Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
32 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

M. Williamson
skype: node.ue


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Manuel Coutinho <[hidden email]>
Date: Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:28 AM
Subject: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia
To: [hidden email]


Dear Node,

It has come to my attention quite some time ago that the Portuguese version
of wikipedia is being overrun with articles written in Brazilian Portuguese,
some of which I have corrected myself but the problem has, long since grown
out of control.
I'm writting to suggest the creation of a new version of wikipedia in
Portuguese from Portugal, in an attempt to provide Portuguese users with
articles written in their correct version of the dialect.
I don't know why this hasn't been already implemented since the language
options on the control panel when you create a new wikipedia user create
that distinction already.
I hope that you take this under consideration and provide me with the
guidelines to start this project.
I'm sure that i will be able to find supporters that are willing to start
the process of translating already existing articles as well as creating new
ones.

Thank you very much.

Yours trully,

Manuel A. C. Coutinho
Designer de Comunicação
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
InstantDesign* Comunicação e Equipamento
www.instdesign.com

T +351 93 479 90 66
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Milos Rancic-2
Is it possible to formalize differences in present technology at some
reasonable level?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

oscar-45
In reply to this post by M. Williamson
it the two are mixed, how to know which one to split off?
one can also consider to rename the domain and split of portuguese
portuguese with a separate project to be started from scratch.

in other words: to decide which (sub)community has to start all over is not
an easy decision.

very best,
oscar

--
*edito ergo sum*

******************
The information contained in this message is confidential and may be legally
privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return
e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
******************
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
Having two wikipedias for the same language is not allowed within the rules
of the language policy. The premise that an article on the
pt.wikipedia.orgis in Portuguese Portuguese is a fallacy. It would be
the same as stating
that every article on the English language Wikipedia is in American English.
It is not.

Milos in his reply is looking for a way out of this conundrum by technical
means; effectively a tool that translates from one form of Portuguese into
the other. Such a solution is for instance in use at the Serbian Wikipedia
where the language is transliterated from Cyrillic into Latin script and the
other way around.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On 22 March 2010 09:13, oscar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> it the two are mixed, how to know which one to split off?
> one can also consider to rename the domain and split of portuguese
> portuguese with a separate project to be started from scratch.
>
> in other words: to decide which (sub)community has to start all over is not
> an easy decision.
>
> very best,
> oscar
>
> --
> *edito ergo sum*
>
> ******************
> The information contained in this message is confidential and may be
> legally
> privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are
> not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
> dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return
> e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
> ******************
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Milos Rancic-2
In reply to this post by oscar-45
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:13 AM, oscar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> it the two are mixed, how to know which one to split off?
> one can also consider to rename the domain and split of portuguese
> portuguese with a separate project to be started from scratch.
>
> in other words: to decide which (sub)community has to start all over is not
> an easy decision.

Before anything else, it should be proved that those two varieties are
distant enough to create separate projects. However, if it is just
about some amount of lexics (which I suppose), it should be solved
with conversion engine.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Hoi,
> Having two wikipedias for the same language is not allowed within the rules
> of the language policy. The premise that an article on the
> pt.wikipedia.orgis in Portuguese Portuguese is a fallacy. It would be
> the same as stating
> that every article on the English language Wikipedia is in American English.
> It is not.
>
> Milos in his reply is looking for a way out of this conundrum by technical
> means; effectively a tool that translates from one form of Portuguese into
> the other. Such a solution is for instance in use at the Serbian Wikipedia
> where the language is transliterated from Cyrillic into Latin script and the
> other way around.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
>  

I think it may be useful to note that the policy page on the the
Portuguese wikipedia looks to the casual observer as if the
folks on that wikipedia have expended some considerable
thought on how to do this in the best possible manner:


http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vers%C3%B5es_da_l%C3%ADngua_portuguesa


FWIW I do agree that of all the options the worst one would
be to split into two projects. It could easily turn out that
50 % of European Portuguese speakers kept editing the
old project, or even that only say a 10 % fringe group
started editing the new European Portuguese only
project. That would be a farce.

