Mailing List Archive

Yann Forget wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
> and stewards.
>
> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>
> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann
>
I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
statement.
Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.

Regards,
Darko bulatovic
President of IT Association of Montenegro


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic schreef:
> Yann Forget wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>> and stewards.
>>
>> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>
>> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Yann
>>
>>
> I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
> can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
> gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
> to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
> statement.
> Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>
> Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
> don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
> request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>
> Regards,
> Darko bulatovic
> President of IT Association of Montenegro
Hoi,
Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.

There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.

Thanks,
GerardM

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>
>> Yann Forget wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>>> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>>> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>>> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>>> and stewards.
>>>
>>> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>>> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>>> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>>> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>>> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>>> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>>
>>> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>>> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>>> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Yann
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
>> can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
>> gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
>> to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
>> statement.
>> Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>>
>> Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
>> don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
>> request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Darko bulatovic
>> President of IT Association of Montenegro
>>
> Hoi,
> Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
> very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
> are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
> about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
> quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
> found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
> point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
>
> There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
> quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
> the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
> thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
> application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
>
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
Gerard,

I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
"and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
there must be political will to make standard from people language.
Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.

As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by
communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.

>.When you read the article
>about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>found outside of Montenegro as well.

Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles?
Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south
slavenian languages?

Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never
participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know
well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special
regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism and
now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own
language, it become problem. AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF
or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very
strong on WMF. But to this aspect of discussion is not place here. My
question is what argument do you have on this? Did you check them or you
just used POV to discuss on this topic?


Please, English is not my native language, and I don't see how you could
miss interpret my statement about multilingual and multi cultural nature
of wikipedia. Every language bring up cultural aspect and I don't see
how you could by-pass this.

And again please return to the topic explain to me how you can be that
CLAIRVOYANCE and assume that Montenegrin wikipedia will bring such bad
image to WMF . You don't have arguments for that. This is just showing
to me that you take POV. You just assume this with (for me) no
particular reason. So I can just guess here why you are doing this.
Please be more specific about your goals here, so I don't assume that
you just take POV here.

I am ready to participate on any level of discussion but please don't
make assumptions as that will bring bad connotation to your willingness
to do right thing in this case.


Thank you,
Darko Bulatovic
President of IT Association of Montenegro

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic schreef:
> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>
>>
>>> Yann Forget wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>>>> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>>>> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>>>> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>>>> and stewards.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>>>> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>>>> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>>>> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>>>> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>>>> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>>>
>>>> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>>>> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>>>> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Yann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
>>> can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
>>> gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
>>> to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
>>> statement.
>>> Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>>>
>>> Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
>>> don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
>>> request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Darko bulatovic
>>> President of IT Association of Montenegro
>>>
>>>
>> Hoi,
>> Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
>> very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
>> are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
>> about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>> quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>> found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
>> point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
>>
>> There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
>> quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
>> the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
>> thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
>> application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> GerardM
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
> Gerard,
>
> I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
> "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
> is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
> there must be political will to make standard from people language.
> Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
> ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
> - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>
With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is
undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.

The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and
the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in
Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making
a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If
your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project
specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is
much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV
than it would otherwise be.
Thanks,
GerardM
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>
>> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Yann Forget wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>>>>> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>>>>> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>>>>> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>>>>> and stewards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>>>>> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>>>>> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>>>>> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>>>>> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>>>>> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>>>>
>>>>> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>>>>> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>>>>> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yann
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
>>>> can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
>>>> gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
>>>> to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
>>>> statement.
>>>> Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>>>>
>>>> Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
>>>> don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
>>>> request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Darko bulatovic
>>>> President of IT Association of Montenegro
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hoi,
>>> Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
>>> very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
>>> are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
>>> about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>>> quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>>> found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
>>> point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
>>>
>>> There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
>>> quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
>>> the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
>>> thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
>>> application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> GerardM
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Gerard,
>>
>> I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
>> "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
>> is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
>> there must be political will to make standard from people language.
>> Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
>> ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
>> - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>>
>>
> With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is
> undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
>
> The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and
> the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in
> Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making
> a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If
> your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project
> specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is
> much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV
> than it would otherwise be.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check
requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a
Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but
you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of
languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide
understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in
understanding.

