Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Milos Rancic
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Ting Chen wrote: > Well, I remember I read some very interesting articles, mainly from > ethnologists in Scientific American about language conservation. > Personally I think that language conservation is something that is > meaningful and should be done. But I have

Re: [Foundation-l] Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...

2009-01-04 Thread effe iets anders
But was that connection close enough (even in the old days) to complain here about copyright violations there? I think Tim had a good point here :P Lodewijk 2009/1/5 Dan Rosenthal : > I don't think this is entirely accurate. For instance, there was the > annual report several months ago noting th

Re: [Foundation-l] Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...

2009-01-04 Thread Dan Rosenthal
I don't think this is entirely accurate. For instance, there was the annual report several months ago noting that we had shared some office space with them. That was relevant to this list. -Dan On Jan 4, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Tim Starling wrote: > Brock Weller wrote: >> Don't know how linked we s

Re: [Foundation-l] Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...

2009-01-04 Thread Tim Starling
Brock Weller wrote: > Don't know how linked we still are with wikia... What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com. Wh

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Ting Chen
Well, I remember I read some very interesting articles, mainly from ethnologists in Scientific American about language conservation. Personally I think that language conservation is something that is meaningful and should be done. But I have doubt if WikiMedia can or should host projects for th

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, In the Wikimedia Foundation we have a division in projects like Wikipedia, Wikisource etc. There is no such thing as a compendium and as this is not an accepted idea. When people ask for a Wikipedia, their request is to write an encyclopaedia. It is for the volunteers to decide what they want

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Milos Rancic
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > The notion of redundancy of articles in minority languages coming from you > Milos is painful. There is typically an article of a majority language that > arguably covers the subject best. All other articles are redundant because > you can u

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Mathias Schindler
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The notion that a language is moribund is problematic. A language is moribund as long as no-one speaking natively that language is objecting. This non-arbitrary definition has become de-facto standard since the street paving process

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, The notion of redundancy of articles in minority languages coming from you Milos is painful. There is typically an article of a majority language that arguably covers the subject best. All other articles are redundant because you can use something like Google translate to share the benefit of

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Milos Rancic
I wasn't precise while describing my intention, so I'll try to do it now with responses to the previous emails. * About moribund languages: It is not a precise term, but it is possible to make some description and to realize where are the borders of the term. For example, a language with ~15.000 s

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
2009/1/4 Andre Engels : > As far as I know, _all_ new languages are supposed to show their > possibility at the incubator nowadays, which to me means that there is > no need for a separate policy on these languages. My proposal would > be: > * Give a warning to the proposer that the language editio

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
> My proposal is to do the next in the cases of moribund languages: > * Reject proposal for project creation. > * Suggesting them to put their language corpus at [multilingual] > Wikisource. > * Allowing them to work on Incubator if they really want to spend some > efforts on language revival. > *

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, The notion that a language is moribund is problematic. Choosing a level of 100 speakers is arbitrary, because who says so. The requirements are that someone who speaks the language natively is part of the starting project is already tough. When people have created an incubator project, the lan

Re: [Foundation-l] What to do with moribund languages?

2009-01-04 Thread Andre Engels
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: > I realized that at Requests for new languages [1] we have a number of > proposals for projects in moribund languages [2]. In brief, when > roughly less than 1000 dominantly older persons speak one language, > this language will be dead when tho