[Foundation-l] policy on languages without native speakers

Thu Apr 24 16:05:23 UTC 2008

"Needs to be"?

How about, "Gerard says it should be"?

Mark

On 24/04/2008, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
>  You have not understood my point. A dead language that is reconstructed,
>  needs to be considered as not being that language. Ancient Greek is a dead
>  language. It is possible to apply for a code that recognises modern work and
>  the old texts. With such a code it is abundantly clear that even though
>  effort is taken to stay as close as the old language as possible, it is
>  inherently not the same.
>
>  I disagree that my concern in this is addressed. As I indicated earlier, I
>  have discussed this with people whose opinion I value and they strengthen me
>  in my position. They are the types who could be called authoritative. :)
>  Thanks,
>       GerardM
>
>
>  On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  > +1. I think that policy should be decided by the community, not by a
>  > tiny self-selected cabal. I don't have a problem with them carrying
>  > out consensus- or vote-produced policies, as long as they enforce them
>  > equally and fairly. Also, there must be an oversight process so that
>  > if the community believes the LC has acted in error in a specific
>  > case, it can be reopened and a constructive dialogue can be held.
>  >
>  > Mark
>  >
>  > On 24/04/2008, Marcos Cramer <marcos.cramer at gmx.de> wrote:
>  > > The discussion about the Ancient Greek Wikipedia has started discussions
>  > about the current language proposal policy and about the current application
>  > procedure for new projects.
>  > >
>  > >  Currently the language subcommittee decides both about the language
>  > proposal policy and about its implemenation in particular cases. I agree
>  > that this has its advantages over the old procedure, where a community vote
>  > decided about each case.
>  > >
>  > >  However I think that all discussions about the language proposal policy
>  > should be public, and if possible the language proposal policy should
>  > represent community consensus. The work of the language subcommittee would
>  > then be reduced to implementing the policy in particular cases and maybe to
>  > make final decisions about the policy in cases where there is no clear
>  > community consensus.
>  > >
>  > >  On 17 October 2007, Pathoschild replaced "interested editors" by "living
>  > native speakers" in the language proposal policy, adding the comment
>  > "tweaked audience criteria per discussion". Since I could find no public
>  > discussion about that change, I assume that it was based on a discussion
>  > within the language subcommittee, which makes it quite hard for outsiders to
>  > find out the rationale behind that change.
>  > >
>  > >  People don't read Wikipedia only in their native languages. As for
>  > myself, my native language is German, but I also read the Wikipedias in
>  > Esperanto, English, Spanish and Swahili. Different Wikipedias often cover
>  > different topics in various degrees of depth, and despite the general NPOV
>  > policy, sometimes some Wikipedias give more weight to certain points of view
>  > than other Wikipedias. So reading Wikipedia in as many languages as one is
>  > capable of reading is often a very rewarding practice.
>  > >
>  > >  Despite the fact that Esperanto has some native speakers (and one active
>  > contributor to the Esperanto WP is a native speaker), the Esperanto
>  > Wikipedia is a good example for the fact that a Wikipedia version can be
>  > very useful independently of their being native speakers of the language in
>  > question.
>  > >
>  > >  So I would urge to remove the word "native" from the language proposal
>  > policy. In order to avoid proposals on completely extinct languages or
>  > recently constructed languages, I would add the following two criteria
>  > (which I already mentioned in an earlier message):
>  > >
>  > >  * New literature is still being produced and published in the proposed
>  > language (whether translated or original)
>  > >  * The proposed language is taught in a number of institutions like
>  > schools or universities.
>  > >
>  > >  GerardM wrote:
>  > >  > Many people maintain their positions and do not for whatever reason
>  > >  > consider the arguments of others.
>  > >
>  > >  Many, including myself, have addressed Gerard's main argument (that one
>  > can't add neologisms to an ancient language, as it would no longer be that
>  > language). As a reminder, here is what I replied to his argument before:
>  > >
>  > >  "In the case of an ancient language that is still used outside of
>  > Wikipedia for new pieces of literature, one can say that as a written
>  > language it is still "living" (though as a spoken language it can be called
>  > "dead"). Inevitably the language is still evolving by accepting new words or
>  > phrases (otherwise new pieces of literature wouldn't really be possible). So
>  > in that case, Gerard's argument doesn't apply."
>  > >
>  > >  Even though I have read all the messages in the threads about Ancient
>  > Greek and the language subcommittee, I haven't seen a response of GerardM to
>  > those who responded to his argument. So it seems to me that it's GerardM
>  > himself who is not considering the arguments of others.
>  > >
>  > >  Marcos
>  > >
>  > > --
>  > >  Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört?
>  > >  Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
>  > >
>  > >  _______________________________________________
>  > >  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
>