body:
I like how explanation was done in the Chagas disease article. Use the
academic terms so people learn them for later use, but explain
difficult stuff the first time it's mentioned. You get the best from
both worlds. The scientists have the academic talk and the "normal"
readers still understand it.

--Mgm

On 7/9/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/07/05, Jon <thagudearbh at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > It would be useful (if we don't already have it somewhere that I've missed) to have a firm statement that says articles should be written to be as intelligible to as many of our readers as possible, with our readers being anyone potentially searching for English-language information on the internet.
> >
> > Jon (jguk)
>
> I guess you can't force people to write in a certain style.
>
> But it's daft to write an encyclopaedia in an academic style. No
> academic in his right mind would refer to Wikipedia - I don't mean any
> offense, but that's just not it's place. They go to journals and
> texts.
>
> What it is useful - what it should be aiming for - is to make subjects
> understandable to the 99.99% of the world that *isn't* expert in that
> field.
>
>
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Mark Williamson

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Natural languages and new Wikipedias;
	Chinook Jargon?

references:
<daoral$ae8$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<BAY22-F4B87E20761559E45F0B1CB7DA0@phx.gbl>
	<dap5l2$pq$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Tim, it is my belief that Wikipedia's goal is, or if it isn't taht it
should be, to provide a free, neutral, and hopefully accurate for
every person on earth in "their own language".

Jimbo claimed that when he said something to that effect, "own
language" meant simply some language they understand. However, as
Anthere made very clear when saying that English is NOT her "own
language" even though she is obviously quite fluent, one's "own
language" is the language of their hearth.

A man born and raised with Nuorese Sardinian, but who at the age of 18
moved to Rome and has since lived and worked among almost exclusively
non-Sardinian-speakers for the last 30 or even 50 years, his "own
language" is still Nuorese.

In Shigeru Kayano's world, there aren't many people with whom he can
converse in his native Ainu tongue anymore. When he was a member of
the diet (Japanese parliament), obviously all motions, new laws, and
everything else was done in Japanese, with an occasional translation
into English being published as an afterthought.

All the radio interviews he did, the vast majority of the people he
met, probably 99% of letters he got from his constituents, his utility
bills, and nearly everything else about his life was conducted
exclusively in Japanese. Yet he will tell you firmly that "his own
language" is Ainu.

He is fluent in Japanese, and has been since a relatively young age.
But his comprehension level is still better in Ainu, the language in
which he forms thoughts, the language in which he dreams.

He said in an interview once that everything he says, he formulates in
Ainu and translates it into Japanese before saying it.

His final speech before the Diet, he made in Ainu. In many countries,
he couldn'tve done this, as they have rules restricting the languages
you can use to make speeches before government bodies. But since Japan
hadn't ever had it come up before, he was free to do so, and he wore
traditional Ainu dress when he did so. (afterwards he wrote a book
called "ainugoga kokkaini hibiku", meaning roughly "the ainu language
resounds through the diet")

It isn't known how many native speakers of Ainu remain. One problem
which is shared with many other "endangered languages" is that of who
can and cannot be classified as a native speaker.

One woman learnt Ainu natively, but at a very young age her exposure
to Ainu was cut off completely. She could speak Ainu relatively
fluently, but only to talk about her childhood (I believe she's passed
on now). Other people can speak a great deal of Ainu, but pepper it
with Japanese words and expressions. Some people can understand even
very complex constructions in Ainu, but can't speak it. Some can only
speak it to certain people (I met somebody once who could speak
O'odham fluently, but only to their grandparents).

Many, or even most of these people, could "recover" their native
language with a little bit of effort. Until recently, they preferred
to hide it away, and one woman whose sister was a prized orator
revealed upon her sister's death that she was actually a very fluent
speaker. She said that when her sister died, she realised that she was
hiding an important cultural asset, and that she should be proud of it
and share it with others rather than just pretending she doesn't know
the language.

All speakers of Ainu are fluent in Japanese, just as all speakers of
Klingon are fluent in English. The difference between them is that
with Klingon, it is for none of its speakers a language they can call
their "own language".

--------------

In response to what Boris has said, all Wikipedias must at some point
be inactive. When br.wiki was first created, it lay dormant and empty
and open to vandalism for a while. Somebody came then, added 50 or so
pages, and then just left again. Now, a few months ago, all of a
sudden 3 native speakers descended on the Wikipedia and started adding
pages slowly. Then, another new person came, and he added long,
quality, new pages at lightning speed (a few a day). Now, the Breton
Wikipedia is growing quickly.

The Georgian and Armenian Wikipedias are also good examples. For a
long time, they were empty, dormant, and frequently vandalised. And
then, all of a sudden, from nowhere, came native speakers who improved
these projects. ka.wiki (georgian) now has over 1000 articles.

The Limburgish Wikipedia is an even better example. It had basically
no content, and Elian proposed it to be locked. I added a table of
contents, tried to translate it into what poor Limburgish I could
muster, and tried to make the mainpage look inviting. I sent e-mails
to people, but got no response.

Then, a couple of months later, it was discovered by Kasper ("Guaka")
and another guy (forgot his name), who began to add content.
(actually, I think Kasper already knew but forgot about it or
something). It grew very slowly until Wouter Steenbeek ("HaafLimbo",
"Caesarion", etc etc) arrived, and he added new pages - long, good,
detailed ones - at a rate of a few per day. He did slow down a little
by now, and the Wikipedia doesn't grow as fast, but it is still
growing at a considerable rate and is fast approaching 1000 articles.

As the founding members of ja: can attest, initially it was a
wasteland with even some vandalism. And they made it better.

It's so amazing, from my point of view. I monitor a list of recent
changes on inactive Wikipedias. I am always very excited when I get to
remove a Wikipedia from the list. So far, I have removed perhaps 10...
Aragonese, Limburgish, Georgian, Armenian, Sicilian, Kashmiri, Scots
Gaelic, I don't remember them all... I will remove the Breton
Wikipedia when somebody translates the interface, although I no longer
actually _monitor_ it since it has usually around 100 new changes each
day.

Bengali and Telugu may go in the near future as well, but there are
still some minor outstanding issues with them.

Most of the people who make these Wikipedias active are newbies.
They've never heard of Wikipedia before, or they've at least never
visited it prior to that.

Most of these people would not have the courage to request tht their
Wikipedia be unlocked.

Mark

On 09/07/05, Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
> > Strongly disagreed. That point of view would make most Wikipedias wastes
> > of time. Everyone speaking Limburgic can read Dutch better. Virtually
> > everyone speaking Welsh, Navajo, and Maori can read English better.
> > Everyone able to read Bambara is supposed to read French as well.
> > Wikipedias contribute to the status of a language and the community it
> > is spoken by. The fact that Klingon is (probably) noone's native
> > language makes a difference, but not entirely a substantial one: it is a
> > nice thing to have, and it can and will benefit the Klingon speaking
> > communities which often meet and use the language quite prominently. It
> > becomes a diiferent story when noone reads it, even when reaching a high
> > number of articles.
>
> I have trouble relating to this. What do you think Wikipedia's goals are
> (or should be)? Why do you contribute to Wikipedia?
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


list: wikien-l

from_name: El C

subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
I'm dissapointed in you, Ruy. This sort of agitation serves no
producitive purpose (even though Mister Wales did hurt your feelings),
on the contrary, it takes away from your valid points and allows the
rest of the list to discard them with far greater ease.

>"those of you not coming to this list to kiss the ass of Ayn Rand
reading porn magnate Jimbo Wales"

>I do regret that Jimbo was not more sensitive to your feelings. I
don't know why Adam Carr can do no wrong in his eyes.

Fred, everything else aside, I am positively impressed with your post.
Wow, I did not expect that.

El_C


from_name: Nyenyec N

subject: [WikiEN-l] Non-free images, there has to be a better way

body:
I think this is a great idea and shouldn't be too hard to implement.

nyenyec

On 7/9/05, Haukur ?orgeirsson <haukurth at hi.is> wrote:
> >> There are still oodles of untagged images.
> >
> > Well, it's about time that they just be deleted wholesale.  But I know
> > there's been a diligent ongoing project to tag them.  I wouldn't want us
> > to disrupt that valuable work by getting draconian all of a sudden.
>
> That project has indeed been doing very valuable
> work. Lots of it. It should be noted, though, that
> there are now more than 5000 images carrying the
> "unverified" tag, those are untagged for most
> intents and purposes.
>
> But still, I think it would be nice if the image
> upload system would automatically add the unverified
> tag if the uploader fails to provide a tag. That
> should further alert new users that we need
> licensing information on each uploaded image.
>
> A helpful interface where the user could select from
> a number of tags would be even better. I've been on
> Wikipedia for more than two years but I still don't
> always remember the most appropriate PD-tag to use
> for each image.
>
> Regards,
> Haukur
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: JAY JG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Writing with our readers in mind

body:
>From: Jon <thagudearbh at yahoo.co.uk>
>
>It would be useful (if we don't already have it somewhere that I've missed)
>to have a firm
>statement that says articles should be written to be as intelligible to as
>many of our readers as
>possible, with our readers being anyone potentially searching for
>English-language information on
>the internet.

If you imagine that your attempt to further your campaign against the use of
BCE/CE using this backdoor method went unnoticed, rest assured that it did
not.

Jay.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Thoughts on the process of requesting adminship

body:
>From: Timwi <timwi at gmx.net>
>
>JAY JG wrote:
>>From: Timwi <timwi at gmx.net>
>>
>>>and we have rather few good admins as a result (500 out of 25500, less
>>>than 2%).
>>
>>Ah, but how many regularly active editors?  Probably no more than 1000.
>
>Ah, but how many regularly active admins? Probably no more than 20.

According to the [[Wikipedia:List of administrators]], 390 are active, and
72 are "semi-active".  Not surprisingly, a high percentage of Wikipedia's
active editors are admins.

Jay.


