--- Andre Engels engels@uni-koblenz.de wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Tomos at Wikipedia wrote:
- English-centrism
I would say that if at all possible, within the
parameters of trying
to come up with a better and more reasonable
counting system, that any
changes should benefit (if possible!) the
non-English wikipedias more
than the English wikipedia.
I disagree. We should try to get the greatest benefit for ALL Wikipedias. What we should try to avoid is changes that benefit the English one but are disadvantageous to (some of) the others, but if we have to options, one of which benefits the English a lot and the others somewhat, and the other the English a little bit and the others somewhat, then the first one is preferable.
I disagree. The option 1 is more often chosen because of the weight of people, so that is a fact, but I see not why it would be the *best* option. It might be the best choice for english, not for others. I am not even sure it is the best choice at all.
In this particular case, Brion's motivation is
that the French has
seen people adding commas for no good reason,
right? I absolutely do
NOT want the French to get the feeling that we're
changing the rules
in order to penalize them.
If I remember correctly, the French that are present at this list were just as negative about this action as the others were.
Absolutely Comma hunting is a lot of distraction, but most seem very willing to go to another system. Some favor the >0 count. Other go to 100 to 200 bytes
So I don't think the french would be a pb to quit the current system.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/