[Foundation-l] Allow new wikis in extinct languages?

Thu Apr 3 19:59:52 UTC 2008

Hoi,
When Gothic was never written in the Latin script, the line is crossed when
it is written in the Latin script. When a encyclopaedia cannot be written in
a language because there is not enough vocabulary and consequently
neologisms have to be created to write the text or when words are given a
meaning that they did not originally have the line is crossed.

Certainly Gothic and probably Anglo-Saxon language have crossed the line
already.

Thanks,
     GerardM

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:

> This is essentially my position.
>
> However, there is a line to be crossed - when we are writing a
> language based on existing materials, and when we are writing in a
> language that we have made up. A Gothic or Anglo-Saxon Wikipedia could
> possibly stay on the proper side of this line, but a Sumerian
> Wikipedia probably could not and a Carian Wikipedia definitely could
> not.
>
> Mark
>
> On 02/04/2008, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <
> >  pathoschild at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >  > Hello,
> >  >
> >  > The language subcommittee only allows languages that have a living
> >  > native community (except Wikisource, due to its archivist nature).
> >  > This is based on an interpretation of the Wikimedia Foundation
> mission
> >  > to "provide the sum of human knowledge to every human being". Thus,
> >  > the overriding purpose of allowing a wiki in a new language is to
> make
> >  > it accessible to more human beings. If a language has no native
> users,
> >  > allowing a wiki in that language does not fit our mission because it
> >  > does not make that project accessible to more human beings. Instead,
> a
> >  > wiki in their native languages should be requested if it doesn't
> >  > already exist.
> >  >
> >  > Typically, the users requesting a wiki in an extinct language don't
> >  > want to provide educational material to more people at all, but only
> >  > want to promote or revive the language. While these are noble goals,
> >  > they are not those of the Wikimedia Foundation, so that a wiki should
> >  > not be created simply to fulfill them.
> >  >
> >  > But that is my opinion. What do you think; should wikis be allowed in
> >  > every extinct language?
> >  >
> >  > --
> >  > Yours cordially,
> >  > Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
> >  >
> >  >
> >
> > If there are people willing to develop and administer the language
> edition
> >  of the encyclopedia, sure. At worst it is their time to waste. Such
> users
> >  should be willing to operate the wiki as in take care of vandalism and
> etc.
> >
> >  If the wiki somehow successfully resurrects a dead language, no harm
> done.
> >  It would be great publicity too. I see this as a no risk endeavored we
> >  should take.
> >
> >  The role of the language subcommittee in my view should be to determine
> >  weather or not there is enough of a community to launch a new language
> >  edition of a project.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >  foundation-l mailing list
> >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>