Mailing List Archive

How to dismantle a language committee
Hi all,

I would like to propose the dismantling of the language committee and
creating a new one (not including Gerard, of course).

Why?
Because it is chronically malfunctioning.
Manifested in:
# Gerard is forcing all his opinion, anything else is going nowhere.
# Other members don't really care and leave it, unfortunately for us, to
Gerard.

Background:
I read about how unfair the LangCom before but I didn't really care because
it wasn't affecting a language I care about. Then came the dreadful proposal
for a dialect Wikipedia in my dialect, Egyptian dialect. At first, I wasn't
sure in the beginning if I should support it or not, then I became sure if
this should happen, it shouldn't happen on a platform like Wikipedia (for
many reasons laid out in detail in the proposal page). I don't care if Ghaly
and company (the people who made the proposal) started that on an
independent website (Wikia or on an own domain for their campaign) but on
Wikimedia, we should do the right thing (I hope). The proposal was approved
(Gerard requires that you have the relevant ISO code and everything from
there could be done, he is a bit annoyed now becuase of all the current
proposals for dialect Wikipedias which were brought up by the Egyptian
dialect Wikipedia proposal) and the technical team had no option but to
create the wiki because Gerard gave it his blessings and the foundation
didn't say a word (I heard that people were happy at Wikimania (Florence?)
because of that proposal but I fail to understand why the Egyptian people
there didn't express their opinion about it (it was in Egypt :!).

Trivia (I like structure but..):
* Gerard is talking about how good the localization of the Egyptian dialect,
well, that is a natural thing when the localization is a matter of
copy-pasting Arabic translation and converting it to a slang form or English
words in Arabic (nothing wrong at all in that of course, we do it all the
time, but we don't do it for the sake of looking hip (there is a certain
language charisma we have in Egypt, that is, if you can speak English and
mix English with Arabic to look cool. don't know if other countries have
it), we do it only to introduce new words that we are unable to find their
equivalent in Arabic (e.g. Acetylcysteine which is أسيتيل سيستئين in Arabic,
basically English (latin) in Arabic).

* May be ISO is wrong: why people are taking ISO codes as absolute,
don't-discuss matter? in our case, we have 22 dialects of Arabic and the
pathetic decision to call them languages of the supposedly "Macro" language
Arabic, that is nonsense and it should be amended, not the blind (if not
stupid) opinion of making all these sorts of dialectical projects (
http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=ara). I tried to contact
the ISO, they say to contact the local office in my country (
http://www.eos.org.eg), and as always, they have dead emails, don't know
about the phone numbers, I'm not even sure that anyone there would listen to
a word of mine, besides, I wish to see changes before my expiry date is due.


* Gerard have the false delusion of protecting the freedom of Egyptians and
taking us out of illiteracy into the light of knowledge by making a new
Wikipedia in slang and dialect. well, you are *wrong*, you are doing quite
the opposite and other people are helping you alas. hope you understand that
someday.

* Wave of ignorance: a new wave of ignorance are upon us and I don't like
Wikipedia being part of it.

* Did you know that when I tell people about this new Wikipedia, the
consiperacy theory of the west dividing us is brought up? like it wasn't
enough that the ar.wiki isn't appreciated because of the several issues we
have. no, now we have another big issue created because of the carelessness
of some people. arz.wiki is a regression, making people think of Wikipedia
as an enemy is a regression.

* Did you know that what was rejected before, is being done on that
arz.wiki? I'm talking about Arabic in latin characters Wikipedia. they have
no objections there if you write Arabic in latin (a big no no in ar.wiki or
any another respectable venue). dialect writing/Arabic in latin writing is
for fun only, nothing serious.

* They have a template on arz.wiki which is placed on articles copied from
ar.wiki that says ~"this article needs more egyptianizing" like the one on
uncyclopedia "this article needs to be more uncyclopediac" or something like
that (sorry for the lack of links).

* I think it would be doable to make a tab that Egyptianizes (or any other
dialect) the Arabic article, that is, if we have some sort of conversion
memory, that is if the dialect is stable (or standard), the dialect differs
from a place to another, from a muhafazah to another (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhafazah). if anyone knows the technical
method we could make a trial instead of the great mess of dialect
Wikipedias. I'm not too sure about this compromise yet.

So, to sum it up:
# Dissolve the current committee and make a new one of people who care.
# Make all the discussions of the committee public and allow community
members to comment and the committee really reads what they have to say.
# Make sure that Gerard isn't on the new committee.
# Treat ISO codes flexibly, they could be amended, they could be ignored if
appropriate.
# Undo the arz.wiki.

Pardon the long email, but I had to say what I have on that important issue,
may be the new year would bring something else besides massacres.

--alnokta
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Mohamed Magdy wrote:
> * I think it would be doable to make a tab that Egyptianizes (or any other
> dialect) the Arabic article, that is, if we have some sort of conversion
> memory, that is if the dialect is stable (or standard), the dialect differs
> from a place to another, from a muhafazah to another (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhafazah). if anyone knows the technical
> method we could make a trial instead of the great mess of dialect
> Wikipedias. I'm not too sure about this compromise yet.

If there're clear (algoritmic) rules for that, it can be done.
See at http://zh.wikipedia.org/ how it can be viewed on seven! different
variants.



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
(This message is not an official message from the subcommittee, just
myself as a member.)


Hello Mohamed Magdy,

As a member of the language subcommittee, I am sorry you are
disappointed with our performance, but it is not true that its members
do not care.

The Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia was approved with insufficient
subcommittee discussion, which sparked some changes inside the
subcommittee. For example, we replaced several inactive members to
increase participation, and there is an upcoming proposal for a quorum
to ensure that no other decision can be made without community
consensus.

