On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 00:49, Zugravu Gheorghe
wrote:
> I think Milos proposal was about to discuss the issue of the "moldovan"
> wikipedia inside the interested people, the ones who sustain the idea of
> a such, and the opponents (maybe the word is not the most appropriate
> one - but i can reme
Mark,
You have been designated by Milos as the representative for the
wonderful, if elusive, Cyrillic-writing Romanian-speakin people of the
Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic. You seem to have taken your
responsibilities seriously, so you wouldn't mind if I ask: where is your
people? No Wikipedia
Happy to respond to questions raised in a
constructive setting at a later time, e.g. IRC Office Hours.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Please explain why it is constructive to respond to questions when asked on IRC
and not constructive to respond to questions on a mailing
Hi folks,
Sorry to have been absent from this discussion thus far: I didn't
realize Sam was going to post the targets when he did, and so I am
playing a little catch-up here.
Below are some questions and answers re the targets that might be
helpful for the discussion. (Erik wrote most of this, an
Gutza, your #2 statement does not follow, Cyrillic has been and is
currently used, including in schools, for the Eastern
Romance/Daco-Romanian/Romanian/Moldovan/whatever variety spoken in all
or some parts of Moldova (and/or, depending on your chosen political
reality, the Pridnestrovian Moldavian
But then we have the following contradicting statements (and both are
yours):
1. a Wikipedia is granted to a language not a country
2. the Moldovan language is in fact the Romanian language (the fact
that it's written in Cyrillic is as relevant as proposing a
project for English
Hoi,
The solution of a dissolution of the mo.wikipedia is in the recognition that
it is Romanian language written in Cyrillic. This is the central argument
and, consequently the Romanian language is part of an acceptable solution.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 13 October 2010 03:34, Gutza wrote:
> O
On 13-Oct-10 04:29, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Remember, a Wikipedia is granted to a language not a
> country.
True. But which language is this about, specifically?
Gutza
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https:
Hoi,
It has been suggested that a solution should be able to pass muster at the
language committee. I am seriously in favour of an end to this extravaganza.
However, I have not seen a proposal that would pass muster of the members of
the language committee.
Let me be specific; a solution needs to
Mark,
I hope I didn't touch the actual mo.wp issue in any way -- I was
obviously referring to the decision process. On which your opinion seems
to be "don't involve the community, keep it transparent, protect the
absent". Milos came up with a proposal. I came up with a proposal. What
is your prop
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> Happy to respond to questions raised in a
> constructive setting at a later time, e.g. IRC Office Hours.
If someone does, and gets any answers (ha), let us know.
___
foundation-l mailing list
found
On the matter of the disposition of mo.wp - I have stated it several
times clearly in the other thread, that there should be some sort of
accommodation available for users of the Cyrillic alphabet that
enables both reading from and contributing to a Wikipedia, be it ro.wp
or a separate Wikipedia.
Mark,
There seems to be some communication problem here. Do you actually have
an opinion on this matter or not? If you do have an opinion, what is it?
Thank you,
Gutza
On 13-Oct-10 03:36, M. Williamson wrote:
> 2010/10/12 Gutza :
>> Mark,
>>
>> You are a veteran in Wikipedia matters -- you hav
2010/10/12 Gutza :
> Mark,
>
> You are a veteran in Wikipedia matters -- you have been involved in this
> project for several years under nickname "Node ue". You have fought in
> the Moldovan language article on en.wp for years, and you have
> single-handedly created and defended the entire mo.wik
Mark,
You are a veteran in Wikipedia matters -- you have been involved in this
project for several years under nickname "Node ue". You have fought in
the Moldovan language article on en.wp for years, and you have
single-handedly created and defended the entire mo.wiki project, from
interface to c
2010/10/11 geni :
> Paying attention to him isn't helping either. We are not short of
> people to ask probing questions/
+1; please don't feed. Happy to respond to questions raised in a
constructive setting at a later time, e.g. IRC Office Hours.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundati
I think Milos proposal was about to discuss the issue of the "moldovan"
wikipedia inside the interested people, the ones who sustain the idea of
a such, and the opponents (maybe the word is not the most appropriate
one - but i can remember any other more neutral word), together with the
Langcom. In
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Muhammad Yahia wrote:
> Is there a way to know if my mail got posted or not?