Speaking only for myself, I don't think a word substitution
solution should be tried either, except as a very last resort,
with a very strong community consensus that that is the
only way forward. To me it seems from the policy page
linked above, that the contributors themselves of that
community have thought things out for themselves pretty
well. Of course I have not followed the Portuguese wikis
community closely, so I may be very wrong, in which
case there shouldn't be a problem for the wikis rough
majority consensus to emerge, and action to be taken
based on that.

But in any case, nothing at all should be based on a single
voice, there needs to be a multiplicity of viewpoints considered
and consensus decision making employed.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen





_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt
Hello Milos,

The languages pt-pt and pt-br, they do not have a significant difference
(pt-pt in general have a C in the words and pt-br no, among other things not
very important).

The Portuguese Wikipedia have many internal problems and this is the reality
for people always request a new wiki (See on MetaWiki, we have a lot of
requests for a new Portuguese Wikipedia.).

A many time ago the language difference really was problem, now this is not
more a problem. (See: <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Language_Orthographic_Agreement_of_1990>).


I think the best option is the people from Portuguese Wikipedia make a
resolution of your problems, but a new wiki dont is a solution for this.

Tonight I talked with people of both countries, and they do not agree with
the separation, perhaps this is a wish of a single person.

Best regards
Lestaty de Lioncourt
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

David Goodman
If I understand the page in the ptWP correctly, they do not have the
equivalent of the enWP rule that topics special to the UK, such as the
article on London,  are writing in the UK version of English, and
those special to the US, like the article on New York City , are
written in the American version of English (and analogously for
Australian, Canadian, etc.). They do have the rule that if an article
is started in one version it must be continued in that version--which
in the enWP is supposed to be applied only to topics not special to
one or another national version.

Have they considered it? It certainly simplifies things in the enWP,
at least for those who can easily switch between the forms.


David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG



On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Milos,
>
> The languages pt-pt and pt-br, they do not have a significant difference
> (pt-pt in general have a C in the words and pt-br no, among other things not
> very important).
>
> The Portuguese Wikipedia have many internal problems and this is the reality
> for people always request a new wiki (See on MetaWiki, we have a lot of
> requests for a new Portuguese Wikipedia.).
>
> A many time ago the language difference really was problem, now this is not
> more a problem. (See: <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Language_Orthographic_Agreement_of_1990>).
>
>
> I think the best option is the people from Portuguese Wikipedia make a
> resolution of your problems, but a new wiki dont is a solution for this.
>
> Tonight I talked with people of both countries, and they do not agree with
> the separation, perhaps this is a wish of a single person.
>
> Best regards
> Lestaty de Lioncourt
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt
Yep, if you start a article in one version, this article must be continued
in that version, but this is not a problem for the community (in the past
yes, now no).

Lestaty de Lioncourt

2010/3/22 David Goodman <[hidden email]>

> If I understand the page in the ptWP correctly, they do not have the
> equivalent of the enWP rule that topics special to the UK, such as the
> article on London,  are writing in the UK version of English, and
> those special to the US, like the article on New York City , are
> written in the American version of English (and analogously for
> Australian, Canadian, etc.). They do have the rule that if an article
> is started in one version it must be continued in that version--which
> in the enWP is supposed to be applied only to topics not special to
> one or another national version.
>
> Have they considered it? It certainly simplifies things in the enWP,
> at least for those who can easily switch between the forms.
>
>
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Virgilio A. P. Machado
In reply to this post by M. Williamson
Ever since Mark Williamson posted the message
from Manuel Coutinho suggesting the creation of a
new version of Wikipedia in Portuguese from
Portugal, I have wondered if this list is the
best place to discuss this matter.