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Mark Ryan wrote:
> Perhaps it was a poor choice of words on my part. Replace "troll" with
> "problem user". Ruy Lopez is moderated on this mailing list, which you
> were probably unaware of. I approved his post above, but did not
> notice the text: "those of you not coming to this list to kiss the ass
> of Ayn Rand reading porn magnate Jimbo Wales". Had I seen this text, I
> would have rejected the post and requested it be reformulated to
> comply with this list's informal civility policy.
>

That post was so many characters wide and so long that my eyes nearly
melted halfway through the first paragraph.

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCz+Pb/RxM5Ph0xhMRA5GhAJwMaQukWoUdOSo07eeMWJZq3IcocwCfSOuv
u+0cxh880W0s/nAASo2Ho10=
=JGK5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK

body:
On 7/9/05, Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable
> administrator.  He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard,
> and he finally decided he'd had enough.  I wish he would come back, but if
> he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful
> service.  Which I do gladly.  Thank you RickK.

While overall I believe he had a greater positive than negative impact
on Wikipedia, and worked tirelessly for the project, I do question the
willingness to paint him in a wholly positive light without negatives.

RickK was a very volatile personality, and not just recently.  I
remember him being similar when I joined the project.  He was always
very prone to taking things personally and regarding statements not
directed at him specifically as personal attacks.  He bit newbies,
including many who meant no malice, but were simply unfamiliar with
the Wikipedia way.

I regard him as displaying a form of the Wik disease; slowly becoming
convinced he was the sole bulwark against the teeming hordes of chaos,
and becoming possessed with the conviction that he was important and
unappreciated simply because others were not as fanatical as he.  He
excused rudeness and sharpness and carelessness because there was
simply too much work he had to do, and not enough time to do it.

IMO, he was headed for a burnout for a long time, and it was a largely
self-inflicted one.

-Matt (User:Morven)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Non-free images, there has to be a better way

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

James D. Forrester wrote:
> Michael Snow wrote:
>
>
>>>"Fair use" is laziness too in many cases. But my point was that if
>>>you're going to the trouble of asking for permission, which is otherwise
>>>commendable, it is lazy and counterproductive not to take the very
>>>simple step of asking for permission *under a free license*.
>
>
> Well, it's rare to get permission for GFDL licensing or whatever; I've
> managed to get loads of replies which are happy to give Wikipedia a
> licence, but will not be able to license under GFDL/CC-BY/etc. - dozens
> and dozens of them. Some of them, I noted, ended up just being grabbed
> and copied for fair use instead (by other users), which is more than
> just a little dispiriting.
>

Unfortunately, the biggest hurdle seems to be the commercial use aspect.
I tried to obtain permission for a (what turned out to be unfree)
Featured Picture. The image we had was a lower-resolution version of a
very large, high-quality composite photo. Permission was refused solely
on the basis that their photo could be used *by anyone who wanted to*
for commercial purposes. People seem to be absolutely paranoid about
copyright.

IANAL, and is seems that the people we commonly ask permission from are
in the same position.

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCz+3+/RxM5Ph0xhMRA7iuAJ4wxB/vrcOkr6ucZ1P/FVP/DN2NsACgjp5h
8NG+cNYEE9J09W/9Ity0RbM=
=hhR2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Haukur ?orgeirsson wrote:
<snip>
>>There are still oodles of untagged images.
>
>
> Well, it's about time that they just be deleted wholesale.  But I know
> there's been a diligent ongoing project to tag them.  I wouldn't want us
> to disrupt that valuable work by getting draconian all of a sudden.
>

There's also the issue of trying to obtain permission for them under a
compatible license, where possible.

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCz/Le/RxM5Ph0xhMRA20aAJ9quWBdQ2vLD9GZDjksKQqDoqGbXwCfbecH
zS7caMR2NLsz5/8skFti1Fk=
=tpLF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Natural languages and such

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Tim Starling wrote:
> I don't think he's the one losing perspective. You can hardly compare
> two languages based on the number of articles in their Wikipedia
> editions. We currently have only 195 articles in Urdu, and I'll do
> whatever is necessary to support its growth into the hundreds of
> thousands. But a Wikipedia written in Klingon is a complete waste of
> time whether it has 100 articles or 100,000. You may as well write it in
> ROT13-encoded English. The measure of success should be information
> transfer, not information content.
>

Xyvatba vf n pbafgehpgrq ynathntr sebz gur gryrivfvba fubj Fgne Gerx,
juvpu unf rawblrq rabhtu cbchynevgl nzbatfg snaf gb trg Xyvatba yvfgrq
nf na "bssvpvny" ynathntr, va zhpu gur fnzr jnl nf Fgne Jnef snaf unir
nggrzcgrq gb unir "Wrqv" yvfgrq nf na bssvpvny eryvtvba.

Guvf cbfg unf ab cbvag jungfbrire. Vs lbh unir qrpbqrq guvf, tbbq sbe
lbh. Abj fgbc nethvat, gur ybg bs lbh!

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCz/TG/RxM5Ph0xhMRAxX7AJ423MhOezezV3436jDr3Eom96vaagCgmz4g
PiAlpgUCNzIDSLfC+pwNxqc=
=QFJb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>>Hmmm!  Mickey Mouse is a cartoon character, and his historical
>>importance is as a cartoon character.  So I would ask is a picture of
>>someone dressed in a Mickey Mouse suit really a picture of Mickey Mouse?
>>;-)
>
>
> Your objection to my point is completely valid.  It is of course true
> that a photo of someone in a Mickey Mouse suit is not as academically
> good as a scan of a cartoon of Mickey Mouse.
>

Of course, where possible, we should try and use the earlist possible
image that we can, so that when (if?)[1] Mickey Mouse (ever?)[2] enters
the public domain, we have an instantly usable image, on the basis of
public domain, date after publication and life of author, etc.

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCz/V3/RxM5Ph0xhMRA8a3AJ0RSboLCDhd0vd2IpOiWIrPZLvG6QCgjGtE
40rGxoU9RarUUtvgVG/CLPA=
=Uf6Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK

body:
Alphax said on July 5:

> Michael Turley wrote:
>> I'm always disappointed when I hear of people leaving, but I'd rather
>> have an unstable person leave because of a failed admin nomination than
>> promote an unstable person to adminship.  At least this way, the
>> instability has only driven a single user away.

> Um, you seem to forget the case of RickK - an unstable admin who left
and deleted pages when they went...

This is a great inflated bubble of an argument.

Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable.  No evidence is presented.

Secondly we're told that RickK "deleted pages" when he went.

Well actually all RickK did when he went was delete his user space
articles.   As he was a member in good standing when he left, he was
surely entitled to do so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=RickK&page=

I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable
administrator.  He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard,
and he finally decided he'd had enough.  I wish he would come back, but if
he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful
service.  Which I do gladly.  Thank you RickK.


from_name: Tim Starling

body:
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:37:50PM +0200, Boris Lohnzweiger wrote:
>
>>However, I think it's finally time to realize that not every language is suitable
>>for a wikipedia. Matter of fact, from a realistic perspective we have more
>>Wikipedias that aren't working than ones that are.
>
>
> You lost historical perspective. I remember times when German Wikipedia had
> so friggin awesome 1200 articles (mostly stubs, by today's standards),
> and we tried to get over 500 on the Polish Wikipedia.
> It wasn't such a long time ago. Now the German Wikipedia seems like the best
> German-language encyclopedia ever made, and the Polish Wikipedia is likely to
> reach similar status in a year or two.

I don't think he's the one losing perspective. You can hardly compare
two languages based on the number of articles in their Wikipedia
editions. We currently have only 195 articles in Urdu, and I'll do
whatever is necessary to support its growth into the hundreds of
thousands. But a Wikipedia written in Klingon is a complete waste of
time whether it has 100 articles or 100,000. You may as well write it in
ROT13-encoded English. The measure of success should be information
transfer, not information content.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

body:
>> There are still oodles of untagged images.
>
> Well, it's about time that they just be deleted wholesale.  But I know
> there's been a diligent ongoing project to tag them.  I wouldn't want us
> to disrupt that valuable work by getting draconian all of a sudden.

That project has indeed been doing very valuable
work. Lots of it. It should be noted, though, that
there are now more than 5000 images carrying the
"unverified" tag, those are untagged for most
intents and purposes.

But still, I think it would be nice if the image
upload system would automatically add the unverified
tag if the uploader fails to provide a tag. That
should further alert new users that we need
licensing information on each uploaded image.

A helpful interface where the user could select from
a number of tags would be even better. I've been on
Wikipedia for more than two years but I still don't
always remember the most appropriate PD-tag to use
for each image.

Regards,
Haukur


subject: [WikiEN-l] On parents banning their children from Wikipedia

body:
Someone identifying himself as thagudearbh at yahoo.co.uk  writes:

> I can see many parents banning their children from using it - to the
> detriment of us all.

I never understand this argument, although it always seems to be advanced
to excuse to repugnant bit of crusading.

If I shut the extraneous details of the crusade out of my mind, it always
seems to come down to asking myself the following question:

What material effect would result from parents banning their children?

And obviously the answer is that more children would use Wikipedia.
Wikipedia as Rock and roll.

So how could this be to the detriment of Wikipedia?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: more active censorship

body:
>From: Timwi <timwi at gmx.net>
>
>The more I read from you, Jay, the more I notice that it is full of
>strawmen. Which is kind of ironic, because you were usually the one who
>most vocally told other people they were setting up strawmen, especially
>without explaining why you think they are strawmen.

An analogy is not a strawman argument.  And the more I read from you, Tim,
the less I respond to. ;-)

Jay.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK

body:
>From: "firstname lastname" <cainwilshire at hotmail.com>
>
>I think RickK will be back. RickK was truly dedicated in a unique way. He
>actually went out of his way to be an asshole. He didn't shy away when the
>situation warranted, and even when the situation didn't warrant it, he was
>there to offer an officious, dismissive snide remark. Only in Wikipedia is
>someone's foulness so celebrated and allowed to truly shine. This was truly
>his place, his home. He will be back. He has nowhere else to go. Nobody
>else will put up with him, even the worst customer service call center
>would have fired him on day one.
>
>This was his support group. With few exceptions, you people are the
>pettiest tyrants I've ever known, much worse than college RAs. He'll be
>back. He needs you to validate him.
>
>What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an
>encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will
>never have any credibility.
>
>Outy.