Thank you
Darko Bulatovic
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic schreef:
> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>
>>
>>> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Yann Forget wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>>>>>> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>>>>>> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>>>>>> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>>>>>> and stewards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>>>>>> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>>>>>> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>>>>>> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>>>>>> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>>>>>> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>>>>>> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>>>>>> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yann
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
>>>>> can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
>>>>> gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
>>>>> to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
>>>>> statement.
>>>>> Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
>>>>> don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
>>>>> request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Darko bulatovic
>>>>> President of IT Association of Montenegro
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hoi,
>>>> Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
>>>> very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
>>>> are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
>>>> about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>>>> quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>>>> found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
>>>> point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
>>>>
>>>> There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
>>>> quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
>>>> the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
>>>> thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
>>>> application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> GerardM
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Gerard,
>>>
>>> I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
>>> "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
>>> is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
>>> there must be political will to make standard from people language.
>>> Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
>>> ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
>>> - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is
>> undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
>>
>> The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and
>> the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in
>> Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making
>> a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If
>> your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project
>> specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is
>> much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV
>> than it would otherwise be.
>> Thanks,
>> GerardM
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
> Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check
> requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a
> Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but
> you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of
> languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide
> understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in
> understanding.
>
> Thank you
> Darko Bulatovic
Hoi,
What ISO language standard are you talking about ? As far as I am aware
you are talking ISO-639-1/2. ISO-639-3 is quite different, ISO-639-6
will be different again.

It is rich that you inform me that I am clueless about languages and
standards. Maybe you have to do some research yourself. You did puff
yourself up by stating that you are the "President of IT Association of
Montenegro". I have been active in the IT business myself and, /that
/does not qualify me as either a linguist or as a politician. It does
qualify me to know if an IT person is qualified being either; it does
not implicitly.

Again, in your argument you value the political background. When it
comes to a vote in the language sub committee, I will vote against the
creation of a Montenegrin because the arguments provided are political
and not linguistics. By your very arguments it seems impossible that a
neutral point of view would be forthcoming. My advise is that for as
much as a Montenegrin orthography exists, it should be permitted in the
sr.wikipedia.org.

Thanks,
GerardM

Some more motivation::
http://www.tol.cz/look/CER/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=14&NrIssue=47&NrSection=5&NrArticle=9309
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>
>> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yann Forget wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>>>>>>> Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>>>>>>> These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>>>>>>> works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>>>>>>> and stewards.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>>>>>>> administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>>>>>>> attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>>>>>>> wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>>>>>>> is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>>>>>>> itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>>>>>>> created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>>>>>>> the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yann
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
>>>>>> can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
>>>>>> gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
>>>>>> to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
>>>>>> statement.
>>>>>> Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
>>>>>> don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
>>>>>> request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Darko bulatovic
>>>>>> President of IT Association of Montenegro
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hoi,
>>>>> Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
>>>>> very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
>>>>> are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
>>>>> about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>>>>> quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>>>>> found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
>>>>> point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
>>>>> quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
>>>>> the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
>>>>> thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
>>>>> application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> GerardM
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>>> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Gerard,
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
>>>> "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
>>>> is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
>>>> there must be political will to make standard from people language.
>>>> Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
>>>> ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
>>>> - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is
>>> undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
>>>
>>> The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and
>>> the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in
>>> Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making
>>> a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If
>>> your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project
>>> specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is
>>> much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV
>>> than it would otherwise be.
>>> Thanks,
>>> GerardM
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check
>> requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a
>> Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but
>> you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of
>> languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide
>> understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in
>> understanding.
>>
>> Thank you
>> Darko Bulatovic
>>
> Hoi,
> What ISO language standard are you talking about ? As far as I am aware
> you are talking ISO-639-1/2. ISO-639-3 is quite different, ISO-639-6
> will be different again.
>
> It is rich that you inform me that I am clueless about languages and
> standards. Maybe you have to do some research yourself. You did puff
> yourself up by stating that you are the "President of IT Association of
> Montenegro". I have been active in the IT business myself and, /that
> /does not qualify me as either a linguist or as a politician. It does
> qualify me to know if an IT person is qualified being either; it does
> not implicitly.
>
> Again, in your argument you value the political background. When it
> comes to a vote in the language sub committee, I will vote against the
> creation of a Montenegrin because the arguments provided are political
> and not linguistics. By your very arguments it seems impossible that a
> neutral point of view would be forthcoming. My advise is that for as
> much as a Montenegrin orthography exists, it should be permitted in the
> sr.wikipedia.org.
>
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> Some more motivation::
> http://www.tol.cz/look/CER/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=14&NrIssue=47&NrSection=5&NrArticle=9309
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
Gerard,

