2010/10/4 Samuel Klein <[email protected]>: > Is there any opposition to naming such a temporary project ro-cyrl? > In your proposal, the converter would eventually be available (as a > user pref) on ro.wp?
I agree that it should be called ro-cyrl as mo is no longer considered a valid ISO code, but thinking of that raises an additional problem: Romanian, like Catalan, is in the relatively uncommon situation of having two groups of speakers who call it two different things, in spite of being able to understand each other. Calling Moldovan Latin text "Romanian" is common and understood, but in Transnistria, "Romanian" generally means "Latin-script" and "Moldovan" means "Cyrillic text", though I suppose this could be solved by simply having a different landing page for Cyrillic users to avoid a confusing situation. I do think the converter should be available as a user pref on ro.wp, but not hidden away somewhere, it should be a tab like on sr.wp or kk.wp. However, at the present state of national political sentiment, this seems unlikely to be accepted by ro.wikipedians, many of whom were offended by the mere idea of the language being written in Cyrillic. Perhaps a better idea, if this is technically feasible, would be to have a separate subdomain that was linked to the same content, so that http://ro-cyrl.wikipedia.org/ or http://mo-cyrl.wikipedia.org/ (or even http://ro.wikipedia.org/cyrl/ or http://mo.wikipedia.org/cyrl/ ) would automatically access the transliterated versions of articles. Just some ideas. Also, since mo: is considered to be a deprecated code for ro, ideally mo: and ro: should both work for ro: content the way nb: and no: both work for no: content. -m. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