Thanks for providing an excellent example of exactly the kind of editor
RickK spend much of his time dealing with.

Jay.


from_name: firstname lastname

subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK

body:
I think RickK will be back. RickK was truly dedicated in a unique way. He
actually went out of his way to be an asshole. He didn't shy away when the
situation warranted, and even when the situation didn't warrant it, he was
there to offer an officious, dismissive snide remark. Only in Wikipedia is
someone's foulness so celebrated and allowed to truly shine. This was truly
his place, his home. He will be back. He has nowhere else to go. Nobody else
will put up with him, even the worst customer service call center would have
fired him on day one.

This was his support group. With few exceptions, you people are the pettiest
tyrants I've ever known, much worse than college RAs. He'll be back. He
needs you to validate him.

What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an
encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will
never have any credibility.

Outy.

>From: "Tony Sidaway" <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
>Reply-To: minorityreport at bluebottle.com,English Wikipedia
><wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK
>Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:39:54 +0100 (BST)
>
>Alphax said on July 5:
>
> > Michael Turley wrote:
> >> I'm always disappointed when I hear of people leaving, but I'd rather
> >> have an unstable person leave because of a failed admin nomination than
> >> promote an unstable person to adminship.  At least this way, the
> >> instability has only driven a single user away.
>
> > Um, you seem to forget the case of RickK - an unstable admin who left
>and deleted pages when they went...
>
>This is a great inflated bubble of an argument.
>
>Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable.  No evidence is presented.
>
>Secondly we're told that RickK "deleted pages" when he went.
>
>Well actually all RickK did when he went was delete his user space
>articles.   As he was a member in good standing when he left, he was
>surely entitled to do so.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=RickK&page=
>
>I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable
>administrator.  He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard,
>and he finally decided he'd had enough.  I wish he would come back, but if
>he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful
>service.  Which I do gladly.  Thank you RickK.
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK

body:
>Thanks for providing an excellent example of exactly the kind of editor
>RickK spend much of his time dealing with.

>Jay.

Which is to say, massively, and with great precision and efficacy.

At the expense of (potential)  'social work' on his part? Yes; good.

El_C


from_name: Tim Schmidt

body:
There's an old discussion at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reading_level as
well.

Tim (BaronLarf)


subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
/There/ Well, it always comes down to the actual material, at any
given instance, only from these can correct generalizations can be
arrived at --a difficult task--  where conjecture is inevitably easy.
Random generalization.

As an aside, Fred may only have enough time to *read* Wikipedia
articles and do arbitration work rather than *write* articles, but he
may still retain a strong attachment and commitment to the well-being
of the encyclopedia --I, myself don't know either way--assume good
faith is indeed a harsh mistress:

I suspect there will be more hurtful by time this thread is concluded.
Unavoidable? Perhaps so.

El_C

>Everything else aside, I have to say I'm pretty disappointed with Fred
>there. Perhaps this is an inevitable consequence of having an
>arbitrator who doesn't actually write articles - they get out of touch
>with what we're actually here for - to write an encyclopedia.

>-- ambi


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
Jack Lynch (jack.i.lynch at gmail.com) [050710 02:03]:

> We need better ways of catagorising one another than troll, admin,
> left -right, or whatever. These are ambiguous terms, and with the
> possible exception of "admin", each person who uses them defines them
> differently.
> Rather than labeling each other, I'd say it is better to label the
> ''conduct''.

You are 100% correct.

- d.


list: foundation-l

from_name: Sebino

subject: [Foundation-l] Personal info

body:
F?licitations!
Congratulations!
Gl?ckwunsche!

 --- On Fri 07/08, Anthere < anthere9 at yahoo.com > wrote:
From: Anthere [mailto: anthere9 at yahoo.com]
To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
     Cc: wikifr-l at wikimedia.org
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 14:30:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Foundation-l] Personal info

Dear all,br>
I had today a first ultrasound exam and it definitly
showed I hosted something alive (heartbeat being
proof), which has made it through the embronic stage
to be now called a foetus and seems to be fine.

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Personal info


body:
Jimmy Wales (jwales at wikia.com) [050710 01:42]:
> Zoney wrote:

> > a) Fair use? We're using a news broadcaster's photos for our *news
> > coverage* without permission? Hah! Yeah right that's fair use!

> You are right that this was wrong.  I would say that it was still
> legally fair use *for us*, i.e. not a legal problem, but my position is
> that just because it is legal, this is not enough for us to use something.
> It is a particularly good example of excessive use of fair use because
> there were and are a great many free images available on the web yesterday.

However, useing another broadcaster's news images is in fact fair use and
entirely appropriate in a lot of cases. This is why newscasters cover their
stuff in their logo.

> > I would suggest there's a clear anti-copyright agenda* at play in
> > allowing "fair use" images to continue to be used at Wikipedia.

> Well, I wouldn't say that.  I would say that I do personally take the
> position that "fair use" _is a good policy_.  The legal rights of
> copyright holders should not extend so far as to be able to forbid all
> uses, particularly of the sort encompassed by fair use.
> So I think it's important for our global mission to stand up for fair
> use as a principle, but at the same time, using it as a crutch because
> we can, or to say we don't care about downstream reusers is a mistake.

Yes. I think it's entirely in Wikimedia's mission, for example, to speak
out on behalf of the public domain, reduced reach of copyright and so
forth, because such things would directly help our work. But the Foundation
will of course want to tread carefully before setting out on such a path.

> > At the moment, yes people are harsh on untagged images. But mostly if
> > the image is relevant - and someone tags it fair use - it stays.

> I think we should only use pictures under fair use if it is *cleanly*
> fair use and if the photo is of significant historical importance and
> there is no possibility of getting a free alternative.  (Not "it would
> be difficult" but "no possibility".)  This is not our current policy and
> not something that's coming from me as a directive, but I think it's the
> right direction for us to move as we mature.

I think this can be done by guidelines, editorial decision and good sense
for the moment.

- d.


body:
Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
> Strongly disagreed. That point of view would make most Wikipedias wastes
> of time. Everyone speaking Limburgic can read Dutch better. Virtually
> everyone speaking Welsh, Navajo, and Maori can read English better.
> Everyone able to read Bambara is supposed to read French as well.
> Wikipedias contribute to the status of a language and the community it
> is spoken by. The fact that Klingon is (probably) noone's native
> language makes a difference, but not entirely a substantial one: it is a
> nice thing to have, and it can and will benefit the Klingon speaking
> communities which often meet and use the language quite prominently. It
> becomes a diiferent story when noone reads it, even when reaching a high
> number of articles.

I have trouble relating to this. What do you think Wikipedia's goals are
(or should be)? Why do you contribute to Wikipedia?

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Joe M

subject: [WikiEN-l] JoeM ban

body:
I have forwarded this message to the mailing list originally sent to Jimbo.

-JoeM

Jimbo,

This is User:JoeM from Wikipedia. I'm contacting you concerning my ban from
editing Wikipedia.

I want to apologize for some of my more rude behavior on your site. I at
times got too angry and enthusiastic in defending my views, and patriotism
is so important to me that I got a little out of control. I've had a lot of
time to think and cool off, though, and I'm not angry anymore, even at the
Communist and pro-terrorist users. My views on America and the importance of
defending freedom have not changed, but I now realize that the way I went
about stating these views only hurt the causes that were important to me.

If I am unblocked, I won't use sockpuppets anymore. I will not engage in
personal attacks. I won't engage in revert wars. I will calmly discuss my
edits and views on talk pages without attacking users that I disagree with.
and I will definitely never, ever vandalize pages again. I will respect the
principle of NPOV.

I think that the Wikipedia project has great potential to shine light on the
TRUTH that the mainstream media hides, and I'd like to be an active
contributor again to make sure the project reaches its full potential.

Please let me know if there's anything else I can do to help get my account
back.  I really want to help Wikipedia grow.

Your friend,
Joe M.

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Allowing blocked users to edit their own talk page,
	done

body:
Replying to myself again...

>>>>I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk
>>>>page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other
>>>>thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
>
>
> This is done, enabled on en only. It can be enabled on other wikis on
> request.

Anyone willing to defend this should go to http://tinyurl.com/8bxwp ,
because it's heading for a quick demise.

-- Tim Starling


body:
Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
>> I have trouble relating to this. What do you think Wikipedia's goals are
>> (or should be)? Why do you contribute to Wikipedia?
>>
> Do you mean I should withdraw from Wikipedia because I am wasting time?

No, I mean that I have trouble relating to it, and I'm wondering why you
contribute to Wikipedia. I'm waiting with curiosity and an open mind.
Don't be ashamed of your beliefs.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Jack Lynch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Empathisation vs. systematisation

body:
very

Jack (Sam Spade)

On 7/9/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/10/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> > Skyring wrote:
> > >
> > > Someone was talking about EQ, which I've since forgotten whether it
> > > stands for Emotion or Empathy.
> >
> > Empathisation. Its complement is systematisation.
> >
> > I've looked around on Wikipedia and it seems that the concept isn't as
> > well-known or widespread as I thought it was: Wikipedia doesn't cover it.
>
> Thanks for that. Very well put.
>
> I've been thinking of that autistic chap from Rain Man recently
> (mainly when grappling with one of those fiendish [[Sudoku]] puzzles).
> He'd be a great editor if left to his own devices, but as soon as
> someone corrected him, uh-oh!
>
> I don't think any of us are at either extreme of the bell-curve, but I
> have a feeling that in the case of WP, the mean might be skewed.
>
> --
> Pete, standard deviant
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
This is a much broader issue than that. Our articles can be quite
incomprehensible to likely readers.