you just change topic when you dint have any arguments. I am topic? :) I
am totally apolitical personally but I rty to be realistic about this
meter. I dont see what is your point?
You will vote against ? I will take this statement here officially.

I don't see in any of your points here to be neutral you are POV all the
time.


>You did puff
>yourself up by stating that you are the "President of IT Association of
>Montenegro". I have been active in the IT business myself and, /that
>/*does not qualify me as either a linguist or as a politician*.

But you will vote against? Right? Ha.

I understand you very well here.

So you don't have any argument but you will still vote against the proposal.

Thank you for your honesty,

Darko Bulatovic
My statement to be president of ITAM is just my official role nothing
more nothing less. So don't be bothered by that.


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic wrote:

>
>
>
Please, can you avoid quoting the whole thread at each reply unless it's
really necessary? It becomes unreadable for people who read digests (and
makes the text unnecessarily long).

Thanks,
Marco/Cruccone
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
> I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
> "and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
> is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
> there must be political will to make standard from people language.

Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet
it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou"
still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation
there is is often not goverment mandated.


> Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
> ignore this your opinion will not be righteous.

The oxford manual of style is not writen by the goverment.

>I will repeat my sentence:
> - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>
> As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by
> communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
>
> >.When you read the article
> >about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
> >quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
> >found outside of Montenegro as well.
>
> Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles?
> Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south
> slavenian languages?
>
> Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never
> participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know
> well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special
> regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism

It shouldn't be

>and
> now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own
> language, it become problem.

Well yes because we are yet to establish that the language exists.


>AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF
> or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very
> strong on WMF.

Not really. the WMF is based in the US the board is mostly from the US
and most significant non US chapter is prbably germany.


--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

geni wrote:
> Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet
> it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou"
> still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation
> there is is often not goverment mandated.
>
>
--- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on
language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on
educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated
on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level
I was talking about.
>> Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
>> ignore this your opinion will not be righteous.
>>
>
> The oxford manual of style is not writen by the goverment.
>
Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)

Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following
*government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
>> I will repeat my sentence:
>> - Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>>
>> As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by
>> communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
>>
>> >.When you read the article
>> >about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>> >quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>> >found outside of Montenegro as well.
>>
>> Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles?
>> Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south
>> slavenian languages?
>>
>> Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never
>> participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know
>> well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special
>> regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism
>>
>
> It shouldn't be
>
>> and
>> now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own
>> language, it become problem.
>>
>
> Well yes because we are yet to establish that the language exists.
>
>
But under same rule WMF has given
>
>> AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF
>> or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very
>> strong on WMF.
>>
>
> Not really. the WMF is based in the US the board is mostly from the US
> and most significant non US chapter is prbably germany.
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF
> >> or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is
very
> >> strong on WMF.
> >>
>
> Not really. the WMF is based in the US the board is mostly from the US
> and most significant non US chapter is prbably germany.

The problem that is discussed here looks like political problem, it is
not yet at that level ( e.g. WMF Board of Trustees), As I can see it is
just affected some part of this community. I just don't understand this
dilemma here regarding Montenegrin Wikipedia, so I am just trying to
realize what possible reasons cold be for this. I didn't aspect this
kind of welcome here on WMF, as we indeed had a good intentions. So
much assumptions here with no reason, as we didn't do anything to
provoke this.

Darko Bulatovic
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hi,

Just to be clear, I don't care that the Montenegrin is created or not.
But I care that it would be created and become a battle field.
Which means that if it is created, there should be appropriate measures
to insure that it does not become a back spot on Wikimedia, like the
Moldavan Wikipedia is now. The problem is not that the Moldavan
Wikipedia was created. The problem is that Moldavian people did not
benefit from the creation of the wiki.

