[Wikipedia-l] Policy draft: Wikimedia projects are not the place for national constitution

Thu Nov 16 11:27:12 UTC 2006

Hoi,
Please refrain from misrepresenting what I said. The notion of what is a 
language has been often defined as "a dialect with a navy/army". Another 
nice saying "To the victor all the spoils". I have already mentioned 
that Cyrillic Moldovan /is /and /will /be continued to be supported as 
being distinct from standard Romanian in future standards. This gives 
ample scope for the continued existence of the http://mo.wikipedia.org. 
This scope is strengthened by the continued harassment / aggression 
against the contributors of this wikipedia.

When you want to achieve some sort of cooperation, /you /will first have 
first to reach out with an olive branch of peace. You will have to 
demonstrate your good intentions and disprove that the wish for 
integration is political in word and deed. To make it a real challenge 
not only you but the whole http://ro.wikipedia.org community has to 
become inclusive. Having opportunities to integrate are imho unlikely to 
be successful at this time because I would not hesitate to predict that 
a forcefully combined "community" will find all kinds of "reasonable" 
arguments to decide in majority and thereby prove to be anything but a 
community that has come together in one project.

Thanks,
    GerardM

Jacky PB wrote:
> --- Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Yeah. Despite their constant assertions to the
>> otherwise, I can
>> testify that Romanians are collectively Russophobic.
>>     
>
> What is this doing here?
> I'm not sure that wikipedia-l is the place for
> exposing your feelings about some nation or another.
> User pages and blogs serve this purpose.
>
> The argument here is about whether one *needs* two
> fully independent wikipedias (ro and mo), or two
> interfaces to a single code base, given that
> 1. the standard language is the same, as stated in
> sources presented above, and accepted, for instance,
> by GerardM.
> 2. wikipedia is about languages, not politics
>
> And there is a second question: Is the second variant
> feasible? 
>
> Dpotop
>
>
>   
>> I don't really
>> blame them, given the role Russia has had in their
>> history.
>>
>> Danutz claimed that it was a "coincidence" that they
>> removed the
>> Cyrillic character from the ball in the logo to
>> replace it with a
>> Romanian one, that they were just replacing a letter
>> at random, not
>> because it was Cyrillic. But I do not believe this.
>>
>> Certainly, it is a basic difficulty that most
>> Romanians don't know
>> Cyrillic well enough to be able to write it,
>> although they can
>> probably read it with some difficulty (just as
>> someone who knew
>> Serbian Latin but not Cyrillic could eke their way
>> through a text).
>>
>> Presumably, though, it could be solved that editbox
>> text, too, would
>> be converted.
>>
>> But still, ro.wp would probably vote against the
>> very idea of having
>> Cyrillic on their WP in any way, shape, or form.
>> They've said some
>> pretty interesting stuff about it, like how badly it
>> fits the
>> language, despite the fact that it is linguistically
>> much
>> better-suited (more phonetic and has no digraphs,
>> represents some
>> distinctions that Latin does not, and combines a
>> couple of
>> diphthongs), and a hostile attitude in general
>> through various
>> actions.
>>
>> I'm guessing that a long-term solution (ie, when the
>> internet comes to
>> Transnistria in its entirety) would be some form of
>> a transliterating
>> portal, if not a separate WP. (likely the Romanian
>> domination of power
>> would anger Nistrians regarding POV disputes)
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On 15/11/06, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> On 11/15/06, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
>>>       
>>>>> As long as there is no automated lossless
>>>>> conversion from Latin to Cyrillic and from
>>>>>           
>> Cyrillic to Latin AND the
>>     
>>>>> orthography used, MediaWiki does not provide
>>>>>           
>> the required functionality
>>     
>>>>> for Romanian/Moldovan.
>>>>>           
>>>> That's a third thing, and an implementation
>>>>         
>> detail for the given
>>     
>>>> language (eg, already implemented for Serbian,
>>>>         
>> etc). Nor is it related
>>     
>>>> to the 'Multilingual MediaWiki' proposal.
>>>>         
>>> Usage of scripts in articles on Serbian Wikipedia
>>>       
>> are regulated by
>>     
>>> policy, not by software (if initial article is
>>>       
>> written in
>>     
>>> Latin-Iyekavian, it should stay Latin-Iyekavian)
>>>       
>> and we are not quite
>>     
>>> happy because of that (we want solution in which
>>>       
>> anyone may use it's
>>     
>>> own script and variant inside of the code). And
>>>       
>> what we want, it is
>>     
>>> necessary for Moldovan/Romanin case and for all
>>>       
>> other cases where
>>     
>>> differences between orthographies are not inside
>>>       
>> of one cultural
>>     
>>> space. (I.e., it is OK for Serbian Ekavian user to
>>>       
>> see Iyekavian text,
>>     
>>> but I don't think that it would be OK for some
>>>       
>> Romanian user to have
>>     
>>> to write in Moldovan Cyrillic ;) )
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>
>>>       
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>   
>> -- 
>> Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.