Fred

On Jul 9, 2005, at 10:12 PM, JAY JG wrote:

>> From: Jon <thagudearbh at yahoo.co.uk>
>>
>> It would be useful (if we don't already have it somewhere that
>> I've missed) to have a firm
>> statement that says articles should be written to be as
>> intelligible to as many of our readers as
>> possible, with our readers being anyone potentially searching for
>> English-language information on
>> the internet.
>>
>
> If you imagine that your attempt to further your campaign against
> the use of BCE/CE using this backdoor method went unnoticed, rest
> assured that it did not.
>
> Jay.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: Fwd: [Foundation-l] Fair Use and Registered Trademarks

body:
Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:

>> We never had to make any settlement with Britannica, or with Oxford,
>> when they complained about "The Oxford Book Of English Verse," as they
>> never asked us to.  Oxford *did* blow some smoke about the OED, but it
>> was just that, and a decade ago, as I recall.
>>
>> I think we will post the first page of the original OED, to test  the
>> winds,
>> esp. since I own a first edition, and can thus prove it is from 1888.
>>
>> We should be able to publish nearly all of the first edition,  except
>> those
>> few volumes published after 1922. . .I can send a list, if you like.
>>
>> I should add that PG has TWO different teams working on the  Britannica,
>> and the other one mentions the name much more.
>>
>> I got one message from the ex-CEO of Britannica, whom I know through
>> other means, and explained that I had had nothing to do with the
>> second one.
>>
>> mh
>
I am curious what prompted the inclusion of the previously mentioned
legal disclaimer in with PG texts for Encyclopedia Britannica then?  I
know a good CYA is always in order, but it seemed a little extreme in
this case, particularly because content was removed.  There must be more
to the story than what Michael Hart is suggesting here.

--
Robert Scott Horning


subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK

body:
The jewel is in the lotus, beauty that arises from muck.

Fred

On Jul 10, 2005, at 12:47 AM, JAY JG wrote:

>> What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into
>> an encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any
>> money, will never have any credibility.


from_name: Skyring

subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
On 7/10/05, Mark Ryan <ultrablue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Had I seen this text, I
> would have rejected the post and requested it be reformulated to
> comply with this list's informal civility policy.

Can we have an informal length policy, too?

I had to replace my scroll wheel a couple of times on that trek. And
then some insensitive clod made a reply, quoting the whole bloody lot.
Cripes.

--
Peter in Canberra


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Jaap van Ganswijk

subject: [Wikitech-l] Webservices API

body:
At 2005-06-27 22:34, Brion Vibber wrote:
>So, there isn't any way to identify the individual applications. But
>there is a way to identify the individuals who are using the
>application which is using the API. Why do you want to block the
>application? Just limit the use of the API to 1000 accesses an hour by
>IP-adress (replace with different numbers as you see more fit). That
>blocks any application, that is misbehaving.

Amazon's webservices have 'solved' the problem
by allowing no more than one request per second
from any IP address.

This however doesn't work properly, because the
clients can't control whether they have a lot of
visitors at once and then none for a length of
time. Some (not very efficient) applications
also request 10 results at once and then none
for a while.

What I proposed was a simple mechanism: Give
every IP-address a credit of say a 60 requests
and decrement this with one for every request
succesfully handled and increase the credit
with one every second (up to the maximum of 60).
As soon as the credit is zero the system either
delays the response until there is credit again
(so upto one second later) (prefered method) or
it sends back an appropriate error message.

This system is easy to implement and it will
give the clients a lot of freedom, but it will
effectively limit the access by IP-addresses
that send too many requests per unit of time.

Of course the values of the parameters are open
to discussion.

Greetings,
Jaap

-- My Amazon scripts:
-- http://www.chipdir.nl/amazon/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: more active censorship

body:
On 7/10/05, Pat Carr <carrp_x at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The assertion was that the general case is that blocks
> are renewed "very quickly". This does seem to be true,
> since most blocks are placed due to ongoing edits.
> Thus, the blocked user will usually hit edit soon
> after the block is in effect.

Or, if exercising an iron determination not to hit the edit button to
right a wrong, then it can be a red link that renews the block. I
quote from a page laughably titled "User is blocked - edit this page":
"You are not blocked from reading pages, only from editing them. If
you were only intending to read a page and are seeing this message,
you probably followed a red link. These are links to pages that do not
exist, so they take users to an editing screen. You should have no
problem if you follow only blue links."

--
Pete, lily-white


body:
On 7/10/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> Skyring wrote:
> >
> > Someone was talking about EQ, which I've since forgotten whether it
> > stands for Emotion or Empathy.
>
> Empathisation. Its complement is systematisation.
>
> I've looked around on Wikipedia and it seems that the concept isn't as
> well-known or widespread as I thought it was: Wikipedia doesn't cover it.

Thanks for that. Very well put.

I've been thinking of that autistic chap from Rain Man recently
(mainly when grappling with one of those fiendish [[Sudoku]] puzzles).
He'd be a great editor if left to his own devices, but as soon as
someone corrected him, uh-oh!

I don't think any of us are at either extreme of the bell-curve, but I
have a feeling that in the case of WP, the mean might be skewed.

--
Pete, standard deviant


from_name: El C

subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
Ahh...(!?)

>Hi Ruy.

>You're perfectly right. I had you confused with another mailing list
>contributor entirely. I apologise for any confusion this may have
>caused.

>~Mark Ryan

You missed the point, Pete Skyring. Deserving, perhaps, but no, that
was meant for everyone else; I don't hold myself to the same standards
as I expect others to adhere to. As in the hypocricy you have for long
cited me in being guilty of. As in the interchangeability between
vanity and humility. Linking self-aggrandizement to sophistry. And
other nonsensical jibberings: those who actually thrive on animosity
and pain. Bad poetry.

>Nevertheless, it is one deserving of your embrace.
>Peter in Canberra

>>On 7/10/05, El C <el.ceeh at gmail.com> wrote:
>>I, myself don't know either way--assume good
>>faith is indeed a harsh mistress


from_name: Mark Williamson

body:
In saying that this is not a language list, both Boris and Gerard are
quite wrong.

There was some logic or other behind the merger of intlwiki-l with
wikipedia-l. I think it's because intlwiki-l was never extremely
active.

But when the two were merged, it's a flaw that people now consider
anything that would've formerly gone on intlwiki-l to be "noise" -- it
belongs here very much.

Gerard said a language cannot survive without a dictionary.
Dictionaries are a relatively recent invention. Navajo didn't have a
dictionary until the 1900s, and it's been around for quite some time.
O'odham still doesn't have a good dictionary (though it has a
dictionary, it's small and of poor quality), yet it's still going
strong.

Wikipedias ensure the presence of a language on the Internet.
According to some, languages will only survive if they have a presence
on the Internet.

Anyhow, back to intlwiki-l vs wikipedia-l...

A few months ago, I suggested that the two be re-split. There was a
lot of support for the idea, obviously much of it from people tired of
being flooded with messages they didn't care for.

Gerard felt I was trying to evade him in some way; that wasn't
discussed much though.

However, the reason I didn't pursue it was Anthere. She didn't
"forbid" me from doing anything, she just expressed that there was a
reason for the merger and she is against them splitting again, and I
felt that since it's not a big deal to me, I would just let it go.

...but, if people really do feel that there needs to be a separate
intlwiki-l once again, it may need to be created.

But, I don't see why people are so annoyed reading about languages,
even discussions and sometimes arguments regarding them. I am not
particularly interested in German history, yet I would find mildly
interesting any argument about the specifics of it...

People like Tim Starling have shown a similar attitude towards
language in the past -- they don't seem to be especially interested in
it, yet they do seem to find some of the issues discussed here at
least somewhat interesting, and aren't afraid of doing a little
research.

Mark

On 10/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
>
> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> > You write that the subscribers at this list are all language entheuasiasts.
>
> I phrased it wrongly. Of course, it's not a language list in the first place.
>
> > The idea of people who do not speak a language want to have
> > a Wikipedia so that they can dabble in it is not what I like to see, I
> > do not think it enhances Wikipedia's reputation.
>
> Fully agreed. That's exactly what I was trying to point out. Fortunately, the rule that you need five native speakers to start a new Wikipedia seems to gain more and more supporters lately. That could prevent a lot of futile discussion in the future.
>
> > When I heard that Nauruans walked away disgusted with what we brought to the table I was apalled.
>
> na: is in fact more like a parody than like a real encyclopedia. I wish someone stop that hanky-panky there for the sake of the project's reputation.
>
> > Sorry Boris nothing personal this has been building up for some time.
>
> That's alright. Thanks for reminding us/me.
>
> Boris
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail k?nnen Sie eine SMS an alle
> Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Dutch-Low Saxon test-mainpage

body:
Boris,

As Ron noted in the messages I copied here, "?" varies to "oe", since
of course not everybody has that keyboard.

Servien says people will just use the German-based spelling instead.
In fact, the distinctions added by Ron _are_ part of the German-based
spelling.

When he says "better publications", I'm sure he means _in_  rather
than _on_, but if you need clarification I could ask.

Interestingly enough, the distinctions are actually made in "Der neue
Sass" the orthographical ? bible ? of nds.wiki... and yet
HeikoEvermann, whose own self-declared nds-competency is only "nds.3",
reverted the changes anyways and was quick to send me a series of very
stern messages in Hochdeutsch when I changed back suspecting a
misunderstanding. I don't know Hochdeutsch well but I know enough to
know that Heiko was cross.

Mark

On 10/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
>
> Just a few final remarks from me on the Dutch Low Saxon issue.
>
> > Even though the consensus is to go along with the German-based orthography
> > (which alienates speakers in the Netherlands), I strongly suggest that the
> > usual orthographic neglect not be perpetuated.
>
> Ok, now I can understand the meaning. Once again, a very good idea. Once again, very academic, too. Reinhard "Ron" Hahn seems to be a very intelligent man. If articles are written in his phonetically more correct way, it surely won't do any harm. But does he really think, you can talk a majority of volunteer, amateur editors into using a method of spelling they are not used to? That "?" is not even on their keyboard.
>
> > According to him, such distinctions are made in "better" Platt publications.
>
> Does '"better" Platt publications' mean publications written _in_ Platt or academic publications written _on_ the subject of the Low Saxon language? Linguists often have different ways of writting things down, due to the specific needs of their science. By the way, did you know "th" stands for two different sounds in English? So what about a spelling reform at en: ?
>
> I think if Wikipedia in Low Saxon is supposed to flourish you'll have meet people were they are.
>
> Boris
>
>
>
>
> Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 10.07.05 07:44:03:
>
> Boris,
>
> Ron's justification is given below. According to him, such
> distinctions are made in "better" Platt publications.
>
> From Ron:
>
> "Even though the consensus is to go along with the German-based orthography
> (which alienates speakers in the Netherlands), I strongly suggest that the
> usual orthographic neglect not be perpetuated.  In ordinary spelling,
> people do not distinguish the diphthong /ei/ (written <e(e)>) from the
> monophthong /ee/ (written <e(e)>), and they do not distinguish the
> dipthong /?i/ (written <??>) from the monophthong /??/ (written <?(?)>).
> As a result of this overly casual spelling method, most learners -- which
> includes most younger people -- mispronounce numerous words on the basis
> of spelling.  Thus, continuing this spelling in a reference resource would
> be tantamount to serious neglect and perpetuation of mispronunciation.  So
> far, these distinctions are made only in better publications, in which the
> monophthongs are written <?(?)> and <?> (or <oe>) respectively.  (In some
> academic conventions they use <e(e)> and <?(?>) with an _ogonek_ (hook),
> which, however, is typographically awkward.)"
>
> And then later, this:
>
> "They do reflect important distinction both phonemically and phonetically.
>
> For example:
>
> /leev-n/ ["le:v=m] ~ ["lE:v=m] <L?ven> 'life'
> /leiv-n/ ["leIv=m] ~ ["laIv=m] <Leven> 'loving'
> Spelling without distinction: Leven
>
> /beed-n/ [be:d=n] ~ ["bE:d=n] <b?den> 'to beg', 'to pray'
> /beid-n/ ["beId=n] ~ ["baId=n] <beden> 'to offer'
> Spelling without distinction: beden
>
> /veet-n/ ["ve:t=n] ~ ["vE:t=n] <W?ten> 'knowledge'
> /veitn/ ["veIt=n] ~ ["vaIt=n] <Weten> 'wheat'
> Spelling without distinction: Weten
>
> /??v at r/ ["2:v3`] ~ ["9:v3`] <?ver> ~ <oever> 'over', 'across'
> /?iv at r/ ["9Iv3`] ~ ["OIv3`] <?ver> '(river/lake) bank)
> Spelling without distinction: ?ver, ?ver
>
> /l??v-t/ [l2:ft] ~ [l9:ft] <l?vt> ~ <loevt>  'praises'
> /l?iv-t/ [l9Ift] ~ [lOIft] <l??vt> 'believes'
> Spelling without distinction: l??vt ~ l??ft"
>
> From what I can tell, though, it's definitely not an exaggeration to
> say it was "fake" before and is real now -- things that were awkward,
> German-syntax-based ways of saying things were modified to more
> natural, genuinely Platt/Nedersaksisch ways of saying things.
>
> Mark
>
> On 09/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> >
> > > Ron has done quite a job on the article [[Katt]], in a huge effort to
> > convert it from Patentplatt to real Platt.
> >
> > Hi Mark!
> >
> > Nice job. As far as I'm able to able to judge, the overall language quality of the article was clearly improved. But I think it's an exaggeration to say the article was written in a fake Platt before and is "real" now. Authenticity is often a matter of perspective. Most of the alterations made are not so much about real vs. phony but rather a matter of spelling, dialect differences or even a matter of taste. Some changes aren't really necessary e. g. replacing the very common "mooken" by a seldomly used "m?ken". One thing I really can't grasp is why Ron/Reinhard introduces the letter "?" (which is never used in Germany), e. g. when replacing the authentic Platt word "?kelnaam" by a weird-looking "?kelnaam" for no visible reason.
> >
> > Best,
> > Boris
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 08.07.05 01:18:55:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Ron has done quite a job on the article [[Katt]], in a huge effort to
> > convert it from Patentplatt to real Platt.
> >
> > Diff: http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&diff=21797&oldid=18531
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 06/07/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Boris,
> > >
> > > I personally think that if in that sample the only extreme differences
> > > are "mer" and the future tense, this should not be insurmountable.
> > >
> > > Brazilian and Iberian Portuguese similarly have some vast differences
> > > in verb conjugations (although they use the same orthography...), yet
> > > they have a single Wikipedia.
> > >
> > > I'm sure many Portuguese people are a little bit annoyed when they see
> > > people using the second-person singular conjugations for both
> > > second-person singular and second-person plural... but then, they're a
> > > little bit used to it since Portuguese often visit Brazilian websites,
> > > read Brazilian books, watch Brazilian movies... and vice-versa but to
> > > a lesser degree.
> > >
> > > Nevertheless, the fact alone that you were able to identify it as the
> > > future tense (as opposed to just completely not knowing) counts for
> > > something.
> > >
> > > Surely, although it might be a bit annoying at first, such a
> > > linguistic difference as use or non-use of the future tense is
> > > surmountable.
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > On 05/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Servien!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for informing me about that. I must admit, I've never heard or read about ANS. So, like the name suggests that's supposed to work in but countries? A good idea for sure. However (and that's a big however), as far as I can tell noboby in Germany ever writes that way. Just have a look a websites from Germany written in nds. You won't ever find all those y's and v's there. Neither in Plattd??tsch literature you can find in book stores in Northern Germany. While that ANS spelling system might be a good thing in theory, I think you just couldn't re-educate thousands of people in order to have one single nds Wikipedia. But I guess I don't have to convince _you_ anyway.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the sample phrase. Here's my try:
> > > >
> > > > "Wenn <or "As"> en Minsch nich faken noog ruut <"na buten" would also work> k?mmt ward he ook nich <equivalent for "h?yl" would be "heel" but is usually not used here> bruun <future tense "w?yrden" also omitted here> s?nnern blievt witt. <Note: I can`t really think of a word for "pale" now - you could possibly take "bleek" (without "witt" in that case) but I'm not 100% sure here>
> > > >
> > > > Even though I have tried to stick to your wording as closely as possible, I think the differences are quite tremendous here. They go far beyond spelling. What was most striking to me was the use of the future tense in your sample phrase. The Plattd??tsch I know just doesn't have that - just like in spoken High German where that tense is not used either. But also the word "mer" (that's like "maar" in Dutch, isn't it?) wouldn`t be understood by readers in Germany. Other differences are less severe, of course. E. g. "genog" instead of "noog" would surely be understood, especially since we have "genug" in German. But take "kump" (do you speak an "?" or an "u" there?) for "k?mmt" for example or even "ie/y" instead of "he". If the decision about a Dutch Low Saxon Wikipedia were in my hands and I had to make that decision solely based on this one example - I would most definately create it! Not because I want to separate Dutch and German wikipedians - it's the 21st century and thank God we're good neighbours - but only of the language facts.
> > > >
> > > > Boris
> > > >
> > > > Servien Ilaino <servien at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 05.07.05 15:33:43:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Boris,
> > > >
> > > > The orthography used in that text seems to me is de Algemeyne
> > > > Neddersassische Schryvwys'... I also used to use it, but people don't
> > > > seem to understand it quite as well in the Netherlands and Germany, I
> > > > must honestly say I understand the ANS writing system way better then
> > > > the one you used at the bottom (of course there are words which are
> > > > completely unknown to me...)
> > > >
> > > > Here is a sample of DLS in ANS writing system:
> > > > As 'n mins ny vaak genog buyten kump sal y ok ny h?yl bruyn w?yrden
> > > > mer sal y spyrwit blyven.
> > > >
> > > > And here in the traditional one:
> > > > As 'n mins nie vaok genog buut'n kump zal ie ok nie heul bruun wurd'n
> > > > mer zal ie spierwit bliev'n/blyv'n.
> > > >
> > > > This is the one I use:
> > > > As 'n mins nie vaok genog buten kump sal ie ok nie heul bruun wurden
> > > > mer sal ie spierwit blyven. (it's a mixture of the traditional one and
> > > > a little from ANS, I don't use the apostrophes because like in the
> > > > word blyv'n is pronounced as "bliem" and this is confusing because
> > > > bak'n [bake] is also pronounced differently like "bakng".)
> > > >
> > > > (Translation of the text:
> > > > If a person doesn't go outside much then he won't have a tanned look,
> > > > but will be pale white.)
> > > >
> > > > Servien
> > > >
> > > > 2005/7/5, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ahh wait, I see here the accusation is that it's in "Patentplatt", which is "based on Missingsch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok "Patentplatt" or "Fernsehplatt" (TV Platt) as it is called sometimes - that really seems to happen. I think that word is less misleading. Of course, different people will have different views on what is unique and what is not. Languages like German or French have had established unified standards for centuries, so there is hardly ever any doubt what's linguistically correct or not at de: or fr:. Obviously, at nds: you don`t have that degree of unambiguousness. I would really appreciate any efforts to improve the linguistic quality of the Low Saxon Wikipedia. After all, it is still at an early stage. Unfortunetaly, I can't really help here for, being a native in High German, I'd probably only worsen the problem of "Patentplatt".
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > A sample of 'real' Low Saxon written in "AGS" orthography:
> > > > > > Lyk so kanst dat in 'n paar dialekten vun de ?nner-Elv' (in Hamborg un kuntray) ook seggen.  "Wat" kan daar in s?kse vellen lyk as "dat" un > "dey" bruken.  I dou dat ook vaken, man tou meyrst wen ik snakken dou.
> > > > >
> > > > > Where does that come from? The vocabulary is mostly alright. But the spelling looks awfully articifial to me. Never before have I seen anyone using "y" in written Platt. And why should you write "v" when you say "f". Just too make look "less German"? Also, the diphtong "ou" might somehow reflect the pronounciation but is certainly not usually used in Northern Germany. And why should one want to use "kk" instead of "ck"? Just because it's written that way in the Netherlands?? And why is there an apostrophe in " Elv' "? Just because the word is "Elbe" in High German. Complete nonsense, in my humble opinion. I don't want to comment comment on the "real Platt" word "kuntray" but the "I" at the beginning of the last sentence is either Bavarian or English but surely not Platt.
> > > > >
> > > > > Coming from the "?nner-Elv'" myself, let me try it:
> > > > >
> > > > > Liek so kannst dat in'n poor Dialekten vun de ?nnerelv (in Hamborg un ?mto) ook seggen. "Wat" kann dor in d?sse/s?kse F?llen liek as "dat" un "de" bruken. Ick/Ik do dat ook faken, man tomeest wenn ick/ik snack.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm...
> > > > >
> > > > > Boris
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 05.07.05 08:34:13:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Boris,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm a bit perplexed as this accusation has been made by a number of
> > > > > people on Lowlands-l, most of the accusers being native speakers of
> > > > > Low German, and at least one (RF Hahn) also speaking Missingsch. Ahh
> > > > > wait, I see here the accusation is that it's in "Patentplatt", which
> > > > > is "based on Missingsch".
> > > > >
> > > > > Accusations: "Unalike the Laich Saxon edeetion whase warkers dinna
> > > > > actually ken the leid.
> > > > > (It's oor Jonny's pet plaint, his windmill faes, an that richtly.)"
> > > > >
> > > > > "It doesn't help that language competency is wanting in the current
> > > > > WikiPlatt team.  Those folks are enthusiastic, and I laud that.  But
> > > > > they don't know the language well enough.  Much or most of it is
> > > > > "Patentplatt" (based on Missingsch), i.e. invented on the basis of
> > > > > German.  I am not at all opposed to introducing technical neologisms,
> > > > > but there needs to be first of all a firm grasp of the basic language,
> > > > > the grammar and the authentic idiom."
> > > > >
> > > > > Information on Patentplatt: "The number of Lowlands Saxon speakers ...
> > > > > would be large if it included people who are somewhat conversant ...
> > > > > and it would be even larger if it included those who ... can really
> > > > > only manage lexically, idiomatically and grammatically deficient,
> > > > > German-based, "made-up Platt" (Patentplatt)."
> > > > >
> > > > > This is very concerning, and is clearly a major factor in the
> > > > > difficulty people from the Netherlands are having reading NDS.wiki. I
> > > > > just dashed off an e-mail to Ron to remind him that he is always
> > > > > welcome to "fix" the Patentplatt, because of course it's Wikipedia.
> > > > >
> > > > > Obviously, this isn't the only factor, and I'm not sure if it's even
> > > > > the greatest factor. But, I feel that we should explore that.
> > > > >
> > > > > A sample of 'real' Low Saxon written in "AGS" orthography:
> > > > >
> > > > > Lyk so kanst dat in 'n paar dialekten vun de ?nner-Elv' (in Hamborg un
> > > > > kuntray) ook seggen.  "Wat" kan daar in s?kse vellen lyk as "dat" un
> > > > > "dey" bruken.  I dou dat ook vaken, man tou meyrst wen ik snakken dou.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm...
> > > > >
> > > > > Best
> > > > > Mark
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Mark!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was quite perplexed to read that they write Missingsch in the Low Saxon Wikipedia. So I just went there and checked out ten random pages. Having grown up in a rural area near Hamburg, it`s easy for me tell apart Low Saxon from Missingsch. The whole issue seems to be very exaggerated. All ten articles I've read were without a doubt in Plattd??tsch. Of course single articles might not be - I haven`t checked the whole Wikipedia. However, one can note that depending on the subject of the article the share of words that very closely resemble standard German words or are even identical (in writing !) is sometimes quite high. But this is a usual phenomenon in Low Saxon. Generally speaking, the more scientific a text gets the closer it comes to Hochdeutsch. Surely, sometimes this can lead to the fact that certain passages of articles don`t look too much like Platt. This can been seen very clearly in this article: http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilia . It has two sections, both written by the same author, as far as I can tell. The first ("Nordd??tsche Slangen") is very "pure" Low Saxon. The second ("Systematik") looks very much like standard German, due to its topic. I think even without knowing both languages in detail you can easily tell the difference. But this is not to be confused with Missingsch. You just couldn`t say that differently or more "real", if you want.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don`t who actually brought up this Missingsch issue (native speaker? hobby linguist?). But as a matter of fact, nds-WP is written in Low Saxon. If individual pages are in other languages (which to some degree happens in many Wikipedias) the guys at nds can certainly cope with that. However,  I disbelieve that this part of the reason native speakers of Low Saxon in the Netherlands ask for a separate WP.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail k?nnen Sie eine SMS an alle
> Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179
>
>
>
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


body:
As it so happens, it appears Heiko sends all communication in
Hochdeutsch, occasionally proceeded by "moin moin" to make it sound
more Platt-ish. Slomox, the other most active current admin, is also
not a native speaker of Low Saxon (but rather Hochdeutsch),

With these people running this nokieksel op 't patentplatt, it's no
wonder it's... in patentplatt.

I'm sure they're also the ones deciding orthographic policy...

Also, the nds.wiki mainpage says it's in Plattd??tsch (ie, flat
german)... and in parenthesis after it says "Plattd??tsch", it says
"neddersassisch un oostnedderd??tsch" (Low Saxon and East Low German).

Hmm... according to the ISO, "nds" does not include East Low German.
Only Low Saxon. Seems this Wikipedia is not in accordance...

Hmm.

Mark

On 10/07/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Boris,
>
> As Ron noted in the messages I copied here, "?" varies to "oe", since
> of course not everybody has that keyboard.
>
> Servien says people will just use the German-based spelling instead.
> In fact, the distinctions added by Ron _are_ part of the German-based
> spelling.
>
> When he says "better publications", I'm sure he means _in_  rather
> than _on_, but if you need clarification I could ask.
>
> Interestingly enough, the distinctions are actually made in "Der neue
> Sass" the orthographical ? bible ? of nds.wiki... and yet
> HeikoEvermann, whose own self-declared nds-competency is only "nds.3",
> reverted the changes anyways and was quick to send me a series of very
> stern messages in Hochdeutsch when I changed back suspecting a
> misunderstanding. I don't know Hochdeutsch well but I know enough to
> know that Heiko was cross.
>
> Mark
>
> On 10/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> >
> > Just a few final remarks from me on the Dutch Low Saxon issue.
> >
> > > Even though the consensus is to go along with the German-based orthography
> > > (which alienates speakers in the Netherlands), I strongly suggest that the
> > > usual orthographic neglect not be perpetuated.
> >
> > Ok, now I can understand the meaning. Once again, a very good idea. Once again, very academic, too. Reinhard "Ron" Hahn seems to be a very intelligent man. If articles are written in his phonetically more correct way, it surely won't do any harm. But does he really think, you can talk a majority of volunteer, amateur editors into using a method of spelling they are not used to? That "?" is not even on their keyboard.
> >
> > > According to him, such distinctions are made in "better" Platt publications.
> >
> > Does '"better" Platt publications' mean publications written _in_ Platt or academic publications written _on_ the subject of the Low Saxon language? Linguists often have different ways of writting things down, due to the specific needs of their science. By the way, did you know "th" stands for two different sounds in English? So what about a spelling reform at en: ?
> >
> > I think if Wikipedia in Low Saxon is supposed to flourish you'll have meet people were they are.
> >
> > Boris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 10.07.05 07:44:03:
> >
> > Boris,
> >
> > Ron's justification is given below. According to him, such
> > distinctions are made in "better" Platt publications.
> >
> > From Ron:
> >
> > "Even though the consensus is to go along with the German-based orthography
> > (which alienates speakers in the Netherlands), I strongly suggest that the
> > usual orthographic neglect not be perpetuated.  In ordinary spelling,
> > people do not distinguish the diphthong /ei/ (written <e(e)>) from the
> > monophthong /ee/ (written <e(e)>), and they do not distinguish the
> > dipthong /?i/ (written <??>) from the monophthong /??/ (written <?(?)>).
> > As a result of this overly casual spelling method, most learners -- which
> > includes most younger people -- mispronounce numerous words on the basis
> > of spelling.  Thus, continuing this spelling in a reference resource would
> > be tantamount to serious neglect and perpetuation of mispronunciation.  So
> > far, these distinctions are made only in better publications, in which the
> > monophthongs are written <?(?)> and <?> (or <oe>) respectively.  (In some
> > academic conventions they use <e(e)> and <?(?>) with an _ogonek_ (hook),
> > which, however, is typographically awkward.)"
> >
> > And then later, this:
> >
> > "They do reflect important distinction both phonemically and phonetically.
> >
> > For example:
> >
> > /leev-n/ ["le:v=m] ~ ["lE:v=m] <L?ven> 'life'
> > /leiv-n/ ["leIv=m] ~ ["laIv=m] <Leven> 'loving'
> > Spelling without distinction: Leven
> >
> > /beed-n/ [be:d=n] ~ ["bE:d=n] <b?den> 'to beg', 'to pray'
> > /beid-n/ ["beId=n] ~ ["baId=n] <beden> 'to offer'
> > Spelling without distinction: beden
> >
> > /veet-n/ ["ve:t=n] ~ ["vE:t=n] <W?ten> 'knowledge'
> > /veitn/ ["veIt=n] ~ ["vaIt=n] <Weten> 'wheat'
> > Spelling without distinction: Weten
> >
> > /??v at r/ ["2:v3`] ~ ["9:v3`] <?ver> ~ <oever> 'over', 'across'
> > /?iv at r/ ["9Iv3`] ~ ["OIv3`] <?ver> '(river/lake) bank)
> > Spelling without distinction: ?ver, ?ver
> >
> > /l??v-t/ [l2:ft] ~ [l9:ft] <l?vt> ~ <loevt>  'praises'
> > /l?iv-t/ [l9Ift] ~ [lOIft] <l??vt> 'believes'
> > Spelling without distinction: l??vt ~ l??ft"
> >
> > From what I can tell, though, it's definitely not an exaggeration to
> > say it was "fake" before and is real now -- things that were awkward,
> > German-syntax-based ways of saying things were modified to more
> > natural, genuinely Platt/Nedersaksisch ways of saying things.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 09/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ron has done quite a job on the article [[Katt]], in a huge effort to
> > > convert it from Patentplatt to real Platt.
> > >
> > > Hi Mark!
> > >
> > > Nice job. As far as I'm able to able to judge, the overall language quality of the article was clearly improved. But I think it's an exaggeration to say the article was written in a fake Platt before and is "real" now. Authenticity is often a matter of perspective. Most of the alterations made are not so much about real vs. phony but rather a matter of spelling, dialect differences or even a matter of taste. Some changes aren't really necessary e. g. replacing the very common "mooken" by a seldomly used "m?ken". One thing I really can't grasp is why Ron/Reinhard introduces the letter "?" (which is never used in Germany), e. g. when replacing the authentic Platt word "?kelnaam" by a weird-looking "?kelnaam" for no visible reason.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Boris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 08.07.05 01:18:55:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Ron has done quite a job on the article [[Katt]], in a huge effort to
> > > convert it from Patentplatt to real Platt.
> > >
> > > Diff: http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&diff=21797&oldid=18531
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > On 06/07/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Boris,
> > > >
> > > > I personally think that if in that sample the only extreme differences
> > > > are "mer" and the future tense, this should not be insurmountable.
> > > >
> > > > Brazilian and Iberian Portuguese similarly have some vast differences
> > > > in verb conjugations (although they use the same orthography...), yet
> > > > they have a single Wikipedia.
> > > >
> > > > I'm sure many Portuguese people are a little bit annoyed when they see
> > > > people using the second-person singular conjugations for both
> > > > second-person singular and second-person plural... but then, they're a
> > > > little bit used to it since Portuguese often visit Brazilian websites,
> > > > read Brazilian books, watch Brazilian movies... and vice-versa but to
> > > > a lesser degree.
> > > >
> > > > Nevertheless, the fact alone that you were able to identify it as the
> > > > future tense (as opposed to just completely not knowing) counts for
> > > > something.
> > > >
> > > > Surely, although it might be a bit annoying at first, such a
> > > > linguistic difference as use or non-use of the future tense is
> > > > surmountable.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > > On 05/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Servien!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for informing me about that. I must admit, I've never heard or read about ANS. So, like the name suggests that's supposed to work in but countries? A good idea for sure. However (and that's a big however), as far as I can tell noboby in Germany ever writes that way. Just have a look a websites from Germany written in nds. You won't ever find all those y's and v's there. Neither in Plattd??tsch literature you can find in book stores in Northern Germany. While that ANS spelling system might be a good thing in theory, I think you just couldn't re-educate thousands of people in order to have one single nds Wikipedia. But I guess I don't have to convince _you_ anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the sample phrase. Here's my try:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Wenn <or "As"> en Minsch nich faken noog ruut <"na buten" would also work> k?mmt ward he ook nich <equivalent for "h?yl" would be "heel" but is usually not used here> bruun <future tense "w?yrden" also omitted here> s?nnern blievt witt. <Note: I can`t really think of a word for "pale" now - you could possibly take "bleek" (without "witt" in that case) but I'm not 100% sure here>
> > > > >