Regards,

Yann
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre
http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre
http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic wrote:

>Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>
>>Darko Bulatovic schreef:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yann Forget wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>Some wikis are plagued with vandalism, spams and non sense. Moldavan
>>>>Wikipedia seems the worst at this time, but there have been others too.
>>>>These projects do not bring any free knowledge to anybody, just a lot of
>>>>works for volunteers (hopefully there are great volunteers like Pill)
>>>>and stewards.
>>>>
>>>>Regarding the Moldavan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org), the
>>>>administrators election was already cancelled twice because of massive
>>>>attacks. Sincere editors have been discouraged and have left. So the
>>>>wiki is just a battle field for vandals, trolls and sockpuppets. There
>>>>is no expected improvement in the near future because the language
>>>>itself is in the middle of a political controversy.
>>>>
>>>>I forsee the same situation for the Montenegrin Wikipedia if it is
>>>>created. These wikis only give a bad image of Wikimedia. I think that
>>>>the Foundation should take its responsibilities and take some decisions.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>Yann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I cant believe my eyes that you Yann say this. How in the God sake you
>>>can forsee such thing about Montenegrin wikipedia? Montenegrin wikipedia
>>>gives bad image of Wikimedia? This statement that you did give bad image
>>>to WMF. You don't have any argument to say this and to support your
>>>statement.
>>>Please elaborate this on Montenegrin request for Wikipedia.
>>>
>>>Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project, without that WMF
>>>don't have right to use that statement. What was done with Montenegrin
>>>request is just showing what kind of lobbying is possible on WMF.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Darko bulatovic
>>>President of IT Association of Montenegro
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Hoi,
>>Wikipedia is in its manifestations very much a multilingual project and
>>very much not a multicultural project. Cultural and political reasons
>>are not a reason to start another project. When you read the article
>>about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
>>quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
>>found outside of Montenegro as well. This means that from a linguistic
>>point of view the case for a Montenegrin Wikipedia is pretty weak.
>>
>>There are languages where the cultural and political differences are
>>quite big while there is no call for a split project. The Chinese and
>>the Dutch wikipedias are good examples for this. It would be a good
>>thing if you could find it in you to consider this and retract the
>>application for a Montenegrin Wikipedia.
>>
>>Thanks,
>> GerardM
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Gerard,
>
>I don't understand why you mis interpret my statement. Please notice
>"and". Who advice you on this meter? Political background of languages
>is undiscussable . There must be political background of language, as
>there must be political will to make standard from people language.
>Linguistics rules are just political will on people language. If you
>ignore this your opinion will not be righteous. I will repeat my sentence:
>- Wikipedia is multilingual and multicultural project.
>
Being multilingual and multicultural does not mean that each language
needs its own Bantustan. South Africa already showed us that apartheid
was a bankrupt system. Post-colonial Africa had to accept that
abandoning colonial boundaries in favour of a return to tribal areas
would be a recipe for chaos.

To say that languages must be driven by politics is absurd. Generally
it works the other way. Tribes develop their own way of talking, and
use that as an excuse for making politics.

>As I sad, culture is connected with language, and culture is spread by
>communication, beside other ways of communication language is primary one.
>
Culture is absolutely connected with language. But a special language
in a closed circle prevents the culture from being spread to any but
those who already know the language.

> >.When you read the article
> >about Montenegrin, the language on the English Wikipedia, it explains
> >quite clearly that elements that are to make Montegrin special can be
> >found outside of Montenegro as well.
>
>Do you know what you talk about? Do you know who write those articles?
>Do you know anything about specifics of Montenegrin dialect of south
>slavenian languages?
>
I'm glad you use the word "dialect". If you and a Serb speak with each
other (preferably about a neutral topic) in your own dialects you each
should be able to understand most of what the other is saying. Thus
they are dialects of the same language. If you can't understand each
other they are different languages.

