Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Noein wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > I don't know if wikipedia should have a chapter specific to children > because it would be culturally biased by our views about education. I think you mean 'project' rather than 'chapter' My view of

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Noein wrote: > I don't know if wikipedia should have a chapter specific to children > because it would be culturally biased by our views about education. > It will be biased on the common sense of the culture, in which language that version is written, on how education should be. As well as ev

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Noein wrote: > Also, for illiterate persons, it would be great to include a "play" > button that would automatically read the article out loud. It should be > included so that illiterate persons don't have to install their own > text-to-speech software. This is gre

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Just my 2c thoughts exploring the idea. I don't know if wikipedia should have a chapter specific to children because it would be culturally biased by our views about education. I think it would be better to aim for a specific psychological profile and

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello Ziko, speaking for myself. I am for such an approach. But I would also like to see such a project, because it is so important, to be prepared carefully. The suggestions is not made the first time, and last time when the suggetion was on meta, it was discussed until no one can give it a c

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hi Ziko, On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > It seems to me doubtless that there is a substantial number of active > Wikimedians who see the need in a simple or children-encyclopedia and > would like to invest some of their own sweat, blood and tears. Yes. This is happening

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello, It seems to me doubtless that there is a substantial number of active Wikimedians who see the need in a simple or children-encyclopedia and would like to invest some of their own sweat, blood and tears. Others, who disagree, may stand on the side line and comment if they like. There are a

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello Milos, reading your mail below I am wondering why your reaction on my first mail was so aggressive. It looks to me as if your consideration is not that far away from mine. Especially I wrote in my suggestion that first of all the project must have a very clearly defined scope and audiance

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > In Italian Wikipedia, for example, we have had long time ago a project > with the aim to create a structure of any article of physics with a > section for "easy readers". > > The project has failed because the most difficult point for a > p

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 24 June 2010 15:04, Ziko van Dijk wrote: >> - Scope and name: Maybe it would practically make no big difference >> whether the project is called "simple" or "for kids". Poor readers and >> adult beginning readers (natives or not) tend to

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Victor Vasiliev wrote: > I may suggest two easy ways how it may be solved technically: > * Introduction of a special namespace on a "larger" Wikipedia. > * Introduction of s subdomain (e.g. simple.de.wikipedia.org) with shared > admins (that should be simple with SUL). > I believe there is no need

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Mark Williamson wrote: > The difference was that Wikipedia was not made for young people. > > If I run a social group for adults and there are issues with children > who visit, I can blame it on their parents and say they should control > them better. If I run a so

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

The difference was that Wikipedia was not made for young people. If I run a social group for adults and there are issues with children who visit, I can blame it on their parents and say they should control them better. If I run a social group for children, I'm now a childcare provider and have a g

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Mark Williamson wrote: > Phoebe, in my humble opinion, this project is a bit different. I think > when we are talking about child development and creating a project for > children, there's no room to screw around or create some amateurish > product. This is somethi

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Phoebe, in my humble opinion, this project is a bit different. I think when we are talking about child development and creating a project for children, there's no room to screw around or create some amateurish product. This is something that, if done wrong, could potentially have a bigger negative

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: > I am not asking you to prove anything about this project.  I just want to > know where you got the idea that this proposal can be accurately summarized > as a " Wikipedia fork with dumb language"  and that the proto-contributors > are biased

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

--- On Fri, 6/25/10, Milos Rancic wrote: > From: Milos Rancic > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one > Wikipedia" > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" > Date: Friday, June 25, 2010, 2:05 PM > On Fri, Jun 25, 20

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

2010/6/25 Milos Rancic : > My first answer is that Wikipedia is good enough for children and that > we do not need a Wikipedia fork with dumb language. I wonder where such an attitude comes from. "Dumb"? Ziko -- Ziko van Dijk Niederlande ___ foundatio

