Re: creation of other language WP's as far as I am concerned if somebody want to take the trouble why should anyone object? If someone wants to create one in Klingon, Ancient Greek or Aramaic let them get on with it. If you don't know the language or object for political reasons then stick to other language WP's. Gibraltarian _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

Hi Mark a Yanito WP sounds great. I'll play around with the Gib article on my own and see what I come up with. :o) _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

On 10/21/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: Mark, at least two linguists (User:Angr is another) said twice that story about Zlatiborian is a hoax. I strongly support sociocultural identities of various people, but this one would be silly if there would not be some not-so-good-informed people who support them. Unlike Montenegrins/Montengrin, there are no people who identify themself as Zlatiborians/Zlatiborian speekers except in regional sense. The person who is propagate Zlatiborian language (Djordje Bozovic) is a bureaucrat on Serbian Wikipedia and declares himself "as Serbian nationalist and Zlatiborian local-patriot" (I can quote his edits on Serbian Wikipedia if anyone wants). BTW, I am not sure what to think about the person who started the story again (User:SellackAlex). She wrote that she is working on Philological Faculty in Belgrade, Departmant of pedagogy and andragogy (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ASellackAlex&diff=26007…) while I can say that there are no such Departmant on _my_ faculty. She corrected it (the correct faculty is Faculty of Philosophy) after I noted this on sr: vilage pump. (Djordje's sock puppet?) I would like to see a people who works on their sociocultural identities. I would like to see live Chakavian, Kaykavian and Torlakian dialects/languages. But, there are no such trends in Balkans. But, trends such as "I am living in down town of Belgrade and I am proud of it; people who are not living in down town are less civilized, less important etc." as well as "I am living in Cacak and I am more Serb then others" are very often. In some cases it goes up to quasi-ethnical declaring as "Dorcolian" (the part of Belgrade), "Belgradian", "Zlatiborian" etc. But, again, there are very few of them who would say "I am talking Dorcolian, not Serbian/SC/B/C". Serbo-Croatian, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin have very small differences. The only reason why they are "separate languages" is political. Between 200.000 and 10.000.000 of people say for themself that they are speaking the language with different name. But, in the case of Zlatiborian (Belgradian, Dorcolian) it is idiosyncretic. Uzice (the main city of the Zlatibor region) has maybe 50.000 of inhabitans. The whole region has around 100.000 of inhabitans. If 250 of people say for themself that they are speaking Zlatiborian, we would have it in statistics (from 2002). But, there are no any kind of mentioning of Zlatiborian language in statistics (you have the blank line to write what is your language if it is not some of the main languages). So, less of 250 people say that their language is Zlatiborian language and this speech is the basis of the Serbian Iyekavian standard. While I don't have anything against anyone who says that "(s)he is speaking Glapolgaptoringian language" even if it is literal English, I think that: 1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If Glapolgaptoringian is the same as English and 100 humans call it Glapolgaptoringian, then it may be noted in the article about English that some people call it in such way. Idiosyncretic naming should stay inside of user space (yes, I agree to move it into Aleksandra's user space but not redirect, and I would say it on the TfD page). Otherwise it makes mass. 2. Wikipedia is not the place for ethnical/national constitution. In the case of Zlatiborian, English Wikipedia is used for that case ("Zlatiborian exists, you can see the article about Zlatiborian on Wikipedia!") I would support Zlatiborians if they are asking for schools in Zlatiborian etc., even I think it is silly. But, I _didn't_heard_ about them and their needs yet! So, if it is OK to say in Wikipedia article "10 people call Serbian language Zlatiborian" or "Mark Williamson calls English language Glapolgaptoringian", it is OK to keep the language tag. Also, note that he/she/they took two-letters code "zb"... As well as I took three-letters code for Belgradian. Do you think that there are more relevant languages which would need those codes? I agree with that. But, as I understud explicite rules on English Wikipedia -- Wikipedia is not the place where all human knowledge should be kept. If someone calls his/her language Zlatiborian even it is the same as Serbian and other Zlatiborians (in the sense of rebion) call their language Serbian, then it is idiosyncretic, not relevant in the sense of encyclopedia. And, of course, when Wikipedia becomes "the place where all human knowledge should be kept" I would completely agree to keep Zlatiborian articles and user boxes. Yes, Mark, I understand that you would support Texans if they say that they are talking Texanian even it is the same as English as well as I support Montenegrins to call their language as Montenegrin even it is (almost) the same as Serbian. But, there are a lot of differences between Montenegrins and Zlatiborians. I hope that I explained what are the differences.

