[Foundation-l] Moldovan Wikipedia

[Johannes Rohr]

GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
writes:

> First of all there were people contributing to the
> mo.wikipedia. This is conveniently forgotten.

Oh, please! Can you name a single native speaker who did? I haven't
checked it all, but according to my knowledge, there was not even one
contributor proficient enough to write original encyclopaedic
content.

> 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.

I highly doubt that the language committee would seriously consider
approving a new Wikipedia without a single contributor with native
proficiency. In what way is this a "political argument"?

How is it a "political argument", that there is appearantly zero
consumer demand for a Cyrillic Moldovan/Romanian wiki? This is a
simple statement of facts, (even though the root cause behind this may
well be a political one.)

> 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, forgive me for not understanding what you are trying to tell
me.

> 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 place.

Well, you have repeated this several time now. Alas, as long as you
fail to take on the central argument against mo.wiki (absense of
native demand and contributors), your opion is not gaining any
strength, at least in my view.

Thanks,

Johannes


-- 
http://www.infoe.de/