>Split of project is not our concern (As Montenegrin people are never
>participated on this projects or they tried on marginal level), you know
>well why is was divided on Balkan, but you stay quiet on this. Special
>regarding Serbian. Wikipedia is used for spreading of nationalism and
>now when Montenegrin wish to have their own wikipedia on their own
>language, it become problem. AND yes it become POLITICAL problem for WMF
>or one part of their members. I am aware that Serbian community is very
>strong on WMF. But to this aspect of discussion is not place here. My
>question is what argument do you have on this? Did you check them or you
>just used POV to discuss on this topic?
>
Using Wikipedia to spread nationalism is absolutely contrary to a
Neutral Point of View. Wikipedia did start in the United States, but if
the Americans who were involved at the earliest stages had insisted that
Wikipedia was there to promote US nationalism it would have failed
miserably in all other English-speaking countries.

Personally, I don't think that there should ever have been separate
Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian wikipedias. If any of them are using
their respective projects to spread their own nationalism that is
wrong. As long as they have their own wikis nobody from within the
Yugoslav communities will be willing to seriously criticise them for it,
and nobody from outside the Yugoslav communities will understand the
language enough to be able to do it.

I can understand that Montenegrins can feel prejudiced when the same
mistake is not made for them as was made for the Serbians.

>Please, English is not my native language, and I don't see how you could
>miss interpret my statement about multilingual and multi cultural nature
>of wikipedia. Every language bring up cultural aspect and I don't see
>how you could by-pass this.
>
Your use of English may have a few errors, but not enough to comment
about, or to leave the impression that you are not making sense.
(Neither Gerrard nor Yann are native English speakers.) My own view of
multiculturalism is typically Canadian, and that involves appreciating
that a country is made up of many cultures that bring a rich diversity
into a country.

>And again please return to the topic explain to me how you can be that
>CLAIRVOYANCE and assume that Montenegrin wikipedia will bring such bad
>image to WMF . You don't have arguments for that. This is just showing
>to me that you take POV. You just assume this with (for me) no
>particular reason. So I can just guess here why you are doing this.
>Please be more specific about your goals here, so I don't assume that
>you just take POV here.
>
I don't think that bringing a bad image is a factor. It's a broader
question of linguistics.

>I am ready to participate on any level of discussion but please don't
>make assumptions as that will bring bad connotation to your willingness
>to do right thing in this case.
>
The only assumption there is that what you want is the right thing.

There is another alternative. Start using the serbo-croatian (sh)
Wikipedia. It was the original Yugoslav project, and is still alive and
well.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic wrote:

>Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>
>>With your blanket statement that "political background of languages is
>>undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
>>
>>The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and
>>the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in
>>Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making
>>a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If
>>your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project
>>specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is
>>much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV
>>than it would otherwise be.
>>
>>
>Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check
>requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a
>Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but
>you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of
>languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide
>understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in
>understanding.
>
It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow
view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation
with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200
countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a
country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
> geni wrote:
> > Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet
> > it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou"
> > still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation
> > there is is often not goverment mandated.
> >
> >
> --- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on
> language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on
> educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated
> on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level
> I was talking about.


Historically things have been somewhat different.

> Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
>
> Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following
> *government *guidelines and major dictionaries).

Governments at the present time are one of the few groups to produce
enough material to need to create manuals of style. that does not mean
they are required for standardisation of language



--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
> The problem that is discussed here looks like political problem, it is
> not yet at that level ( e.g. WMF Board of Trustees), As I can see it is
> just affected some part of this community. I just don't understand this
> dilemma here regarding Montenegrin Wikipedia, so I am just trying to
> realize what possible reasons cold be for this.

There is a lack of solid evidence that is is a solidly distinct language

>I didn't aspect this
> kind of welcome here on WMF, as we indeed had a good intentions.

I'm sure you do.

> So
> much assumptions here with no reason, as we didn't do anything to
> provoke this.

There isn't much we can do until we can figure out if Montenegrin is a
distinct language or a dialect.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

>
> It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow
> view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation
> with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200
> countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a
> country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.
>
> Ec
I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly
European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian,
Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....) so their process of building language is
trough nation history. Same thing is with south Slavic language. It is
not reference to country - more region in which people talk similar.
History of south Slavic people ( Europe) is quite dense in political and
demographic change, So many parts of South Slavs are developed
differently try many centuries and that was also reflected on language.
So here we have situation that all Balkan nations have their own
languages and their wikipedias. I don't see how this same rule should be
different for Montenegro. I will not mention that wikipedia is also
possible for some artificial languages and don't have very harsh and
strict rules regarding this. But in Montenegrin case it seems that
people wish to close eyes. Why?







