Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

Platonides wrote: > Mohamed Magdy wrote: >> * I think it would be doable to make a tab that Egyptianizes (or any other >> dialect) the Arabic article, that is, if we have some sort of conversion >> memory, that is if the dialect is stable (or standard), the dialect differs >> from a place to anothe

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

The differences are certainly more than spelling, but there exists a continuum for a variety like Egyptian Arabic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-creole_speech_continuum I don't know if it would be accurate to classify Egyptian Arabic as a creole, but such a continuum certainly exists AFAIK be

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

Mark Williamson wrote: > Most of the grammatical features you cited are shared with Standard > Arabic... that's not a list of differences, it's a general description > of Egyptian Arabic with a couple of differences noted. Written in > Arabic script, short vowels aren't distinguished most of the ti

Re: [Foundation-l] Chinese wikinews in China Blocked

We're talking about the Chinese Wikinews... Mark 2009/1/11 Charlotte Webb : > On 1/10/09, Chen Minqi wrote: >> >> >> Here are some results from the above web page. >> >> Tested From:Shanghai, China >> Resolved As:208.80.152.2 >

Re: [Foundation-l] Chinese wikinews in China Blocked

what i meant to say is. at least the english site is still accessible, which is odd (i mis-read the subject line) because the latter site has quite a bit more anti-PRC content. weird... ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsub

Re: [Foundation-l] Chinese wikinews in China Blocked

On 1/10/09, Chen Minqi wrote: > > > Here are some results from the above web page. > > Tested From:Shanghai, China > Resolved As:208.80.152.2 > Status:Empty reply from server > Response Time:0.414 sec > > Tested From:

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

Most of the grammatical features you cited are shared with Standard Arabic... that's not a list of differences, it's a general description of Egyptian Arabic with a couple of differences noted. Written in Arabic script, short vowels aren't distinguished most of the time, so that's irrelevant anyhow

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 5:12 AM, Tim Starling wrote: > Arabic may have spread from Morocco to Malaysia, but Cairo is quite close > to the Arabian peninsula, so I wonder if you're not overgeneralising. From: http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?menu=004&LangID=51 "Egyptian Arabic is distinguished

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

Marcus Buck 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. With the difference, that Latin fell o

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Tomasz Ganicz wrote: > I did't want to come back to Belarus Wikipedia case, but at that time > I have found quite easily 2 good experts. One from Univ. of Warsaw, > vice-head o Belaruss literature department and one from Univ of Oxford > (an emeritus professor, spe

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Marcus Buck 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. With the

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

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 plac

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

(oops, should be "divergent") 2009/1/11 Mark Williamson : > 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 : >> Marcus Buck wrote: >>> In the Arabic world there's a prevalent POV, that

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

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 : > 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

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Jesse Plamondon-Willard wrote: > ...and there is an upcoming proposal for a quorum to ensure that > no other decision can be made without community consensus. (That should be "subcommittee consensus", of course.) -- Yours cordially, Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Path

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

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 Romance languages. So Egyptia

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 7:24 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 2009/1/12 Anthony : > > My purpose is to learn. What's yours? > > To actually work for the benefit of the projects. To benefit them in what way? By ignoring all the problems and pretending everything is always perfect? __

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

2009/1/12 Anthony : > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:15 PM, David Gerard wrote: >> 2009/1/11 Anthony : >> > 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 goo

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:15 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 2009/1/11 Anthony : > > > 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 thing. Absolute and co

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

Luxembourgish has an ISO code, doesn't it? Why wouldn't it be allowed? Mark 2009/1/11 Ziko van Dijk : > The problem seems to be not the lack of a linguist's knowledge. We > Wikimedians are not sure or unanimous about what to expect from a Wikipedia > language edition, and what languages (language

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Anthony wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Erik Moeller wrote: > >> There is a legitimate >> argument that, under a literal reading of the GFDL, any re-user _also_ >> has to include a full copy of the change history. > > > The problem with that argument is

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

2009/1/11 Milos Rancic : > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Tomasz Ganicz 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