Subcommittee discussion is publicly archived (except comments by 2
members), as you can see in these relevant discussions:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-11#Subcommittee_dissatisfaction
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-12#Wiktionary_Masry

I am also sorry we are seen as unfair; I have tried to ensure a
universal, objective policy that treats all requests equally. If you
have any suggestions, please let me know.

As for dissolving the subcommittee and recreating it with a different
membership, I would not be opposed.

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
I was against the idea of creating a Masry Wikipedia (there is a looong
thread where I brought it up here), *However* I am against deleting any
Wikipedia that has been created and picked up an active community,
regardless of how controversial it is. It is simply unfair to the people who
have invested their time in the 300 something articles it has now. I think
that is the correct thing to do despite the volume of complaints from people
we are recieving on ar.wp and OTRS.

That said, I am personally taking issue with LangCom.


- Gerard has been the *only* person from LangCom that I have seen reply
to any of the issues, his replies are selective, he refuses to answer
whatever he doesnt think is relevant to his argument and is in general very
aggressive, If the guys at LangCom chose him as the public face, I would say
they were looking to pick fights rather than communicate decisions.
- I Have asked several times about the delibration process and how the
tons of arguments given on the controversial Masry topic were considered, I
one time got an answer that was simply 'Can't disclose the arguments because
of privacy issues of committee members' and the other was 'There was no
arguments, I asked on the mailing list if I can create it and no one said
no'. Both answers suggest an either disengaged committee or one that doesnt
think transparency of the decision process is important, but rather,
secretive decision is better.
- After looking on the meta page for the committee, I asked if the
committee has any mechanism for determining inactive members, if the process
of decision is 'I sent an email and no one objected', that may mean
approval, but it also may mean that people are not active. I got no answer
for the question but Immediately after Masry controversy, two committee
members resigned and one was removed for inactivity without any explanation
given, is that an acknowledgement that the committee was malfunctioning? Why
wasnt there some kind of public explaination.



--
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
2009/1/10 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>:

> - Gerard has been the *only* person from LangCom that I have seen reply
> to any of the issues, his replies are selective, he refuses to answer
> whatever he doesnt think is relevant to his argument and is in general very
> aggressive, If the guys at LangCom chose him as the public face, I would say
> they were looking to pick fights rather than communicate decisions.


Seconded, particularly the aggression.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com> wrote:
> - Gerard has been the *only* person from LangCom that I have seen reply
> to any of the issues, his replies are selective, he refuses to answer
> whatever he doesnt think is relevant to his argument and is in general very
> aggressive, If the guys at LangCom chose him as the public face, I would say
> they were looking to pick fights rather than communicate decisions.

Gerard is definitely not a subcommittee spokesperson. Every word he
and I speak are as individual members, speaking our own opinions.
Discussion with the subcommittee should be done on the mailing list or
on <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_subcommittee>, where
I for example frequently respond.


Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com> wrote:
> - After looking on the meta page for the committee, I asked if the
> committee has any mechanism for determining inactive members, if the process
> of decision is 'I sent an email and no one objected', that may mean
> approval, but it also may mean that people are not active. I got no answer
> for the question but Immediately after Masry controversy, two committee
> members resigned and one was removed for inactivity without any explanation
> given, is that an acknowledgement that the committee was malfunctioning? Why
> wasnt there some kind of public explaination.

The members resigned or were removed at my proposal, one of several
changes to ensure the problem you mentioned did not occur again. There
are no language subcommittee announcements, but this and other
decisions can be understood by reading the public archives:
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-11#Remove_inactive_members>.

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
I don´t think this is very fair. You can call Gerard a lot, but not really
agressive... He can be very enthusiast, committed, and very sure he is
right, and trying to persuade others, but agressive?

Anyway, I don't think a mailinglist (especially not this one) is a good
place to discuss *people* rather then subjects. Have you tried to discuss
your problems directly with Gerard, Muhammad and David? Sometimes that
helps.

Best regards,

Lodewijk

2009/1/10 David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>

> 2009/1/10 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>:
>
> > - Gerard has been the *only* person from LangCom that I have seen reply
> > to any of the issues, his replies are selective, he refuses to answer
> > whatever he doesnt think is relevant to his argument and is in general
> very
> > aggressive, If the guys at LangCom chose him as the public face, I
> would say
> > they were looking to pick fights rather than communicate decisions.
>
>
> Seconded, particularly the aggression.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Hi Jesse,

Thank you for the links, the last time I asked to look at those I was told
the whole mailing list was private and not open to the public, I think
opening this up is a huge step forward towards transparency.

I appreciate also your clarification about Gerard, I would have appreciated
him making that clear in the discussions that happened.

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Jesse Plamondon-Willard <
pathoschild@gmail.com> wrote:

> Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com> wrote:
> > - Gerard has been the *only* person from LangCom that I have seen reply
> > to any of the issues, his replies are selective, he refuses to answer
> > whatever he doesnt think is relevant to his argument and is in general
> very
> > aggressive, If the guys at LangCom chose him as the public face, I
> would say
> > they were looking to pick fights rather than communicate decisions.
>
> Gerard is definitely not a subcommittee spokesperson. Every word he
> and I speak are as individual members, speaking our own opinions.
> Discussion with the subcommittee should be done on the mailing list or
> on <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_subcommittee>, where
> I for example frequently respond.
>
>
> Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com> wrote:
> > - After looking on the meta page for the committee, I asked if the
> > committee has any mechanism for determining inactive members, if the
> process
> > of decision is 'I sent an email and no one objected', that may mean
> > approval, but it also may mean that people are not active. I got no
> answer
> > for the question but Immediately after Masry controversy, two committee
> > members resigned and one was removed for inactivity without any
> explanation
> > given, is that an acknowledgement that the committee was
> malfunctioning? Why
> > wasnt there some kind of public explaination.
>
> The members resigned or were removed at my proposal, one of several
> changes to ensure the problem you mentioned did not occur again. There
> are no language subcommittee announcements, but this and other
> decisions can be understood by reading the public archives:
> <
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-11#Remove_inactive_members
> >.
>
> --
> Yours cordially,
> Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the links, the last time I asked to look at those I was told
> the whole mailing list was private and not open to the public, I think
> opening this up is a huge step forward towards transparency.
>

