[Foundation-l] Re: Rethinking Meta (was- Wikiquote now has subdomains)
Erik Moeller
erik_moeller at gmx.de
Mon Jul 19 05:35:00 UTC 2004
Anthere-
> Meta is the only place where we can really meet, and find information
> that someone else left.
Can you give me a single example where splitting Meta by subdomain would
do any harm in bringing people together? I would like to move this
discussion from the general, emotional "Don't split us up!" to the
specific, rational "This is where it would cause problems" level. What
recent policy discussion or vote would have been harmed by this approach?
Let's take the "Stewards" discussion and vote as an example. The whole
discussion was mostly English as was the voting page. If we used
subdomains, we could have made it a requirement that the page be
translated into the main languages before we vote. We could have
aggregated the votes from the different language Wikimedias so that each
community could express their preferences in their language. We could have
translated important arguments from the discussion in realtime (in the
form of localized "pro" and "cons" lists, for example).
This is a lot better than having a single page with the occasional piece
of untranslated French or Japanese between a couple of participants. In
that case, the main part of the page is English - excluding those who
don't speak it - and some parts of the discussion are not - excluding
those who don't speak that language. It's a lose-lose situation.
> In my experience, it does bring people together, provided that you
> welcome the interaction.
I can't interact with someone whose language I do not speak, unless
someone translates it for me. A Wikipedia-style setup facilitates that.
> Plus, there are japanese and chinese people currently over there. We
> have Tomos, Suisui, Britty etc...
Exactly - the people on Meta are mostly the ones who speak some amount of
English. Someone who doesn't speak any English won't even understand the
user interface.
> This is what is happening on the multinlingual mailing lists, because
> each time someone DARE putting a word in a language different than
> english, he is severely told that "of course, he could write in english,
> because really, no one can understand him".
First, I must remind you that my main objection in the last debate on this
matter was using a different language in order to exclude others from a
certain comment. This is a completely separate issue, and I would have the
same objection on Meta.
Second, if you want to reach the *largest number* of people, you should
either use English or make sure that what you say gets translated into
English. That should be very obvious, no? It would be helpful if you could
acknowledge this simple point.
Translations become far easier with a consistent approach, and people feel
more welcome if the main site they navigate is in their mother tongue.
This seems to work very well for Wikipedia, I don't see why it shouldn't
work on Meta.
This is about giving non-English projects a larger voice instead of
relying on multilingual people like you to act as mouthpieces for those
who don't speak English. Just like there is a Wikipedia community for
every language, there should be a Wikimedia community for each. Once you
have something like ja.wikimedia.org, the creation of a Japanese Wikimedia
chapter becomes more likely as well because people will find it far easier
to interact when there is no constant interference by what is *effectively
indistinguishable from random noise* to them. The problem of creating
project-wide policies is addressed through board review and voting
standards.
It may be a good idea to put this issue to a Wikimedia-wide vote if we
fail to reach consensus.
Regards,
Erik
More information about the foundation-l
mailing list