> > > > > Even though I have tried to stick to your wording as closely as possible, I think the differences are quite tremendous here. They go far beyond spelling. What was most striking to me was the use of the future tense in your sample phrase. The Plattd??tsch I know just doesn't have that - just like in spoken High German where that tense is not used either. But also the word "mer" (that's like "maar" in Dutch, isn't it?) wouldn`t be understood by readers in Germany. Other differences are less severe, of course. E. g. "genog" instead of "noog" would surely be understood, especially since we have "genug" in German. But take "kump" (do you speak an "?" or an "u" there?) for "k?mmt" for example or even "ie/y" instead of "he". If the decision about a Dutch Low Saxon Wikipedia were in my hands and I had to make that decision solely based on this one example - I would most definately create it! Not because I want to separate Dutch and German wikipedians - it's the 21st century and thank God we're good neighbours - but only of the language facts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Boris
> > > > >
> > > > > Servien Ilaino <servien at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 05.07.05 15:33:43:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Boris,
> > > > >
> > > > > The orthography used in that text seems to me is de Algemeyne
> > > > > Neddersassische Schryvwys'... I also used to use it, but people don't
> > > > > seem to understand it quite as well in the Netherlands and Germany, I
> > > > > must honestly say I understand the ANS writing system way better then
> > > > > the one you used at the bottom (of course there are words which are
> > > > > completely unknown to me...)
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a sample of DLS in ANS writing system:
> > > > > As 'n mins ny vaak genog buyten kump sal y ok ny h?yl bruyn w?yrden
> > > > > mer sal y spyrwit blyven.
> > > > >
> > > > > And here in the traditional one:
> > > > > As 'n mins nie vaok genog buut'n kump zal ie ok nie heul bruun wurd'n
> > > > > mer zal ie spierwit bliev'n/blyv'n.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the one I use:
> > > > > As 'n mins nie vaok genog buten kump sal ie ok nie heul bruun wurden
> > > > > mer sal ie spierwit blyven. (it's a mixture of the traditional one and
> > > > > a little from ANS, I don't use the apostrophes because like in the
> > > > > word blyv'n is pronounced as "bliem" and this is confusing because
> > > > > bak'n [bake] is also pronounced differently like "bakng".)
> > > > >
> > > > > (Translation of the text:
> > > > > If a person doesn't go outside much then he won't have a tanned look,
> > > > > but will be pale white.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Servien
> > > > >
> > > > > 2005/7/5, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ahh wait, I see here the accusation is that it's in "Patentplatt", which is "based on Missingsch.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok "Patentplatt" or "Fernsehplatt" (TV Platt) as it is called sometimes - that really seems to happen. I think that word is less misleading. Of course, different people will have different views on what is unique and what is not. Languages like German or French have had established unified standards for centuries, so there is hardly ever any doubt what's linguistically correct or not at de: or fr:. Obviously, at nds: you don`t have that degree of unambiguousness. I would really appreciate any efforts to improve the linguistic quality of the Low Saxon Wikipedia. After all, it is still at an early stage. Unfortunetaly, I can't really help here for, being a native in High German, I'd probably only worsen the problem of "Patentplatt".
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > A sample of 'real' Low Saxon written in "AGS" orthography:
> > > > > > > Lyk so kanst dat in 'n paar dialekten vun de ?nner-Elv' (in Hamborg un kuntray) ook seggen.  "Wat" kan daar in s?kse vellen lyk as "dat" un > "dey" bruken.  I dou dat ook vaken, man tou meyrst wen ik snakken dou.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Where does that come from? The vocabulary is mostly alright. But the spelling looks awfully articifial to me. Never before have I seen anyone using "y" in written Platt. And why should you write "v" when you say "f". Just too make look "less German"? Also, the diphtong "ou" might somehow reflect the pronounciation but is certainly not usually used in Northern Germany. And why should one want to use "kk" instead of "ck"? Just because it's written that way in the Netherlands?? And why is there an apostrophe in " Elv' "? Just because the word is "Elbe" in High German. Complete nonsense, in my humble opinion. I don't want to comment comment on the "real Platt" word "kuntray" but the "I" at the beginning of the last sentence is either Bavarian or English but surely not Platt.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Coming from the "?nner-Elv'" myself, let me try it:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Liek so kannst dat in'n poor Dialekten vun de ?nnerelv (in Hamborg un ?mto) ook seggen. "Wat" kann dor in d?sse/s?kse F?llen liek as "dat" un "de" bruken. Ick/Ik do dat ook faken, man tomeest wenn ick/ik snack.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hmm...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Boris
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 05.07.05 08:34:13:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Boris,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm a bit perplexed as this accusation has been made by a number of
> > > > > > people on Lowlands-l, most of the accusers being native speakers of
> > > > > > Low German, and at least one (RF Hahn) also speaking Missingsch. Ahh
> > > > > > wait, I see here the accusation is that it's in "Patentplatt", which
> > > > > > is "based on Missingsch".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Accusations: "Unalike the Laich Saxon edeetion whase warkers dinna
> > > > > > actually ken the leid.
> > > > > > (It's oor Jonny's pet plaint, his windmill faes, an that richtly.)"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "It doesn't help that language competency is wanting in the current
> > > > > > WikiPlatt team.  Those folks are enthusiastic, and I laud that.  But
> > > > > > they don't know the language well enough.  Much or most of it is
> > > > > > "Patentplatt" (based on Missingsch), i.e. invented on the basis of
> > > > > > German.  I am not at all opposed to introducing technical neologisms,
> > > > > > but there needs to be first of all a firm grasp of the basic language,
> > > > > > the grammar and the authentic idiom."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Information on Patentplatt: "The number of Lowlands Saxon speakers ...
> > > > > > would be large if it included people who are somewhat conversant ...
> > > > > > and it would be even larger if it included those who ... can really
> > > > > > only manage lexically, idiomatically and grammatically deficient,
> > > > > > German-based, "made-up Platt" (Patentplatt)."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is very concerning, and is clearly a major factor in the
> > > > > > difficulty people from the Netherlands are having reading NDS.wiki. I
> > > > > > just dashed off an e-mail to Ron to remind him that he is always
> > > > > > welcome to "fix" the Patentplatt, because of course it's Wikipedia.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Obviously, this isn't the only factor, and I'm not sure if it's even
> > > > > > the greatest factor. But, I feel that we should explore that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A sample of 'real' Low Saxon written in "AGS" orthography:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Lyk so kanst dat in 'n paar dialekten vun de ?nner-Elv' (in Hamborg un
> > > > > > kuntray) ook seggen.  "Wat" kan daar in s?kse vellen lyk as "dat" un
> > > > > > "dey" bruken.  I dou dat ook vaken, man tou meyrst wen ik snakken dou.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hmm...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best
> > > > > > Mark
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 04/07/05, Boris Lohnzweiger <BorisLohnzweiger at web.de> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Mark!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I was quite perplexed to read that they write Missingsch in the Low Saxon Wikipedia. So I just went there and checked out ten random pages. Having grown up in a rural area near Hamburg, it`s easy for me tell apart Low Saxon from Missingsch. The whole issue seems to be very exaggerated. All ten articles I've read were without a doubt in Plattd??tsch. Of course single articles might not be - I haven`t checked the whole Wikipedia. However, one can note that depending on the subject of the article the share of words that very closely resemble standard German words or are even identical (in writing !) is sometimes quite high. But this is a usual phenomenon in Low Saxon. Generally speaking, the more scientific a text gets the closer it comes to Hochdeutsch. Surely, sometimes this can lead to the fact that certain passages of articles don`t look too much like Platt. This can been seen very clearly in this article: http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilia . It has two sections, both written by the same author, as far as I can tell. The first ("Nordd??tsche Slangen") is very "pure" Low Saxon. The second ("Systematik") looks very much like standard German, due to its topic. I think even without knowing both languages in detail you can easily tell the difference. But this is not to be confused with Missingsch. You just couldn`t say that differently or more "real", if you want.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don`t who actually brought up this Missingsch issue (native speaker? hobby linguist?). But as a matter of fact, nds-WP is written in Low Saxon. If individual pages are in other languages (which to some degree happens in many Wikipedias) the guys at nds can certainly cope with that. However,  I disbelieve that this part of the reason native speakers of Low Saxon in the Netherlands ask for a separate WP.
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________________
> > Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail k?nnen Sie eine SMS an alle
> > Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
> QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
> POSSIT MATERIARI
> ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Angels