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: >> Such strong labeling of the goals and make-up of this group wishing to work >> on a Medical Encyclopedia for Children really needs to be supported by some >> evidence. Especially as I d

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: > Such strong labeling of the goals and make-up of this group wishing to work > on a Medical Encyclopedia for Children really needs to be supported by some > evidence. Especially as I don't believe they are participating in this > conversation

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

--- On Fri, 6/25/10, Milos Rancic wrote: > From: Milos Rancic > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one > Wikipedia" > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" > Date: Friday, June 25, 2010, 1:07 PM > On Fri, Jun 25, 20

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:11 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: > But, to be fair, do we ask such questions of our other projects? I do > not recall being asked if I was a trained encyclopedia writer or a > trained journalist when I joined Wikimedia :) Perhaps we should ask > these kinds of hard questions of

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> Yes.  We should definitely lay the groundwork well, as Ziko says.  But >> there are good projects underway today and doing this, in spanish, >> french, and dutch.  Some of the organizers

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > We are all amateurs in cognitive development. My two exams in this > field makes me an expert on this list. And we don't need just > professionals, but extraordinary professionals. And those > professionals have to be introduced well in Wikim

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: > Yes. We should definitely lay the groundwork well, as Ziko says. But > there are good projects underway today and doing this, in spanish, > french, and dutch. Some of the organizers of those projects have > contributed to the Wikikids propo

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Birgitte, what I am discussing is whether or no t I see any merit in this idea at all. Thanks. On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: > > > --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Milos Rancic wrote: > >> From: Milos Rancic >> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the po

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

--- On Thu, 6/24/10, Milos Rancic wrote: > From: Milos Rancic > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one > Wikipedia" > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" > Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010, 6:06 PM > On Fri, Jun 2

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > The fact that 10 years old child probably doesn't know what density > means, doesn't mean that she or he can't read about that on > encyclopedia. Of course. Children who specialize in a topic often make excellent teachers, and sometimes feat

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Mark Williamson wrote: > as if we were dumb. I have heard (and I am not an expert) from many > people the idea that you will get what you give, meaning that if you > treat an adolescent as if they were a criminal, they will often become > a criminal; it seems to m

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

I would like to add: The internal links used on our projects help avoid many of the problems of not understanding something. As a 13 year old reader of Wikipedia some seven years ago, if I did not understand something, I could always click on the link to a page that would explain it to me. If I we

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Benjamin Lees wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: >>> >>> If you don't have a strong background in a field then drinking from >>> the fire hose of full-complexity concepts is

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Miloš, I am inclined to agree with you. As someone who is not so far removed from his own adolescence, I can attest that I've always found "Children's writing" to be incredibly condescending and even demeaning. Perhaps I was not a typical child, but ever since about 7 years of age I really hated t

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Benjamin Lees wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> >> If you don't have a strong background in a field then drinking from >> the fire hose of full-complexity concepts is hard no matter if you are >> a child or not. If you do have a r

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 24 June 2010 15:04, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > > - Scope and name: Maybe it would practically make no big difference > > whether the project is called "simple" or "for kids". Poor readers and > > adult beginning readers (natives or not) tend

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > I strongly disagree. There is a big difference between simple language > and simple concepts. Children need simple concepts (basically, you > can't assume as much prior knowledge because they haven't had time to > learn things that adults con

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On 24 June 2010 15:04, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > - Scope and name: Maybe it would practically make no big difference > whether the project is called "simple" or "for kids". Poor readers and > adult beginning readers (natives or not) tend to read texts that are > meant for children anyway. It could ma

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: >> finding relevant pedagogues who would lead child contributors. > > That's a fine idea.  Also finding active middle- and high-school > students interested in leading such a project.  Ther

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hi Milos, On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > Writing dumb articles because of thinking that children are dumb is > dumb. And not just dumb, but deeply ageist and discriminatory. I don't think that either simplified or children's projects should be "dumbed down". Ottava's es

