For some weird reason, I am unable to approve this mail in the mailing list admin interface. I am therefore forwarding it.
---------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht ---------- From: MarcoAurelio <[email protected]> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <[email protected]> Cc: Bcc: Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 20:17:29 +0000 Subject: Re: [Langcom] Montenegrin Wikipedia (URGENT) As a simple observer, what is the point on creating a wiki for a language which is identical to Serbian but on two words / letters? I don't think we should involve politics here. Regards, M. El El jue, 28 dic 2017 a las 17:58, Michael Everson <[email protected]> escribió: > It was political. > > > On 28 Dec 2017, at 03:00, Steven White <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > From a purely linguistic perspective, it's hard to argue with any of > this. And I don't have a skin in the game here; objectively, it doesn't > matter to me if Montenegrin becomes eligible or not. Still, I would say the > following: > > > > Concerning MF-Warburg's comment: I fully understand that the others are > grandfathered and wouldn't be created now. But the fact that they exist now > means that the question about Montenegrin cannot be considered in a vacuum, > either. > > > > Concerning Jan's comment: I hear you. But to extend your analogy, the > Irish are looking for an Irish English wiki because every time an Irishman > tries to bring a different POV to articles about Ireland on the British > wiki, s/he is being shot down. (Pretend it's 1975, or 1922, and the example > is more trenchant.) Also, this whole issue of language secessionism doesn't > really exist in English, so to make that comparison is only partially valid. > > > > I do think we need to hear from Milos on this subject. > > > > Let me add: On the Meta discussion page, I'm about to allow the > discussion to reopen, with a focus on really two questions only: > > > > • The principal question is whether or not Montenegrins actually > have "free, unbiased access to the sum of all human knowledge" on the > current projects. What they keep suggesting is that they don't: Serbian > POV dominates, and Montenegrin POV is given short shrift. I am going to ask > the Montenegrin advocates to prove that with concrete examples. But if they > do so, then either (a) NPOV is going to have to be enforced from the > outside (if that's even possible, but thereby violating normal practices of > project autonomy) or (b) we're going to have to allow the Montenegrins to > have their own project. > > • The second question: It's really quite remarkable in a way that > the Montenegrins got the Library of Congress to make the first change to > ISO 639-2 in five years. I'll grant that was probably just a political > victory. But I'm going to invite the Montenegrin community to share any new > evidence that they may have that may have changed LoC's mind, and could > change ours. Maybe there isn't any new evidence. But if there is, we should > be open to it. > > > > Steven > > > > Sent from Outlook > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Langcom mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > -- M. A.
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