Whoever told you that was misinformed or it was a misunderstanding.
There has been semi-public archives for a long time:
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Language_subcommittee/Archives&oldid=553592>

--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
I personally do not care about the nature of Gerard's character, he may be a
very nice person if I meet him in person ( next Wikimania maybe). I am just
refering to the way he conducted himself during the discussions on
languages. And yes, I strongly believe this was aggressive. I won't get into
such details but you can read the other thread.

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 2:38 PM, effe iets anders
<effeietsanders@gmail.com>wrote:

> I don´t think this is very fair. You can call Gerard a lot, but not really
> agressive... He can be very enthusiast, committed, and very sure he is
> right, and trying to persuade others, but agressive?
>
> Anyway, I don't think a mailinglist (especially not this one) is a good
> place to discuss *people* rather then subjects. Have you tried to discuss
> your problems directly with Gerard, Muhammad and David? Sometimes that
> helps.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2009/1/10 David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>
>
> > 2009/1/10 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > - Gerard has been the *only* person from LangCom that I have seen
> reply
> > > to any of the issues, his replies are selective, he refuses to answer
> > > whatever he doesnt think is relevant to his argument and is in
> general
> > very
> > > aggressive, If the guys at LangCom chose him as the public face, I
> > would say
> > > they were looking to pick fights rather than communicate decisions.
> >
> >
> > Seconded, particularly the aggression.
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Mohamed Magdy wrote:
> (I heard that people were happy at Wikimania (Florence?)
> because of that proposal but I fail to understand why the Egyptian people
> there didn't express their opinion about it (it was in Egypt :!).

I was sitting next to an Egyptian VIP in the front row when the
announcement was made, and he laughed and indicated that he thought this
was stupid.

It is not up to me to make any decisions nor have any particular opinion
about Egyptian, but this is one of many data points that suggest to me
that the current process is widely regarded as being broken.

--Jimbo

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided the link
to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic

When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what I
thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were raising such
concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:

I have indicated that the language
> committee was unanimous in deciding that the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia
> request was eligible.
>

As indicated earlier, all members of the language
> committee were explicitly asked to consider the issue that you raise. The
> consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the freedom to
> work on a project in their language, languages that are eligible under the
> language policy of the WMF.
>
>
Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard and
Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous decision'.
Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?

Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for some kind
of audit?

Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have to work
on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.

Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com> wrote:
> So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided the link
> to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic

Yes, there was no discussion about approving the Egyptian Arabic
Wikipedia before its creation. That is the reason for the various
changes that occurred (and are occurring) after the wiki was created,
to ensure this never happens again.

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Hoi,
This is a personal attack, an attack that is the result of discontent of the
way in which the policy of the language committee has been implemented.

So let me show where Mohammed is wrong. First of all, the language committee
is multiple people. Recently two high powered people were added to the
language committee. They are Michael Everson, who is so much of an expert in
this field that he rates his own Wikipedia article and Milos Rancic, a
linguist and a steward of the WMF. It is also incorrect that I would be the
only one "doing" things. The last request to the board for a Pontic
Wikipedia was written by Pathoschild. With such people actively involved,
the argument that I can force my will on them is ... a bit off.

Second, Mohammed is upset about one issue only. The existence of the
Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia. Mohammed is on one side of a dispute. He is under
the impression that I am on the other side of this. The people who are on
the other side of his dispute are the people who requested the Egyptian
Arabic Wikipedia and who are making the most of their project.

At the time when the request for the arz.wp was made, I asked the members of
the language committee if Egyptian Arabic was eligible. I got the reply that
it should be because it is recognised as a separate language. Nobody
objected to this and consequently the language was given the status of
eligible. The reason why I consulted the other members of the committee was
exactly because I foresaw people objecting forcefully. I have not been
disappointed. I am disappointed by Pathoschild's assertion that there was
not enough discussion, he should have spoken up at the time.

As far as the localisation for Egyptian Arabic is concerned, there is a
request for an Egyptian Arabic Wiktionary and it is to fulfill the
requirement for a secondary project that the localisation is doing so well.

Key in the current policy is that we have looked for objective criteria to
base the policy on. Using the ISO-639-3 standard is at the basis of how
languages are identified on the Internet. We publish our content on the
Internet so it was an obvious choice. The procedure and the requirements are
well published. It does not make everybody happy, including myself but it
does its job.

I have discussed illiteracy at some point. It is a well established fact
that learning to read and write is best done by learning to read and write
in the mother tongue. I have been involved in the translation of a study
about the use of SignWriting in Saudi Arabia that proved this point. There
are many such studies, and they make it quite clear that a close connection
between the written language and the spoken language improves literacy. When
the basic reading and writing skills are learned, a second language is
learned much easier and this has a lasting impact on the abilities of a
student.

It may surprise you, but I have a long history of trying to achieve things
for languages like the Arabic language. At some stage there was an
opportunity to have the complete English language Wikipedia translated by a
state of the art machine translaton engine. For all kinds of reasons this
did not happen. One of the reasons was the availability of servers.

The Arabic Wikipedia is doing really well. It has a consistently excellent
localisation, and it is growing nicely. If anything I am surprised that it
is not bigger then it is. In the discussions about Egyptian Arabic, I have
made the point repeatedly that the best way of proving the point that
standard Arabic is superior is by making sure that the Arabic Wikipedia is
indeed superior.

