I am in favor of the proposal. Search needs to work and agree rigidity for the 
sake of following established rules isn't as valuable as providing a useful 
knowledge source and a community that can work together to maintain it.

Regards,

Karen Broome 



> On May 5, 2015, at 8:30 AM, Oliver Stegen <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Amir, can you give us an update on what happened since that az-wp admin's 
> ugly action?
> 
> Gerard had proposed that we only act after interacting with the az 
> communities on their preferences. However, I'm afraid that this will cause 
> only further division (quite apart from the fact that azj speakers and azb 
> speakers do not seem to be able to communicate with each other in writing). 
> So, as has been suggested in an earlier message for LangCom to take action 
> asap in our role as "appointed experts", I vote to approve the outstanding 
> request for azb-wp.
> 
> Have I counted correctly that we're now 5 in favour and 1 against?
> How much longer must we wait for other LangCom members to cast their vote?
> Who is able to implement our decision? Or at least communicate our decision 
> to those who will implement it?
> 
> Oliver
> 
>> On 04-May-15 10:20 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
>> I'm with Antony: what that admin did is ugly and wrong, but it's only a 
>> symptom, and according to what I know about this language, the right 
>> solution to the problem is to split the site, similarly to what is done with 
>> Punjabi and Hindi/Urdu.
>> 
>> The spoken language may be the same, but the written languages are not, in 
>> practice, mutually intelligible, because the Arabic script is not studied by 
>> people in the Republic of Azerbaijan, and vice-versa, so the languages are 
>> not unique enough to exist within the same site. As I wrote earlier, I'm 
>> surprised that they held together for so long. The codes should be az and 
>> azb.
>> 
>> There is an outstanding request for azb Wikipedia, and there is an active 
>> localization community, and we should simply approve it.
>> 
>> בתאריך 4 במאי 2015 21:31,‏ "Antony Green" <[email protected]> כתב:
>>> If the Azeri Wikipedia community wants separate Wikipedias for Latin and 
>>> Arab script, I'm in favor of doing that, partially because of the 
>>> impossibility of automatic conversion and partially because of the 
>>> linguistic differences between Northern and Southern Azeri, which if I've 
>>> understood the situation correctly are greater in the written language than 
>>> the spoken language. (In this respect the difference between the languages 
>>> is reminiscent of the difference between Hindi and Urdu: the spoken 
>>> languages are largely mutually intelligible, but the written languages are 
>>> not, for one thing because the scripts are different and for another 
>>> because learnèd words are borrowed from different sources.)
>>> 
>>> If that is the route we go, then I'm in favor of keeping the status quo at 
>>> az-wp, namely that it is written in Northern Azeri (the standard language 
>>> of the Republic of Azerbaijan) in the Latin script; it need not be moved to 
>>> azj.
>>> 
>>> I would prefer that the Arabic-script Southern Azeri Wikipedia use the code 
>>> azb and not az-Arab.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Antony
>>> 
>>>> On 2015-05-04 15:52, Mjbmr wrote:
>>>> South Azerbaijani has a iso 639-3 code and that's azb and not az-arab, 
>>>> there are resources that make this language separate from North 
>>>> Azerbaijani and that's not just script.
>>>> 
>>>>> On 5/4/2015 5:53 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
>>>>> On 4 May 2015, at 09:45, Oliver Stegen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sorry, Gerard, but I'm voting with MF, mjbmr and Michael to let Azeri in 
>>>>>> Latin script keep az.wikipedia. I also vote for opening a new wikipedia 
>>>>>> for Azeri in Arabic script, preferably az-arab.wikipedia.
>>>>> I recommend that we go to the community and tell them that we want to 
>>>>> create just that, az-arab.wikipedia, as the solution that we (the 
>>>>> appointed experts) feel is best for their concerns.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I do not believe you will find them opposing it. If however we give them 
>>>>> a basket of options (some of which this committee does not support) then 
>>>>> we are only prolonging problems.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Langcom mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

Reply via email to