Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Siberian Wikipedia

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Proposals for closing projects
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Elk Salmon (talk | contribs) at 12:02, 10 November 2006 (→‎Where is all the circus?). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Close Siberian wikipedia

I've never heard of "Siberian" language, but I was indifferent to this Wikipedia at the beginning, even though I thought the entire section was Original Research, using not-really-existant language. However, it has become a home for trolls and keeps bashing everything Russian [1] [2] ("Moskali" in their terms) from nationalist point of view, teaming up with Ukranian nationalists. (Of course, Ukranian, unlike Siberian, is a language in its own right.) There is no respect for Neutral Point of View in this Wikipedia.

I can see the following reasons to close it:

  1. it uses specially crafted or virtually unknown language named "Siberian";
  2. it has no respect for Neutral Point of View and keeps consistent anti-Russian position;
  3. it can never serve to promote and preserve knowledge and create a true encyclopedia because of its strong bias and no real user base;
  4. it demands insertion of its interwikies to other language sections, and, given the above, I consider such interwikies as feeding the trolls;
  5. it is not serious on common topics; for instance, see "translation" of Hamlet with obscene words at the very end.

All in all, I think this section lowers prestige of Wikipedia as a whole. -- Paul Pogonyshev 23:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • And it was without any consensus, simply under Muscovite flashmob and because of impossibility for making decision without english sources about this, and 7 wikipedias still have articles about Siberian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It had FULL consensus from the Admin of the wiki! And please stop insulting others with terms like flashmob and such, it only weakens your case if you turn to insults instead of logical arguments. --Kuban kazak 19:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support arguments

  1. There is no valid source that verify existing of Siberian language (was suggested as "original research") [3]
    • To prove this, www.ethnologue.com, one of the most authoritative sources about world's languages mentions "Siberian" as a language family only, not as a single language [4]. This language family has nothing to do with Russian dialects or derivative languages. --Volkov 13:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. No single paper book published
  3. Not serious on common topics [5] [6]
    That's lie, based on xenophobic feelings to the language.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Small size
    • Most of content is empty stub [7]
    • Artificial exaggerration of its size. 6 hours ago during my vote I checked it had some 4,500 articles (as reported on their main page). Of which at least 4,300 were year articles, at least from 2300 BC to 2006. Smart move, I must say. Right now they already have 6,567 articles! The growth that surpasses english wikipedia. I can nothing but guess they are running bots or something to artificially inflate themselves. Mikkalai 21:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Pure accusation to a new wiki without any proofs--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you saying that 4,300 articles are not year articles? (actually, it is already over 5,466 of empty articles, because I see ru-sib:3000 до н. п. and ru-sib:2100 and plus 366 days ru-sib:9 ревуна.). And I have no desire to fish out what other empty pages you dumped there. Mikkalai 01:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I am saying that many year articles are not empty - 1419, 2000, 2010, 14, 90, etc, etc. Many day articles are not empty too. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Talk about it in Further comments with Mikkalai (Carn_ru)
  5. Aggressive anti-russian position [8] [9]
    This is lie, based on misunderstanding of this articles. You do not know the language, how can you judge about it? (Yaroslav Zolotaryov)
    It is a position that only you and your friends can judge anything about Siberian language. I know russian and can understand it's dialects. (Carn_ru)
    haha, where have you studied Russian dialectology? The russian dailects are studied by scientists for centuries, and still not known well. As to Siberian, your "translation" in the bottom shows, that you understand about 50% You think too much of yourself. Your self-confidence cannot be proved by your knowledge. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. An opening of "siberian" language section was caused by voting falsification.
    1. Most of votes for creation were anonymous, only with e-mails, their names in Livejournal etc., you can falsificate easily (one person can create many accounts). Most of these people have no contributions in any of Wikimedia projects.
    2. Note supporters deleted anonymous votes
    3. There were two discussions: both on Requests_for_new_languages and Requests_for_new_languages/Non-natural. The proposer, User:Yaroslav Zolotaryov, moved "votes" from first page to second. (Requests_for_new_languages is rather a discussion but not voting at all)
    4. Many votes of wikipedians were deleted by someone (as example "oppose" vote of ru:User:Maximaximax, bureaucrat of Russian Wikipedia). Page Requests_for_new_languages was vandalized sereral times from Philippines IP-s (example), and some votes were deleted from proposal (mainly opposing siberian Wikipedia creation). This vandalism was only partially reverted.
      And this vote of Maximax is still in the vote page--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    5. Some people marked themself as native speakers but also voted in Requests_for_new_languages/Non-natural. So argument for creation "there're already 8 native speakers which are ready to contribute new Wikipedia" should be ignored. The language itself was created in 2005 so there're also no "10 millions of native speakers" in real life.
