Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

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

Re: Fwd: Pt-Portuguese Wikipedia

Virgilio A. P. Machado
Sorry, but I could not grasp the argument "that the fomentation
around the European Portuguese issue seems to be perennial" is "clear
evidence that the community within the Portuguese wikipedia has a
very good handle on the issue." Does it mean that if a problem
doesn't go away it's because it is well handled?

I'm glad someone considers addressing matters of one's language a
pastime and salute the agreement that you don't have to know
Portuguese to engage in such pastime. Everybody should have a hobby
of some kind. Writing to a mailing list could be one. I do have other
things to do, but this is so much more fun.

Nice try that of mentioning Galician, but that is a controversial
issue and I would not touch it with a ten foot pole. It would also
make you terribly unpopular in a lot of Spanish circles of power.
There might be a mistake in the statement that those two wikipedias
relate to the Portuguese language grouping. I believe the
non-controversial wording is Portuguese-Galician language grouping.

I read with great interest the considerations about "how to discern
the degree of apartness within the *many* Portuguese dialects", that
it is "easy to weigh the pros and the cons [,of creating a European
Portuguese only wikipedia] and come to a fair *evaluation* that it
would be a very problematic "solution". I was very entertained by a
"personal evaluation" and that someone of great authority in these
matters doesn't "think a European Portuguese only wikipedia is a case
where it is ideally justified." One must be really clever to reach
all those conclusion so easily. I surely don't have an answer for
that, myself, but would love to see, and I am willing to contribute
to a serious study of the problem.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 14:44 23-03-2010, you wrote:

>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


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

Chris Lee-18
As an example, maybe an article, possibly a featured one on the site be
assigned to a few Brazilian Portuguese speakers to edit and to a few
European Portuguese speakers  to edit to their respective dialects, AND not
on content. Measures could be taken to check that these are not biased
'separatist' editors, and then at least we can assess the severity of the
issue.
And since most of this discussion is between non native speakers of either
dialect (as the en community seems to be policing the wiki-world (not much
different from the real world...)) hopefully there is at least one
Portuguese-English speaker who can relay the findings back to us non
speakers?
Just a thought.

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Sorry, but I could not grasp the argument "that the fomentation
> around the European Portuguese issue seems to be perennial" is "clear
> evidence that the community within the Portuguese wikipedia has a
> very good handle on the issue." Does it mean that if a problem
> doesn't go away it's because it is well handled?
>
> I'm glad someone considers addressing matters of one's language a
> pastime and salute the agreement that you don't have to know
> Portuguese to engage in such pastime. Everybody should have a hobby
> of some kind. Writing to a mailing list could be one. I do have other
> things to do, but this is so much more fun.
>
> Nice try that of mentioning Galician, but that is a controversial
> issue and I would not touch it with a ten foot pole. It would also
> make you terribly unpopular in a lot of Spanish circles of power.
> There might be a mistake in the statement that those two wikipedias
> relate to the Portuguese language grouping. I believe the
> non-controversial wording is Portuguese-Galician language grouping.
>
> I read with great interest the considerations about "how to discern
> the degree of apartness within the *many* Portuguese dialects", that
> it is "easy to weigh the pros and the cons [,of creating a European
> Portuguese only wikipedia] and come to a fair *evaluation* that it
> would be a very problematic "solution". I was very entertained by a
> "personal evaluation" and that someone of great authority in these
> matters doesn't "think a European Portuguese only wikipedia is a case
> where it is ideally justified." One must be really clever to reach
> all those conclusion so easily. I surely don't have an answer for
> that, myself, but would love to see, and I am willing to contribute
> to a serious study of the problem.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
>
>
> At 14:44 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> >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
>
>
> Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
> Engenharia
> Industrial
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
> DEMI/FCT/UNL<http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/%0ADEMI/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
>
_______________________________________________
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 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
I absolutely agree. My "characterization of
possible motivations is frankly beyond the pale."
In fact it is a very rosy characterization. There
is proof buried in this mailing list and in my
mailboxes of utter indifference, if not outright
contempt for the problems of a Wikipedia in a
"foreign" language, from the subscribers of this
list all the way up to the highest levels of
responsibility at the Wikimedia Foundation. A
simple way to state it might be: you guys have a
problem, you sort it out or don't bother us, and
we won't bother you. A lot of people will pay lip
service to the common good, but will not even
budge when they have a chance to do something
about it. Never underestimate the results of some
gentle persuasion, specially coming from those
who hold the keys to all the hardware that's
being used as a playground by a few.

