Wikipedia talk:Complete list of language wikis available/Archive 1

Whether new language Wikipedias use the new software
How can I know if one of the not-created-yet languages with a subdomain reserved uses the new software or not? And if it does, why the link is an invalid one? Or if it doesn't, what should I do?


 * The low saxon wikipedia http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki.cgi seems to have vanished. Does anybody know what has happened? 80.137.81.110 08:42, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * It is back - see andy 09:26, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Toki Pona
Hey, how about a Toki Pona wikipedia? I'm sure Damian Yerrick would help run it... --User:Chuck Smith
 * Not for at least a few weeks, but perhaps once the language settles out. Heck, Sonja Elen Kisa is about to change the words for 'it' and 'they'. Besides, what would be the two- or three-letter code for such a constructed pidgin? And with numerals of length O(n), how are we supposed to do year in review? --Damian Yerrick
 * Oh, that's an easy one: just give each year a name. Brion VIBBER, Friday, May 17, 2002
 * I asked Sonja about the whole thing, and she responded: "crazy! / an encyclopedia is very unTP / TP is about modesty / not about hording millions of entries of knowledge" --Damian Yerrick


 * See comments in the section on "the smaller conlangs" below.
 * --VerdLanco 10:29, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The smaller conlangs
I see there is an Esperanto wikipedia, but what about other conlangs? Quenya and Klingon are both spoken by quite a few people around the world (the same kind of people that i would expect to use this sort of site). -- Tango


 * We have Interlingua and Volap&uuml;k; they both have language codes, of course. If there's really interest in working in Quenya or Klingon, maybe we can set something up, but they're not "serious" conlangs. Maybe I'm just biased towards international auxiliary languages against fictional devices, though. ;) --Brion 16:59 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)


 * In April, 2004, Toki Pona got its own Wikipedia. But in November User:Jimbo decided to have it suspended, for reasons of "trying to introduce some consistency into our policies".  (See User talk:Jimbo Wales.)
 * --VerdLanco 10:29, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Since the Toki Pona Encyclopedia ended up at Wikicities, maybe proponents of smaller constructed languages could take a similar route to get an encyclopedia off the ground. Maybe the content could be moved to its own wikipedia at a later date if there's enough interest.  FWIW, the difference between Esperanto/Interlingua/Volap&uuml;k and Quenya/Klingon/Toki Pona is obvious (to me anyway):  Eo/ia/vo were all created as IALs while the others were created for artistic purposes and just happen to have some people who took them up. --Theodore Kloba 20:23, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the only wiki
May I move this one to Complete list of language wikipedias available ? There is a confusion between wikipedia and wiki here. User:anthere

I agree. Indeed some japanese Wikipedians were misled by the current title. Tomos 03:29, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Yes, anthere, please do!
 * --VerdLanco 10:16, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

it.wikipedia.com offline
Moved from Village pump on Saturday, September 13th, 02003.

http://it.wikipedia.com/ gives "The page you are looking for is currently unavailable." Where is the best place to report something like this? Thanks, Fantasy 14:19, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)


 * The server hosting all the *.wikipedia.com wikis is offline at the moment. :( It's being looked into, hopefully should be back up within a day. (Apparently it won't come up on a remote reboot, so Jason the tech guy has to go in to the colocation center and bang on it in person.) --Brion 16:45, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

-

What's happening with wikipedia.com?
Moved from Village pump on Saturday, September 13th, 02003.

Now, if you go to it.wikipedia.com thaere is another page called ClubHouse. Llull
 * http://tvclubhouse.bomis.com/ to be more specific. Angela


 * That server's been having problems lately; it looks like the virtual server configuration is now broken. :( I'll ask if we can just pull the remaining old-software wikipedias off there and onto the main Wikipedia server... --Brion 20:45, 10 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * While youre at it, you might see about qualifying for special relocation funds from Wikimedia to be closer to the server. -&#25140;&#30505sv
 * Hey, give me enough money to buy food with, and I'll gladly live in a closet next to the server. Seriously. -- Jake 02:56, 2003 Sep 11 (UTC)
 * Sounds a great idea. Me too. Angela 03:07, Sep 11, 2003 (UTC)
 * I make funny joke. But its amazing how hard it seems to just get the server reset, innit? -&#25140;&#30505sv

Any news about the old server? Andres 10:07, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)


 * The news is that it is bound for that big serverfarm in the sky. Requiescat In Pace. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 11:21, Sep 12, 2003 (UTC)