As to Latin script in the arz.wikipedia, that is news to me. If this existed
while in the Incubator, the project would not have had approval. I am
disappointed about this. If anything, this damages the project considerably.

Given that Egyptian Arabic is indeed a separate language, it is not feasible
to do full justice to the language by using machine translation. Machine
translation only work up to a point. One such tool that is likely to do a
great job is called Apertium, this tool is particularly good at translating
closely related languages, and I am sure that you agree that this applies...
I would be happily surprised if a real effort is given in creating such a
machine translation.

Thanks,
GerardM



2009/1/10 Mohamed Magdy <mohamed.m.k@gmail.com>

> Hi all,
>
> I would like to propose the dismantling of the language committee and
> creating a new one (not including Gerard, of course).
>
> Why?
> Because it is chronically malfunctioning.
> Manifested in:
> # Gerard is forcing all his opinion, anything else is going nowhere.
> # Other members don't really care and leave it, unfortunately for us, to
> Gerard.
>
> Background:
> I read about how unfair the LangCom before but I didn't really care because
> it wasn't affecting a language I care about. Then came the dreadful
> proposal
> for a dialect Wikipedia in my dialect, Egyptian dialect. At first, I wasn't
> sure in the beginning if I should support it or not, then I became sure if
> this should happen, it shouldn't happen on a platform like Wikipedia (for
> many reasons laid out in detail in the proposal page). I don't care if
> Ghaly
> and company (the people who made the proposal) started that on an
> independent website (Wikia or on an own domain for their campaign) but on
> Wikimedia, we should do the right thing (I hope). The proposal was approved
> (Gerard requires that you have the relevant ISO code and everything from
> there could be done, he is a bit annoyed now becuase of all the current
> proposals for dialect Wikipedias which were brought up by the Egyptian
> dialect Wikipedia proposal) and the technical team had no option but to
> create the wiki because Gerard gave it his blessings and the foundation
> didn't say a word (I heard that people were happy at Wikimania (Florence?)
> because of that proposal but I fail to understand why the Egyptian people
> there didn't express their opinion about it (it was in Egypt :!).
>
> Trivia (I like structure but..):
> * Gerard is talking about how good the localization of the Egyptian
> dialect,
> well, that is a natural thing when the localization is a matter of
> copy-pasting Arabic translation and converting it to a slang form or
> English
> words in Arabic (nothing wrong at all in that of course, we do it all the
> time, but we don't do it for the sake of looking hip (there is a certain
> language charisma we have in Egypt, that is, if you can speak English and
> mix English with Arabic to look cool. don't know if other countries have
> it), we do it only to introduce new words that we are unable to find their
> equivalent in Arabic (e.g. Acetylcysteine which is أسيتيل سيستئين in
> Arabic,
> basically English (latin) in Arabic).
>
> * May be ISO is wrong: why people are taking ISO codes as absolute,
> don't-discuss matter? in our case, we have 22 dialects of Arabic and the
> pathetic decision to call them languages of the supposedly "Macro" language
> Arabic, that is nonsense and it should be amended, not the blind (if not
> stupid) opinion of making all these sorts of dialectical projects (
> http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=ara). I tried to contact
> the ISO, they say to contact the local office in my country (
> http://www.eos.org.eg), and as always, they have dead emails, don't know
> about the phone numbers, I'm not even sure that anyone there would listen
> to
> a word of mine, besides, I wish to see changes before my expiry date is
> due.
>
>
> * Gerard have the false delusion of protecting the freedom of Egyptians and
> taking us out of illiteracy into the light of knowledge by making a new
> Wikipedia in slang and dialect. well, you are *wrong*, you are doing quite
> the opposite and other people are helping you alas. hope you understand
> that
> someday.
>
> * Wave of ignorance: a new wave of ignorance are upon us and I don't like
> Wikipedia being part of it.
>
> * Did you know that when I tell people about this new Wikipedia, the
> consiperacy theory of the west dividing us is brought up? like it wasn't
> enough that the ar.wiki isn't appreciated because of the several issues we
> have. no, now we have another big issue created because of the carelessness
> of some people. arz.wiki is a regression, making people think of Wikipedia
> as an enemy is a regression.
>
> * Did you know that what was rejected before, is being done on that
> arz.wiki? I'm talking about Arabic in latin characters Wikipedia. they have
> no objections there if you write Arabic in latin (a big no no in ar.wiki or
> any another respectable venue). dialect writing/Arabic in latin writing is
> for fun only, nothing serious.
>
> * They have a template on arz.wiki which is placed on articles copied from
> ar.wiki that says ~"this article needs more egyptianizing" like the one on
> uncyclopedia "this article needs to be more uncyclopediac" or something
> like
> that (sorry for the lack of links).
>
> * I think it would be doable to make a tab that Egyptianizes (or any other
> dialect) the Arabic article, that is, if we have some sort of conversion
> memory, that is if the dialect is stable (or standard), the dialect differs
> from a place to another, from a muhafazah to another (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhafazah). if anyone knows the technical
> method we could make a trial instead of the great mess of dialect
> Wikipedias. I'm not too sure about this compromise yet.
>
> So, to sum it up:
> # Dissolve the current committee and make a new one of people who care.
> # Make all the discussions of the committee public and allow community
> members to comment and the committee really reads what they have to say.
> # Make sure that Gerard isn't on the new committee.
> # Treat ISO codes flexibly, they could be amended, they could be ignored if
> appropriate.
> # Undo the arz.wiki.
>
> Pardon the long email, but I had to say what I have on that important
> issue,
> may be the new year would bring something else besides massacres.
>
> --alnokta
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Hoi,
As I have been saying before, the language committee works on the basis that
if only one person objects, something does not move forward. Many subjects
are raised on our mailing list where people are notified that something is
going to be done and when nobody objects within a certain time frame, the
proposal is moved forward.
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>