Please understand that a lot of people - really a
lot of very powerful people - don't give a hoot
about the Portuguese Wikipedia or any of its
problems, and since I have proof and I haven't
seen proof to the contrary anywhere, I rest my case.

As for a believable plan of action at the risk of repeating myself:

«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.»

All I have asked for is the suggestion of a page.
You can't find a single word about that request
in all that has been written. Not even: what if
that page is created and nobody contributes? That
is a possibility. There's also the possibility
that whatever conclusion is reached it will not
be implemented by those who hold the power in the
Portuguese Wikipedia or the keys in the Wikimedia
Foundation. There's also the possibility that if
someone had several million dollars to spare, any
solution that would please that person would be
implemented. So you see, most things can be had
for a price, and all I have asked was the
suggestion of a page. I wonder what it takes to have that.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 17:14 23-03-2010, you wrote:

>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


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

Chad
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I absolutely agree. My "characterization of
> possible motivations is frankly beyond the pale."
> In fact it is a very rosy characterization. There
> is proof buried in this mailing list and in my
> mailboxes of utter indifference, if not outright
> contempt for the problems of a Wikipedia in a
> "foreign" language, from the subscribers of this
> list all the way up to the highest levels of
> responsibility at the Wikimedia Foundation. A
> simple way to state it might be: you guys have a
> problem, you sort it out or don't bother us, and
> we won't bother you. A lot of people will pay lip
> service to the common good, but will not even
> budge when they have a chance to do something
> about it. Never underestimate the results of some
> gentle persuasion, specially coming from those
> who hold the keys to all the hardware that's
> being used as a playground by a few.
>
> Please understand that a lot of people - really a
> lot of very powerful people - don't give a hoot
> about the Portuguese Wikipedia or any of its
> problems, and since I have proof and I haven't
> seen proof to the contrary anywhere, I rest my case.
>
> As for a believable plan of action at the risk of repeating myself:
>
> «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.»
>
> All I have asked for is the suggestion of a page.
> You can't find a single word about that request
> in all that has been written. Not even: what if
> that page is created and nobody contributes? That
> is a possibility. There's also the possibility
> that whatever conclusion is reached it will not
> be implemented by those who hold the power in the
> Portuguese Wikipedia or the keys in the Wikimedia
> Foundation. There's also the possibility that if
> someone had several million dollars to spare, any
> solution that would please that person would be
> implemented. So you see, most things can be had
> for a price, and all I have asked was the
> suggestion of a page. I wonder what it takes to have that.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
>
>
> At 17:14 23-03-2010, you wrote:
>>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
>
>
> 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
>

It requires you to take initiative to start the page and try
to draw others into a discussion. You don't need anyone's
permission to do that.

Also, I think it was (briefly) glossed over before, but there
/is/ the Language Converter code in MediaWiki that could
be leveraged to help some here. I don't think it's necessarily
a magic bullet, but it's worth exploring. I know nothing in
Portuguese, so I don't really grasp how widespread the
discrepancies are, but I assume there's rules to describe
them.

Social solutions are also helpful, like the aforementioned
American/British and Cyrillic/Latin issues mentioned
earlier in the thread. A combination of social and technical
solutions might just help bring some closure to this issue.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
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 Chris Lee-18
That is a good idea, but you have the work cut
out for you. Simply e-mail the article
«Portuguese language» to the largest possible
number of professors of Portuguese at the most
prestigious universities in the world and in both
Portugal and Brazil and ask for their comments. A
few things in that article and in both the
«European Portuguese» and «Brazilian Portuguese»
could use a few touches. You got to send out the
article to a lot of professors to unsure that
you'll get a few answers. Be sure to ask
permission to publish their comments. Copy/Paste
them to the article discussion page and there you have it.

That is the long road. The short way? Take a look
at the articles «Língua portuguesa», «Português
europeu», and «Português brasileiro»? Would you
trust those responsible for an Encyclopedia that
have the articles about their own language in
that sorry state? OK, not all is that bad. You
can always feast your eyes in the excellent
translation made in «Futebol», or for something
completely different, how about «Bruna Ferraz»?
If you're male and above 18, don't miss on what
the Commons have to offer. For something
Portuguese, you can take a look at «Braga». I do
agree that those two towers of the cathedral
don't stand a chance in the comparison.

A final note. It is perfectly alright with
everybody to say «Brazilian Portuguese». I wonder
what Google might have to say about the
difference between «European Portuguese» and
«Portuguese of Portugal» (not even mentioned in
the English version, but written as an
alternative title in the Portuguese version -
«português de Portugal»). European Portuguese?
Only in Wikipedia. I bet you that if you asked on
the street about it, people would not know what
you're talking about or wonder if it is the
Portuguese used in Brussels or some other place
like that. I don't think such thing even exists.
There's always been one and only one Portuguese,
the Portuguese of Portugal. Everything else are
just its descendancy spread all over the world, aside from syphilis, of course.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 21:03 23-03-2010, you wrote:

>As an example, maybe an article, possibly a featured one on the site be
>assigned to a few Brazilian Portuguese speakers to edit and to a few
>European Portuguese speakers  to edit to their respective dialects, AND not
>on content. Measures could be taken to check that these are not biased
>'separatist' editors, and then at least we can assess the severity of the
>issue.
>And since most of this discussion is between non native speakers of either
>dialect (as the en community seems to be policing the wiki-world (not much
>different from the real world...)) hopefully there is at least one
>Portuguese-English speaker who can relay the findings back to us non
>speakers?
>Just a thought.
>
>On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
> > Sorry, but I could not grasp the argument "that the fomentation
> > around the European Portuguese issue seems to be perennial" is "clear
> > evidence that the community within the Portuguese wikipedia has a
> > very good handle on the issue." Does it mean that if a problem
> > doesn't go away it's because it is well handled?
> >
> > I'm glad someone considers addressing matters of one's language a
> > pastime and salute the agreement that you don't have to know
> > Portuguese to engage in such pastime. Everybody should have a hobby
> > of some kind. Writing to a mailing list could be one. I do have other
> > things to do, but this is so much more fun.
> >
> > Nice try that of mentioning Galician, but that is a controversial
> > issue and I would not touch it with a ten foot pole. It would also
> > make you terribly unpopular in a lot of Spanish circles of power.
> > There might be a mistake in the statement that those two wikipedias
> > relate to the Portuguese language grouping. I believe the
> > non-controversial wording is Portuguese-Galician language grouping.
> >
> > I read with great interest the considerations about "how to discern
> > the degree of apartness within the *many* Portuguese dialects", that
> > it is "easy to weigh the pros and the cons [,of creating a European
> > Portuguese only wikipedia] and come to a fair *evaluation* that it
> > would be a very problematic "solution". I was very entertained by a
> > "personal evaluation" and that someone of great authority in these
> > matters doesn't "think a European Portuguese only wikipedia is a case
> > where it is ideally justified." One must be really clever to reach
> > all those conclusion so easily. I surely don't have an answer for
> > that, myself, but would love to see, and I am willing to contribute
> > to a serious study of the problem.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Virgilio A. P. Machado
> >
> >
> > At 14:44 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> > >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
> >
> >
> > Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
> > Engenharia
> > Industrial
> > http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
> >
> DEMI/FCT/UNL<http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/%0ADEMI/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
> >
>_______________________________________________
>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 Chad
Thanks Chad. I know that, but what kind of page (what title)? Where?
Would it be alright to be bilingual?

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 23:25 23-03-2010, you wrote:

>It requires you to take initiative to start the page and try to draw
>others into a discussion. You don't need anyone's permission to do
>that. Also, I think it was (briefly) glossed over before, but there
>/is/ the Language Converter code in MediaWiki that could be
>leveraged to help some here. I don't think it's necessarily a magic
>bullet, but it's worth exploring. I know nothing in Portuguese, so I
>don't really grasp how widespread the discrepancies are, but I
>assume there's rules to describe them. Social solutions are also
>helpful, like the aforementioned American/British and Cyrillic/Latin
>issues mentioned earlier in the thread. A combination of social and
>technical solutions might just help bring some closure to this
>issue. -Chad _______________________________________________
>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

Chris Lee-18
In reply to this post by Virgilio A. P. Machado
Wow, those are some bitter words. Aside from the deep disgust you have...
I don't think we need to contact any professors, most editors are probably
not professors anyway. If there are parties from each side who believe there
are significant differences and a need to split, rather than bring the work
to the non native speakers and ask for our opinion or mediation, I was
suggesting to simply take an article and have each side show eachother and
us the differences there are; not in content, of course.

And dude, relax.

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>wrote:

> That is a good idea, but you have the work cut
> out for you. Simply e-mail the article
> «Portuguese language» to the largest possible
> number of professors of Portuguese at the most
> prestigious universities in the world and in both
> Portugal and Brazil and ask for their comments. A
> few things in that article and in both the
> «European Portuguese» and «Brazilian Portuguese»
> could use a few touches. You got to send out the
> article to a lot of professors to unsure that
> you'll get a few answers. Be sure to ask
> permission to publish their comments. Copy/Paste
> them to the article discussion page and there you have it.
>
> That is the long road. The short way? Take a look
> at the articles «Língua portuguesa», «Português
> europeu», and «Português brasileiro»? Would you
> trust those responsible for an Encyclopedia that
> have the articles about their own language in
> that sorry state? OK, not all is that bad. You
> can always feast your eyes in the excellent
> translation made in «Futebol», or for something
> completely different, how about «Bruna Ferraz»?
> If you're male and above 18, don't miss on what
> the Commons have to offer. For something
> Portuguese, you can take a look at «Braga». I do
> agree that those two towers of the cathedral
> don't stand a chance in the comparison.
>
> A final note. It is perfectly alright with
> everybody to say «Brazilian Portuguese». I wonder
> what Google might have to say about the
> difference between «European Portuguese» and
> «Portuguese of Portugal» (not even mentioned in
> the English version, but written as an
> alternative title in the Portuguese version -
> «português de Portugal»). European Portuguese?
> Only in Wikipedia. I bet you that if you asked on
> the street about it, people would not know what
> you're talking about or wonder if it is the
> Portuguese used in Brussels or some other place
> like that. I don't think such thing even exists.
> There's always been one and only one Portuguese,
> the Portuguese of Portugal. Everything else are
> just its descendancy spread all over the world, aside from syphilis, of
> course.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
>
>
> At 21:03 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> >As an example, maybe an article, possibly a featured one on the site be
> >assigned to a few Brazilian Portuguese speakers to edit and to a few
> >European Portuguese speakers  to edit to their respective dialects, AND
> not
> >on content. Measures could be taken to check that these are not biased
> >'separatist' editors, and then at least we can assess the severity of the
> >issue.
> >And since most of this discussion is between non native speakers of either
> >dialect (as the en community seems to be policing the wiki-world (not much
> >different from the real world...)) hopefully there is at least one
> >Portuguese-English speaker who can relay the findings back to us non
> >speakers?
> >Just a thought.
> >
> >On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]
> >wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, but I could not grasp the argument "that the fomentation
> > > around the European Portuguese issue seems to be perennial" is "clear
> > > evidence that the community within the Portuguese wikipedia has a
> > > very good handle on the issue." Does it mean that if a problem
> > > doesn't go away it's because it is well handled?
> > >
> > > I'm glad someone considers addressing matters of one's language a
> > > pastime and salute the agreement that you don't have to know
> > > Portuguese to engage in such pastime. Everybody should have a hobby
> > > of some kind. Writing to a mailing list could be one. I do have other
> > > things to do, but this is so much more fun.
> > >
> > > Nice try that of mentioning Galician, but that is a controversial
> > > issue and I would not touch it with a ten foot pole. It would also
> > > make you terribly unpopular in a lot of Spanish circles of power.
> > > There might be a mistake in the statement that those two wikipedias
> > > relate to the Portuguese language grouping. I believe the
> > > non-controversial wording is Portuguese-Galician language grouping.
> > >
> > > I read with great interest the considerations about "how to discern
> > > the degree of apartness within the *many* Portuguese dialects", that
> > > it is "easy to weigh the pros and the cons [,of creating a European
> > > Portuguese only wikipedia] and come to a fair *evaluation* that it
> > > would be a very problematic "solution". I was very entertained by a
> > > "personal evaluation" and that someone of great authority in these
> > > matters doesn't "think a European Portuguese only wikipedia is a case
> > > where it is ideally justified." One must be really clever to reach
> > > all those conclusion so easily. I surely don't have an answer for
> > > that, myself, but would love to see, and I am willing to contribute
> > > to a serious study of the problem.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Virgilio A. P. Machado
> > >
> > >
> > > At 14:44 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> > > >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
> > >
> > >
> > > Prof. Virgilio A. P. Machado            [hidden email]
> > > Engenharia
> > > Industrial
> > > http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/
> > >
> > DEMI/FCT/UNL<
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/%0ADEMI/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
> > >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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<http://web.archive.org/web/20070824105539/www.ipei.pt/GDEI/%0ADEMI/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
>
_______________________________________________
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

M. Williamson
In reply to this post by Virgilio A. P. Machado
I think there are two options: Meta and pt.wp itself. My personal opinion is
that it does not need to be bilingual, but that is of course up to you.

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Thanks Chad. I know that, but what kind of page (what title)? Where?
> Would it be alright to be bilingual?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
>
>
> At 23:25 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> >It requires you to take initiative to start the page and try to draw
> >others into a discussion. You don't need anyone's permission to do
> >that. Also, I think it was (briefly) glossed over before, but there
> >/is/ the Language Converter code in MediaWiki that could be
> >leveraged to help some here. I don't think it's necessarily a magic
> >bullet, but it's worth exploring. I know nothing in Portuguese, so I
> >don't really grasp how widespread the discrepancies are, but I
> >assume there's rules to describe them. Social solutions are also
> >helpful, like the aforementioned American/British and Cyrillic/Latin
> >issues mentioned earlier in the thread. A combination of social and
> >technical solutions might just help bring some closure to this
> >issue. -Chad _______________________________________________
> >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
>
_______________________________________________
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,
To poor some cold water on this discussion. The language policy is quite
clear. There is no room for two Portuguese Wikipedias. When you are able to
convince the ISO 639-3 standard to make Portuguese a macro language it will
become different.

There have been languages that made that claim successfully and consequently
they become eligible for multiple Wikipedias. The Kurdish Wikipedia hosted
the Arabic scripted Sorani texts until it got its own Wikipedia.

So by all means discuss it, but from a language policy and committee point
of view, it will be a hard if not impossible case to argue to split the
pt.wikipedia at this time under the current conditions.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 24 March 2010 18:44, Mark Williamson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think there are two options: Meta and pt.wp itself. My personal opinion
> is
> that it does not need to be bilingual, but that is of course up to you.
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]
> >wrote:
>
> > Thanks Chad. I know that, but what kind of page (what title)? Where?
> > Would it be alright to be bilingual?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Virgilio A. P. Machado
> >
> >
> > At 23:25 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> > >It requires you to take initiative to start the page and try to draw
> > >others into a discussion. You don't need anyone's permission to do
> > >that. Also, I think it was (briefly) glossed over before, but there
> > >/is/ the Language Converter code in MediaWiki that could be
> > >leveraged to help some here. I don't think it's necessarily a magic
> > >bullet, but it's worth exploring. I know nothing in Portuguese, so I
> > >don't really grasp how widespread the discrepancies are, but I
> > >assume there's rules to describe them. Social solutions are also
> > >helpful, like the aforementioned American/British and Cyrillic/Latin
> > >issues mentioned earlier in the thread. A combination of social and
> > >technical solutions might just help bring some closure to this
> > >issue. -Chad _______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Virgilio A. P. Machado
In reply to this post by M. Williamson
Mark,

A page in the Portuguese Wikipedia could shut out
the community at large. A bilingual page would be
very hard to pull off. As far as I can tell,
non-Portuguese discussions are not welcomed there.

I looked at Meta and saw no place for a page like
that. Could you be more specific?

That's why I brought the question to the list: I
really don't know where a discussion like that
could take place within the projects of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Going back to my initial posting:

«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.»

Like Chad pointed out, even within this
discussion, there have been posts suggesting
several helpful rules and technical approaches.
Solutions from different projects could be
brought together and would be available for all
those where they might be useful. This would make
the discussion less specific to the Portuguese
Wikipedia but more valuable to the Wikimedia
community. Even with that broader scope I don't
know where to start. If there's not already a
place like that, where would it appropriate to create one?

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 17:44 24-03-2010, you wrote:

>I think there are two options: Meta and pt.wp itself. My personal opinion is
>that it does not need to be bilingual, but that is of course up to you.
>
>On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
> > Thanks Chad. I know that, but what kind of page (what title)? Where?
> > Would it be alright to be bilingual?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Virgilio A. P. Machado
> >
> >
> > At 23:25 23-03-2010, you wrote:
> > >It requires you to take initiative to start the page and try to draw
> > >others into a discussion. You don't need anyone's permission to do
> > >that. Also, I think it was (briefly) glossed over before, but there
> > >/is/ the Language Converter code in MediaWiki that could be
> > >leveraged to help some here. I don't think it's necessarily a magic
> > >bullet, but it's worth exploring. I know nothing in Portuguese, so I
> > >don't really grasp how widespread the discrepancies are, but I
> > >assume there's rules to describe them. Social solutions are also
> > >helpful, like the aforementioned American/British and Cyrillic/Latin
> > >issues mentioned earlier in the thread. A combination of social and
> > >technical solutions might just help bring some closure to this
> > >issue. -Chad
>_______________________________________________
>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

Chad
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Mark,
>
> A page in the Portuguese Wikipedia could shut out
> the community at large. A bilingual page would be
> very hard to pull off. As far as I can tell,
> non-Portuguese discussions are not welcomed there.
>
> I looked at Meta and saw no place for a page like
> that. Could you be more specific?
>
> That's why I brought the question to the list: I
> really don't know where a discussion like that
> could take place within the projects of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> Going back to my initial posting:
>
> «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.»
>
> Like Chad pointed out, even within this
> discussion, there have been posts suggesting
> several helpful rules and technical approaches.
> Solutions from different projects could be
> brought together and would be available for all
> those where they might be useful. This would make
> the discussion less specific to the Portuguese
> Wikipedia but more valuable to the Wikimedia
> community. Even with that broader scope I don't
> know where to start. If there's not already a
> place like that, where would it appropriate to create one?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
>
>
> At 17:44 24-03-2010, you wrote:
>>I think there are two options: Meta and pt.wp itself. My personal opinion is
>>that it does not need to be bilingual, but that is of course up to you.
>>
>>On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <[hidden email]>wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks Chad. I know that, but what kind of page (what title)? Where?
>> > Would it be alright to be bilingual?
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> >
>> > Virgilio A. P. Machado
>> >
>> >
>> > At 23:25 23-03-2010, you wrote:
>> > >It requires you to take initiative to start the page and try to draw
>> > >others into a discussion. You don't need anyone's permission to do
>> > >that. Also, I think it was (briefly) glossed over before, but there
>> > >/is/ the Language Converter code in MediaWiki that could be
>> > >leveraged to help some here. I don't think it's necessarily a magic
>> > >bullet, but it's worth exploring. I know nothing in Portuguese, so I
>> > >don't really grasp how widespread the discrepancies are, but I
>> > >assume there's rules to describe them. Social solutions are also
>> > >helpful, like the aforementioned American/British and Cyrillic/Latin
>> > >issues mentioned earlier in the thread. A combination of social and
>> > >technical solutions might just help bring some closure to this
>> > >issue. -Chad
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>

For lack of anywhere else, start it up at [[Portuguese language issues]]
or something. I'm not a regular metapedian, so there might be a better
place--I just can't think of a *specific* place offhand.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
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
Began!

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_language_issues

If you have any further suggestions or comments, they are very welcome.

Please use either the
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Portuguese_language_issues#English>English
or
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Portuguese_language_issues#Portugu.C3.AAs>Portuguese
sections of the
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Portuguese_language_issues>talk
page for debate.

Thank you all so very much.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


At 23:41 24-03-2010, you wrote:

>On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Virgilio A. P.
>Machado <[hidden email]> wrote: > Mark, > > A
>page in the Portuguese Wikipedia could shut
>out > the community at large. A bilingual page
>would be > very hard to pull off. As far as I
>can tell, > non-Portuguese discussions are not
>welcomed there. > > I looked at Meta and saw no
>place for a page like > that. Could you be more
>specific? > > That's why I brought the question
>to the list: I > really don't know where a
>discussion like that > could take place within
>the projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. > >
>Going back to my initial posting: > > «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.» > > Like Chad pointed out, even
>within this > discussion, there have been posts
>suggesting > several helpful rules and technical
>approaches. > Solutions from different projects
>could be > brought together and would be
>available for all > those where they might be
>useful. This would make > the discussion less
>specific to the Portuguese > Wikipedia but more
>valuable to the Wikimedia > community. Even with
>that broader scope I don't > know where to
>start. If there's not already a > place like
>that, where would it appropriate to create
>one? > > Sincerely, > > Virgilio A. P.
>Machado > > > At 17:44 24-03-2010, you
>wrote: >>I think there are two options: Meta and
>pt.wp itself. My personal opinion is >>that it
>does not need to be bilingual, but that is of
>course up to you. >> >>On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at
>5:17 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado
><[hidden email]>wrote: >> >> > Thanks Chad. I
>know that, but what kind of page (what title)?
>Where? >> > Would it be alright to be
>bilingual? >> > >> > Sincerely, >> > >> >
>Virgilio A. P. Machado >> > >> > >> > At 23:25
>23-03-2010, you wrote: >> > >It requires you to
>take initiative to start the page and try to
>draw >> > >others into a discussion. You don't
>need anyone's permission to do >> > >that. Also,
>I think it was (briefly) glossed over before,
>but there >> > >/is/ the Language Converter code
>in MediaWiki that could be >> > >leveraged to
>help some here. I don't think it's necessarily a
>magic >> > >bullet, but it's worth exploring. I
>know nothing in Portuguese, so I >> > >don't
>really grasp how widespread the discrepancies
>are, but I >> > >assume there's rules to
>describe them. Social solutions are
>also >> > >helpful, like the aforementioned
>American/British and Cyrillic/Latin >> > >issues
>mentioned earlier in the thread. A combination
>of social and >> > >technical solutions might
>just help bring some closure to
>this >> > >issue.
>-Chad >>_________________________________________
>______ >>foundation-l mailing
>list >>[hidden email] >>Unsubsc
>ribe:
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l 
> > > >
>_______________________________________________ >
>  foundation-l mailing list >
>[hidden email] > Unsubscribe:
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l 
> > For lack of anywhere else, start it up at
>[[Portuguese language issues]] or something. I'm
>not a regular metapedian, so there might be a
>better place--I just can't think of a *specific*
>place offhand. -Chad
>_______________________________________________
>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
12