body:
On 7/10/05, Jack Lynch <jack.i.lynch at gmail.com> wrote:
> I created a wikiproject
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject:Spiritual_Fauna
>
> anyone who would like to help is welcome.

This could be the start of something big. [[Ark of the Covenant]]
could do with cleanup along the same lines.

--
Pete, thinking that it might be guarded by demons


subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
On 7/10/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/07/05, Ruy Lopez <ruy.lopez at mail.com> wrote:
> >Lots.
>
> A wise man once said to me: if you can't write it on the back of a
> postcard, it's not worth saying.

I'll bet that wise man wasn't Thomas Jefferson.

--
Peter Hancock


from_name: Fastfission

subject: [WikiEN-l] New fair use tag proposal

body:
One way that I think would increase the value of our "fair use" tags,
and prevent them from being just slapped around haphazardly, is if
they contained their justifications a little more explicitly, and also
explained themselves a little more specifically.

Here's an example I've been playing with (obviously it could enjoy
some editing, but I think my intent should be clear), for a fair use
tag which could be used on photographic portraits of individuals (not
promotional material, necessarily) used to illustrate articles:
--
    This is a copyrighted photographic portrait of a notable
individual. It is believed that this qualifies under the fair use
provision of United States copyright law (see copyrights), because the
editor of Wikipedia who has placed this copyright tag believes it to
satisify the following criteria:
    1. It is used for purely educational purposes and significantly
enhances value of the encyclopedia article it is being used to
illustrate and is not meant to defraud or otherwise harm the existing
copyright holder.
    2. Alternative photographs under a free license have not been
located and seem unlikely to currently exist.
    3. Its total pixel dimensions is far below any suitable print
resolution. As such it is only provides a limited amount of
reproducibility and in limited applications.
    4. Its ultimate source and likely copyright holder is listed above
if known, for those seeking to license the photograph for their own
use. If it is not known, its immediate source is listed above, who may
be possibly contacted for copyright information as well.
    5. It is being used on the English edition of Wikipedia, which is
sponsored by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, for the purpose of
creating an encyclopedia and spreading general knowledge. If you are
re-using Wikipedia content for another website (see our copyright
policy), these fair use criteria may not apply.
Please note that the posting of copyrighted material that does not
have the express permission of the copyright holder may be in
violation of applicable law and of our policy. Those with a history of
violations may be temporarily suspended from editing pages.
----
I didn't note all of the links and wikis, but suffice to say important
terms (i.e. "notability") would be linked, and the links to the
Foundation and Wikipedia itself would be hard-linked (URLs).

The benefits I see in a (long) tag like this is:
1. Its very use defines what characteristics the picture must have. It
would thus be very easy to spot whether or not it was incorrectly
placed or incorrectly used, and hopefully any user applying it would
understand what it meant. This is meant both to help police fair use
images, and also to help users who don't have a great understanding of
the requirements of the fair use clause.
2. It makes fair use look like serious business. Which it should be.
3. It clearly states that the fair use criteria may only apply to the
English Wikipedia, and that other re-users of content will have to
re-think whether the criteria applies to their our pages.
4. I think that if a copyright holder saw this, they'd at least
understand what they'd be going up against. Current fair use tags
provide no justifications for the decision (we're told it may have
been discussed, but we know that's not usually true) -- this one at
least has it built into it.

So... thoughts? Obviously the wording should be fixed up a bit, but
that can be done in the standard fashion. I'm more interested in
whether or not the concept is good (and whether some of the specifics
that I think are important are worthwhile -- i.e. the low print
resolution, which I think makes it clear that we are not trying to
encourage copyright violation). If so, this is something which could
easily be done, in one way or another, for all of our fair use tags.

FF


subject: [WikiEN-l] The ongoing trolling

body:
My post wasn't exclusively directed to you, and I'm not interested in
responding to that.

El_C

>No I didn't. I was making a point for you, but I don't think you've
worked it out yet. I'm >not a troll, I'm not a vandal. I speak the
truth as I see it. I accept that I can make errors >and I accept
correction when it is valid. If I have a major flaw it is that I am
far too quick >to point out the flaws in others, and to take pleasure
in doing so, the amount of my >pleasure in direct proportion to their
level of arrogance.

>The Prime Minister of Australia sees the Governor-General as
Australia's head of state. >That's not my opinion, it's the opinion of
the head of government, and it's not up to you >or any other editor to
deny it. Furthermore, it's not just the Prime Minister of this
>country, it is senior members of both parties. Simon Crean, during
his time as Leader >of the Opposition also called the Governor-General
the head of state. You have the >leaders of both of the major parties
in Federal Parliament saying the same thing.

>That doesn't make the Governor-General the undisputed head of state,
but one point >you don't seem to have grasped is that there IS a
dispute. Not between you and me and >any other editor; our opinions
don't matter a damn. There is a diiference of opinion at >the highest
levels of national leadership.

>And now, if you look at [[Government of Australia]] we see that
someone else has stuck >his head up and pointed out what I've said for
the past six months, and they have >provided verifiable sources, as I
did. And surprise, surprise, we see the same mindless >reverts and the
same threats coming from the same editors.

>I say that you should assume good faith, Mister Admin. That's my point.


subject: [WikiEN-l] A Perhaps OT Post -- My Wikipedia Talk

body:
On 7/8/05, Geoff Burling <llywrch at agora.rdrop.com> wrote:
> * One person asked if the goals of Commons & Wikisource don't
> overlap the goals of the Gutenberg Project. I'm not sure I
> gave the right answer to his question.

Does Gutenberg do media other than whole books? That should answer
that question pretty concisely. In any event, Gutenberg is clearly
arranged around a very different model than us, which I think makes it
pretty different (but still wonderful) thing. Gutenberg also doesn't
allow self-publishing, to my knowledge, which would seem a good
opposite to Commons, which encourages it.

FF


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Has someone good contacts to Sourceforge staff
	(keepers,
	webmasters) ? I need a sniplet from the SF account ***script***
	(timezone OFFSETS)

body:
Thomas Gries wrote:
> Timezone CODES are present on [2]
> I just found that _Sourceforge_ has a wonderful list of timezode codes
> (on your account management  page [2], if you have an SF account ),
> which could be use immediately for MediaWiki
>
> Why am I calling here, what is missing ?
>
> I would need all the  corresponding Timezone OFFSETS as used by
> sourceforge, which I only can get via a personal contact.
> (I have list of timezone offsets at hand, but want to save time)

ls /usr/share/zoneinfo

They may be POSIX-ish standardized or not, I'm not sure offhand.

The thing to remember is that there aren't fixed offsets for all these
thanks to daylight saving time (which may vary as to whether it's
applied, which hemisphere-style it's applied to, when it enters and
leaves, etc). It's probably best to leave the work to the operating
system's built-in timezone database if possible. Alternatively, check
for whatever database these files get built from on a typical free Unix.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050710/c97a9ad0/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Norath Norath

subject: [WikiEN-l] Chilling effect

body:
I have reformulated this email, since it was censorred
previously.

When asked why he blocked me, David Gerard responded
by saying that he saw no community support for not
blocking me. I suggest that this could be because of a
chilling effect of blocking people who criticise
admins.

I do not know how to make this point in a way which is
more acceptable to the list. I hypothesis that if
people are blocked for trying to hold admins
accountable, the number of people trying to hold
admins accountable will fall.

Norrath

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: more active censorship

body:
--- Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:

> OK, this might apply to the majority cases, but it
> is still a wrong
> thing to do precisely because of the minority cases
> such as the
> following example:
>
> Imagine you're such an editor who got caught up in
> an edit war. You then
> make a decision to stop, close your browser and cool
> off at pretty much
> the same time that an admin decides to block you for
> some policy
> (personal attacks, say).
>
> The next day -- 20 hours later -- you have cooled
> off and you vow to
> approach the issue with a clearer mind now. You
> discover you're banned
> for the next 24 hours. Your cooling off is
> instantaneously undone.
>
> Timwi
>

I agree completely - this is an example close to my
heart right now - reasonable people, when treated
unreasonably and denied any right of appeal, start to
act in ways which seem unreasonable to others, but are
reasonable to them.

Norrath

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com