[Foundation-l] Allow new wikis in extinct languages?

Thu Apr 3 22:32:50 UTC 2008

You know some of this is offtopic (regarding this thread) :)

   - White Cat

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:

> I never said it is acceptable. I said I have been one of the prime
> advocates within that project for using Wulfilas' alphabet.
>
> However, I do not think that using the Latin alphabet (which it
> doesn't even do on all pages... just some of them) means it departs
> from the corpus.
>
> Mark
>
> On 03/04/2008, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> >  When you learn a language, the language should be learned warts and
> all. I
> >  disagree with you that writing in the Latin script should be qualified
> as
> >  acceptable at all. A WMF project is written for the benefit of the
> READERS
> >  of that project
> >  Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> >
> >
> >  On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >  > What are these neologisms you are talking about? Please give multiple
> >  > examples. I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just skeptical of your
> >  > claims.
> >  >
> >  > As far as Gothic goes, that is a project I was involved with closer
> to
> >  > the beginning and I advocated for the use of Gothic script. However,
> >  > people became lazy and resorted to using Latin script. It is really
> >  > not as difficult to use the Gothic script as they make it seem... and
> >  > in the future I hope we can overcome this nasty anachronism. Script
> >  > alone is not an argument enough to say that they are departing from
> >  > the corpus, however.
> >  >
> >  > Mark
> >  >
> >  > On 03/04/2008, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > > Hoi,
> >  > >  When Gothic was never written in the Latin script, the line is
> crossed
> >  > when
> >  > >  it is written in the Latin script. When a encyclopaedia cannot be
> >  > written in
> >  > >  a language because there is not enough vocabulary and consequently
> >  > >  neologisms have to be created to write the text or when words are
> given
> >  > a
> >  > >  meaning that they did not originally have the line is crossed.
> >  > >
> >  > >  Certainly Gothic and probably Anglo-Saxon language have crossed
> the
> >  > line
> >  > >  already.
> >  > >
> >  > >  Thanks,
> >  > >      GerardM
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >  On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com
> >
> >  > wrote:
> >  > >
> >  > >  > This is essentially my position.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > However, there is a line to be crossed - when we are writing a
> >  > >  > language based on existing materials, and when we are writing in
> a
> >  > >  > language that we have made up. A Gothic or Anglo-Saxon Wikipedia
> >  > could
> >  > >  > possibly stay on the proper side of this line, but a Sumerian
> >  > >  > Wikipedia probably could not and a Carian Wikipedia definitely
> could
> >  > >  > not.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Mark
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > On 02/04/2008, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >  > >  > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <
> >  > >  > >  pathoschild at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > Hello,
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > The language subcommittee only allows languages that have a
> >  > living
> >  > >  > >  > native community (except Wikisource, due to its archivist
> >  > nature).
> >  > >  > >  > This is based on an interpretation of the Wikimedia
> Foundation
> >  > >  > mission
> >  > >  > >  > to "provide the sum of human knowledge to every human
> being".
> >  > Thus,
> >  > >  > >  > the overriding purpose of allowing a wiki in a new language
> is
> >  > to
> >  > >  > make
> >  > >  > >  > it accessible to more human beings. If a language has no
> native
> >  > >  > users,
> >  > >  > >  > allowing a wiki in that language does not fit our mission
> >  > because it
> >  > >  > >  > does not make that project accessible to more human beings.
> >  > Instead,
> >  > >  > a
> >  > >  > >  > wiki in their native languages should be requested if it
> doesn't
> >  > >  > >  > already exist.
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Typically, the users requesting a wiki in an extinct
> language
> >  > don't
> >  > >  > >  > want to provide educational material to more people at all,
> but
> >  > only
> >  > >  > >  > want to promote or revive the language. While these are
> noble
> >  > goals,
> >  > >  > >  > they are not those of the Wikimedia Foundation, so that a
> wiki
> >  > should
> >  > >  > >  > not be created simply to fulfill them.
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > But that is my opinion. What do you think; should wikis be
> >  > allowed in
> >  > >  > >  > every extinct language?
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > --
> >  > >  > >  > Yours cordially,
> >  > >  > >  > Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > > If there are people willing to develop and administer the
> language
> >  > >  > edition
> >  > >  > >  of the encyclopedia, sure. At worst it is their time to
> waste.
> >  > Such
> >  > >  > users
> >  > >  > >  should be willing to operate the wiki as in take care of
> vandalism
> >  > and
> >  > >  > etc.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  If the wiki somehow successfully resurrects a dead language,
> no
> >  > harm
> >  > >  > done.
> >  > >  > >  It would be great publicity too. I see this as a no risk
> >  > endeavored we
> >  > >  > >  should take.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  The role of the language subcommittee in my view should be to
> >  > determine
> >  > >  > >  weather or not there is enough of a community to launch a new
> >  > language
> >  > >  > >  edition of a project.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > > _______________________________________________
> >  > >  > >  foundation-l mailing list
> >  > >  > >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > >  > >  Unsubscribe:
> >  > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > >  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > >  > Unsubscribe:
> >  > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  _______________________________________________
> >  > >  foundation-l mailing list
> >  > >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > >  Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  foundation-l mailing list
> >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>