> So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided the link
> to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic
>
> When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what I
> thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were raising such
> concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:
>
> I have indicated that the language
> > committee was unanimous in deciding that the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia
> > request was eligible.
> >
>
> As indicated earlier, all members of the language
> > committee were explicitly asked to consider the issue that you raise. The
> > consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the freedom
> to
> > work on a project in their language, languages that are eligible under
> the
> > language policy of the WMF.
> >
> >
> Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard and
> Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous decision'.
> Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?
>
> Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
> mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for some
> kind
> of audit?
>
> Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have to work
> on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.
>
> Best Regards,
> Muhammad Alsebaey
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Which creates the situation we are in, according to you, all members of the
language committee were explicitly asked to consider the issues that I and
others raised, but since only one out of the 10+ people responded, therefore
they must have all considered all the issues and have no comment, and the
decision is unanimous. I am not going to debate with you how this doesnt
sound very logical, It is sufficient to say you are now finding out that
there were at least 1 objecting and 4 inactive members after you declared
the decision 'unanimous'.

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hoi,
> As I have been saying before, the language committee works on the basis
> that
> if only one person objects, something does not move forward. Many subjects
> are raised on our mailing list where people are notified that something is
> going to be done and when nobody objects within a certain time frame, the
> proposal is moved forward.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> 2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>
>
> > So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided the link
> > to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
> >
> >
> >
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic
> >
> > When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what I
> > thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were raising
> such
> > concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:
> >
> > I have indicated that the language
> > > committee was unanimous in deciding that the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia
> > > request was eligible.
> > >
> >
> > As indicated earlier, all members of the language
> > > committee were explicitly asked to consider the issue that you raise.
> The
> > > consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the freedom
> > to
> > > work on a project in their language, languages that are eligible under
> > the
> > > language policy of the WMF.
> > >
> > >
> > Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard and
> > Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous
> decision'.
> > Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?
> >
> > Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
> > mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for some
> > kind
> > of audit?
> >
> > Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have to work
> > on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Muhammad Alsebaey
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Hoi,
You are wrong. If one person had objected at the time, the proposal would
not have been made eligible.
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>

> Which creates the situation we are in, according to you, all members of
> the
> language committee were explicitly asked to consider the issues that I and
> others raised, but since only one out of the 10+ people responded,
> therefore
> they must have all considered all the issues and have no comment, and the
> decision is unanimous. I am not going to debate with you how this doesnt
> sound very logical, It is sufficient to say you are now finding out that
> there were at least 1 objecting and 4 inactive members after you declared
> the decision 'unanimous'.
>
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > As I have been saying before, the language committee works on the basis
> > that
> > if only one person objects, something does not move forward. Many
> subjects
> > are raised on our mailing list where people are notified that something
> is
> > going to be done and when nobody objects within a certain time frame, the
> > proposal is moved forward.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > 2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>
> >
> > > So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided the
> link
> > > to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic
> > >
> > > When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what I
> > > thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were raising
> > such
> > > concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:
> > >
> > > I have indicated that the language
> > > > committee was unanimous in deciding that the Egyptian Arabic
> Wikipedia
> > > > request was eligible.
> > > >
> > >
> > > As indicated earlier, all members of the language
> > > > committee were explicitly asked to consider the issue that you raise.
> > The
> > > > consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the
> freedom
> > > to
> > > > work on a project in their language, languages that are eligible
> under
> > > the
> > > > language policy of the WMF.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard and
> > > Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous
> > decision'.
> > > Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?
> > >
> > > Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
> > > mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for some
> > > kind
> > > of audit?
> > >
> > > Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have to
> work
> > > on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Muhammad Alsebaey
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Muhammad Alsebaey
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Do you have a set time limit for people to respond in? a week? a month? and
what about the 4 inactive persons, how do you consider them inactive? what
if you had 7 inactive members out of 10 at a time and didnt know it, would
it still be a 'unanimous' decision?

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hoi,
> You are wrong. If one person had objected at the time, the proposal would
> not have been made eligible.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> 2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>
>
> > Which creates the situation we are in, according to you, all members of
> > the
> > language committee were explicitly asked to consider the issues that I
> and
> > others raised, but since only one out of the 10+ people responded,
> > therefore
> > they must have all considered all the issues and have no comment, and the
> > decision is unanimous. I am not going to debate with you how this doesnt
> > sound very logical, It is sufficient to say you are now finding out that
> > there were at least 1 objecting and 4 inactive members after you declared
> > the decision 'unanimous'.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> > <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > As I have been saying before, the language committee works on the basis
> > > that
> > > if only one person objects, something does not move forward. Many
> > subjects
> > > are raised on our mailing list where people are notified that something
> > is
> > > going to be done and when nobody objects within a certain time frame,
> the
> > > proposal is moved forward.
> > > Thanks,
> > > GerardM
> > >
> > > 2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided the
> > link
> > > > to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic
> > > >
> > > > When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what I
> > > > thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were raising
> > > such
> > > > concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:
> > > >
> > > > I have indicated that the language
> > > > > committee was unanimous in deciding that the Egyptian Arabic
> > Wikipedia
> > > > > request was eligible.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As indicated earlier, all members of the language
> > > > > committee were explicitly asked to consider the issue that you
> raise.
> > > The
> > > > > consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the
> > freedom
> > > > to
> > > > > work on a project in their language, languages that are eligible
> > under
> > > > the
> > > > > language policy of the WMF.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard
> and
> > > > Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous
> > > decision'.
> > > > Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?
> > > >
> > > > Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
> > > > mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for
> some
> > > > kind
> > > > of audit?
> > > >
> > > > Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have to
> > work
> > > > on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Muhammad Alsebaey
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Muhammad Alsebaey
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Hoi,
Typically the time period is a couple of days up to a week. Pathoschild has
asked our least active members if they were still interested in being a
member. He indicated that he was going to make proposals. I am still waiting
for those.
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>