      And that is their business, what they say about themselves. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Frivolous attitude: If they were serious about their language, the article ru-sib:Cибирской говор would be much longer than two sentences. Mikkalai 01:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, the finest argument to close wikipedias - short size of article about it's language)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Емопридык ("Ебьона мать, опеть припьорся дык!") v smysle troll, k kazhdoj bochke zatychka. Kak eto budet na sibirskOm? Mikkalai 02:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Personal attacks - that's all that you can do now. Hopefully Tarasevich and his friends will open the second belwiki soon, and freedom in belorussian wikicommunity will increase. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose arguments

  1. Siberian wikipedia has no articles about politics, and Russians are mentioned 2-3 times in it.
    this says that Siberia has no capital and that it is fragmented. See also en:Yakutsk, w:en:Novosibirsk, w:en:Krasnoyarsk and else.
    So what's wrong with this and where is the russophobia?)))))))) Siberia really has no capital. That's paranoia from your side. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Siberian Federal District has no administrative center, or, maybe, Siberia is a independent commonwealth to have it's own capital? (Carn_ru)
    Siberia is different notion from Siberian Federal District. All the same 1) this is POV discussion irrelevant to the voting 2) this is not political article, but you invent politics in it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It is true that there is no united Siberia and that there is no capital of Siberia in general. Though there are several capital cities in Siberia. The criticism is irrelevant, I believe. ACrush ?!/© 19:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    They are capitals of administrative regions (oblasts) but not of the whole Siberia. All the same, the POV discussion is irrelevant. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Siberian language have more than 50 articles in online and offline media about it.
    Proof, especially for offline. Guinness man 22:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    http://www.reakcia.ru/article/?1289 - example of offline article. But this is not "OR or not OR" discussion. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    they call your group «сибирские националисты», you are really Siberian nationalist? Carn ru 12:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That's one of the names of oblastniks. But do you want to delete the whole wikipedia because some russian newspaper called me nationalists? This is only political repressions with invented accusations. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. There is offline newspaper in Tomsk in siberian language.
    Proof please. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1.
    Maket [10] --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Trial issue with a planned 1000 copies. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1.
    Just FYI, the newspaper designed and prepared by Zolotaryov's team as may be seen here. Any other? 83.237.231.25 09:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Enemies of Sibwiki are nationalists and xenophobs.
    Sibwiki core users may be considered nationalists as well while discussing the "Siberian republic" whose army should liberate Siberia and occupy lower Volga regions to strip Moscow of access to oil resources. Liberté, égalité, fraternité, and please don't forget the NPOV. 83.237.231.25 09:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC) -- not logged in ACrush ?!/©[reply]
    But we do not do this in Siberian Wikipedia, and you want to organise political persecutions just because we are Siberian Oblastniks. There are no articles in sibwikipedia even about oblastnichestvo. But you, Putin slaves, want to close the wiki only because it is written in our Language --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Wait a minute. Sure you will have articles about Oblastnichestvo some day soon. Hopefully, a neutral and fact/reference-reliant one. What I wrote above is only a simple fact which may be helpful in consideration of this argument from Sibwiki founder. ACrush ?!/© 10:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But this is simply political accusation. Of course, I have certain political position and you have. But I do not write from my political position in Wikipedia, but you do, inventing arguments from nothing only because existence of Siberian Wikipedia is against your political position. All this votes in support are simply vote stacking from Russian Wikipedia, while in oppose part we have persons from very many nations - tatars, belorussians, ukrainians, turks, romanians. Our part is true international, free, having full diversity. But your part is simply Russians invited from Ruwiki under nationalistic slogans. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Whoa you're tough. I'm not a member of any political parties, I have no political stance on the subject of this discussion. I only ask for information and provide what I found. What's wrong with that? Please give us more information. That's all!ACrush ?!/© 10:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The wrong is that your information is political accusation with no relation to Wikipedia. You reveal the real goals of your friends, who search for Russophobia in wikipedia, where there is no articles about Russians or Russia, and nothing about Russian history and politics. You consider only using of real dialect as agression against you - and this is just xenophobia at play. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually my information was only the symmetrical response to your claim that the critics, who you dub "enemies", are all xenophobs and nationalists. See above. I would consider case closed if both sides refrained from mutual accusations and would consider the facts: whether the language exists, whether it is constructed or not, whether there is an opportunity that the SibWiki may evolve normally in cooperation and not confrontation with the compatriots. Please provide the full bibliographical records of the dictionaries you used in the creation (Ok, say generalization or smth) of the language - what the dictionaries call it: dialect or language; - what the textbooks say: whether the dialect/language is more or less uniform throughout Siberia, etc. ACrush ?!/© 19:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1) language exists just because dictionary, grammar and wikipedia exists 2) it is irrelevant is it constructed or not 2) SibWiki have very good cooperation with all wikipedias except russian 3) the list of my sources will be about 500 numbers - to be short, it was dialect until the standardised form was developed by Volgota group. All the same, this is irrelevant - even if the language would be totally constructed, it have right to have it's own wikipedia. All this noise about it signifies only one thing - the language is really popular and it has many enemies and friends. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem is that one online dictionary, one tentative grammar and a wikipedia may not be enough to make this a language capable of maintaining a serious, neutral encyclopedia. There must be enough native speakers born, research conducted, books and dictionaries published, etc. The part you numbered 1) is not serious as long as there is no other support for the language known but Volgota.
