Angela is right - the Proposal_for_Sinitic_linguistic_policy failed to make an open call to the ZH community for their opinion.
Due diligence has not been performed. My suggestions from July:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-July/041203.html http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-July/041207.html
were not heeded. The voting page does not have complete background materials; nor was the page translated into Chinese, the main relevant community; nor was the announcement made to wikizh-l or the main zh.wikipedia.org community pages.
Personal differences aside, the organizer of a vote, as an implicit "overseer," should show restraint in terms of commenting on individual votes and as a result, influencing the votes on the page.
One reason the final (sixth) GNAA VfD was accepted after several controversial rounds of voting was because of how professionally the vote was administered. We should learn from that.
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
On 9/6/05, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/5/05, Walter van Kalken walter@vankalken.net wrote:
I found our policy with regards to Chinese languages stranger and stranger. We do not do this if we open another Germanic or Romanic language pedia!
It's not policy. There is no policy for creating new languages (just a draft one at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_policy_for_wikis_in_new_languages). I was just giving my opinion, and I feel that the relevant communities should be told about any language proposals, not only Sinetic ones. If some dialect of English were proposed, it would be very unfair to try to hide that from the existing English language communities within Wikimedia.
Angela. _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l