--- Andre Engels <engels(a)uni-koblenz.de> wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Tomos at Wikipedia wrote:
2. English-centrism
I would say that if at all possible, within the
parameters of trying
to come up with a better and more reasonable
counting system, that any
changes should benefit (if possible!) the
non-English wikipedias more
than the English wikipedia.
I disagree. We should try to get the greatest
benefit for ALL Wikipedias.
What we should try to avoid is changes that benefit
the English one but
are disadvantageous to (some of) the others, but if
we have to options, one
of which benefits the English a lot and the others
somewhat, and the other
the English a little bit and the others somewhat,
then the first one is
preferable.
I disagree. The option 1 is more often chosen because
of the weight of people, so that is a fact, but I see
not why it would be the *best* option. It might be the
best choice for english, not for others. I am not even
sure it is the best choice at all.
In this
particular case, Brion's motivation is
that the French has
seen people adding commas for no good reason,
right? I absolutely do
NOT want the French to get the feeling that
we're
changing the rules
in order to penalize them.
If I remember correctly, the French that are present
at this list were
just as negative about this action as the others
were.
Absolutely
Comma hunting is a lot of distraction, but most seem
very willing to go to another system.
Some favor the >0 count. Other go to 100 to 200 bytes
So I don't think the french would be a pb to quit the
current system.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/