[Foundation-l] Rename proposal of Kurdish wikipedia

[Nathan]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:49 PM, M. Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> And if I were to ask the community to make it? I would be perfectly willing
> to do the same thing. This should not be relevant in Wikimedia. If a
> pedophile says "We should put a picture of a naked child on every page of
> Wikipedia!", we should refute his idea on its merits, not based on the fact
> that he's a pedophile. I have been thinking for a long time now that ku.wp
> should be moved to kmr.wp, I am just not a big fan of all of the bureaucracy
> and so avoided doing it myself. Now someone else has done it, and I support
> it.
>
> So it really bothers me that you're judging a proposal based on the
> (supposed) ethnicity of the person who suggested it, especially since the
> proposal has always had merit and I could've easily been the proposer
> myself. If an argument has no merit, then say so based on the argument. Ad
> hominem is never right, and that's actually exactly what you've done here.
>

You are, again, jumping to conclusions unsupported by what I actually
wrote. I didn't "judge the proposal" based on his ethnicity. If you
can't be bothered to read what I've posted, then please refrain from
further replies.

---
Millosh wrote:

If White Cat has pro-Turkish bias, he wouldn't support Sorani
speakers, as they are "on PKK's side" and PKK is the archenemy of
Turkey. However, much more relevant factor in inter-Kurdish disputes
are personal and political feuds, not ethnic tension.
---

Here's a situation where there may be unknown ramifications to the
action requested. In a period of ethnic and political conflict between
two groups, even minor and seemingly apolitical maneuvers may have
larger significance not apparent to outsiders. Since we don't have all
the details, it can be helpful to understand the background of the
people involved in a dispute - in this case, virtually all of the
Kurdish editors are against the proposed rename, while White Cat (who
has an amply documented history of pro-Turkish editing which should
not be doubted) is in favor. If, as you say, it's a purely logical and
reasonable argument, then the nature of the two sides is an
interesting coincidence. Perhaps the Kurdish editors prefer having a
"Kurdish Wikipedia" as an emblem of their unified ethnic identity, or
perhaps there are other factors at play.

Nathan