[Foundation-l] Communicating effectively: Wikimedia needs clear language now

[Tom Morris]

On 19 February 2012 10:21, Thierry Coudray <thierry.coudray at wikimedia.fr> wrote:
>>
>> We're a multi-lingual movement, and this makes clear English even more
>> important. If something is unclear to a native speaker, it's even more
>> difficult for someone who has English as a second or third language.
>>
>
> I confirm.
> Its quite difficult for a non fluent english speaker to be involved in the
> international wikimedia movement even if I understand that we need a lingua
> franca and this lingua franca is english.
> But please do not complicate their life for example by using American or
> British locutions (or explain it if use).
>

Just to clarify: the issue I raised isn't about American or British
terms. I'd argue that UK/US (and Canada, Australia, NZ etc.)
differences isn't really a major issue with Foundation/Chapter
communications. A few of the Foundation-isms (Sue's "On-passing") are
probably down to spending too much time in California. (And I do hope
Wikimedia UK doesn't start using phrases like "Tally ho, chaps!" in
their documents...)

Mostly though, thanks to the Internet and multinational corporations,
godawful business jargon crosses all national borders. Words and
phrases like 'onboarding', 'stakeholders', 'mission statements',
'platforms', 'proactive', 'sectors' and pretty much anything
'strategic', for instance.

To see the difference, consider:

Wikipedia is the leading player in the online reference sector and
provide a revolutionary cloud-based 'encyclopedia as a service'.
Thanks to the visionary utilization of our key strategic software
assets, we deliver value-add to our stakeholders by enabling them to
modify, shape and determine the future of the resource by modification
of key text assets.

vs.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia on the Internet that anybody can edit.

-- 
Tom Morris
<http://tommorris.org/>