[Foundation-l] Throwing some data onto the flamefest fire (was: English Wikipedia ethnocentric policy affects other communities)

Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Sat Dec 23 09:50:31 UTC 2006

You have not being paying attention. It has been indicated that 
compulsory transliteration is culturally not acceptable for many people. 
Also the suggestion that there has been no serious discussion up to now 
makes things worse. It has been indicated by people who are seriously 
involved in the Wikimedia Foundation that the reluctance, even denial 
how serious this issue is perceived from outside the English language 
Wikipedia is such that big words have been used to describe this 
outrage. This project has already lost a lot of face. The reversal by 
Gregory made inadvertently make Aphaia loose face.

 From my perspective, the POV of the English language Wikipedia is 
seriously out of kilter and the room for "serious discussion" is 
diminishing. I do not get the impression that the arguments are heard / 
understood / taken seriously. I can envision that this will be an issue 
for the board. It is not necessarily something where the English 
language Wikipedia community should have it their own way.


James Hare schreef:
> Guys, girls, people (and objects) who are neither,
> We will not go anywhere if we keep shouting "RACISM!!!!! DIEDIEDIE" back and
> forth. I am dead serious about this.
> If you want to get anywhere, we must discuss objectively and address the
> issues like mature ladies and gentlemen.
> Pros:
> - Less of a technical issue on English Wikipedia for those who don't have
> the ability (or permission) to install new fonts
> - Allows people of the community to identify people with a name they can
> understand, as opposed to using what they will just see as squiggly lines.
> Being able to fight vandalism was a pro, but then technical fixes came along
> that prohibited mixing different writing scripts.
> Cons:
> - Does not allow people to use the name they really want.
> - SUL issues: with all sorts of different usernames, it'll be hard to have a
> -single- user login when you have to have multiple because of script
> requirements.
> I've stated this many times -- I like the idea of system transliteration for
> each wiki. Or at least a way to have an identity that's different from the
> username you log in with, so you can have a uniform username but you can be
> identified with what will be considered a comprehendable name.
> What other remedies can you suggest?
> Serious discussion starts now.
> On 12/22/06, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/23/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/23/06, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This case needs referendum on English Wikipedia,
>>> There is no pratical way to do that.
>> (Public) referendum is possible: just make a poll and then announce it
>> on Watclist, Sitenotice, Main Page and other relevant pages.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list