Also, a quote which is partially funny: "You would recognize the difference if you could just see some examples of it. Zlatiborian and Serbian are very similar, but a Serbian would say: Nigde na svetu nema lepsega grada od Beograda, but a Zlatiborian says: Nidje na svijetu nema ljepseg grada od Biograda. Or, while a Serbian says: Letos behosmo u Gruziji, posecivasmo hramove i manastire, a Zlatiborian would say: Ljetos bijasmo u Djurdjiji, posjecivasmo crkve i manastire, etc." Now quite obviously a great deal of that is just Ekavian/Ijekavian (svetu -> svijetu; lepsega -> ljepsega; letos -> ljetos; posecivasmo -> posjecivasmo), I wonder about the rest? Gruziji vs Djurdjiji seems to me to be a moot point because as far as I know, both are accepted in Serbian. Mark

Arbeo, this is about templates on userpages, not articles. Mark On 24/10/05, Arbeo M <arbeo_m(a)yahoo.de> wrote: -- If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail. Si ud. querría que le enviara una invitación para juntar gmail, favor de envíeme un mensaje. Si vous voudriez que je vous envoie une invitation à joindre gmail, envoyez-moi s.v.p un message. Se vce. gostaria que eu lhe enviasse um convite para juntar gmail, favor de envie-me uma mensagem.

I don't think it matters -- even if there is no template, people can make it look like a language template anyhow. So if they can make something that looks like a rabbit and acts like a rabbit, why not just give them a rabbit? Mark On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)mutualaid.org> wrote: -- If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail. Si ud. querría que le enviara una invitación para juntar gmail, favor de envíeme un mensaje. Si vous voudriez que je vous envoie une invitation à joindre gmail, envoyez-moi s.v.p un message. Se vce. gostaria que eu lhe enviasse um convite para juntar gmail, favor de envie-me uma mensagem.

People can still add the category [[Category:User zb]] to their page. Mark On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)mutualaid.org> wrote: -- If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail. Si ud. quiere que le envíe una invitación para juntar gmail, envíeme un mensaje. Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation à joindre gmail, envoyez-moi s.v.p un message. Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de envie-me uma mensagem. Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.

Uhh... is there such a category? And if there were, would it matter if that were a part of it? And why couldn't they classify it if it were userified? Mark On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)mutualaid.org> wrote: -- If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail. Si ud. quiere que le envíe una invitación para juntar gmail, envíeme un mensaje. Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation à joindre gmail, envoyez-moi s.v.p un message. Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de envie-me uma mensagem. Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.

On 25/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)mutualaid.org> wrote: I have no problem with that. So, do you consider Belgradian to be your mother tongue? I, for one, think you're blowing smoke and disrupting WP to prove a point. How many people do you think honestly consider Bronxian or Philadelphian or San-Franciscan to be their mother tongue? Probably only a handful. And what are the chances that these people are Wikipedians? Wikipedia is about consensus, not "majority rules". Mark -- If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail. Si ud. quiere que le envíe una invitación para juntar gmail, envíeme un mensaje. Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation à joindre gmail, envoyez-moi s.v.p un message. Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de envie-me uma mensagem. Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.

I don't care about your feelings vs. their feelings. I will ask you again: Do you consider Belgradian to be your mother tongue? I don't advocate a policy of _having_ such templates, but rather of _allowing_ them when people who plan to actually use them want to create them. In your case, it seems more like you're wanting to disrupt WP to make a point, rather than that you actually feel like Belgradian is your mother tongue. What? I didn't say anything about having another Chinese WP. Yes, I advocate for Cantonese and Wu WPs, but contrary to what you may think these aren't "one more Chinese Wikipedia". Now, what I assume here is that you're trying to tell me that my belief is in a "majority rules" policy and that I should apply it everywhere. Quite the contrary, I still believe in consensus. However, assuming good faith, I have not contested the 3 or so votes against a Cantonese WP that are either unsigned or signed by an anonymous user, as well as those by users who appear to be likely sockpuppets. I have not insisted that every voter verify their identity. Also, the difference between a straight-out vote and a straw poll whose goal is to achieve consensus is that a straight-out vote doesn't nessecarily include elaboration on the opinions of the voters, just a simple "aye" or "nay". Nobody has insisted that all the Sinitic-wp voters on Meta all elaborate on their positions. Many have simply voted support or oppose with no explanation. On the other hand, on the template-deletion page, people have expressed more detailed opinions which, although diametrically opposed, could probably find some sort of compromise in between. And I should also add that Meta and individual Wikipedias are very different sites with very different rules -- many of the articles at Meta would be speedied if they were posted to en.wiki. Mark