[Foundation-l] Moldovan Wikipedia
gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Fri Nov 9 15:45:09 UTC 2007
First of all there were people contributing to the mo.wikipedia. This is
When for political reasons a project is closed, something that I find
objectionable in and of itself, and when the language committee does not
consider political arguments at all, it makes in my mind perfect sense to at
least inform you that the arguments used to close a project down are not
accepted at all when considering the start or restart of a project.
Again, the fact of the matter is that a vote does not remove the politics
from the issue. When there is an existing state of war, you present the
perfect argument why this vote has been a flawed instrument.
Again, the procedure followed is problematic. I disagree utterly with the
proposal and the fact that this project was closed at all in the first
On Nov 9, 2007 8:02 AM, Johannes Rohr <jorohr at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 06:22:05 +0100, GerardM wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > From a policy point of view the language committee does not consider
> > political arguments. The argument that a likelyhood is very small is
> > exactly the kind of argument that would still allow a language to be
> > accepted.
> You are successfully confusing me.
> 1. because at any other occasion you insist that project closures are
> none of langcom's business and
> 2. because langcom's policy is exactly: "no community - no wiki". In this
> case there was, as far as I see, no community.
> > The aim of our foundation is to provide information to all
> > people, not just the people that you care for.
> The only valid purpose of a "Moldavian" Wikipedia would be to serve a
> Moldavian linguistic community. However, I cannot see that there has been
> any demand by native Moldavians for such a Wiki, which is not surprising
> if the observation is correct that the only remaining use of Cyrillic
> script is in those places where it is enforced by ethnically Russian
> dominated authorities.
> > The arguments for closure for Moldovan are not shared by the language
> > committee and it was a VOTE that closed the mo.wikipedia it was
> > definetly not consensus.
> Again: Can you name any native Moldavian/Romanian speaker who voted in
> favour of the continuation of this project?
> > It was also not done with permission of the
> > board. The notion that you or anybody else feels that a language code is
> > given out in error is politics. It is personal while I agree that you
> > can have this opinion, it is an opinion you are entitled to it. I do not
> > share your sentiments.
> Then where exactly is it said that the mo language code is reserved for
> Moldavian/Romanian /in Cyrillic script/?
> > Also when you use these arguments and you insist that they are to be WMF
> > policy, you do provide arguments to deny languages that are being
> > considered. This is not a zero sum game.
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
More information about the foundation-l