> Do you have a set time limit for people to respond in? a week? a month? and
> what about the 4 inactive persons, how do you consider them inactive? what
> if you had 7 inactive members out of 10 at a time and didnt know it, would
> it still be a 'unanimous' decision?
>
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > You are wrong. If one person had objected at the time, the proposal would
> > not have been made eligible.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > 2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>
> >
> > > Which creates the situation we are in, according to you, all members
> of
> > > the
> > > language committee were explicitly asked to consider the issues that I
> > and
> > > others raised, but since only one out of the 10+ people responded,
> > > therefore
> > > they must have all considered all the issues and have no comment, and
> the
> > > decision is unanimous. I am not going to debate with you how this
> doesnt
> > > sound very logical, It is sufficient to say you are now finding out
> that
> > > there were at least 1 objecting and 4 inactive members after you
> declared
> > > the decision 'unanimous'.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> > > <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > As I have been saying before, the language committee works on the
> basis
> > > > that
> > > > if only one person objects, something does not move forward. Many
> > > subjects
> > > > are raised on our mailing list where people are notified that
> something
> > > is
> > > > going to be done and when nobody objects within a certain time frame,
> > the
> > > > proposal is moved forward.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > GerardM
> > > >
> > > > 2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > > So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey graciously provided
> the
> > > link
> > > > > to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikipedia_Egyptian_Arabic
> > > > >
> > > > > When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what
> I
> > > > > thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were
> raising
> > > > such
> > > > > concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have indicated that the language
> > > > > > committee was unanimous in deciding that the Egyptian Arabic
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > request was eligible.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As indicated earlier, all members of the language
> > > > > > committee were explicitly asked to consider the issue that you
> > raise.
> > > > The
> > > > > > consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the
> > > freedom
> > > > > to
> > > > > > work on a project in their language, languages that are eligible
> > > under
> > > > > the
> > > > > > language policy of the WMF.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard
> > and
> > > > > Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous
> > > > decision'.
> > > > > Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?
> > > > >
> > > > > Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
> > > > > mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for
> > some
> > > > > kind
> > > > > of audit?
> > > > >
> > > > > Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have
> to
> > > work
> > > > > on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Muhammad Alsebaey
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Muhammad Alsebaey
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Muhammad Alsebaey
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
Jimmy Wales hett schreven:
> Mohamed Magdy wrote:
>
>> (I heard that people were happy at Wikimania (Florence?)
>> because of that proposal but I fail to understand why the Egyptian people
>> there didn't express their opinion about it (it was in Egypt :!).
>>
>
> I was sitting next to an Egyptian VIP in the front row when the
> announcement was made, and he laughed and indicated that he thought this
> was stupid.
>
> It is not up to me to make any decisions nor have any particular opinion
> about Egyptian, but this is one of many data points that suggest to me
> that the current process is widely regarded as being broken.
>
> --Jimbo
I agree, that the current process of new language edition approval has
major flaws and can be regarded as broken to some degree. And I will not
take a definite stance in the matter of arz.Wikipedia.

But please be aware, that the question of whether or not language
editions in language varieties widely regarded as "dialects" are
"stupid", "useless" or "laughable" is highly POV. We European or
American outsiders have few personal POV about the matter, but we don't
know much about the real linguistic differences. Those who know about
the differences, have very deep personal POVs. If we grow up in a
specific society, we unconsciously internalize the prevalent POVs of
that society at a very early age. It's hard to overcome those POVs.

In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that Arabs form one nation
united by the use of the Arabic language. But in reality Standard Arabic
is something like Latin. With the difference, that Latin fell out of use
to make place for the Romance languages. So Egyptian Arabic vs. Standard
Arabic is like French vs. Latin. And the Egyptian VIP is like a 13th
century monk. "Writing in the language of the people. How stupid...
Latin is a godly language."
By the way: This "uniform nation" and "stupid language" thing is not a
Arabian world only thing, that the Europeans got rid of by kicking
Latin's ass. The whole repeats itself on lower levels. Look at French
vs. Occitan. If you ask Sarkozy or the Parisiens, Occitan is a French
dialect. As citizens of the French Republic they should speak French.
Trying to establish Occitan as a language on par with French is trying
to destroy the unite French nation. But from a linguistic POV Occitan is
not very closely related to French. Not closer than to Catalan, Spanish
or Italian.
Catalan being the next example. The Spanish saw it as a Spanish dialect.
But they couldn't manage to drum that "fact" into the Catalans and
Catalan finally became a "recognized" language.

So if the Egyptian VIP laughs, he does not laugh a linguistic laughter,
but a political laughter.

The emancipation of Arabic "dialects" could lead to the establishment of
a Arabience language family like Latin fell apart in the Romance
language family. And that's what many Arabs fear, just as the Latin
monks didn't like the end of Latin. But the 'future' (that means
contemporary) Italians and French and Portuguese live happily with the
former vernaculars.

Allowing the Arab dialects to go this way is a highly political
decision. Forbidding it would be too. So there is no way Wikimedia could
avoid making a political stance. But from the POV of 'Freedom' we should
allow. If we forbid that's a definite stance. If we allow, there are
still two possible outcomes: Latin will fall or it stand strong and
Vulgar will stay vulgar.