    Please remember that wikipedia is not a primary source of information. Actually, most of your opponents seem to oppose the attitude, but not the language. You might be interested in counting the times you called newcomers and ru-wiki users in general trolls, xenophobs and liars without actually providing proof of their deceit or good-faith error which should be assumed in the first place.ACrush ?!/© 16:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    There are no wikipedia policy, which defines how many books should be published to open wikipedia. We have very many native speakers now - the siberian wiki is the biggest and the most active from all the newly created wikies. As to my invented "insluts" - this is only accusation, Actually this is just you who do personal attack now - I am only defending my position, but you say that my defending is insult against you. All the proofs of errors of those, who agressively want to close the sibwiki, were already given. About conduct of the attackers you can learn from one of the next lines, where Mikkalai have said about my words "blatant lie", when it is very easy to check that sibwiki has not 5500 empty articles --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Sibwiki has more then 50 users and about 10 active editors from them.
  6. Sibwiki has 2000 articles, which are not stubs, and grows rapidly
    This one also needs proof. I see nothing but a bunch of stubs right now. Guinness man 22:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Just open your eyes. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Blatant lie. There are at least 5,500 empty articles about years/days, like, ru-sib:1907and ru-sib:9 ревуна. ешшо тут маловато написано дык. Mikkalai 01:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And many of them are filled. All the same, the 1200 others are definitely not yeas and days - this is the biggest wiki from the newly created ones. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually there are about 900 articles, and less than 200 of them have more than 3 sentences. Mikkalai 02:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That's normal for a new wiki, which has only one month. Later we will make them bigger. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Dictionary and grammar exist outside wikipedia in volgota.com and ukrainian sites
    Did any exist elsewhere before volgota? 83.237.231.25 09:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)-- not logged in ACrush ?!/©[reply]
    Yes, dialect vocabularies, from which we collected all words to the one language. Grammar is 100% equal to typical grammar of Northern Russian Dialects --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe you have some dictionaries and/or textbooks at hand. Please provide the full bibliographical references for consideration. This is not a provocation - I need to know before I make my decision like others. ACrush ?!/© 10:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you mean siberian dialect dictionaries? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, these too. Any books you used to create the language / dialect, any printed books describing the language. Any proof that ru-sib: is not a primary source of information in this language which wikipedias cannot be.ACrush ?!/© 16:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. The language is not created, this is standardisation of the living dialects. 1. I thank a little and decided not to do this, because this is irrelevant. All the bibliography abotu northern russian dialects you can take from the Google. It is easy verifiable that 1) Northern Russian Dialects, especially of 19 century, are very different from so called "Russian standard", which according to my POV is not Russian language at all, but modernized Chyrch Slavonic; 2) grammar and lexics of language used in sibwiki, is identical to grammar and lexics, described by real scientists for Northern Russian Dialects 3) xenophobic feelings for real dialects are known in Russian culture from 18 century, and even in that times they considered them obscenity and insult. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It is NOT a standardisation of living dialects. That is what is happening at projects like Westvlams or Westvloams. YOU are taking slang expressions and deviant vocabulary from villages all over Siberia (which all have dialects which are basically 99.5% identical to Standard Russian) and combining that into a language using Ukrainian and Belarusian to fill up the gaps. Note that I use "You" and you are using the passive voice. Passive voice is always used in English to hide who is performing the action. But it is clear from the sheer speed with which you are creating articles since the project was proposed for deletion, that YOU (and the bots) are the performer. That is why it is WP:OR and WP:OWN. The POV is only there to get the usual Russophobic crowd from Ukraine, Belarus and Romania. --Paul Pieniezny 17:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Your messages is always a great source of joy and laugh for me)))))))))) I want to sleep now and will answer later))))) About bots who work at the wiki besides me - this is very strong))) Eto silno))))))) Ja urzhalsja prosto)))))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    To be short: 1. Full nonsense about russian dialectology. 2. Full nonsence about sibwiki, which is full of users now, btw just this voting attract new people to the wiki. 3. And this crowd is victorious, you will never have 2/3 votes here, which you need for closing the wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support closing the Siberian wiki (55 votes, 54 identified)

  1. Paul Pogonyshev 23:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC) (nominator)[reply]
  2. I can confirm all of the above. MountainBlueAllah 00:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Links to POV innate nonsense languages can seriously impede the encyclopaedic process, because on controversial issues people (both end users and editors of another interwiki) may be tempted to have a look at the version in languages they do not know. I also agree with all that is stated above, so close this project (or at the very least stop the editors there from making these links). --Paul Pieniezny 00:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    All these POV accusations means only one thing: Russian Nationalists want to push their own POV into Siberian wiki. Actually Siberian wikipedia now has no political articles at all, and no POV articles. All POV accusations were invented by Russian Xenophobes. They cannot put their insults and lies into Ukrainian and Belorussian articles, so they try to close SIberian wiki, because Siberians are small and weak Slavic nation. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    "Siberians are small and weak Slavic nation" — that's bullshit. Imagine: you heard tha someone said that ihbabitans of Texas (or New England or Kent) are small and weak German nation. What would you think of him/her?
