Hoi,
The current policy is really objective; a request for a project will be
honoured when it complies with a set of prerequisites.
- is the language recognised as a language in the ISO-639-3
- is the language sufficiently unique
- is there a sufficiently large corpus in the incubator
2009/1/11 Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@gmail.com
2009/1/10 Cetateanu Moldovanu cetatean...@gmail.com:
Hello, I want to wish you all a Happy New Year !
Also, I'd like to know what's the progress of renaming the subdomain mo
to
mo-cyrl mo.wikipedia.org - mo-cyrl.wikipedia.org, as was
2009/1/11 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
When you talk about reasonable decisions, what is it that makes something
reasonable? The fact that people like Mohamed consider Egyptian Arabic as
ignorant makes clear their position, but is that reasonable ? The language
committee has
2009/1/11 Jon Harald Søby jhs...@gmail.com:
Also, I'd like to know what's the progress of renaming the subdomain mo
to
mo-cyrl mo.wikipedia.org - mo-cyrl.wikipedia.org, as was stated in
november last year, an important issue for us.
For whom?
Did they have an election and chose Mr.
James Rigg writes:
As a member of the Wikimedia staff, using sarcasm - in both the post
title and contents - against another contributor to the list isn't
very professional.
Please. I try to use my sarcasm professionally!
People understand that freedom of speech does not mean that someone
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
Why are so few community-developed mediawiki extensions used by the
Foundation?
Are people asking for them? Are there bugs open asking for review?
Are there problems with the current code? Does it scale to WMF level?
2009/1/11 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu:
Keep in mind regarding my Semantic drum beating that I am not a developer of
Semantic Mediawiki or Semantic Forms. I am just a user, and as Erik put it,
an advocate.
Semantic MediaWiki's syntax is disastrously horrible and intended for
ontology
I believe this example is an even clearer demonstration of the usability
disaster that is parser functions. And it is just the kind of thing that can
be essentially snuck into MediaWiki without the complete
community consensus. Perhaps that's not the case - I would be interested in
reading a more
Just an off topic, you do realize that me and the original poster of this
thread are different people, right? I do ask because you kind of mixed our
arguments in the last part of your post. The original poster probably has a
more 'vivid' choice of words than I usually do :) .
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009
So, there are two conclusions: (1) I may imagine the process which had
happened in relation to EA approval: no one made any serious objection
and it passed. (2) There are two LangCom members introduced better in
the linguistic issues, so the expertise level is raised and I think
that it will
Hoi,
This is not that strange. The time span for discussion is brief. Discussion
is relevant until the moment when it is decided that a language is eligible.
When a language is eligible, the people who work on a proposal have to
fulfill the rest of the requirements but do so in the understanding
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Mike Godwin mgod...@wikimedia.org wrote:
People understand that freedom of speech does not mean that someone
has the right to falsely shout 'fire' in a crowded cinema, but people
also understand that calling an organisation transparent, when it is
in fact
Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 3:13 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:
A prize for best cross-media reuse of content - I love it. I will
contribute to the prize pool one large gnu, and one piece of similarly
huggable CC swag, signed by free-content luminaries To Be Named.
--SJ
How does
2009/1/11 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu:
I see on Village Pump (technical) and wikitech-l, in addition to an
associated talk page, that there was a vocal group of people who objected to
parser functions and that they were ignored and the extension was enabled
anyway.
This is wikipedia. We
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I think there should be not only computer-linguists experts like
Evertype in LangCom, but you desperately need people who have good
knowledge about culture, sociology and history of the main language
groups, or at
2009/1/11 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net:
With that comment you would certainly win a bobblehead of Richard
Stallman if such a thing were available. This could be awarded for a
single-minded devotion to whatever topic is at hand to an extent where
all shmoos and tribbles march past
2009/1/11 Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@gmail.com:
2009/1/11 Jon Harald Søby jhs...@gmail.com:
Also, I'd like to know what's the progress of renaming the subdomain mo
to
mo-cyrl mo.wikipedia.org - mo-cyrl.wikipedia.org, as was stated in
november last year, an important issue for us.
For
2009/1/11 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
Granted, including full change histories is overkill
Thanks for acknowledging this.
The GFDL (including prior versions) deals with author names for three
different purposes:
* author credit on the title page;
* author copyright in the copyright notices;
*
2009/1/11 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
What we are left with, then, is to come up with attribution guidelines
in the context of CC-BY-SA which are consistent with reasonable
expectations and established practices for author credit per the GFDL.
False. Read the CC-BY-SA again. Neither of
2009/1/11 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/1/11 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
What we are left with, then, is to come up with attribution guidelines
in the context of CC-BY-SA which are consistent with reasonable
expectations and established practices for author credit per the GFDL.
False.
On Sunday 11 January 2009 20:08:22 Brian wrote:
pointed out, I would bet there's at least one template that uses a
ParserFunction on 75% or more of all the articles on enwiki. MediaWiki
effectively has a programming language in it because of a few hours of
developer work and a few minutes of
Perhaps, do you have a link? :)
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.yu wrote:
On Sunday 11 January 2009 20:08:22 Brian wrote:
pointed out, I would bet there's at least one template that uses a
ParserFunction on 75% or more of all the articles on enwiki.
2009/1/11 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
I don't understand, which terms don't appear and how is that relevant?
CC-BY-SA allows authors to specify how they wish to be attributed, so
we can (at least try to) choose a way that ought to be acceptable to
people that have accepted the GFDL.
Hoi,
The Wikimania presentations of Alexandria are no longer online.. I am trying
to find out if a backup exists..
Thanks,
GerardM
PS If you have a copy of the Merrick Schaeffer presentation, I would be
happy to learn that you do..
2009/1/11 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu
Perhaps, do
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I think there should be not only computer-linguists experts like
Evertype in LangCom, but you desperately need people who have good
knowledge
Thanks Gerard, could you also inquire about the year before? I remember them
being in some obscure ftp directory, unlabeled.
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
The Wikimania presentations of Alexandria are no longer online.. I am
trying
to
I think most have more important things to worry about.
Mark
2009/1/11 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/1/11 Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@gmail.com:
2009/1/11 Jon Harald Søby jhs...@gmail.com:
Also, I'd like to know what's the progress of renaming the subdomain mo
to
mo-cyrl mo.wikipedia.org
2009/1/9 shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com:
Today Chinese wikinews in China Blocked. GFW keyword is zh.wikinews.org.
other wikinews can acess.
Do we have a page somewhere listing exactly which sites of ours are
blocked in China?
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
2009/1/11 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I think there should be not only computer-linguists experts like
Evertype in LangCom, but you
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:15 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/11 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
It's also misleading if one considers that the term transparency and
the
term freedom of speech are not comparable in this way. Absolute and
complete freedom of speech is a good
(oops, should be divergent)
2009/1/11 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com:
Some Arabic varieties are more different than others. I would support
a Wikipedia in Derja, for example (Maghrebi Arabic).
Mark
2009/1/11 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org:
Marcus Buck wrote:
In the Arabic world
Tim Starling hett schreven:
Marcus Buck wrote:
In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that Arabs form one nation
united by the use of the Arabic language. But in reality Standard Arabic
is something like Latin. With the difference, that Latin fell out of use
to make place for the
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Marcus Buck m...@marcusbuck.org wrote:
Tim Starling hett schreven:
Marcus Buck wrote:
In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that Arabs form one nation
united by the use of the Arabic language. But in reality Standard Arabic
is something like Latin.
33 matches
Mail list logo
