http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Template:BLPLang is not currently used at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Movement_Strategic_Plan_Summary
This can be construed as the WMF wanting to reach the people of the world to provide educational contents AND English-dominate them. The fact that http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_subcommittees/Trans#Core_set_of_languages is now marked as "obsolete" disappoints me. It seems to mean that multilingualism has been rejected. Can the notion that a key document like a strategic plan is ready for release when it exists in only one language be discussed ? Or is it already too late ? Has multilingualism definitely lost the game ? For example because most of the supporters of multilingualism have left the management sphere of WMF. If you look at Jay Walsh's user page on meta : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jaywalsh you can find an indirect acknowledgement that Canada is a multilingual country. Is multilingualism worse off or better off in the Wikimedia Foundation than it is in Canada ? Should http://blog.wikimedia.org/ remain 100% English ? Why not have 1 or 2% of non-English with English translation ? 5 or 10% of English-with-some-translation ? Which degree of openness to non-English language should be shown on http://blog.wikimedia.org/ ? What is the purpose of linking to the blog from non-English main pages such as http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Portada anyway ? Would it not be fairer to tell people "we have nothing pertinent in your language on this website. Please learn English first and come back. See you again" ? Shouldn't a number of English-only contents be moved to the USA, UK, Australia, etc. chapter websites ? _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