    This so called "language" is easy to understand for any Russian. The biggest difference is usage of writing system that is close to pronunciation (instead of etymological in Russian literally language). (unsigned comment of newly created user)
    Remember, that this is not your Russian wikipedia and this is not your Russian language. Actually you want to delete it because Russian imperialism is mentioned in 2 articles, simply mentioned, whithout any POV and whithput any insults to Russians. But in Ukrainian, Belorussian, Tatar wikies, etc, Russian imperialism is mentioned hundreds of times, because this nations for a long time have problems with Muscovite Empire. So today you want to delete 6500 articles of Siberian Wiki, because Russian Imperialism is mentioned in 2 of them, but tomorrow, if this request will be successful, you will ask for deletion of Ukrainian, Belorussian, Tatar, Chechen and other wikies in the same reason. You simply want dictatorship in Wikipedia to push your POv's, that's all. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh my godness, we, "Muscovites" are very artful, we'll not delete Ukrainian, Belorussian, Tatar and else wiki. We will teach they our =) imperialistic russian culture and language, so they'll write ru-wiki with us =) Carn ru 20:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    So you want to destroy their nations, you yourself have said this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Russia is multinational country. Nations peculiarity should be saved. There is Ukrainian, Belorussian, Tatar nations with their own habitat. What nation are you talking in connection with "Siberian language"? Yukaghir, Yakuts, Inuit, Yukaghir, Koryaks, Kamchadals or maybe Kipchaks? Carn ru 11:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The Siberian nation. But even you do not recognize it, lack of nation is not cause for closing Wikipedias - what nation is connected with Ido or Esperanto? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    May it be that the "Siberian nation" is some kind of Russian nation, or, maybe, there is no connection betwen them? Esperanto and later Ido was made to connect people different nations. You want to connect or to separate nations? Or, maybe, you want to create some kind of museum of regional? Carn ru 10:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Some kind of part of Russian supernation, including Ukrainians and Belorussians as Kiev Rus descendants. But that's only my interpretation, and the Siberian Project can have many interpretation - some members of Volgota believes that this is "some kind of museum of regional" We have diversity in Siberian language movement so interpretations are many. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    So what about the ab-origin nations of Siberia? What is their place in the Siberian language?If you include the Belorussians and Ukrainians, why do you call it Siberian? ACrush ?!/© 20:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The Slavic colonists are aboriginal nation too. Actually Turks and Finns were settling in Siberia just like Slavs - they came from Europe or Southern Asia. So, though my father is from old Turk tribe, I believe, that Slavs can be part of Siberian nation just like my tribe or Yakut tribe. Actuality the majority of old Slavic settlers have some Turk or Mongol blood, and their dialects are full of Turk and Mongol words. I do not call Ukrainians and Belorussians Siberians, but they are our relatives, because old Slavic Siberian Culture descends from Kiev Rus. So Siberian nation has two kinds of relatives: european ones, Slavs, and asiatic ones, Turks and Mongols. That is specific of Siberian nation for centuries. But that's my POV, which almost do not present in the wiki, so this discussion is irrelevant too. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Lies, calling us Muscovites (I am actually from the Kuban, not Moscow). And no unlike your Siberian indiocy, I have no issues with genuinuity of Chechen, Tatar, Ukrainian and Belarusians languages. So please don't start about imperialism. The one I see here is that a language that is unrecognised, is being used for political sources. If there are no scholarly evidence for that langauge it does not exist. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Muscovite this is human who fight for Moscow empire, like you. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Ochen' smeshno! I live in Belgium, the only thing Russian about me is my grand mother who was born into a community of Old Believers (Wojnowo, can be found at http://www.mikolajki.pl/english/atrakcje_en.htm) but had a German passport anyway. I am not fighting for the Muscovite Empire, but only against crazy nationalist POV. What if I were to create some constructed version of the Dutch language (which is my mother tongue now) and fill it with anti-German and/or anti-Polish POV articles? Trolls enough who would be willing to help. Tot wiedrzeen-ja! --Paul Pieniezny 19:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    So if you live in Belgium, what can you know about Siberian dialects, Siberian Oblastniks, and Siberians? You know only those thing which Russian Nationalists told you. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    A) My nick on English Wikipedia is Pan Gerwazy, I make no secret of that. I read the article in a Ukrainian newspaper that you quoted to prove the language exists, but which had the president of the movement say "Perhaps when I die I will finally hear people speak the Siberian language". And you know I read that, because I quoted it in the AfD on the article in the English Wikipedia. B) What is the difference between me living in Belgium and most if not all of your Magnificent Ten living in Ukraine? The distance is not so much bigger proportionately. I teach English in an Interpreters' School, we have two students from Siberia. So I know very well what I am talking about. --Paul Pieniezny 01:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But this is not knowledge, only some rumours and strong political POV against us. The ukrainians are participating in the language movement - we have many resources hosted by Ukrainians. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Against who exactly? What's the Ukrainian point in promotion of Siberian language and the oblastniks? Are they Siberians in any way? Assuming good faith, which is not obvious from the aggressive discussion: why not call that some Great-Slavic language, uniting not only the Northern and Ukrainian dialects, but also the Muscovite Russian, the Serbian? Why separate Central Russia from your movement? In the end, why not learn some Buryat language and help them in creation of their wikipedia? That would make more sense and far better comply with the purpose of the Foundation's activity. As of now, for me the project seems more appropriate for wikia until the existence and the spread of the language are proven. ACrush ?!/© 20:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And what is the Russian point to fight against the Sibwiki? And Central Russia is not separated from you movement - maybe you will be surprised, but one of our chief editors lives in Moscow. But language is based on northern Russian dialects but not central ones, so it belongs to Northern Russia and Siberia. The SNLF (more general organisation than Volgota) promotes buryat language too, while Volgota is turco-slavic branch and we promote the Slavic language of Siberia and Tatar language. And all this nations and languages have great friendship in SNLF, but that is only Muscovites who hate us and who are so agressive against us, and who want to delete out wikipedia with many good and neutral articles. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strongly support All articles is POV-pushing, original research and looks as articles from Uncyclopedia. --87.245.180.194 07:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Sorry it was me. Forgot to login --Morpheios Melas 07:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Lie and propaganda from anonimous troll. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Not lie, but true. Not propaganda but facts. Not anonimous but signed. NOT TROLL BUT RU.WIKIPEDIA ADMINISTATOR!!! LOL!!! ))) --Morpheios Melas 07:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But I am sibwikipedia bureaucrat and Incubator admin, so what) Your administarator duty does not make your POV-lie truth --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Its not lie and you know that --Morpheios Melas 08:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That's lie and you know that, and everybody can easily check it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course anybody cat can check! :)--Morpheios Melas 09:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And see that you lie) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Quite the contrary --Morpheios Melas 10:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No, quite the contrary --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't accuse other peoples of lying, from what originages out of your sib wiki, Morpheios is a saint compared to that-- Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But he lies, and everybody can check this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No it you tell lies. And it was more than once proved in this discussion. --Morpheios Melas 06:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Just the discussion shows that you tell lies and propaganda. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    it's a lie! --Morpheios Melas 09:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No!)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes! --Morpheios Melas 10:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No)). How clever admins ruwiki has!)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    More clever than in ru-sib.wiki (witch will be closed soon). Heh! --Morpheios Melas 10:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe
    enough
    for
    those
    childness? Carn ru 15:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Ru-sib Wikipedia must be closed, because various violations occured in creating proposal discussion:
    1. Most of votes for creation were anonymous. Yes, all this people provided e-mails, their names in Livejournal etc., but I think that it is not correct to accept this "votes" (I quoted word "votes" because Requests_for_new_languages is rather a discussion but not voting at all). Most of these people have no contributions in any of Wikimedia projects. And I'm sure that e-mails or Livejournal account names are not enough. As everyone know, any person can easily create 100 accounts on various mail hostings, so even if we'll threat Requests_for_new_languages page as voting, anonymous votes should never been taken to consideration. Please also note that supporters deleted anonymous votes of people who opposed creation of this wiki. That's doublethink and should been taken into consideration.
    2. There were two discussions: both on Requests_for_new_languages and Requests_for_new_languages/Non-natural. The proposer, User:Yaroslav Zolotaryov, moved votes from first page to second (when it became clear that there're not enough support for opening wiki in siberian language as natural). Also please note that page Requests_for_new_languages was vandalized sereral times from Philippines IP-s (example), and some votes were deleted from proposal (mainly opposing siberian Wikipedia creation). This vandalism was only partially reverted, and Yaroslav moved votes right after this vandalism. Of course, some of them were lost (mainly "oppose" votes). Many votes of wikipedians were deleted by someone (as example "oppose" vote of ru:User:Maximaximax, bureaucrat of Russian Wikipedia).
    3. Some people marked themself as native speakers but also voted in Requests_for_new_languages/Non-natural. That means they lied. I think that argument for creation "there're already 8 native speakers which are ready to contribute new Wikipedia" should be ignored because it is not true. The language itself was created in 2005 so there're also no "10 millions of native speakers" in real life. Native language of all of them is Russian and nothing else. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1 08:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    All this was already explained and procedure considered valid, Maximax vote still exists in proper place. Where you have been all the summer? And now you invent accusations to make Russian rule over Wikipedia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope. There were no explanation. Votes was just consciously "lost". And also I noticed most of your comment being a clear personal attacks. Why your POV should rule over Wikipedia? ----ru:Участник:Boleslav1 09:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Where have you seen personal attacks in my comments? But this vote and all other similliar votes are filled with personal attacks against me. As to losing votes, you did not show any diff where the votes were lost, so this is personal attack too. I do not push my POV anywhere, but you and your friends want to push your POV, inventing accusations without any prooves, as to voting procedure and as to Sibwiki content. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    See the upper comment, vandalism from Philippine ip, comparison between votes in natural and non-natural proposing sections. And stop refering to some concocted "antisiberian POV". Article about your project was deleted in english wikipedia as unnotable. Or that was a russian provocation too? --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    Meta is consantly vandalized, and those phillipinian deleted half of page with all the other votings, so what? Just your own guys did not vote against Siberian in non-natural section, but voted ijn natural. And article in enwiki was deleted without any consensus, simply because voting was filled by russian vandals which lied. There are articles about siberian in 7 wikies, constantly vandalized by yor friends, and therefore protected everywhere. Your antisiberian friends also vandalize in sibwiki every day, and this "philippinian IP" possibly was also Russian provocation. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah! Maybe some mythical russian nationalists also write "lies" in your siberian wikipedia? Maybe russian nationalists deleted a link to ru.wiki right after the opening of ru-sub? --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    There is no lie in sibwiki, and we deleted many links from main page to make it shorter. Al the same, we are not your slaves, and you will not order to us which links should we have in the Main Page. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No lie? So you insist that Pushkin was black? It's not a lie. It's just a funny nonsence designed for uncyclopedia but occasinally found oneself in wikipedia. Next. Isn't it strange that only a link to ru-wiki (one of the biggest wikies) been deleted? -ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    No, I o not insist that Pushkin was black, but you should discuss Pushkin in sibwiki. Maybe you will propose closure of every wiki, where it is written something about Pushkin not according to your POV? No, many links to other wikies were deleted too, that is only your paranoia. And where is the link to siberian wiki from the Main Page of ruwiki? You are still deleting siberian inerwikies and even name of the language from "List of Wikipedias" template --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    In the template and the side panel we mention all the languages with a large amount of articles (> 20000) and most minor languages of Russia. 90% of Sib-wiki content - is the bot uploaded stubs. Unfortunately we decided not to delete interwiki's to ru-sib articles. --83.237.242.146 11:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No, this template - http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F:%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%B9/1000 Where you cowardly deleted the language #58, the Siberian, because you hate it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Lol! Please, look into the page history. Nobody ever deleted ru-sub. It has no registered code, that's why it has no labeled name. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    Sometimes some people want to restore the name manually, but you protect the article and have banned belorussians who tried this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Mae culpa. fixd. Anyway - you started the war against ru.wiki. Agression on the milestone page was caused by you. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    No, ruwiki started agression against us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Stop accusing about agression, it was the Russian en-wiki community that started this off. The first stone was thrown in by ME. [11], on a fully genuine basis, not agression, but about ending xenophobia. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you think the proposal to close because of one word is not agression? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Weak Support. I have nothing against siberian language itself: it is a new created language, as you can see on sib.wiki main page (link "Подробности о сибирском языке тут(укр.)"): (you can see it in the main page : "Сибірська мова — літературна мова, створена у 2005 році" ("Siberian language is a literary language, created in 2005") and it can exist even if there is only a very little number of speaking peoples. But the content of sib.wiki in my opinion is strongly provocative. --DmRodionov 08:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But you mistranslate the words "літературна мова", which is equal to "Language Standard". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I think, that both translations are ok. But it is only a trifle. --DmRodionov 08:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Artificially made "language" more likely to be a dialect. Initiator of the project - LJ-user samir74 or simply Yaroslav Zolotaryov also always spams some ukrainian LJ-communities, asking for voting support. RU-User:dimi.t@r contribution
    • Strongly support. "Siberian language" was created in 2005. It is a disgusting mix of dialect words invented for encouragement Siberian separatism. Sib-Wikipedia must be closed. --85.21.4.130 09:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)[reply]
  8. sadly, but support. I'm disappointed in siberian wikipedia. --MaminSiberyak 10:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    User with almost no edits in sibwiki articles, maybe created by russians in provocative goals. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not true. I really worked in russian wikipedia for a long time under other name (now I work only someteme in english wiki, also under different name), but when I went to syberyan wikipedia I really wanted to help (in addition to edits articles I adwised, how to use bots and so on, isn't it?). But very quickly I understand, that syberyan language is only toy for nazi and separatist. Also I understand that this language has no future. So why waste money of Wikimedia Fund on it? Sorry me Yaroslav. --MaminSiberyak 12:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And all this story only verifies my first assumption. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes and your next assumption is that this is done on the orders of FSB... original. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Who knows? He have not wrote any article, only registered and participated in discussions. All that he did was to provoke conflict with Chernenko and prevent Chernenko to help us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong Support: this madness must be stopped.
    • Non-existent content of this section: 99% of its contents are empty stubs, as can be quickly seen by looking through a few random pages
    • Insignificance of this "language": it is unknown to anyone outside its section of the Wikipedia and its Livejournal page, mostly promoted by a single individual.
    • Gross violation of No original research: the language has not even been fully developed or ever used outside WP and LJ. The en-wiki article on this language has been permanently deleted as original research.
