" board@wikimedia.org Subject: RE: [Ticket#: 114198] Simplified versus Traditional Chinese Created: 03/08/2005 10:08:58 I will try to locate it, but I have logged on to your site to confirm the availability of Traditional Chinese and could not find it. On one occasion I could not get an reference to Taiwan via your search.
All this may be structural as you seem to be struggling with unifying your multi-language system. But, the perception here is that you eliminated the Traditional Chinese.
I previously complained about it and someone in your organization did not deny it -- only said that it was a 'bottom-up' decision. So, you have a problem that is multi-faceted: technical, informational, and political. Mainland China might be compounding it by blocking the Traditional side.
Currently, I can no longer find any indication of Traditional Chinese in your menu system. My computer is set up to receive and read many languages - including English, Traditional, and Simplified Chinese.
George Herzog Taiwan
From: "George Herzog" goldy@ms19.hinet.net To: "'Wikimedia Foundation'" board@wikimedia.org Subject: RE: [Ticket#: 114198] Simplified versus Traditional Chinese Created: 03/08/2005 10:14:43 This is a second reply. My ability to read technical Chinese in Simplified Characters is non-existant, but it seems that I did hit a 'toggle' that switched to Traditional Chinese. You apparently have no way to find it in English. Previously, you had clearly designated choices in both Chinese Fonts, but you reduced your menu items to only one Chinese language item.
Hopefully, you see the problem. At a glance, it looks as if you only support one - not two.
Initially I supported Wikipedia amongst my university students in Taiwan [I teach at two Kaohsiung universities] and urged them to contribute translations to and from English. The technological entries were of great interest to many of my students.
But, you have eliminated our language - Traditional Chinese.
This is not a simple matter of duplication of resources.
Traditional Chinese provides a wealth of information and a cultural point of view that cannot be found in Simplified Chinese. Chairman Mao Tse Dung chose to simplify Chinese as a means to control freedom of speech and freedom of press. It made it easy for the Cultural Revolution to burn books at a glance because all Traditional publications were taboo. Also, the two forms do not easily exchange meaning as the isolation of 50 years with the Cultural Revolution on the mainland and the technological advancement in Taiwan have more and more divided the two.
Consider you editorial policy carefully. Not all material that goes into an encyclopedia is objective and both multiple language and cultural perspectives are necessary to provide a balanced and genuine portrayal of the world we live in. Mainland China will often organize and pay people to put pressure on companies, countries, and institutions outside of China as a way to isolate Taiwan. It appears that they have been successful with Wikipedia [they did force Project Gutenberg to abandon support of its Taipei mirror site].
By eliminating Traditional Chinese support, you have eliminated the freest and most democratic portion of Chinese culture from you archives. You have begun to support a government that might happily demand that you exclude all references to Taiwan in exchange for reaching their population. And, you may find yourself supporting a revisionist form of Chinese history. I just don't see how you can abide by your principles and not support both languages.
For your information, Taiwan was a charter member of the United Nations and is currently only one of two countries that are excluded (the other is the Vatican by it's own choice). And, I am sure you know where most, if not all, of your hardware comes from. While it did indeed suffer corruption under the KMT rule, it finally managed to overcome long-term martial law in the 1980s and finally had a democratically elected president [Lee Dung Hwei] in about 1996. The current struggle for Taiwan is much akin to the struggle of Berlin during the Cold War. I have been in Kaohsiung when Mainland China dropped ballistic missiles 15km offshore during Lee Dung Hwei's presidential campaign as a source of intimidation.
Sadly you seem to have naively fallen in with China's organized and continual efforts to isolate and force Taiwan to become like Hong Kong and Macao. If you look at the recent history, you can easily see that people there have less freedom than prior to 1997. I have been to China and Hong Kong [before and after the turn over] and I can provide detailed examples of how much less freedom exists there than in Taiwan.
As it stands, most Taiwanese are either unable [because of language barrier] or unwilling to contribute to your efforts.
Of course, if you reinstated Traditional Chinese and were will to stay the course, you might not only gain a readership.
You might find yourself with one or several benefactors. But as it stands, you have closed the door.
In the beginning you offered great potential as a tool for bilingual education, but your credibility is being deeply challenged.
Respectfully,
George Herzog
An American English teacher in Kaohsiung, Taiwan
Initially I supported Wikipedia amongst my university students in Taiwan [I teach at two Kaohsiung universities] and urged them to contribute translations to and from English. The technological entries were of great interest to many of my students.
But, you have eliminated our language – Traditional Chinese.
This is not a simple matter of duplication of resources.
Traditional Chinese provides a wealth of information and a cultural point of view that cannot be found in Simplified Chinese. Chairman Mao Tse Dung chose to simplify Chinese as a means to control freedom of speech and freedom of press. It made it easy for the Cultural Revolution to burn books at a glance because all Traditional publications were taboo. Also, the two forms do not easily exchange meaning as the isolation of 50 years with the Cultural Revolution on the mainland and the technological advancement in Taiwan have more and more divided the two.
Consider you editorial policy carefully. Not all material that goes into an encyclopedia is objective and both multiple language and cultural perspectives are necessary to provide a balanced and genuine portrayal of the world we live in. Mainland China will often organize and pay people to put pressure on companies, countries, and institutions outside of China as a way to isolate Taiwan. It appears that they have been successful with Wikipedia [they did force Project Gutenberg to abandon support of its Taipei mirror site].
By eliminating Traditional Chinese support, you have eliminated the freest and most democratic portion of Chinese culture from you archives. You have begun to support a government that might happily demand that you exclude all references to Taiwan in exchange for reaching their population. And, you may find yourself supporting a revisionist form of Chinese history. I just don't see how you can abide by your principles and not support both languages.
For your information, Taiwan was a charter member of the United Nations and is currently only one of two countries that are excluded (the other is the Vatican by it's own choice). And, I am sure you know where most, if not all, of your hardware comes from. While it did indeed suffer corruption under the KMT rule, it finally managed to overcome long-term martial law in the 1980s and finally had a democratically elected president [Lee Dung Hwei] in about 1996. The current struggle for Taiwan is much akin to the struggle of Berlin during the Cold War. I have been in Kaohsiung when Mainland China dropped ballistic missiles 15km offshore during Lee Dung Hwei's presidential campaign as a source of intimidation.
Sadly you seem to have naively fallen in with China's organized and continual efforts to isolate and force Taiwan to become like Hong Kong and Macao. If you look at the recent history, you can easily see that people there have less freedom than prior to 1997. I have been to China and Hong Kong [before and after the turn over] and I can provide detailed examples of how much less freedom exists there than in Taiwan.
As it stands, most Taiwanese are either unable [because of language barrier] or unwilling to contribute to your efforts.
Of course, if you reinstated Traditional Chinese and were will to stay the course, you might not only gain a readership.
You might find yourself with one or several benefactors. But as it stands, you have closed the door.
In the beginning you offered great potential as a tool for bilingual education, but your credibility is being deeply challenged.
Respectfully,
George Herzog
An American English teacher in Kaohsiung, Taiwan