This is a very serious and recurring issue:

2005:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Brazilian_Portuguese

2006:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_new_languages/Archives/2006-11#Discussion_of_the_poll_concerning_the_creation_of_an_European_Portuguese_Wikipedia

2007:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_European_Portuguese

It also causes a lot of conflicts and animosity.
There are heated discussions, with passionate and
inflammatory statements that lead to exaggeration and uncorroborated «truths».

Perhaps the reason the issue keeps popping up is
that, although it has been extensively
«discussed», it has not been properly addressed, much less solved.

Perhaps the question is not the creation of a new
version of Wikipedia, but to make the Portuguese
Wikipedia appealing to all readers and writers
(editors) of the Portuguese language. There might
be solutions and proposals to address this
problem which have been kept from seeing the light of day, for untold reasons.

It might be worthwhile to open a page where the
discussion could be centralized. It would be nice
if the page could be bilingual, with one section
in English, to open the discussion to the wider
Wikimedia community, and another in Portuguese,
for those who lack enough command of the English
language to participate in the broader discussion.

If anyone would be so kind as to suggest what
that page might be and where it could be created,
I would be more than happy to participate. Some
statements have already been made in this list that require clarification.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Thomas Dalton
On 22 March 2010 19:01, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Perhaps the reason the issue keeps popping up is
> that, although it has been extensively
> «discussed», it has not been properly addressed, much less solved.

I think the reason it has never been addressed is that nobody outside
the Portuguese community can see a problem. It all seems to be a lot
of fuss about nothing. That means the wider Wikimedia community will
never accept a two-wiki solution and the most obvious one-wiki
solution is the one used by the English Wikipedia, namely: stop
complaining and just write encyclopaedia articles. We're not going to
indulge a community engaged in a childish argument about nothing.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Marcus Buck-2
Thomas Dalton hett schreven:

> On 22 March 2010 19:01, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Perhaps the reason the issue keeps popping up is
>> that, although it has been extensively
>> «discussed», it has not been properly addressed, much less solved.
>>    
>
> I think the reason it has never been addressed is that nobody outside
> the Portuguese community can see a problem. It all seems to be a lot
> of fuss about nothing. That means the wider Wikimedia community will
> never accept a two-wiki solution and the most obvious one-wiki
> solution is the one used by the English Wikipedia, namely: stop
> complaining and just write encyclopaedia articles. We're not going to
> indulge a community engaged in a childish argument about nothing.
>  
I hope you speak Portuguese. Cause decisions like this should be made by
people who know the language variants and their differences and not by
outsiders. Leave the decision to the speakers of Portuguese. Anyway it
seems that the majority of speakers does not want to split. Outsiders
can assist by giving advice. E.g. how to minimize the problems that
arise from the differences. But outsiders shouldn't impose decisions on
the community.

Marcus Buck
User:Slomox
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Thomas Dalton
On 22 March 2010 20:24, Marcus Buck <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I hope you speak Portuguese. Cause decisions like this should be made by
> people who know the language variants and their differences and not by
> outsiders. Leave the decision to the speakers of Portuguese. Anyway it
> seems that the majority of speakers does not want to split. Outsiders
> can assist by giving advice. E.g. how to minimize the problems that
> arise from the differences. But outsiders shouldn't impose decisions on
> the community.

I don't speak Portuguese, but that doesn't stop me knowing that
different dialects of it are mutually intelligible. What happens with
the existing project is a matter for that project's community, but the
creation of a new project is a matter for the wider Wikimedia
community.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Milos Rancic-2
In reply to this post by Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Yep, if you start a article in one version, this article must be continued
> in that version, but this is not a problem for the community (in the past
> yes, now no).

At sr.wp we use the same rule in relation to writing articles in
Cyrillic or Latin, Ekavian or Iyekavian, and even for transcription of
foreign names or not. That rule removed a lot of tensions.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Virgilio A. P. Machado
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
I don't see any evidence that "nobody outside the
Portuguese community can see a problem" unless
one personal opinion should be considered proof.

The statement was not about anybody outside the
Portuguese community seeing a problem, but that
"the issue keeps popping up". The very fact that
is being addressed here corroborates that
statement. Examples of previous discussions were
also provided spanning a period of five years. No
evidence has been produced to the contrary, i.e.,
that the issue does not keep popping up.

If "it all seems to be a lot of fuss about
nothing" that might be because appearances can be
deceiving and burring your head in the sand or
looking the other way will not make any existing
problems go away, although everybody is entitled
to ignore them. That's a very common attitude
when the problems are not at your doorstep,
although there's always the danger that they will
eventually get there. Again, the very fact that
this discussion is taking place here is a symptom
that there is a fuss about something.

No statements were made concerning the creation
or not of a "two-wiki solution". It's nice to
know that someone believes that "the wider
Wikimedia community will never accept a two-wiki
solution". Hopefully not everybody will have such
a preconceived idea and keep an open mind about
the specific needs of specific projects. Until
the problems and needs are properly accessed it
is premature to dismiss any alternative solution.

Thank you so much for suggesting the "one-wiki
solution [...] used by the English Wikipedia,
namely: stop complaining and just write
encyclopaedia articles." Assuming that you'll
follow your own advice, your contributions to a
constructive dialog will be sorely missed.

Indulgence can be an act of tolerance, a moderate
form of respect, which is the basis for
non-discrimination. As for childish arguments
about nothing, there is something to be said for
someone that bothered to address them. It is an
example to be followed. If you do not engage
youngsters in rational conversation often enough,
even if it is about nothing, they might grow up
to become rude adults or total morons.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 19:50 22-03-2010, you wrote:

>On 22 March 2010 19:01, Virgilio A. P. Machado
><[hidden email]> wrote: > Perhaps the reason the
>issue keeps popping up is > that, although it
>has been extensively > «discussed», it has not
>been properly addressed, much less solved. I
>think the reason it has never been addressed is
>that nobody outside the Portuguese community can
>see a problem. It all seems to be a lot of fuss
>about nothing. That means the wider Wikimedia
>community will never accept a two-wiki solution
>and the most obvious one-wiki solution is the
>one used by the English Wikipedia, namely: stop
>complaining and just write encyclopaedia
>articles. We're not going to indulge a community
>engaged in a childish argument about nothing.
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>[hidden email] Unsubscribe:
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
Engenharia
Industrial
http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
DEMI/FCT/UNL                    Fax:   351-21-294-8546 or 21-294-8531
Universidade de Portugal                or 351-21-295-4461
2829-516 Caparica                       Tel.:  351-21-294-8542 or 21-294-8567
PORTUGAL                                or 351-21-294-8300 or 21 294-8500
                                         Ext.112-32
96-577-3726
Faculdade de Ciencias e Tecnologia/UNL (FCT/UNL)

(Dr. Machado is Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering at the
School of Sciences and Engineering/UNL of the University of Portugal)  
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:

> I don't see any evidence that "nobody outside the
> Portuguese community can see a problem" unless
> one personal opinion should be considered proof.
>
> The statement was not about anybody outside the
> Portuguese community seeing a problem, but that
> "the issue keeps popping up". The very fact that
> is being addressed here corroborates that
> statement. Examples of previous discussions were
> also provided spanning a period of five years. No
> evidence has been produced to the contrary, i.e.,
> that the issue does not keep popping up.
>  
There is also clear evidence that the community
within the Portuguese wikipedia has a very good
handle on the issue, for all that the fomentation
around the European Portuguese issue seems to be
perennial.

> If "it all seems to be a lot of fuss about
> nothing" that might be because appearances can be
> deceiving and burring your head in the sand or
> looking the other way will not make any existing
> problems go away, although everybody is entitled
> to ignore them. That's a very common attitude
> when the problems are not at your doorstep,
> although there's always the danger that they will
> eventually get there. Again, the very fact that
> this discussion is taking place here is a symptom
> that there is a fuss about something.
>
>  
To me it seems that the great majority of people
who are themselves on the Portuguese wikipedia
do not think raising this issue time and again is
a useful pastime. Thus the issue of whether you are
or are not Portuguese language speaking yourself,
seems to me a moot point.

> No statements were made concerning the creation
> or not of a "two-wiki solution". It's nice to
> know that someone believes that "the wider
> Wikimedia community will never accept a two-wiki
> solution". Hopefully not everybody will have such
> a preconceived idea and keep an open mind about
> the specific needs of specific projects. Until
> the problems and needs are properly accessed it
> is premature to dismiss any alternative solution.
>
>  
I'll agree that "two-wiki solution" in this connection
is very poor phrasing. Adding a European Portuguese
only wikipedia wouldn't be a solution, and it wouldn't
be "two-wiki", since I believe there currently exist
*at least* two wikipedias relating to the Portuguese
language grouping, namely Portuguese and Galician.

The issue is really whether how to discern the degree
of apartness within the *many* Portuguese dialects,
including not only European and Brazilian but the
African, creole Portuguese etc, and which can not
reasonably be expected to be able to contribute
within the default Portuguese wikipedia.

One does not need to dismiss a proposed solution,
to point out the inherent problems with it. And
creating a European Portuguese only wikipedia
would create many problems, of such weight, that
though not dismissing the concept as a theoretical
possibility, it is easy to weigh the pros and the cons,
and come to a fair *evaluation* that it would be a
very problematic "solution".

My personal evaluation tends to be that an European
only wikipedia is not a good solution, though I am not
sure about the African Portuguese or the Creole Portuguese
cases -- purely because I have not at all studied
the issues with those. I would agree that there is still
perhaps too much resistance towards creating
separate wikipedias for creoles, dialects and the
like -- in the general case -- though I don't think a
European Portuguese only wikipedia is a case where
it is ideally justified.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Virgilio A. P. Machado
In reply to this post by Marcus Buck-2
The ability to speak Portuguese is really not a
requirement to participate in a serious
discussion about many problems concerning the
Portuguese Wikipedia. There are millions of
people who speak Portuguese, but are total or
functional analphabets. I would not consider that
they meet the requirements needed to engage in
such a discussion. On the other hand, there are
many people who might not speak Portuguese, but
are the most knowledgeable about the Portuguese
language. Ain't that a shame? Now, go figure.

I agree with the statement that "decisions like
this should be made by people who know the
language variants and their differences". People
of average intelligence should be able to make an
informed decision, if those variants and
differences are clearly stated and explained to
them. They will then be in the know, too.

The concept of "outsiders" is more difficult to
grasp. If "outsiders" means people who don't
"know the language variants and their
differences", I'm afraid that will exclude a very
large percentage of the most active editors of
the Portuguese Wikipedia and a lot of them will
not be capable of making an informed decision any time soon.

Leaving the decision to the speakers of
Portuguese is perhaps a statement inspired in
self rule and democracy, but those concepts are
hardly understood, much less applied, in the
conditions most speakers of Portuguese live in
this very day. As for the practices in the
Portuguese Wikipedia I'll already address that
topic on another occasion. One might consider, on
the other hand, that the generalization of such
policy would make irrelevant all international
organizations. The Wikimedia Foundation happens
to be an international organization, by its very
nature and basic principles. The fact that there
have been posts made to this list, about the
subject, by an international group, also goes to
show that the problem and the solution concerns
more people than strictly those who speak
Portuguese. That would be a complete and total
disaster, for reasons already explained.

If one truly believes in self rule and democracy,
the assertion that "it seems that the majority of
speakers does not want to split." is a real
mystery. If those questions got to be decided by
majorities, we all would probably end up with a
single Wikipedia... in Chinese. Please, spare me
of the fixation on to split or not to split. That
might not be the question. Again and again I see
people avoiding the issue of clearly identifying
the problems, looking for appropriate solutions,
and proposing and supporting informed decisions.