Marcus Buck

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:08 AM, Jimmy Wales <jwales@wikia-inc.com> wrote:
> Mohamed Magdy wrote:
>> (I heard that people were happy at Wikimania (Florence?)
>> because of that proposal but I fail to understand why the Egyptian people
>> there didn't express their opinion about it (it was in Egypt :!).
>
> I was sitting next to an Egyptian VIP in the front row when the
> announcement was made, and he laughed and indicated that he thought this
> was stupid.
>
> It is not up to me to make any decisions nor have any particular opinion
> about Egyptian, but this is one of many data points that suggest to me
> that the current process is widely regarded as being broken.

Jimmy, just to remind you that people in one academic institution in
Belgrade laughed when you mentioned Bosnian language in 2005. But,
things are somewhat changed now.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
2009/1/11 Marcus Buck <me@marcusbuck.org>:

> In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that Arabs form one nation
> united by the use of the Arabic language. But in reality Standard Arabic
> is something like Latin. With the difference, that Latin fell out of use
> to make place for the Romance languages. So Egyptian Arabic vs. Standard
> Arabic is like French vs. Latin. And the Egyptian VIP is like a 13th
> century monk. "Writing in the language of the people. How stupid...
> Latin is a godly language."

So, tell me...
Which language do the egyptian newspapers use?
In which language are the egyptian books written?
Which language does Naguib Mahfus use in his books?
Which language do the children learn at school?
Which language do you use in a letter when you apply for a job?

greetings,
elian

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
2009/1/11 Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com>:
> Jimmy, just to remind you that people in one academic institution in
> Belgrade laughed when you mentioned Bosnian language in 2005. But,
> things are somewhat changed now.

Not really. There is still little evidence that it is a language
distinct from the rest of the Central-South Slavic diasystem.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
elisabeth bauer hett schreven:
> 2009/1/11 Marcus Buck <me@marcusbuck.org>:
>
>
>> In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that Arabs form one nation
>> united by the use of the Arabic language. But in reality Standard Arabic
>> is something like Latin. With the difference, that Latin fell out of use
>> to make place for the Romance languages. So Egyptian Arabic vs. Standard
>> Arabic is like French vs. Latin. And the Egyptian VIP is like a 13th
>> century monk. "Writing in the language of the people. How stupid...
>> Latin is a godly language."
>>
>
> So, tell me...
> Which language do the egyptian newspapers use?
> In which language are the egyptian books written?
> Which language does Naguib Mahfus use in his books?
> Which language do the children learn at school?
> Which language do you use in a letter when you apply for a job?
>
> greetings,
> elian
The answer to all of this is: Standard Arabic. That's exactly what I was
pointing at. There's a strong non-conscious POV forcing the people to
use a language for writing, that is very different from their native
language. What language do most Mari use, when writing to other Mari?
Russian. Aymara will most likely use Spanish when writing to other
Aymara. Does that mean, that Mari is a dialect of Russian and Aymara a
dialect of Spanish? Of course not. But it's a symptom of a very deeply
internalized feeling of inferiority. A feeling spurred by Russian and
Spanish speakers feeling superiority over those uneducated non Spanish
speakers and non Russian speakers.

A 13th century monk would have argued:

Which language do the Royal chronicles use?
In which language is the Vulgata written?
Which language does Francis of Assisi use in his books?
Which language do the novices learn at monastery school?
Which language do you use in a letter when you petition to the sovereign's court?


The use of Latin restricted knowledge to those who were educated in the
monasteries. The dismissal of Latin was an act of emancipation for the
speakers of the vernaculars. I do not know enough about Arabic to judge
whether pushing the vernaculars would be an act of intellectual
emancipation or an act of divide et impera.

If the idea of writing in the vernacular would be obviously ridiculous,
nobody would do it. There are people who want to work on arz, so they
must see some use in it. Maybe they are still wrong. We can only figure
it out, if we allow them to try.

By the way: You mention schools. When schools became mandatory in the
course of the 18th, 19th century, many people had humanistic and
educational goals. But from the very beginning it was also a tool for
the country's rulers to manipulate the brains of young people. To induce
attachment to the king and to prepare boys to be good soldiers. To make
the children loyal citizens. That's still valid today. Language is one
measure of bending the pupils' mind (of bending all people's minds). By
teaching the national language, that in many cases is different from the
native language, you estalish a direct channel to the mind. This channel
is in the sole occupancy of the authorities and there's no need to share
it with other information transmitters, cause the native environment
uses another language (at least that was true in the time, when schools
became mandatory. Today there are more diverse information channels).
Language is a tool of power. That's the reason, why VIPs are no good
source for opinions about languages not supported by the powers in
force. Somebody who is Very Important has to stay in touch with the
powers in force to keep being important. Touching the balance of power
by supporting languages other than the language of power is dangerous if
you have to keep a status.
The mission of the foundation is an educational one. So it would be
better to ask the uneducated masses of Egypt, whether they feel a gain
from a Wikipedia in their language or whether they stick with the
"Latin" Wikipedia.

