[Wikipedia-l] Re: Press release : Logo putsch on the FrenchWi kipedia !

[Anthere]

Constans, Camille (C.C.) a écrit:
>>And this is not even mentionning that the proper way to write 
>>is the one 
>>suggested by the French Academy or the French Typographic 
>>Code. Perhaps 
>>Canada has a chance as well here, but I doubt a decree in 
>>Algeria about 
>>how to use french would be given much consideration :-)
> 
> 
> Difficult question too, i would like to know it works between American People and british people ?

More or less ok, I think. That is, if an article was written in british 
english, american people are supposed not to entirely rewrite it in 
american english. Same reversely.


>>It is just another step. Dominancy over content, over style, logo :-)))
> 
> 
> Do you think we're really pov ? We're working to prevent that, I hope...

We are working hard. But please read CK page.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_Utilisateur%3AC%E9r%E9ales_Killer

CK is suggesting that it is perfectly ok to add to wikipedia that some 
words should preferably be used instead of others.
We can laugh upon the aubette, but there are about a dozen other words.

He says it is ok that wikipedia article contains that
*"people should preferably use the word "batonnet ouaté" rather than 
"cotton tige""

Okay. So ...
1) very few people use batonnet ouaté, the vast majority say coton tige.
2) it is a pov to say one word is better (preferable) than another. It 
is not wikipedia role to promote the usage of one word over the other
3) instead, we should attribute the opinion to someone, perhaps the 
Académie Française, perhaps a Quebecois Office, but not wikipedia. 
Wikipedia should not say to people which words they should use, 
Wikipedia should reports the fact that people use one word more than 
another, and that French Decree xxx suggested that we should change our 
habit
4) Tarquin will add on top of that, that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, 
we are not discussing over words, but over concepts, hence it is not a 
good idea to have two articles, one for cotton tige, the other for 
batonnet ouaté, we all clean our ears just the same way, so one article 
is enough.

That sounds simple ?

Well, to me yes (though I still have not understood very well who 
supported the batonnet ouaté usage). Some people would undertand that. 
And others would not. Ok, so let's talk about it. And find to who we can 
attribute this opinion.

Now, look at that discussion  page. What is happening ? Quiet 
conversation between Alvaro, FvdP and I. Ending by asking CK his opinion.

What is his opinion ?
1) cotton tige is incorrect, batonnet aouaté is correct. That is final.
2) I am a very very nastly woman and because of me, he will quit Wikipedia

Ok, what do happen then ?
1) People sooth him
2) I explain it is not a personal attack, but just a discussion over how 
we could better respect npov, so what does he think of above 
propositions, and who is the one saying "batonnet aoute" is better than 
"cotton tige" ?


What is CK suggestion ?

that instead we write that "in written language, usage of batonet ouaté 
is preferable to coton tige"

Which changes nothing

So we do discuss again. Meanwhile, there are a couple of very 
interesting exchanges on typographic rules

Then what is CK answer, in an open letter to Tarquin and I

1) That I know only to be nice with PP
2) that he is a long-lasting professional (28 years old expertise on 
typography)
3) that the word comes from Belgium anyway
4) that the Académie Française does not respect NPOV itself
5) that he will quit wikipedia because of me

All arguments not being in the least a reason to go on writing that we 
should use the word batonnet ouateé rather than cotton tige.

How reasonable is it to spent hours on such a trivial matter ? :-))))


>>As a matter of interest, I would be curious to know how those 
>>internationals, that are split between wikipedias assume that. I find 
>>extremely disconcerting to see two parts of a "common" project 
>>being so 
>>different. It is a bit like that psychological disorder :-)
> 
> 
> Do you think we're really different ? I'm sure there's some probleme as ours on en, de, nl, oc,   oups not oc, there's no yet enough people :)

Yes it is different Shai. Of course, there are problems on every 
wikipedia. But, I was trying to think about it, and on every single rule 
or usage I could think of, fr: and en: are different.
We don't use the same rules to delete, or to undelete
We don't use the same rules to name people sysops
We don't put the interlanguage links in the same order or the same place 
I think
We don't use page protection in edit wars the same way
We accept or do not accept the same way foreign languages in articles
The etiquette is different


>>I hope this issue be solved Tarquin, because fr needs you badly.
> 
> 
> As I said, leaving is not a solution. Tarquin choose to leave, it's his choice.
> Athymik does it some weeks ago.

And Elsios as well
And where is Alvaro ?
And how tired am I ?

Indeed our choice.
Leaving is not a solution for Wikipedia, but it might be a solution to us.