_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

>
> Being multilingual and multicultural does not mean that each language
> needs its own Bantustan. South Africa already showed us that apartheid
> was a bankrupt system. Post-colonial Africa had to accept that
> abandoning colonial boundaries in favour of a return to tribal areas
> would be a recipe for chaos.
>
> To say that languages must be driven by politics is absurd. Generally
> it works the other way. Tribes develop their own way of talking, and
> use that as an excuse for making politics.
>

Please Montenegro is not in Africa, and it has much to offer to the
world, from their own culture and civilization. Many great people was
born in Montenegro and many had a great contribution to the human
civilization. In other sense the Montenegrin Wikipedia is great tool for
Montenegro to put effort in building unified Encyclopedia that anyone
can use. Many Benefits are possible for future generations of
Montenegrin to aggregate knowledge and to continue to share their
knowledge and to translate form English to their native language and
vice versa.

Wikipedia and WMF had a vision when I started to use it and to use their
tools, if that vision was changed I don't know. This vision was saying
that Wikipedia is multilingual encyclopedia, not some -lingual encyclopedia.
> Using Wikipedia to spread nationalism is absolutely contrary to a
> Neutral Point of View. Wikipedia did start in the United States, but if
> the Americans who were involved at the earliest stages had insisted that
> Wikipedia was there to promote US nationalism it would have failed
> miserably in all other English-speaking countries.
>
> Personally, I don't think that there should ever have been separate
> Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian wikipedias. If any of them are using
> their respective projects to spread their own nationalism that is
> wrong. As long as they have their own wikis nobody from within the
> Yugoslav communities will be willing to seriously criticise them for it,
> and nobody from outside the Yugoslav communities will understand the
> language enough to be able to do it.
>
> I can understand that Montenegrins can feel prejudiced when the same
> mistake is not made for them as was made for the Serbians.
>
>
But there are many articles on wikipedia that promote nationalism with
support of some facts or invented ones. Montenegrin related articles are
good examples, please see discussion on some of them and you will see
what happen there. If you stop Montenegrin wikipedia I don't see how
that will help in this effort? I think that will just do opposite. On
other languages cold be the same ( As I know it is on some Balkan versions).
> I don't think that bringing a bad image is a factor. It's a broader
> question of linguistics.
>
I am not linguist but for this occasion I gathered many material on this
topic and I am ready to contribute to clear this part and to put it on
light.
>
>> I am ready to participate on any level of discussion but please don't
>> make assumptions as that will bring bad connotation to your willingness
>> to do right thing in this case.
>>
>>
> The only assumption there is that what you want is the right thing.
>
> There is another alternative. Start using the serbo-croatian (sh)
> Wikipedia. It was the original Yugoslav project, and is still alive and
> well.
>
> Ec
>
>
But I don't really see what happening here. Many people talk about
Montenegrin wikipedia in bad way as it should be killed before it is
born without fair trial. This not looks very good for community and for
future development.

It is not problem with Montenegrin wikipedia it is problem with current
wikipedias that don't obey rules to be NPOV. And it looks like no one
are willing to be persistent to change this. In contrary to Yann I
think that Montenegrin wikipedia could contribute in solving this
problem in one part. At least that could show that problem is not on
small projects, That problem could be in people that lead and contribute
to the projects (easy could be on much larger WP). Laziness and trouble
fighting vandals should not be reason to stop new projects.

Yugoslavia have place in History but not in future, now future for
Balkan nations are in EU.

Regards,
Darko Bulatovic
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

geni wrote:
> On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
>
>> geni wrote:
>>
>>> Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet
>>> it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou"
>>> still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation
>>> there is is often not goverment mandated.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on
>> language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on
>> educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated
>> on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level
>> I was talking about.
>>
>
>
> Historically things have been somewhat different.
>
>
>> Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
>>
>> Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following
>> *government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
>>
>
> Governments at the present time are one of the few groups to produce
> enough material to need to create manuals of style. that does not mean
> they are required for standardisation of language
>
>

Criteria for ISO 639-1

The following criteria for defining new languages in ISO 639-1 has been
established by the ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee.