The 'pedias formerly on wikipedia.com have been reopened under wikipedia.org. Thank you! Is it possible to announce this on the old addresses? Andres 10:48, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * I believe the old address will automatically redirect to the new one in a couple of days when the DNS updates. Angela 10:50, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)

-

Irish language name
It seems that some people are quite imperative that the Irish language version be referred to as the Irish Gaelic version. Why? Is there some other language referred to as Irish that it may be confused with? There is a difference to be expressed between Scottish Gaelic language and Scots language, definitely, but why tag on the Gaelic at the end? The languages are more that sufficiently different to merit it. -- Kwekubo


 * I don't see why we should change our usage. Article 8(1) of the English version of the Irish Constitution refers to it as "The Irish language...", and what's good enough for the Constitution should be good enough for us! "Gaelige" is the name of the language for itself. -- Arwel 23:10, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'm going through the languages which are red-linked to see if there are articles under different names. A few issues have come up:

Fhjordic Language - there are only two links for ''fhjordic' and they are both wiki. The only link for Fjordic is a porn site.


 * Fictional. Would be worthwhile going through the history and finding out who added it... In particular, fh is _not_ an ISO 639 2 letter code. Morwen 14:09, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Unless this is meant to be something like Faroese it's a joke. Secretlondon 14:39, Nov 18, 2003 (UTC)
 * Vandalism - added by anon IP early nov 03. Secretlondon 14:45, Nov 18, 2003 (UTC)

Messed up main pages?
Just glancing at a few of the languages which don't yet have any content, I noticed that quite a few of them have a problem with the list of languages overlapping the sidebar. This is easy to fix, by replacing the first DIV tag:

with

the difference being float:right; width:100% becomes clear:both. I did this on the Abkhazian site, but as I noticed it on several others, is there an easy way to automate this?

Also, the Abkhazian site had badly nested tags in the first paragraph which may or may not be causing problems on the other versions HappyDog 06:38, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Why has the text for the nds link been changed from Plattdüütsch to Platdüütsch? Look at the main page or, even more tellingly, the article on the language itself, and you'll see the double-T all across the board. -Branddobbe 20:51, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

Norwegian
I have reverted Wolframs changes because:

(bokmål/riksmål) -> (bokmål): riksmål is not a recognized, nor widely used from of written Norwegian. I suppose Wolfram will object that it is widely used, but AFAIK there are no data on this. The no.wikipedia.org states in its current written language policy (also disputed and made by Wolfram) that bokmål is to be used, riksmål is not mentioned. It lloks like Wolfram is trying to make it look like norwegian is riksmål and bokmål, and not nynorsk and bokmål (the official recognised forms).

 The tag: I have removed this tag because it is not used in any of the other comments, and does not make any difference on some browsers. I you'd like to keep it, please apply it to all the other comments too.

Statistics: I removed majority form (86%) bokmål/traditional standard Norwegian (riksmål) and nynorsk ("New Norwegian", used by around 14 %) (formatting removed) because this is a part of the dispute discussion. If you don't think its not disputed you should discuss it here and then remove the dispute text. Such arguments does not belong in the list.

'New' in Norwegian (nynorsk) listing: I removed this because the (bokmål) listing is not translated and it is not necessery.

I also removed the link to the Norwegian Wikipedia discussion in place of a link to this talk page.

As a final comment I'd like to say that I think it is very nice that you contribute so much time on the norwegian wikipedia (including language articles), but it is sad that in respect to the norwegian language your articles are often quite tainted by POV, and since the nynorsk users are so few, there are none but me to balance it. Eagerly awaiting your comments --Dittaeva 14:57, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dittaeva's statements on "riksmål" are incorrect. Riksmål (or in English "Traditional Standard Norwegian" ) is de facto the standard language of Norway, which is used by most large Norwegian newspapers and encyclopedias, including Aftenposten and Store Norske Leksikon. The official language called "bokmål" (literally "book language", but meaning "Standard Norwegian"), which was developed from riksmål, but (unsuccessfully) merged with nynorsk, was originally only used by the government, and was not very popular, to express it mildly. A better name of "bokmål" would be "samnorsk". After the recent language reforms (1981, 2003) the now official "bokmål" language however may be considered (modern) riksmål, as it has adopted most of the traditional riksmål spelling - but riksmål cannot be called "bokmål". Norwegian (or Standard Norwegian) is the name of the "bokmål"/"riksmål" language often used by the speakers of this language, while speakers of the minority language New Norwegian ("nynorsk") insist that the language cannot be called Norwegian because New Norwegian, a language created by Ivar Aaasen in the late 19th century, is also a Norwegian language (in the same way Low German is also a German language). However, speakers of standard Norwegian feel it offensive and ignorant calling this language "bokmål" in English, a name which is not understood by English-speaking people, and without even mentioning riksmål. Most Americans would feel it offensive if someone called them "USAians" as well, I guess. Wolfram 18:21, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Some statistics: According to the Norwegian Language Council, around 10-12 % of all Norwegians now use Nynorsk (an estimate), while the rest use bokmål/riksmål. And in 2000, 92 % of all publications in Norwegian were in bokmål/riksmål, and 8 % in Nynorsk.

An example of the (traditional) difference between "bokmål" and "riksmål": Until 1981 water was called (only) "vatn" in bokmål, while it was called "vann" in riksmål. "Vann" is the form used by almost all of the people speaking the bokmål/riksmål language, while "vatn" is primarily a New Norwegian word. The same applies to a bunch of other common words.


 * May I understand your argument about riksmål like this "as most norwegians write something conforming to the riksmål standard, norwegians write riksmål and not bokmål"? I find such an argument quite irrelevant. I could do the same thing, do a survey that found how most norwegians write, make a standard of it (called f.ex. TheRealNewNorwegian (TRNN)) and claim that most norwegians were using the TRNN standard and not bokmål. What matters here is what norwegian written language norm/standard the no.wikipedia.org uses and should use. The history behind these norms/standards and what its followers think of them is also irrelevant (but all those things might be relevant to a discussion about the use of the no, subdomain).


 * While bokmål "was originally only used by the government" it has been so from 1929, and the government runs the schools, and most norwegians have attended school after 1929.


 * You state that riksmål "is used by most large Norwegian newspapers and encyclopedias", while your own list show that only two large (the biggest and ) uses it, while the two others (VG and Dagbladet) are "neutral". And I only know of two norwegian general-topic encyclopedias one using riksmål and the other (Caplex)?


 * While you might think that bokmål could also be called "samnorsk", and that "speakers of standard Norwegian feel it offensive and ignorant calling this language 'bokmål'" those are your very POVs. I am not shure what you mean with "speakers of standard Norwegian", but do you really think that most norwegians that have been learning bokmål in school, find it offensive calling their written language bokmål?


 * I'm going away on holiday now, so I'm probably not going to be able to attend the discussion, nor the reversion of your edits for a while. I have therefore only removed the link to the no: page sine it is on this discussion page, and left riksmål in. That does not mean however, that I condone your use of riksmål in the page, it is merely a kind of "cease-fire". ---Dittaeva 14:25, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * BTW: Could you please use the "summary" field much more extensivly both here and on no.wikipedia.org.?

If you want to continue this discussion, the correct place is the Norwegian page dealing with the issue. Thank you. Wolfram 15:08, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Just after going on holiday I realized that as long as the current no.wikipedia.org comprises all the norwegian forms (which it does today, although favouring bokmaal) we are (have been) having a "potential conflict". I have therefore undone my "seed of conflict" and restored the norwegian listing to what it was before (19:02, 18 Jan 2004). The conflict will off course reappear should nynorsk ever be banned from no.wikipedia.org. ---Dittaeva 16:02, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Tok Pisin
Hello, I would like to start a Tok Pisin wikipedia. Could someone help me to open it? Tok Pisin does not seem to have an ISO 639-1 two-letter code but tp seems to be free. Otherwise the ISO 639-2 is tpi. For the moment, I made a tentative page and I presented it as a link on the Bislama main page (a language closely related to Tok-Pisin). Thank you for helping. --Milaiklainim 16:15, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I've left you note on the bi talk page. I think it is an excellent idea for a tpi.wikipedia.org. You just need to wait until a developer has time. Secretlondon 23:02, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll wait, then. Thanks in advance to the developer who'll take this in charge, and to all others for working on Wikipedia(s) --Milaiklainim 06:39, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm confused now. What's the difference between http://tp.wikipedia.org and http://tpi.wikipedia.org ? They seem to have different content at the moment. Marnanel 03:42, Apr 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * tpi is for Tok Pisin, tp will be for another wiki. Secretlondon 07:54, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)