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Ting Chen wrote: > *Earth* (or *the Earth*) is the third planet > from the Sun > , the fifth-largest and the densest of > the eight planets in the Solar System >

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > - Create new Wikipedias, or a new project: What would make sense? If > they were new Wikipedias, we would potentially double the list with > interwiki links ("in other languages"). I prefer a new project. One way to handle interlanguage l

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello Ziko, hello Milos, some time ago, when the board was discussing about the sexual content problems I made the following proposal. I didn't published it because I feel it still very premature and also because I wanted to wait for the research work that Sue should do and see what the experts

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Hello, > > Recently there has been a controversy on Wikipedia in German about > extra articles in simple language. Authors of its medical group wanted > to create sub pages suitable for children, believing in an urgent > need. [1] > > In the

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > It may be relevant to note that http://wikijunior.org currently redirects > to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior . > > From what I've heard, Wikijunior was supposed to become its own separate > project at some point.  Now, that is Wi

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

2010/6/24 Gerard Meijssen > When you are going to consider simple Wikipedias for all languages, please > also consider how we will deal with different orthographies.. A child of 10 > speaking Portuguese will have considerably more problems reading either the > South American or the European varian

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > It may be relevant to note that http://wikijunior.org currently redirects > to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior . > > From what I've heard, Wikijunior was supposed to become its own separate > project at some point.  Now, that is Wik

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

It may be relevant to note that http://wikijunior.org currently redirects to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior . >From what I've heard, Wikijunior was supposed to become its own separate project at some point. Now, that is Wikibooks-related and not Wikipedia-related, but if one were looking

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hoi, A great idea, but let us not forget: بسيط պարզ უბრალო פשוט 簡単な 간 단한 прост 简单 łatwy எளிய సరళమైన ง่าย or mộc mạc. We could even be bold and have a complete URL in the scripts of these languages.. I have been in favour for us to research this for a long time.. When you are going to cons

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On 24 June 2010 15:52, Pharos wrote: > What about wikipediajr.org ? > > And so we would have en.wikipediajr.org, fr.wikipediajr.org etc. Or even just a modifier - jr.en.wikipedia.org jr.de.wikipedia.org ...to which we could also alias "simple", "kinder", etc etc. This helps emphasise the disti

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

I may suggest two easy ways how it may be solved technically: * Introduction of a special namespace on a "larger" Wikipedia. * Introduction of s subdomain (e.g. simple.de.wikipedia.org) with shared admins (that should be simple with SUL). I believe there is no need for seperate set of admins for s

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Samuel J Klein wrote: > Overall, we've never decided whether a "simple" or "children's > encyclopedia" should be a separate project with its own root domain, > or another set of 'languages' that show up as an interlanguage link or > as FOO.wikipedia.org . > I don't think we've even decided those

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

What about wikipediajr.org ? And so we would have en.wikipediajr.org, fr.wikipediajr.org etc. Thanks, Pharos On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Thanks for your very useful thoughts, Samuel. They lead us to these > two key questions: > > - Create new Wikipedias, or a new pr

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Thanks for your very useful thoughts, Samuel. They lead us to these two key questions: - Create new Wikipedias, or a new project: What would make sense? If they were new Wikipedias, we would potentially double the list with interwiki links ("in other languages"). I prefer a new project. - Scope a

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hoi, The language committee is tasked with other projects; for subsequent projects for a language there is a requirement for a complete localisation for that language and for a "substantial" sized content for that project. The rationale for this is that many projects were created because we could o

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hi Ziko, On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > In the discussion, the question of creating a Wikipedia in simple > German came up. This would be useful. > As we know, to-day Wikimedia language committee policies prohibit a > new Wikipedia in a language that already has a Wiki

[Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello, Recently there has been a controversy on Wikipedia in German about extra articles in simple language. Authors of its medical group wanted to create sub pages suitable for children, believing in an urgent need. [1] In the discussion, the question of creating a Wikipedia in simple German cam