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Erik Moeller wrote: > 2009/1/11 Anthony : > > 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 p

Re: [Foundation-l] Chinese wikinews in China Blocked

2009/1/9 shi zhao : > 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 ___

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

The problem seems to be not the lack of a linguist's knowledge. We Wikimedians are not sure or unanimous about what to expect from a Wikipedia language edition, and what languages (language communities) we trust to conform to our expectations. My thoughts about the questions discussed here: - The

Re: [Foundation-l] Language codes to rename

I think most have more important things to worry about. Mark 2009/1/11 geni : > 2009/1/11 Amir E. Aharoni : >> 2009/1/11 Jon Harald Søby : > 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 st

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

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 wrote: > Hoi, > The Wikimania presentations of Alexandria are no longer online.. I am > trying > to find out if a backup e

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Tomasz Ganicz 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 h

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

2009/1/11 geni : > 2009/1/11 Thomas Dalton : >> 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 GF

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

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 > Perhaps, do you have a link? :) > > > O

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

Perhaps, do you have a link? :) On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Nikola Smolenski 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." MediaWiki > > effe

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

2009/1/11 Thomas Dalton : > 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. They can specify b

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

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

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

2009/1/11 geni : > 2009/1/11 Erik Moeller : >> 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. Neit

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

2009/1/11 Erik Moeller : > 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 those terms appear

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

2009/1/11 Anthony : > 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; * author names for t

Re: [Foundation-l] Language codes to rename

2009/1/11 Amir E. Aharoni : > 2009/1/11 Jon Harald Søby : >>> > 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

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

2009/1/11 Ray Saintonge : > 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 unnoticed. > > Sam, Pho

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Tomasz Ganicz 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 least you shoul

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

2009/1/11 Brian : > 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 could find vocal opposi

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

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 > H

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

2009/1/11 Anthony : > 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 thing. Absolute and complete > transparency isn't. But then, I think we've had this con

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

Simetrical, Thanks for your research. I have read the links you sent in full. Here is the motivation for developing developing parser functions: "*In response to a campaign by users of the English Wikipedia to harrass > developers by introducing increasingly ugly and inefficient meta-templates >

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

Hoi, I mentioned it before, the Neapolitan wikipedia decided to do away with templates because it prevents people from contributing to their project. It works for them not to use templates. Please do not understand this as a request to do away with templates. Templates are an important impediment

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

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 th

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Mike Godwin 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 semi-transpare

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Brian wrote: > ParserFunctions are my specific example of how the current development > process is very, very broken, and out of touch with the community. However, the community as a whole has not objected to ParserFunctions. They were enabled with the full cons

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

> 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 w

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

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

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

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 c

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

Brian wrote: > I believe it is possible to expand the parser functions in place in a > non-destructive way. There are always edge cases of course. > But if it is not possible, it is a clear violation of a core wiki principle > - that all changes be easily revertible. > ParserFunctions was checked

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

2009/1/11 Brian : > 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 geeks, not the mere humans

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Brian 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? Things like this need answer

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

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 some

Re: [Foundation-l] Language codes to rename

2009/1/11 Jon Harald Søby : >> > 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. Ce

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

2009/1/11 Gerard Meijssen : > 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 only a remit to help new

Re: [Foundation-l] Language codes to rename

2009/1/11 Amir E. Aharoni > 2009/1/10 Cetateanu Moldovanu : > > 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 stated in > > november last year,

Re: [Foundation-l] Language codes to rename

2009/1/10 Cetateanu Moldovanu : > 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 stated in > november last year, an important issue for us. For whom? --

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

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 this help in cr

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

Gerard Meijssen wrote: > 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 sufficient

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

On Sunday 11 January 2009 01:18:55 Milos Rancic wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:08 AM, Jimmy Wales wrote: > > I was sitting next to an Egyptian VIP in the front row when the > > announcement was made, and he laughed and indicated that he thought this > > was stupid. > > > > It is not up to me

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

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

Re: [Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

2009/1/11 Milos Rancic : > 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 rai

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

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 On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:57 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:59 PM, g