我的英文不好，谁能帮助回答一下？
[[zh:user:shizhao]]
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wikimedia Foundation <board(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:52:34 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Ticket#: 114198-FW] Simplified versus Traditional [...]
To: shizhao(a)gmail.com
Hello ShiZhao. This email was sent to the board address, but I don't fully
understand why George Herzog believes traditional Chinese is being eliminated
from the Chinese Wikipedia. Do you know what might be the cause of this
complaint? I havw enclosed the emails below.
I hope you can help.
Thanks.
Angela Beesley
--
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation
http://wikimediafoundation.org/
---- Forwarded message from "George Herzog" <goldy(a)ms19.hinet.net> ----
Date:
From: "George Herzog" <goldy(a)ms19.hinet.net>
To: <board(a)wikimedia.org>
Cc:
Reply-To:
Subject: [Ticket#: 114198-FW] Simplified versus Traditional [...]
Initially I supported Wikipedia amongst my university
students in Taiwan
[I
teach at two Kaohsiung universities] and urged them to contribute
translations to and from English. The technological entries were of
great
interest to many of my students.
But, you have eliminated our language - Traditional Chinese.
This is not a simple matter of duplication of resources.
Traditional Chinese provides a wealth of information and a cultural
point of
view that cannot be found in Simplified Chinese. Chairman Mao Tse Dung
chose to simplify Chinese as a means to control freedom of speech and
freedom of press. It made it easy for the Cultural Revolution to burn
books
at a glance because all Traditional publications were taboo. Also, the
two
forms do not easily exchange meaning as the isolation of 50 years with
the
Cultural Revolution on the mainland and the technological advancement in
Taiwan have more and more divided the two.
Consider you editorial policy carefully. Not all material that goes
into an
encyclopedia is objective and both multiple language and cultural
perspectives are necessary to provide a balanced and genuine portrayal
of
the world we live in. Mainland China will often organize and pay people
to
put pressure on companies, countries, and institutions outside of China
as a
way to isolate Taiwan. It appears that they have been successful with
Wikipedia [they did force Project Gutenberg to abandon support of its
Taipei
mirror site].
By eliminating Traditional Chinese support, you have eliminated the
freest
and most democratic portion of Chinese culture from you archives. You
have
begun to support a government that might happily demand that you exclude
all
references to Taiwan in exchange for reaching their population. And,
you
may find yourself supporting a revisionist form of Chinese history. I
just
don't see how you can abide by your principles and not support both
languages.
For your information, Taiwan was a charter member of the United Nations
and
is currently only one of two countries that are excluded (the other is
the
Vatican by it's own choice). And, I am sure you know where most, if not
all, of your hardware comes from. While it did indeed suffer corruption
under the KMT rule, it finally managed to overcome long-term martial law
in
the 1980s and finally had a democratically elected president [Lee Dung
Hwei]
in about 1996. The current struggle for Taiwan is much akin to the
struggle
of Berlin during the Cold War. I have been in Kaohsiung when Mainland
China
dropped ballistic missiles 15km offshore during Lee Dung Hwei's
presidential
campaign as a source of intimidation.
Sadly you seem to have naively fallen in with China's organized and
continual efforts to isolate and force Taiwan to become like Hong Kong
and
Macao. If you look at the recent history, you can easily see that
people
there have less freedom than prior to 1997. I have been to China and
Hong
Kong [before and after the turn over] and I can provide detailed
examples of
how much less freedom exists there than in Taiwan.
As it stands, most Taiwanese are either unable [because of language
barrier]
or unwilling to contribute to your efforts.
Of course, if you reinstated Traditional Chinese and were will to stay
the
course, you might not only gain a readership.
You might find yourself with one or several benefactors. But as it
stands,
you have closed the door.
In the beginning you offered great potential as a tool for bilingual
education, but your credibility is being deeply challenged.
Respectfully,
George Herzog
An American English teacher in Kaohsiung, Taiwan
---- End forwarded message ----
From:
Wikimedia Foundation <board(a)wikimedia.org>
To:
"George Herzog" <goldy(a)ms19.hinet.net>
Subject:
[Ticket#: 114198] Simplified versus Traditional Chinese
Created:
03/07/2005 10:00:45
Dear George,
Thank you for your mail.
