[Wikipedia-l] Re: Request for new Wikipedia: bokmål

[Olve Utne]

At 20:35 06/11/2004 +0000, Lars Alvik wrote:
>Ok, there are some basic facts, that the request didn't provide.
>
>1. Most of the articles on no: is on either bokmål or riksmål.
>2. The debate started on nn:, and is probably an attempt to claim (or deny 
>the other part use of the no; domain)
>3. A split (practicaly a move) would give bokmål (the dominant language) a 
>unfamiliar name.

Hello Lars & everyone else,
As an active Nynorsk / Norsk Bokmål / Swedish Wikipedia writer,
I find your list of "basic facts" a bit skewed, Lars.

I can assure you that there is no conspiracy to claim the no: domain
for another non-exclusive language of Norway (be it Nynorsk,
Norsk Bokmål, Norsk Riksmål, Høgnorsk, Sámegiella (Northern Sami),
other Sami languages, languages of national minorities or whichever).

As for the no: articles being mostly in Norsk Bokmål/Riksmål (and
near 100% of the user interface), that is true -- and you seem to wish
to use this argumentatively against the Nynorsk Wikipedia people.
The logical consequence of that would in fact be to also admit that
the use of no: as a language code for our Norsk (mainly Bokmål)
Wikipedia is linguistically inappropriate.

Here is an alternative list of "basic facts", for the case of balancing
the arguments:

1. "Either Bokmål or Riksmål" makes little sense,
    since the two are part of one orthographic/morphologic
    continuum officially (but not amongst the Riksmål proponents)
    known as "Bokmål" -- a continuum with a difference magnitude
    roughly equivalent to the difference between UK and US English,
    minus (!) the clarity of norms.
2. The Bokmål name is unfamiliar partially because its proponents
    prefer, for political reasons, to call it (incorrectly) simply "Norsk"
    (Norwegian).
3. The majority of the Norwegian population write Bokmål
    but speak dialects that are closer to Nynorsk than Bokmål.
4. The Nynorsk Wikipedia people are definitely not interested
    in taking over the no: domain.
    (Rebuttal of your "basic fact" #2 -- which I find suspicious
    that you included in a "basic facts" list at all....)
5. The discussion most likely takes place on Nynorsk
    because the debate culture there is easier on its participants
    than the one on no:.
6. The logical name for a nb: Wikipedia would probably be
    "Norsk Bokmål" rather than simply "Bokmål".
    That is what the code nb: stands for anyway --
    and it is as familiar as Norsk, but more precise.
    (Rebuttal of your "basic fact" #2.)
7. The domain name no: as such transcedes: nb or nn:,
    and should, logically speaking, be a common site with
    contents and/or links reflecting both Nynorsk and Bokmål.
8. In the hypothetical event of a separate Norsk Bokmål Wikipedia,
    the no: domain could either
    a) remain as a mixed entity, as it is to some degree now
       (which is a basic assumption within the nn: discussion);
    b) be used as a common portal to nb: and nn:,
       and possibly also the national minority languages of Norway;
    c) or be a disambiguation link page.
9. The reasons for the wish of a separate Norsk Bokmål Wikipedia
    may vary for the various users. My personal view is that a
    separate Norsk Bokmål Wikipedia may be a better strategy for
    the work towards a future common-Scandinavian interface
    with parallel articles in the four main written forms of Scandinavian
    (defining Bokmål and Riksmål as one, since there is no single
    definite linguistical trait that defines these as separate codes
    rather than a socio-linguistic continuum).
10.I know that the sometimes fiercely high-profile POV from
    some central people on no: serves to scare some people away.
    This has already been referred to in the wikipedia-l debate
    as part of the reason why some people who wish to keep
    writing in Norsk Bokmål may wish a separate Wikipedia
    as a way to "come clean".

I personally do not have a strong preference either way,
but I do think that it is important to try to keep the discussion
on a factual level.

Best regards,

Olve

___________________

Olve Utne
http://utne.nvg.org