You usually get an automatic response from the mailman software if
your message was rejected, automatically discarded, or moderated. If
you didn't get one, it probably went through (or i
>
> I think it's a default privacy preference for private lists. One that
> should be abolished, IMHO.
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Standardization#Privacy_options
>
>
If it's a private mailing list, would it accept posting from an outsider? Is
there a way to know if my mail got
- Original Message -
From: "David Gerard"
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Expertise and Wikipedia redux
> On 12 October 2010 20:54, Peter Damian
> wrote:
>
>> Otherwise the article irritated me in that once a
Gutza, the problem with such a solution is inequality of numbers.
Every time this has been discussed previously, such forums have been
dominated by Romanians from Romania with very little input from
Moldovans and 0 input from Transnistrians. This is unfair and steps
should be taken to remedy any sy
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 13:56, David Gerard wrote:
> On 12 October 2010 20:54, Peter Damian wrote:
>
>> Otherwise the article irritated me in that once again it cited the badly
>> flawed 'Nature' study.
>
>
> And it didn't irritate you that this is a vice-chancellor saying these
> things, with an
On 12 October 2010 20:54, Peter Damian wrote:
> Otherwise the article irritated me in that once again it cited the badly
> flawed 'Nature' study.
And it didn't irritate you that this is a vice-chancellor saying these
things, with an aim to making you pretty much redundant?
(Vice-chancellors are
> Crowd-sourced reputations! We list all the people who want to be
> experts, and let Wikimedians vote them up or down! Kind of like
> academic "Hot or Not."
Something like Ebay would actually make sense. Yes, seriously.
Otherwise the article irritated me in that once again it cited the badly
f
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 3:35 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> This reads like a radical anti-egalitarian manifesto by some young
> Internet-based firebrand. Wikipedia is way cool! Universities are dead
> institutions walking! We'll all learn off the web! Social networks
> will replace campuses! You know
This reads like a radical anti-egalitarian manifesto by some young
Internet-based firebrand. Wikipedia is way cool! Universities are dead
institutions walking! We'll all learn off the web! Social networks
will replace campuses! You know the sort of thing:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-edu
MZMcBride, 12/10/2010 20:12:
> The wikimediafoundation.org and meta.wikimedia.org pages are spectacularly
> unhelpful and I have no idea why the mailing list index would omit this
> entry. I'll try to correct the former issues. I don't know who can correct
> the latter.
I think it's a default priv
It is good to see discussion of the targets. There is also a final
strategic plan document, which is almost finished and which the Board
reviewed at our meeting over the weekend. There were small wording
changes in the final plan.
Mike Peel wrote:
> I think one of the major benefits of the stra
Muhammad Yahia wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 3:31 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
>> would it perhaps be more effective to send these questions to the audit
>> committee, whose role it is (as far as I can tell) to control this kind of
>> issues? They also have the authority to give relevant advices where
>>
I've been watching the conversation on this topic from the bench.
Milos, this is a highly sensitive issue, you can't tell "private
parties" to settle this privately and come back with a solution -- this
has to be settled in a public medium (if only for the consensus to be
visible). I suggest a pag
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 3:31 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> would it perhaps be more effective to send these questions to the audit
> committee, whose role it is (as far as I can tell) to control this kind of
> issues? They also have the authority to give relevant advices where
> necessary.
>
Hello,
> This whole thread is interesting. You can work side by side with someone for
> several years and not know that the Wikipedia next door delete talk pages
> where the question is resolved.
Yeah. We are forks.
>
> Anyway, I published an essay about raising quality on the Swedish Wikipedia
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> would it perhaps be more effective to send these questions to the audit
> committee, whose role it is (as far as I can tell) to control this kind of
> issues? They also have the authority to give relevant advices where
> necessary.
I
On 10 October 2010 09:33, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Despite repeated assurances at Wikimania, on lists and on strategywiki,
> that the strategic plan was going to consider all Wikimedia projects as
> important, now at
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Five-year_targets the
> sec
Hi John,
would it perhaps be more effective to send these questions to the audit
committee, whose role it is (as far as I can tell) to control this kind of
issues? They also have the authority to give relevant advices where
necessary.
Best,
Lodewijk
2010/10/12 John Vandenberg
> On Tue, Oct 12
35 matches
Mail list logo
