headers
Mark Williamson | 1 Aug 02:30
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

At 7,211 pages, they are obviously working on something.

According to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias it has
a low depth, but it is higher than some Wikis that are much larger:

- Lombard (0 depth)
- Telugu (3 depth)
- Cebuano (0)
- Volapuk (0)
- Newari (2)
- Bishnupriya Manipuri (3)
- Ido (3)
- Sundanese (4)
- Javanese (3)
- Piedmontese (2)
- Tajik (3)
- Sanskrit (2)
- Yoruba (1)

Mark

On 31/07/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr@...> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> while I understand that nobody is keen to get dragged into the
> controversy over the "Siberian" Wikipedia[1] I still feel that some
> sort of a solution should be envisaged, even if currently there is no
> such body as a meta arbitration committee, that would have the formal
> authority to handle this case.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen | 1 Aug 02:32
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

On 8/1/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr@...> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> while I understand that nobody is keen to get dragged into the
> controversy over the "Siberian" Wikipedia[1] I still feel that some
> sort of a solution should be envisaged, even if currently there is no
> such body as a meta arbitration committee, that would have the formal
> authority to handle this case.
>
> The Siberian Wikipedia is composed in a non-notable constructed
> language, which has absolutely no recognition by any relevant
> authority. It is loosely based on historical contemporary Russian
> dialects of Northern Russia and Siberia. Much of its content is
> non-encyclopaedic, some has been considered highly offensive by many
> Russians.
>

Without making any deeper judgement on the language in question,
much less the content; I think you have seriously misunderstood
the meaning of the word "constructed language".

A _constructed language_ is one that is created without any
historical precedent at all of people speaking anything remotely
like it.

On this basis I don't think you can be talking about a constructed language
as such, even though I make no judgement on whether the language/dialect
 - what have you - is notable enough to merit any presence on wikimedia.

> Notable cases, where action has been taken with regard to
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Hsiang-Tai (Ted) Chien | 1 Aug 10:02
Picon
Gravatar

Wikimania Golden Awards

Hello wikimedians,

We will have a Wikimania Golden Awards activity from now to August 4, 2007. You will have a chance to win a prize cup and a WikiStick USB device which contains local Wikipedia database and context search software for free. For more information, you may refer to the Wikimania Golden Awards page on the Wikimania website this year:

http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Awards

The winners will be announced in the Award Session of Wikimania in August 5, 2007.

Want to win the prize? Submit your best graphics and join the contest!

 

Regards,

H.T. (Ted)

Wikimania Organization Team

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Johannes Rohr | 1 Aug 10:48
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

"Mark Williamson" <node.ue@...>
writes:

> At 7,211 pages, they are obviously working on something.

[...]

Mostly (i.e. ~6000 pages, iirc) are bot-generated year-stubs.

Thanks,

Johannes

--

-- 
http://www.infoe.de/
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Johannes Rohr | 1 Aug 10:54
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

"Thomas Dalton"
<thomas.dalton@...> writes:

>> It is loosely based on historical contemporary Russian
>> dialects of Northern Russia and Siberia.
>
> "historical contemporary"? Isn't that an oxymoron?

Should have been "historical *and* contemporary". 

Verbose: Russian dialects of Western Siberia which are, as far as I
know, mostly extinct, and the dialect of the Pomors which I understand
is still preserved in some remote places of Arkhangelsk region and
maybe neighbouring provinces in North-Western Russia.

Thanks,

Johannes
--

-- 
http://www.infoe.de/
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Johannes Rohr | 1 Aug 11:22
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

"Jussi-Ville Heiskanen"
<cimonavaro@...> writes:

> On 8/1/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr@...> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,

[...]

>> The Siberian Wikipedia is composed in a non-notable constructed
>> language, which has absolutely no recognition by any relevant
>> authority. It is loosely based on historical contemporary Russian
>> dialects of Northern Russia and Siberia. Much of its content is
>> non-encyclopaedic, some has been considered highly offensive by many
>> Russians.
>>
>
> Without making any deeper judgement on the language in question,
> much less the content; I think you have seriously misunderstood
> the meaning of the word "constructed language".
>
> A _constructed language_ is one that is created without any
> historical precedent at all of people speaking anything remotely
> like it.

I don't think you are right here. Most conlangs borrow heavily from
existing vernaculars or historical languages. Take for instance
Esperanto, Interlingua, Slovio, Latina sine flexione.

