Now, see, for all the people who weren't quite sure whether or not you're a troll, there's the proof.
Now STFU, before I have to start filling your inbox with links to the "How about a nice cup of Shut The Fuck Up" advertisement (or, as you would say, adVURRtissmunt).
Mark
On 23/09/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 21/09/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
If Norwegian can have two wikipedias, then so should English, for the
same
reasons.
Or, alternatively, Norwegian shouldn't have two Wikipedias; if the situations are as analagous as you imply, I would support their merger. What Norwegian speakers would have to say on the matter is a whole other debate (and one of which plenty can probably be found in the list archives, if you look).
The Norwegian issue was discussed extensively.
In addition to massive (rather than minor) orthographic differences, Bokmål and Nynorsk have very different grammars (some examples: the word "I" is "Jeg" in Bokmål and "Eg" in Nynorsk, the word "not" is "ikke" in Bokmål and "ikkje" in Nynorsk, even the word "Norway" is "Norge" in Bokmål and "Noreg" in Nynorsk.)
Now, the heart of this issue is: it isn't just a consensus of Americans that has led to the status quo. It is a consensus of people from America as well as from all over the Commonwealth, including but not limited to the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, India...
If you want, you can open a poll on Meta-Wiki. If even 10 established members of any Wikipedia vote in favour of a split, I will be very surprised.
Until such time as you open that poll, I respectfully request that you
STFU.
make me.
Mark _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM POSSIT MATERIARI ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE