Re: Language autonomy and "readiness" (was: Swedish, Spanish, French Wikinews set up)

--- Erik Moeller <erik_moeller@...> wrote:
> Aside from what people's feelings are, it is important to collect 
> empirical data. So far, your claim that Wikipedia will lose contributors 
> to in-the-news articles because of Wikinews is unproven. It may in fact 
> be the other way around, given that Wikinews prominently links to as 
> much Wikipedia material as possible.

Again, those data were in a language that I already noted was fine for
Wikinews. And English, being such an international language and spoken by so
many people can not be a used in such a test. The English-speaking community of
users working on Wikimedia projects is huge. So your results are not at all
surprising. 

> But the arguments that have been brought up against the French Wikinews 
> are just the same that have been brought up against Wikinews in general: 
> It could harm our reputation, it could lead to legal problems, etc. 
> Whether these arguments outweigh the benefits of the project has been 
> addressed in a global vote. 

Imposing the results of a global vote onto a language community which has a
great deal of opposition to the vote result, is not something that makes for
harmonious co-existence between languages. This is especially true when a large
plurality of the global vote is from a single language community. 

So global votes are great for deciding if the foundation wants to start a new
project at all. But whether or not particular language communities are ready
for that project should be up to them - not forced onto them. 

> What is a good solution to that problem? Perhaps, as soon as the 
> required number of contributors is reached, there should be a vote on 
> when the desired launch date is. "Never" would not be an option in that 
> vote, but it could have a scope of, say, 4 weeks. This would also be a 
> test of whether the people who pledged to participate are actually still 
> around and interested, so the vote could have the same minimum number of 
> participants.

'Never' is not a valid option. I can agree with that. But 'not in the immediate
future' *would* have to be an option, IMO. 

> I am opposed to delaying the creation of Wikinews just because a 
> Wikipedia in the language in question is still too small. That would 
> create a hierarchy of projects. When there are participants, the project 
> should be launched - but the timetable for the launch could be set by 
> the community.

You are putting words into my mouth. I never said that Wikpedians in a certain
language decide this, I said that the relevant language community decides it
(well at least if I did say it, that was not what I meant :). *All* Wikimedia
projects in a particular language have a stake in a new project in their
language. Thus all Wikimedians who participate in those language project
versions need to be heard. 

-- mav

		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com