Still I'm not keen to fight over terms. What ever you call it,
"Sibirskoi govor" is not a vernacular, not a natural language. It
would not be understood by its alleged native speakers in the Russian
North, as much of its vocabulary is either constructed or borrowed
from other languages (and deliberately designed to be as distant from
standard Russian as possible).

> On this basis I don't think you can be talking about a constructed
> language as such, even though I make no judgement on whether the
> language/dialect - what have you - is notable enough to merit any
> presence on wikimedia.

The simplest and most objective criteria we have is recognition by
relevant bodies external to Wikimedia. ru-sib has no iso code or other
form of external recognition, thus it clearly wouldn't be eligible
under the current language proposal policy. It is purely an Internet
phenomenon, propagated by a bunch of bloggers.

>> Notable cases, where action has been taken with regard to
>> non-encyclopaedic Wikipedias in conlangs or Wikipedias in
>> non-notable conlangs include the Klingon (thl) and Toki Pona
>> (tokipona) editions. Both have been eventually relocated to wikia,
>> where their authors have every freedom and opportunity to continue
>> their projects as they see fit.
>
> I am not saying the same solution is a wrong solution, but I *do*
> think you are comparing apples and oranges.

...only in the sense that the aforementioned Wikis have probably less
or no offensive content, like referring to Russians as "Muscovite
scum" ("Moskal'ska svoloch"). Or which other substantial differences
do you see?

>> Unless there are double-standards, the same solution should be applied
>> to the ru-sib Wikipedia.
>
> There may or may not be double standards, but circumstances certainly
> alter cases, and whatever might be fair in the particular case you are
> discussing, pretty certainly it will not hinge on a comparison to klingon or
> toki pona.

[...]

I cannot see what you mean by "circumstances alter cases" when
referring to this case. In fact, if ru-sib was proposed today, it
would almost certainly be rejected. The ru-sib guys were just lucky
that they managed to get their Wiki created just before a
comprehensive policy on new languages had been developed.

Thanks,

Johannes

--

-- 
http://www.infoe.de/
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen | 1 Aug 11:55
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

On 8/1/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr@...> wrote:

<lots of good stuff>

I think what you said in that last posting clarified the
situation admirably. Where I lacked the proper context
before, your posting was greatly informative and I at least
feel your position is much stronger as a result (in my eyes,
even if it may not mean that much in the larger scheme of
things).

What you describe would indeed be a very fishy situation.

--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mark Williamson | 1 Aug 12:03
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

That's still 1,211 pages.

Mark

On 01/08/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr@...> wrote:
> "Mark Williamson" <node.ue@...>
> writes:
>
> > At 7,211 pages, they are obviously working on something.
>
> [...]
>
> Mostly (i.e. ~6000 pages, iirc) are bot-generated year-stubs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Johannes
>
> --
> http://www.infoe.de/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@...
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--

-- 
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Mark Williamson | 1 Aug 12:13
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

On 01/08/07, Johannes Rohr <jorohr@...> wrote:
> Still I'm not keen to fight over terms. What ever you call it,
> "Sibirskoi govor" is not a vernacular, not a natural language. It
> would not be understood by its alleged native speakers in the Russian
> North, as much of its vocabulary is either constructed or borrowed
> from other languages (and deliberately designed to be as distant from
> standard Russian as possible).

Of course it isn't a vernacular. That doesn't mean it isn't a natural
language - there are several natural "standard" languages that aren't
anybody's vernacular, or that weren't until very recently.

I find your statement regarding intelligibility suspect. Please
provide references to support it.

> The simplest and most objective criteria we have is recognition by
> relevant bodies external to Wikimedia. ru-sib has no iso code or other
> form of external recognition, thus it clearly wouldn't be eligible
> under the current language proposal policy. It is purely an Internet
> phenomenon, propagated by a bunch of bloggers.

Yes, but it doesn't make sense to me that we should close all existing
Wikis that would not be created under the current policy. I feel that
we should grandfather them in and treat proposed removals on a
case-by-case basis.

> ...only in the sense that the aforementioned Wikis have probably less
> or no offensive content, like referring to Russians as "Muscovite
> scum" ("Moskal'ska svoloch"). Or which other substantial differences
> do you see?

First of all, that offending content is part of a poem used as an
example of a certain author, or at least that is what I have been
told.

Second of all, the differences are very great, and they lie in the
intention of the respective languages: Toki Pona is intended as a
simple international auxiliary language; Klingon is the language of a
fictional race of aliens. Siberian, on the other hand, is intended to
be a language for a specific geocultural group.

> I cannot see what you mean by "circumstances alter cases" when
> referring to this case. In fact, if ru-sib was proposed today, it
> would almost certainly be rejected. The ru-sib guys were just lucky
> that they managed to get their Wiki created just before a
> comprehensive policy on new languages had been developed.

There are dozens of other Wikis that would not be created today
because current policy is very restrictive due to the xenophobic idea
that "we already have enough Wikis". If the current policy had existed
at the beginning, who knows how many languages we'd have today?

--

-- 
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Johannes Rohr | 1 Aug 13:04
Picon

Re: Future fate of Siberian Wikipedia

"Mark Williamson" <node.ue@...>
writes:

> On 01/08/07, Johannes Rohr
<jorohr-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@...> wrote:
>> Still I'm not keen to fight over terms. What ever you call it,
>> "Sibirskoi govor" is not a vernacular, not a natural language. It
>> would not be understood by its alleged native speakers in the Russian
>> North, as much of its vocabulary is either constructed or borrowed
>> from other languages (and deliberately designed to be as distant from
>> standard Russian as possible).
>
> Of course it isn't a vernacular. That doesn't mean it isn't a natural
> language - there are several natural "standard" languages that aren't
> anybody's vernacular, or that weren't until very recently.
>
> I find your statement regarding intelligibility suspect. Please
> provide references to support it.

Almost all terms for modern terms are completely invented and do not
exist elsewhere. Just some examples from the main page: "mezhugigma"
("Internet"), "robotny vedy" (probably "natural sciences"),
"vseznaika" ("encyclopaedia"), "bashlykoznaisvo" ("management"),
"artelezaisvo" (probably "social science"), "mudrionozaisvo" (probably
"philosophy"). I could continue for quite a while but I'm afraid it
will get boring. However, the creator of the language has explicitely
stated this intention in his blog: 

,----
| "I don't think it will be too hard to construct a Siberian language,
| adding to chaldon's dialect grammar the required amount of Tatar
| roots, up to making the Siberian language unintelligible to European
| Russians. "[1].
`----

>> The simplest and most objective criteria we have is recognition by
>> relevant bodies external to Wikimedia. ru-sib has no iso code or other
>> form of external recognition, thus it clearly wouldn't be eligible
>> under the current language proposal policy. It is purely an Internet
>> phenomenon, propagated by a bunch of bloggers.
>
> Yes, but it doesn't make sense to me that we should close all existing
> Wikis that would not be created under the current policy. I feel that
> we should grandfather them in and treat proposed removals on a
> case-by-case basis.

When there are no issues, there is certainly no need to do
anything. But, alas, this is not the case here.

>> ...only in the sense that the aforementioned Wikis have probably less
>> or no offensive content, like referring to Russians as "Muscovite
>> scum" ("Moskal'ska svoloch"). Or which other substantial differences
>> do you see?
>
> First of all, that offending content is part of a poem used as an
> example of a certain author, or at least that is what I have been
> told.

A "poem" - what a lame pretext. This poem has been uploaded by its
very author, who is at the same time the creator of the language and
the founder and one of the administrators of this wiki. Gimmie a
break! There have been many pleas to take this page down. He has
consistently refused to do so.

Additionally, there are many articles, which are just as
non-encyclopaedic as this one. Take the article "Rosseia", ("Russia"),
which i.a. states that "the symbols of Russian mentality are Vodka and
herring" or Yaroslav Zolotaryov's original article on Alexander
Pushkin, where he described him as "Russian nigger and poet". N.b.:
This version has been written by the creator of the language, and
founder and administrator of the ru-sib Wikipedia.[2]

> Second of all, the differences are very great, and they lie in the
> intention of the respective languages: Toki Pona is intended as a
> simple international auxiliary language; Klingon is the language of a
> fictional race of aliens. Siberian, on the other hand, is intended to
> be a language for a specific geocultural group.

...if you call a bunch of bloggers at livejournal.com a "geocultural
group", maybe. So what? 

[...]

Thanks,

Johannes

Footnotes: 
[1] "Не думаю, что будет сложно сконструировать
сибирский язык, залив в чалдонскую диалектную
грамматику нужное количество татарских корней,
вплоть до непонимания сибирского языка
европейскими русскими." http://samir74.livejournal.com/2005/04/30/

[2]  http://ru-sib.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9F%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD%2C_%D0%9B%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%A1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87&oldid=4587

--

-- 
http://www.infoe.de/
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane