[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wikipedia-l
Subject:    Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Dutch-Low Saxon test-mainpage
From:       Heiko Evermann <heiko.evermann () gmx ! de>
Date:       2005-07-12 7:27:41
Message-ID: 200507120927.41550.heiko.evermann () gmx ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Mark,
> > Nevertheless Mark changed "veel" into "vääl". I then reverted it. In
> > general Sass favours "e" över "ä". Mark does otherwise. He changed a lot
> > of "e"s into "ä"s. I do not consider that an improvement.
>
> I've said before and I'll say again, those changes were originally
> made by Ron Hahn. You reverted them, and then I reverted you. So they
> do not originate from me.
Maybe. But after all, anonymous edits are living a dangerous life. As I said 
somewhere else: I use the recent changes patrol flags to check each and every 
edit in nds.wikipedia.org. Anonymous edits are something I check twice.

> > 1) We have been tidying up a lot recently, but Mark fails to notice. He
> > just comes along, has an idea, does not ask the community about its
> > customs and just does whatever he has in mind. He gets reverted, does it
> > again and gets into trouble. This is egotism. Wikipedia however is
> > supposed to be a community project.
>
> If it's supposed to be a community project, then why are you excluding
> opinions such as Servien's and Ron's as if they were from outside,
> even though these people tried to contribute?
I have had a long discussion with Servien. The result of which is that we 
would like to have two different wikipedias: nds and nds-nl, and we perfectly 
agree. The problem with you is just that you do as you please, and when 
someone disagrees, you just go on as you please. Again: "respect the 
community". And a further piece of information: community is those people who 
were already there. If someone comes to join, the best way to earn respect 
within a community is by doing good work. Good work being work that the 
community that is already there likes. If however someone comes and just 
changes things without caring about previous discussions, then this is what 
might happen:
1) the changes happen to be in line with previous decisions. Good luck. 
Respect points earned.
2) the changes happen to go against local policy. Bad luck. No respect points 
earned. 
2.1) the changes were anonymous. Community suspects some kind of vandalism. 
Quick revert. Such things happen at least twice a week. The problem with 
anonymous users is that you cannot even drop them a note. Hence the quick 
revert.
2.2) the changes were made by a logged in user. Community might complain. A 
discussion starts. Changes may or may not be reverted.

The first edits of the article about "Katt" were anonymous and they did not 
fit into our local policy. They got reverted. Then you stepped in and just 
did the same thing. And that brought you into trouble.


> > 2) Whether or not these phonetic distinctions are neccessary or not is
> > not just for me or for Mark to decide. The main orthography (according to
> > Sass) thinks otherwise. And therefore it is fine not to make that
> > distinction. 3) That also means that his orthographic converter will not
> > be needed. Unless, of course, a community process over time comes to a
> > different conclusion.
>
> How is the conclusion about an orthographic converter even RELATED to
> your other conclusion??
We do not need your orthographic converter, because we are not converting from 
Sass to Ron's spelling.

> > > And then, after this, there needs to be a recognition that nds.wiki at
> > > the current time can only be for Northern and Western Low Saxon, ie
> > > excluding Plautdietsch, Westphaelsch, Eastphaelsch... otherwise we
> > > open the Pandora's box of incomprehensibility.
> >
> > Yes, this is indeed the case. But these variants of Low Saxon are
> > different no matter what orthography you use. Nordneddersassisch is one
> > of the variants within Low Saxon that developed into a standard. (BTW:
> > Harry Potter vol 1+2 were translated into Low Saxon, guess into which
> > version... Right: Nordneddersassisch)
>
> What is your point here? That's basically what I said.
My point is that you seemed to present your point in a way that suggests that 
this decision is deplorable. I said. Yes! This is the way it is.

Kind regards,

Heiko Evermann
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]