* Relation to ISO 639-2. Since ISO 639-1 is to remain a subset of ISO
639-2, it must first satisfy the requirements for ISO 639-2 and also
satisfy the following.
* Documentation.
o a significant body of existing documents (specialized texts, such as
college or university textbooks, technical documentation manuals,
specialized journals, subject-field related books, etc.) written in
specialized languages
o a number of existing terminologies in various subject fields (e.g.
technical dictionaries, specialized glossaries, vocabularies, etc. in
printed or electronic form)
* Recommendation.A recommendation and support of a specialized authority
(such as a standards organization, *governmental body*, linguistic
institution, or *cultural organization*)
* Other considerations
o the number of speakers of the language community
o t*he recognized status of the language in one or more countries*
o the support of the request by *one or more official bodies*
* Collective codes. ISO 639-1 does not use collective codes. If these
are necessary the alpha-3 code shall be used.

This document was revised on 22 Sept. 2006 as approved by the ISO 639
Joint Advisory Committee on 10 June 2006. This replaces the published
text in ISO 639-2, sections 4.1.1, 4.1.3, and A.2.1.

ISO 639-2 defines a proper subset of the totality of alpha-3 language
identifiers in all parts of ISO 639. The primary applications for which
ISO 639-2 is intended include libraries, archives and other
documentation applications. Thus, the general criterion for inclusion of
a language in ISO 639-2 is that there is a significant body of
literature in the language or describing the language. In order to
establish this, the following objective and subjective metrics will be
applied.

* Number of documents.
The request for a new language identifier shall include evidence that
one agency holds 50 different documents in the language or that five
agencies hold a total of 50 different documents among them in the
language. Documents include all forms of material and are not limited to
text. This is a necessary requirement, but not sufficient in and of
itself. In addition the following requirements will be considered.
* Size and variety of literature.
The size and variety of the literature in the language, be it written or
oral, will be considered and should be documented in the proposal. The
documentation may be in the form of reference to library holdings or
bibliographies or more general statements quantifying the literature and
its variation.
** National or regional support*
The proposal should preferably be explicitly supported by a national or
regional language authority or standardizing body. If such support for
some reason is unobtainable, a recommendation from another authority or
language organization will be taken into account.
* Formal or official status
If the language in question has some sort of "official" status,
documentation of this status will greatly support the proposal. The
assignment of formal status to languages is in no way consistently
practiced throughout the world, *and the lack of such status is not a
negative argument if other requirements are met.*
* Formal education
If the language is used as a means of instruction in formal education on
any level, documentation of this use will support the proposal. Teaching
of the language is also relevant, in particular if the teaching is
extensive.

I think that give list of requirements for standardization so that we
don't waste time in future discussion on this. I hope thios will clear
up my reference to government and to political aspect of this story.

Regards,
darko Bulatovic
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:

> Criteria for ISO 639-1
>

We don't follow it.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

geni wrote:

>On 11/29/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
>
>
>>geni wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Not so much. there are a number of different forms of English and yet
>>>it is accepted that there is only one language. In some areas "thou"
>>>still exists. In others colour is spelled color. What standisation
>>>there is is often not goverment mandated.
>>>
>>>
>>--- in mayor cases Academies( or similar institutions) are working on
>>language standardisation. So that are working under Goverment policy on
>>educational and science level. Freedom in that filed is also regulated
>>on Goverment level, so in any case it is political meter. On that level
>>I was talking about.
>>
>>
>Historically things have been somewhat different.
>
>
>>Please check this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
>>
>>Part of text: This table gives the accepted spellings (following
>>*government *guidelines and major dictionaries).
>>
>>
>Governments at the present time are one of the few groups to produce
>enough material to need to create manuals of style. that does not mean
>they are required for standardisation of language
>
Governments also need style manuals for official publications, but these
do not have the force of law for non-governmental operations. Our
schools never make reference to any kind of official spelling or grammar
when teaching children. English, more than any other language is based
on history, custom and usage. There is such a thing as poor language
skills for native speakers, but one feature that makes it very difficult
for the health of other languages is the easy acceptance by English of
ways of speaking drawn from other languages.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Darko Bulatovic wrote:

>>It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow
>>view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation
>>with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200
>>countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a
>>country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.
>>
>>Ec
>>
>>
>I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly
>European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian,
>Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....) so their process of building language is
>trough nation history. Same thing is with south Slavic language. It is
>not reference to country - more region in which people talk similar.
>History of south Slavic people ( Europe) is quite dense in political and
>demographic change, So many parts of South Slavs are developed
>differently try many centuries and that was also reflected on language.
>So here we have situation that all Balkan nations have their own
>languages and their wikipedias. I don't see how this same rule should be
>different for Montenegro. I will not mention that wikipedia is also
>possible for some artificial languages and don't have very harsh and
>strict rules regarding this. But in Montenegrin case it seems that
>people wish to close eyes. Why?
>
Many languages in Europe do not have countries to match the language:
Galician, Catalan, Frisian, Sardinian ... And what should happen with
the Roma? Other languages are spoken in several countries. Wikipedia
is based on languages, not on nations or the evil of nationalism or
patriotism.

I don't like the artificial languages any more than you do. Except for
Esperanto, there is nobody that really speaks these languages on a
regular basis, and nobody to be the audience for the language games that
their supporters like to play. It would be very difficult to get rid of
them, as the experience with a totally ridiculous language like Klingon
has shown.

I have no problem with Montenegrin independence, though I have sometimes
wondered why it was so much slower to break away from Serbia than the
other repblics of Yugoslavia. Many of us from outside the Balkans find
the persistent chauvinism of the entire area (not just Yugoslavia)
thoroughly mystifying, and I don't think that Wikipedia should be
encouraging these separate language in the face of contrary linguistic
evidence.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> But there are many articles on wikipedia that promote nationalism with
> support of some facts or invented ones. Montenegrin related articles are
> good examples, please see discussion on some of them and you will see
> what happen there. If you stop Montenegrin wikipedia I don't see how
> that will help in this effort? I think that will just do opposite. On
> other languages cold be the same ( As I know it is on some Balkan
> versions).


I thought that mixing different cultures in the same wiki was a way to
reach NPOV...
If there are a Montenegrin wp, and a Serbian wp, will we not have
a Montenegrin version of the history and a Serbian version of the history?
I don't see how this is NPOV...

Or maybe I didn't understand well (quite possible), then please explain.

Regards,
Kip.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> I don't understand you very well here. Many language (mostly
> European)are having nation marks (English, French, German, Russian,
> Albanina, Greek, Italian, ....)
You forgot that German is spoken in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and
Italy all three happily living together on one wiki - and of course:
there are some differences among these four versions of German, but
nevertheless they are ONE language.
French is spoken in France, Canada, Switzerland etc. and they work on
one Wikipedia.
Dutch is spoken in the Netherlands, Belgium and France and they work on
one Wikipedia.
Italian is spoken in Italy and Switzerland and they work on one Wikipedia.
English is spoken in Great Britain, USA, Australia, New Zealand etc. and
they all work on one Wikipedia.

Of course there are slight differences in the usage of certain
terminology, in writing etc., but they all happily work together. There
is the possibility, even now, to handle more than one language on a Wiki
and the smaller the communities of a certain language or variation or
dialect the more sense it makes to co-operate in one wiki for the simple
fact that the project has a better chance to survive - anyway the day is
not all too far that it will become even easier to hav various scripts
and dialects live on one wiki.

A Wiki project is about co-operation and not separation. You want to be
different: well, then show it and co-operate instead of allowing for
political separation. We all have one thing in common: we are human
beings and as such we have something called intelligence that
distinguishes us from other living forms ans as such we have the power
to decide ... the wiki way is co-operation and trying to understand each
other and not separation.

Languages develop over centuries, sometimes you have vowel shifts and
even stronger differences within one language ... well that is about
spoken language ... if you force the writing in a certain different way
that means that you create an artificial version of a language or you
write in a dialect.

Again: please co-operate and show that people, even living in different
nations, are able to work together.

Thank you for your attention and understanding.

Best,

Sabine
Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale!
http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l