Nathan, perhaps there is a communication error here. GerardM and I are arguing for the same thing, which is a transliteration engine, but ONLY so long as it allows people to read AND contribute, rather than just being read-only as proposed by Marcus. My other contention is that if this is not possible due to community opposition at ro.wp, then mo.wp should be kept; GerardM seems to disagree there and says that such a solution should be done whether ro.wp community approves or not. I'm still not sure how any of that is unreasonable.
-m. 2010/10/5 Nathan <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Muhammad Yahia <[email protected]> wrote: > >> So a Romanian language would not be eligible unless it allowed support >> for Cyrillic, even if there is no community that is interested in writing in >> it? >> >> My point is simply that there seems to be a lot of discussion, but I am yet >> to see participation from people who actually want to read and write in >> Cyrillic. I've seen the requests for closure repeated over the years after >> it was frozen, but I have not seen anyone speaking for the community that >> supposedly finds mo.wp useful who is actually part of that community. >> > > As far as I've seen, the only person arguing for a usable mo-cyrl wiki > is Mark Williamson. I sort of doubt that he is actually from > Transnistria or a Romanian speaker, but his philosophical point seems > to be that having a wiki in your native language and script is a basic > human right. I'm not sure when that became the dominant criteria for > opening or maintaining a wiki in a particular language. > > Nathan > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