But, you have eliminated our language - Traditional
Chinese.
There are no attempts to remove Traditional Chinese from Wikipedia to my
knowledge.
http://zh.wikipedia.org includes articles in both simplified and traditional
Chinese. Every logged in user had the option of setting their interface to
traditional Chinsese, not only the Chinese Wikipedia, but on any MediaWiki site.
The only difference I am aware of is that the home page for traditional
Chinese has been redirected to the simple one in this edit:
http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E9%A6%96%E9%A0%81&diff=0&…
I don't know why this is the case, but it may be best to discuss it with the
community of that wiki on their mailing list at
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikizh-l
Are there other traditional Chinese pages which are no longer accessible or is
it only the home page you have noticed this problem?
Angela
Angela Beesley
--
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation
http://wikimediafoundation.org/
From:
"George Herzog" <goldy(a)ms19.hinet.net>
To:
"'Wikimedia Foundation'" <board(a)wikimedia.org>
Subject:
RE: [Ticket#: 114198] Simplified versus Traditional Chinese
Created:
03/08/2005 10:08:58
I will try to locate it, but I have logged on to your site to confirm the
availability of Traditional Chinese and could not find it. On one occasion
I could not get an reference to Taiwan via your search.
All this may be structural as you seem to be struggling with unifying your
multi-language system. But, the perception here is that you eliminated the
Traditional Chinese.
I previously complained about it and someone in your organization did not
deny it -- only said that it was a 'bottom-up' decision. So, you have a
problem that is multi-faceted: technical, informational, and political.
Mainland China might be compounding it by blocking the Traditional side.
Currently, I can no longer find any indication of Traditional Chinese in
your menu system. My computer is set up to receive and read many languages
- including English, Traditional, and Simplified Chinese.
George Herzog
Taiwan
From:
"George Herzog" <goldy(a)ms19.hinet.net>
To:
"'Wikimedia Foundation'" <board(a)wikimedia.org>
Subject:
RE: [Ticket#: 114198] Simplified versus Traditional Chinese
Created:
03/08/2005 10:14:43
This is a second reply.
My ability to read technical Chinese in Simplified Characters is
non-existant, but it seems that I did hit a 'toggle' that switched to
Traditional Chinese. You apparently have no way to find it in English.
Previously, you had clearly designated choices in both Chinese Fonts, but
you reduced your menu items to only one Chinese language item.
Hopefully, you see the problem. At a glance, it looks as if you only
support one - not two.
Initially I supported Wikipedia amongst my university students in Taiwan [I
teach at two Kaohsiung universities] and urged them to contribute
translations to and from English. The technological entries were of great
interest to many of my students.
But, you have eliminated our language - Traditional Chinese.
This is not a simple matter of duplication of resources.
Traditional Chinese provides a wealth of information and a cultural point of
view that cannot be found in Simplified Chinese. Chairman Mao Tse Dung
chose to simplify Chinese as a means to control freedom of speech and
freedom of press. It made it easy for the Cultural Revolution to burn books
at a glance because all Traditional publications were taboo. Also, the two
forms do not easily exchange meaning as the isolation of 50 years with the
Cultural Revolution on the mainland and the technological advancement in
Taiwan have more and more divided the two.
Consider you editorial policy carefully. Not all material that goes into an
encyclopedia is objective and both multiple language and cultural
perspectives are necessary to provide a balanced and genuine portrayal of
the world we live in. Mainland China will often organize and pay people to
put pressure on companies, countries, and institutions outside of China as a
way to isolate Taiwan. It appears that they have been successful with
Wikipedia [they did force Project Gutenberg to abandon support of its Taipei
mirror site].
By eliminating Traditional Chinese support, you have eliminated the freest
and most democratic portion of Chinese culture from you archives. You have
begun to support a government that might happily demand that you exclude all
references to Taiwan in exchange for reaching their population. And, you
may find yourself supporting a revisionist form of Chinese history. I just
don't see how you can abide by your principles and not support both
languages.
For your information, Taiwan was a charter member of the United Nations and
is currently only one of two countries that are excluded (the other is the
Vatican by it's own choice). And, I am sure you know where most, if not
all, of your hardware comes from. While it did indeed suffer corruption
under the KMT rule, it finally managed to overcome long-term martial law in
the 1980s and finally had a democratically elected president [Lee Dung Hwei]
in about 1996. The current struggle for Taiwan is much akin to the struggle
of Berlin during the Cold War. I have been in Kaohsiung when Mainland China
dropped ballistic missiles 15km offshore during Lee Dung Hwei's presidential
campaign as a source of intimidation.
Sadly you seem to have naively fallen in with China's organized and
continual efforts to isolate and force Taiwan to become like Hong Kong and
Macao. If you look at the recent history, you can easily see that people
there have less freedom than prior to 1997. I have been to China and Hong
Kong [before and after the turn over] and I can provide detailed examples of
how much less freedom exists there than in Taiwan.
As it stands, most Taiwanese are either unable [because of language barrier]
or unwilling to contribute to your efforts.
Of course, if you reinstated Traditional Chinese and were will to stay the
course, you might not only gain a readership.
You might find yourself with one or several benefactors. But as it stands,
you have closed the door.
In the beginning you offered great potential as a tool for bilingual
education, but your credibility is being deeply challenged.
Respectfully,
George Herzog
An American English teacher in Kaohsiung, Taiwan
Initially I supported Wikipedia amongst my university students in
Taiwan [I teach at two Kaohsiung universities] and urged them to
contribute translations to and from English. The technological
entries were of great interest to many of my students.
But, you have eliminated our language – Traditional Chinese.
This is not a simple matter of duplication of resources.
Traditional Chinese provides a wealth of information and a cultural
point of view that cannot be found in Simplified Chinese. Chairman
Mao Tse Dung chose to simplify Chinese as a means to control freedom
of speech and freedom of press. It made it easy for the Cultural
Revolution to burn books at a glance because all Traditional
publications were taboo. Also, the two forms do not easily exchange
meaning as the isolation of 50 years with the Cultural Revolution on
the mainland and the technological advancement in Taiwan have more and
more divided the two.
Consider you editorial policy carefully. Not all material that goes
into an encyclopedia is objective and both multiple language and
cultural perspectives are necessary to provide a balanced and genuine
portrayal of the world we live in. Mainland China will often organize
and pay people to put pressure on companies, countries, and
institutions outside of China as a way to isolate Taiwan. It appears
that they have been successful with Wikipedia [they did force Project
Gutenberg to abandon support of its Taipei mirror site].
By eliminating Traditional Chinese support, you have eliminated the
freest and most democratic portion of Chinese culture from you
archives. You have begun to support a government that might happily
demand that you exclude all references to Taiwan in exchange for
reaching their population. And, you may find yourself supporting a
revisionist form of Chinese history. I just don't see how you can
abide by your principles and not support both languages.
For your information, Taiwan was a charter member of the United
Nations and is currently only one of two countries that are excluded
(the other is the Vatican by it's own choice). And, I am sure you
know where most, if not all, of your hardware comes from. While it
did indeed suffer corruption under the KMT rule, it finally managed to
overcome long-term martial law in the 1980s and finally had a
democratically elected president [Lee Dung Hwei] in about 1996. The
current struggle for Taiwan is much akin to the struggle of Berlin
during the Cold War. I have been in Kaohsiung when Mainland China
dropped ballistic missiles 15km offshore during Lee Dung Hwei's
presidential campaign as a source of intimidation.
Sadly you seem to have naively fallen in with China's organized and
continual efforts to isolate and force Taiwan to become like Hong Kong
and Macao. If you look at the recent history, you can easily see that
people there have less freedom than prior to 1997. I have been to
China and Hong Kong [before and after the turn over] and I can provide
detailed examples of how much less freedom exists there than in
Taiwan.
As it stands, most Taiwanese are either unable [because of language
barrier] or unwilling to contribute to your efforts.
Of course, if you reinstated Traditional Chinese and were will to stay
the course, you might not only gain a readership.
You might find yourself with one or several benefactors. But as it
stands, you have closed the door.
In the beginning you offered great potential as a tool for bilingual
education, but your credibility is being deeply challenged.
Respectfully,
George Herzog
An American English teacher in Kaohsiung, Taiwan