The notion that "Outsiders can assist by giving
advice." brings to mind so many examples of
"foreign advisers" that I shudder at the thought.
After a childish epithet, all that was needed was
a paternalistic one. Writing from a country with
almost nine hundred years and being part of a
nation much older and greater, I'm afraid I'll
have to ask you to spare my humbler and less
literate countrymen and women from that
embarrassing position. Let me assure you that we
take pride in honoring our hospitality traditions
and love to talk with our equals and people
without pretenses, mostly if they happen to be false.

There is merit in proclaiming that the problems
that arise from differences should be minimized,
although it's kind of difficult to decide on
"how" until it is clearly and completely known "what".

As for decisions imposed by outsiders on the
community, that again all depends on how
outsiders and community are defined, but no
matter which way you look at it, that's exactly what's been going on.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 20:24 22-03-2010, you wrote:

>Thomas Dalton hett schreven: > On 22 March 2010
>19:01, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>
>wrote: >   >> Perhaps the reason the issue keeps
>popping up is >> that, although it has been
>extensively >> «discussed», it has not been
>properly addressed, much less solved. >>     > >
>I think the reason it has never been addressed
>is that nobody outside > the Portuguese
>community can see a problem. It all seems to be
>a lot > of fuss about nothing. That means the
>wider Wikimedia community will > never accept a
>two-wiki solution and the most obvious
>one-wiki > solution is the one used by the
>English Wikipedia, namely: stop > complaining
>and just write encyclopaedia articles. We're not
>going to > indulge a community engaged in a
>childish argument about nothing. >   I hope you
>speak Portuguese. Cause decisions like this
>should be made by people who know the language
>variants and their differences and not by
>outsiders. Leave the decision to the speakers of
>Portuguese. Anyway it seems that the majority of
>speakers does not want to split. Outsiders can
>assist by giving advice. E.g. how to minimize
>the problems that arise from the differences.
>But outsiders shouldn't impose decisions on the
>community. Marcus Buck User:Slomox
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>[hidden email] Unsubscribe:
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
Engenharia
Industrial
http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
DEMI/FCT/UNL                    Fax:   351-21-294-8546 or 21-294-8531
Universidade de Portugal                or 351-21-295-4461
2829-516 Caparica                       Tel.:  351-21-294-8542 or 21-294-8567
PORTUGAL                                or 351-21-294-8300 or 21 294-8500
                                         Ext.112-32
96-577-3726
Faculdade de Ciencias e Tecnologia/UNL (FCT/UNL)

(Dr. Machado is Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering at the
School of Sciences and Engineering/UNL of the University of Portugal)  
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Virgilio A. P. Machado
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
It is gratifying to know that someone is so sure that different
dialects of Portuguese are mutually intelligible. I speak more than
one language and have never able to understand all native speakers of
any language both in speech and writing. How dumb of me.

Blind non-interventionist policies have spelled disaster for
countless minorities, but some people will get a better feeling for
it when Spanish becomes the language of the majority of US citizens,
as they already are when that is happening in their town, county or state.

I understand that the topic started with a suggestion to create "a
new version of Wikipedia in Portuguese from Portugal", but I can't
fail to notice that, for the wider Wikimedia community, avoiding to
address any of problems of the Portuguese Wikipedia, might be very
convenient to keep it where it is, mired in problems. We all have
problems of our own, right? Why bother?

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado

At 20:49 22-03-2010, you wrote:

>On 22 March 2010 20:24, Marcus Buck <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I hope you speak Portuguese. Cause decisions like this should be made by
> > people who know the language variants and their differences and not by
> > outsiders. Leave the decision to the speakers of Portuguese. Anyway it
> > seems that the majority of speakers does not want to split. Outsiders
> > can assist by giving advice. E.g. how to minimize the problems that
> > arise from the differences. But outsiders shouldn't impose decisions on
> > the community.
>
>I don't speak Portuguese, but that doesn't stop me knowing that
>different dialects of it are mutually intelligible. What happens with
>the existing project is a matter for that project's community, but the
>creation of a new project is a matter for the wider Wikimedia
>community.
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>[hidden email]
>Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
Engenharia
Industrial
http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
DEMI/FCT/UNL                    Fax:   351-21-294-8546 or 21-294-8531
Universidade de Portugal                or 351-21-295-4461
2829-516 Caparica                       Tel.:  351-21-294-8542 or 21-294-8567
PORTUGAL                                or 351-21-294-8300 or 21 294-8500
                                         Ext.112-32
96-577-3726
Faculdade de Ciencias e Tecnologia/UNL (FCT/UNL)

(Dr. Machado is Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering at the
School of Sciences and Engineering/UNL of the University of Portugal)  
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:

>
> I understand that the topic started with a suggestion to create "a
> new version of Wikipedia in Portuguese from Portugal", but I can't
> fail to notice that, for the wider Wikimedia community, avoiding to
> address any of problems of the Portuguese Wikipedia, might be very
> convenient to keep it where it is, mired in problems. We all have
> problems of our own, right? Why bother?
>  


While it may be true that not all contributors in this
thread have written with perfect comprehension of
the specific situation, I do think the above characterization
of possible motivations is frankly beyond the pale.

Please understand that nobody -- really nobody -- wishes
for Portuguese Wikipedia to remain mired in problems.

Personally I do believe that notwithstanding that, the
best experts on how to heal the rifts within the Portuguese
Wikipedia might not come from the outside. That is my
personal view, lacking a believable plan of action for how
the foundation or some other external part of the larger
community could effect a healing action on the Portuguese
community.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Virgilio A. P. Machado
In reply to this post by Milos Rancic-2
This is a very interesting suggestion and the recognition that it is
important to remove tensions is very commendable.

Unfortunately I haven't heard of any plans for Cyrillic to be adopted
to write Portuguese. Now consider that Latin characters were use by
200 million people and Cyrillic by 20 million. If you were someone
who reads and writes in Cyrillic, would you like to use an
encyclopedia where you might find 10 articles written with Latin
characters for each one written in Cyrillic? Wouldn't you say there
might be trend for both Cyrillic readers and writers to abandon that
encyclopedia? Would you consider that a desirable outcome?

Suppose, furthermore, that the 20 million Cyrillic readers and
writers can also read and write in Latin characters, but the opposite
is not true. That is, the 200 million readers and writers who use
Latin characters have a lot of trouble reading and/or writing in
Cyrillic. Would you foresee a long life for Cyrillic articles? Would
you consider that a desirable outcome?

Fortunately we don't have Cyrillic, but you might have started to get
the picture, because the 200 and 20 million are real numbers.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 04:53 23-03-2010, you wrote:

>On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt
><[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Yep, if you start a article in one version, this article must be continued
> > in that version, but this is not a problem for the community (in the past
> > yes, now no).
>
>At sr.wp we use the same rule in relation to writing articles in
>Cyrillic or Latin, Ekavian or Iyekavian, and even for transcription of
>foreign names or not. That rule removed a lot of tensions.
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>[hidden email]
>Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
Engenharia
Industrial
http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
DEMI/FCT/UNL                    Fax:   351-21-294-8546 or 21-294-8531
Universidade de Portugal                or 351-21-295-4461
2829-516 Caparica                       Tel.:  351-21-294-8542 or 21-294-8567
PORTUGAL                                or 351-21-294-8300 or 21 294-8500
                                         Ext.112-32
96-577-3726
Faculdade de Ciencias e Tecnologia/UNL (FCT/UNL)

(Dr. Machado is Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering at the
School of Sciences and Engineering/UNL of the University of Portugal)  
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12