Marcus Buck

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: How to dismantle a language committee [ In reply to ]
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Marcus Buck <me@marcusbuck.org> wrote:
> elisabeth bauer hett schreven:
>> 2009/1/11 Marcus Buck <me@marcusbuck.org>:
>>
>>
>>> In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that Arabs form one nation
>>> united by the use of the Arabic language. But in reality Standard Arabic
>>> is something like Latin. With the difference, that Latin fell out of use
>>> to make place for the Romance languages. So Egyptian Arabic vs. Standard
>>> Arabic is like French vs. Latin. And the Egyptian VIP is like a 13th
>>> century monk. "Writing in the language of the people. How stupid...
>>> Latin is a godly language."
>>>
>>
>> So, tell me...
>> Which language do the egyptian newspapers use?
>> In which language are the egyptian books written?
>> Which language does Naguib Mahfus use in his books?
>> Which language do the children learn at school?
>> Which language do you use in a letter when you apply for a job?
>>
>> greetings,
>> elian
> The answer to all of this is: Standard Arabic. That's exactly what I was
> pointing at. There's a strong non-conscious POV forcing the people to
> use a language for writing, that is very different from their native
> language. What language do most Mari use, when writing to other Mari?
> Russian. Aymara will most likely use Spanish when writing to other
> Aymara. Does that mean, that Mari is a dialect of Russian and Aymara a
> dialect of Spanish? Of course not. But it's a symptom of a very deeply
> internalized feeling of inferiority. A feeling spurred by Russian and
> Spanish speakers feeling superiority over those uneducated non Spanish
> speakers and non Russian speakers.
>
> A 13th century monk would have argued:
>
> Which language do the Royal chronicles use?
> In which language is the Vulgata written?
> Which language does Francis of Assisi use in his books?
> Which language do the novices learn at monastery school?
> Which language do you use in a letter when you petition to the sovereign's court?
>
>
> The use of Latin restricted knowledge to those who were educated in the
> monasteries. The dismissal of Latin was an act of emancipation for the
> speakers of the vernaculars. I do not know enough about Arabic to judge
> whether pushing the vernaculars would be an act of intellectual
> emancipation or an act of divide et impera.
>
> If the idea of writing in the vernacular would be obviously ridiculous,
> nobody would do it. There are people who want to work on arz, so they
> must see some use in it. Maybe they are still wrong. We can only figure
> it out, if we allow them to try.
>
> By the way: You mention schools. When schools became mandatory in the
> course of the 18th, 19th century, many people had humanistic and
> educational goals. But from the very beginning it was also a tool for
> the country's rulers to manipulate the brains of young people. To induce
> attachment to the king and to prepare boys to be good soldiers. To make
> the children loyal citizens. That's still valid today. Language is one
> measure of bending the pupils' mind (of bending all people's minds). By
> teaching the national language, that in many cases is different from the
> native language, you estalish a direct channel to the mind. This channel
> is in the sole occupancy of the authorities and there's no need to share
> it with other information transmitters, cause the native environment
> uses another language (at least that was true in the time, when schools
> became mandatory. Today there are more diverse information channels).
> Language is a tool of power. That's the reason, why VIPs are no good
> source for opinions about languages not supported by the powers in
> force. Somebody who is Very Important has to stay in touch with the
> powers in force to keep being important. Touching the balance of power
> by supporting languages other than the language of power is dangerous if
> you have to keep a status.
> The mission of the foundation is an educational one. So it would be
> better to ask the uneducated masses of Egypt, whether they feel a gain
> from a Wikipedia in their language or whether they stick with the
> "Latin" Wikipedia.

First of all, I may sign every Marcus' word in this and previous email.

There is one more issue which I mentioned in the previous iteration
related to EA [Sports]. Having education in the native language is a
very important cultural achievement. Instead between 1/4 and 1/5 of
inhabitants who don't know to read and write you [Egyptians etc.] will
have much better ratio. Besides examples which I gave the last time,
here are two more: one of the poorest countries in Europe, Albania,
with relative majority of Muslim inhabitants, has 98.7% of literate
people; not so rich Azerbaijan (yes, it could be much richer) with
90%+ Muslim majority has 98.8% of literate people. This is something
less than 1/100 of inhabitants who don't know to read and write. In
both of countries Arabic is a language for religious purposes, while
native languages are educational. More educated persons means more
intellectual power, which gives more political influence. Power of
European countries before the Renaissance was silly in comparison with
China (which solved educational problems at other way, not applicable
to phonographic writing systems) and civilizations under Chinese
influence (like Mongols, Tatars and Turks were). Instead of opposing
EA and similar projects, educated Egyptians (and other educated Arabs)
should learn from European history (but, please, avoid the first half
of 20th century!).

And about life and work of Gerard Meijssen... Along with Jesse, Gerard
is the most responsible person for the fact that Language subcommittee
is working. Before asking to remove him from the subcommittee, I would
like to see a proposal for a member which would have comparably
similar characteristics:

* A high level of enthusiasm for Wikimedian projects and involvement in them.
* At least one significant project (cf. OmegaWiki).
* At least 6 months of active work in Language subcommittee.

Otherwise, we may close the shop.

To be more precise, here are things which none of others would do:

* Implementing transparency by archiving emails at the public place.
Along with other technical issues which make LangCom to look like the
most regulated (sub)committee, this is done by Jesse and I can't
imagine someone else who would do that. While I think that
transparency and look and feel are important, for that kind of job I
would have to be payed (actually, I wouldn't accept such job, even it
is payed).
* Raising attention around boring issues around languages by using
variety of methods (blogging, writing projects, talking with a lot of
people...). This is done by Gerard and I really can't imagine someone
else at that position. Even I am 10 years or so younger than Gerard, I
have a very small part of his energy. And he is interested in
languages.

Both of them are doing those jobs for years. It is not about temporary
enthusiasm.

At the other side, of course, I am one of not so big number of persons
who has the honor to know very well how hard is to work with Gerard.
But, his willingness to change some positions (slowly but surely) is
good enough in conjunction with his other qualities. In other words, I
would like to be able to fly, but I am not. I would like to see
perfect persons at the right positions, but it is far from reality.

Out of the issue related to Gerard personally, I want to say that this
objection (and the previous one) to Language subcommittee's work is
the most articulated one. Because of that I think that we may have
some benefits from it. For example, I would like to hear a generic
solution for cases like EA is (here, at the list, or at Meta).
Personally, I would like to see more articulated community's opinion
toward issues related to languages.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

1 2 3  View All