[Wikipedia-l] Re: FW: Wikipedia for Old English

Adam Bishop grenfell_ at hotmail.com
Sat Aug 7 00:34:17 UTC 2004

That sounds pretty good - I'd love to help with medieval history, you'd 
definitely need at least an Ælfred ðe Great article!

>From: "James R. Johnson" <modean52 at comcast.net>
>Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>To: <wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org>
>Subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] Re: FW: Wikipedia for Old English
>Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 20:27:25 -0400
>Hey Adam,
>	Thanks for the help and kinds words - these are all very good and
>important questions.
>As for types of articles, I (myself as a writer/contributor to the AS 
>would like to start out with simple fact-based articles, perhaps the 
>listed on the "100 articles every wiki should have."  I would 
hope that
>people would contribute articles, either Pokemon, Mario, News, 
>whatever.  I have no doubt someone will want to write Anglo-Saxon 
>articles, but I'd rather do modern history, some biographies, biology,
>technology, etc.  If you'd like to write the Pokemon article, feel free! 
>wille þæt séon, gif þu þæt wille wrítan.  There are people who can
>contribute readily on the Forum for Old English mailing list, English-L
>mailing list, and Old English Made Easy mailing list.
>The form of the language would be early West Saxon, as used in the Clark
>Hall Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, without the syncopation of endings 
>verbs (a more formal syntactic convention).
>The groups are above mentioned, as well as other groups that can be 
>with a google search. There is already a terminology page for the 
>terms, as well as many biology and other terms native to the language.  
>Icelandic has created new uses for old words, I'm sure Old English can 
>the same (How about an article about a circulwyrde or the symantec 
>rungestreon, or þá Nipponiscan léode (the Japanese people)?).
>Does that help?
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org
>[mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Adam Bishop
>Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 5:22 PM
>To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: FW: Wikipedia for Old English
>I think an Old English Wikipedia sounds interesting (although I don't 
>very much OE myself), and now that you are also discussing Latin, I 
>to point out a few problems you might encounter (I am an admin on the 
>Most importantly, you should start off by making some guidelines about 
>should and should not be included.  The Latin wikipedia is pretty old 
>only recently has there been a concerted effort to give it some 
direction -
>I think any new wikipedia in a dead language would benefit from having 
>rules first.
>For example, you would (I assume) want to have articles about 
>related topics, but will people also want to write about unrelated 
>   Will the stereotypical Pokemon article be allowed?
>What form of the language will you use?  For Latin, I think we try to be 
>classical as possible, although there is some medieval and neo-Latin 
>too.  As far as I understand, the 9th century Wessex dialect is the most
>attested form of Anglo-Saxon, right?  Would you accept alternate
>spelling/grammar found in other dialects (Northumbrian, perhaps)?
>(As a side note, you would probably also want to specifically state that 
>English is not the same as "ye olde English", nor is it 
Chaucerian or
>Shakespearian English, as has been mentioned already.)
>Are there groups who still use Old English, from whom you can draw 
>contributors or information on where to begin?  Is there any information 
>how to use OE words for modern concepts? For Latin it is fairly easy to 
>Neo-Latin terms, but what if you want to write about Japan, for example, 
>OE? I guess my point is, can OE still be used in a meaningful way, or 
>you be limited by existing vocabulary?
>I hope these questions/suggestions help, and I hope I can contribute 
when it
>is created!
>Adam Bishop
>>From: Pierre Abbat <phma at phma.hn.org>
>>Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: FW: Wikipedia for Old English
>>Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 15:40:55 -0400 > >On 
Thursday 05 August 2004
>10:48, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
>> > "James R. Johnson" 
<modean52 at comcast.net> writes:
>> > > I guess it's like Latin in being a dead 
language, but just as
>> > > deserving of a Wiki.
>> >
>> > Encyclopedia writer should try to get the facts right 
>> > Latin is still in use (and it was never dead).  And, 
>important, > > Latin something like a sleeping lingua 
>>"Dead" referring to a language means 
"having no native
>speakers". Unlike Manx, >which died with its last native 
>(but is still in use), Latin died >(but remained in use) when its
>descendants differentiated sufficiently that >none of them was 
>which can't be pinpointed as precisely.
>>li fi'u vu'u fi'u fi'u du li pa
>>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>Designer Mail isn't just fun to send, it's fun to receive. Use special
>stationery, fonts and colors.
>   Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the
>first two months FREE*.
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org

MSN® Calendar keeps you organized and takes the effort out of scheduling 
  Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the 
first two months FREE*.

More information about the Wikipedia-l mailing list