    • Gross violation of WP:DISRUPT: an analogy would be creating a whole new Wikipedia in Texanian (or some other b.s. language I just pulled out of my ass), and labeling anyone who dares closing it as an American chauvinist. This kind of provocative behavior makes people laugh at the Wikipedia as a place where lunatics and weirdos roam free and talk to each other in their made-up languages. This appears to be the main goal of the ru-sib creator: to push the limits of absurdity and disruptiveness. Csman 11:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Complete lie, 1) sibwiki has 2000 articles, which are not stubs, and grows rapidly 2) language is well-known, many media write about siberian wikipedia 3) language is fully developed, dictionary and grammar exist outside wikipedia in volgota.com and ukrainian sites, 4) the fourth point is mere lie and troll accusations. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Well Star Trek planets also have their own language, yet they do not seem to be biased against Earth now... As for Ukrainian sites and volgota... I mean further justifies my assumption on this being a Svidomy Ukrainian conspiracy. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support per nomination. Bunch of absurd crap lowering the respect to the whole Wikipedia project. Move it to Uncyclopedia or Абсурдопедиа or whatever Alex Bakharev 12:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    All the 6500 articles are crap? It is obvious that you lie. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, ALL of them! --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Strong Support. This so-called "Siberian language" Wikipedia is a very bad fake, created for even worse purposes. I'm from Siberia, my parents are from Siberia, their parents lived there and, if they can, they would tell many unpleasant words about this invention of Zolotaryov. This fake part of Wikipedia makes me to be very upset of the fact that we live with him in one town. MaxiMaxiMax 12:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And how's about local dialect dictionares, which Siberian is based on? If you or your ancestors are from Syberia, that doesn't tell anyone a thing. My classmate states that he's Russian and that the belarusian language is crap. Another classmate's parents forbid him to speak belarusian, because they think it's crap. Maybe we should know go and vote for closing be.wiki, because it's HOLY SHIT CRAP? -- 82.209.211.100 14:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    There is right now a rich proposal in generating the official be wiki, not the twisted original research CRAP that is presentely written there. --Kuban kazak 14:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Strong Support. There is no such language. The project is a dump of obsceneties, ridiculously distorted Ukrainian language and original research. Every joke has its limits. When we sanction interwiki links to a trolling project composed of Russian-language obsceneties, we bring Wikimedia Foundation into disrepute. --Ghirlandajo 13:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no Esperanto, no Interlingua, Laojban, Ido, Solresol, Wenedyk, Slovio, Slovianski etc., isn't it? ALL THE CONSTRUCTED LANGUAGES DO NOT EXIST (that is one of the points shared by Kaganer below). Do you know Siberian, to claim it's DISTORTED UKRAINIAN? I'm sure no, because the language seems to be full of obscenes to you. Deutsch seems very rude language for my ear. Let us close Deutsch wikipedia! And I also think, that you personal existion in Wikimedia, miss "Ghirlandajo", "brings it to disrepute". As you care about Wikimedia's reputation so much, then you have to destroy yourself immediately. -- 82.209.211.100 14:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I think he not knows "siberian" because it DOES NOT EXIST as a language. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support per nomination and per MaxiMaxiMax & Ghirlandajo. --Kaganer 14:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Strong Support Siberian language as far as I am concerned, as far as official linguistics is concerned does NOT EXIST. Everything that sib wiki is built on is 100% RUSSOPHOBIA. None of the articles there are encyclopedic. These people decieved wikimedia to start the project off, and now it has turned into a russophobic rant for gathering of nationalistic pseudo-Ukrainians, nothing else nothing more. That fact that wikimedia's finances go into crap like this is unacceptable. --Kuban kazak 14:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    hahaha, Russians are mentioned 3-4 times in Sibwiki))))) All the 6500 articles are RUSSOPHOBIA? Then this is the biggest encyclopedia of russophobia in the world))))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oddly enough the first time you said something that bears compleate and utter truth. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax, Kuban kazak and others. The liers can not write NPOV encyclopedia, and sib-wiki supportrers are liers. This statement is not offence, but just constatation of a fact: people who declare a conlang invented in 2005 to be their native language are liers. P.S. Dear Yaroslav, please don't tell that I'm a russian nationalist. I live in Belgium, I adhere liberal ideology, I've voted for the creation of Ukrainian wikiversity and against closure of Chechen wikipedia (above). But I really hate every kind of nationalistic extremism (not matter whether pro or contra). And your language is just a tool of russophobic extremists.Kneiphof 15:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I have seen many times that you accuse ukrainians in not NPOV, and you know, that Siberian is not conlang, but attempt to make standard from of certain dialects. So it is native for speakers of this dialects. Therefore, even if you claim yourself a liberal, you are against right of this humans to choose native language, and in reality you are simple imperialist, regardless of what you are speaking about yourself. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    One more lie by Yaroslav. There was only one time I pointed that some articles from Ukrainian Wikipedia could have problems with NPOV, because they were copypasted from an encyclopedia that was published by Ukrianin immigrants abroad. Are you absolutely shure that this encyclopedia was toally NPOV concidering political matters? Luckily, Ukrainian wikipedia now has many active contributors, who are working hard, and I see that those unwikified copypasted articles are being cleaned and improved. I have never accused ukraininan people. Concidering dialect speakers - I think you do much more harm than good to them, since now, because of you, their culture is mainly associated with russophobic extremism. Kneiphof 18:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    You are definitely against right of sibwiki users to speak any language what they want to speak, so please do not claim yourself liberal. Actually only AndyVolhov and his friends are true liberals in ruwiki. And you want delete 6500 articles because their existence is not according to your political POV, so you are true imperialist. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    "Siberian" IS conlang. Stop talking nonsence. --83.237.242.146 17:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No, this is project of dialect standardisation, stop talking nonsence yourself. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax, Kuban kazak and others. Vlad2000Plus 16:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support This "wikipedia" proved to be nothing more than a nationalist POV-pushing vehicle in the hands of some extremists. If we don't want Wikipedia to become a shame because of such projects, it should be closed... -- Grafikm fr 16:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strongly Support per nomination - closing the Siberian wiki as language vandalizm. Alexandrov 16:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Quite a few articles are absupotely ugly and are not only mockery of the Russian langauge but of the topics described. Others are "original research" and speculations which no one is rushing to clean. The claim about huge number of already created pages is sham. I clicked "random page" about dozen times and with a single exception I landed on a page of a calendar year, like, ru-sib:1324. I checked their Category:Years and lo!, there are several thousand "articles"! Good work! Also, a fact of nothe, their "discionary" does not have the words Siberia or Siberian, the details about siberian language in their main page refer to ukrainian wikipedia. So I guess their main effort was to scandalize, like, article about Hamlet: "М а р ц е л л: Ебьона мать, опеть припьорся дык!" It would be fun to read omething like this at anekdot.ru . And yes, I had real fun to read their Calegory:Poetry. But still voting to close. Mikkalai 17:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Bunch of demagogy without real arguments, based only on your feelings. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    "Ебьона мать, опеть припьорся дык!" Mikkalai 01:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That only illustrates that you have no arguments, only feelings and suspicions. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. Not a real language. --Ornil 17:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. The sooner we get rid of this "literary language" abomination, the better. К ебьоной матери! (from what I understood from comments above, this is neither an obscenity nor rude).Ezhiki 17:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. per Alex Bakharev, see Comments. "Siberian language" is no more than pseudoscience. ru:User:Typhoonbreath 18:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support (sorry, I'm has no account at meta, I'm just ordinary member of russian wiki. My ru_wiki page, my IP confirmation: [12]). Siberian wiki was supported in creation as a simple solution to decresize level of flood in ru_wiki pages about siberian language. There is no such language, and during a deletion page "Сибирский язык" (siberian language) no sources was found to confirm existence of such language. After creation ru_sib is was nice time. They wasted there forces on ru_sib, and do not apear in the ru. But currently they want to make a iwiki with russian wikipedia. And this is not funny. I'm think, it must be closed. #!89.104.121.156 18:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Totally xenophobic view. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support 'couse I don't think a dialect should be hosted on the wikimedia servers without any pay for it, till there is no publications on a paper or else. I think they should host theyr own wiki-project - it would be interesting. I like talk to inpolite people rarely - they say directly what they thought. I am ru-wiki user Carn, it's my ip, 85.21.92.222 (telling all this make me feel i am sockpuppet, trying to become real man) Carn ru 20:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Fuck yes, it's high time we teach those Little Russians a lesson! I don't care what crap they belive but we're not going to stand when they publicy spit on Mother Russia. You want to democracy, sure we'll play democarcy: there are 30 millions of you and 150 millions of us - you lose. --82.241.114.214 20:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)[reply]
    if you had account in some wiki projekt, plz indicate it, and make diff to confirm your IP, like this
    Don't you think that, if you have strong position - you should show mercy to weak position? Weakness need to be aggresive not to die out. Why you are agressive? Carn ru 21:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support. I have absolutely no problem with this language being artificial or otherwise. There exist nice wikipedias in artificial languages. What I DO have problem with, however, is that this is not really an encyclopedia. The authors of ru-sib seem to be just "having fun" and pay very little attention to things like NPOV, references, original research, or just plain making any kind of sense. And this is not a problem with some articles only; it permeates the whole thing, yet with absolutely no concern or discussion by the authors. Many articles would be considered outright vanalism on any normal wikipedia (e.g. the gratituous obscenities in Hamlet) yet no one seems to ever be reverting or even discussing. The article just keeps to be happily edited on, with several industrious editors, as if it's perfectly normal. Unbelievable. Sorry guys, I wish you luck with your language endeavours, but Wikipedia has its own rules and culture which you don't seem to fit at all. Try again some other time. 24.137.84.198 21:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC) -- en:User:Trapolator[reply]
    And your opinion is cause for POV discussion in sibwiki, but not for sibwiki closure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Since you ended up here, I'm giving my opinion on the subject being discussed here. NPOV discussions might make sense if these were just casual NPOV transgressions in an otherwise normal wikipedia. But it does not look to me that way. This seems to be your policy and general attitude. Even if we ignore the bordering-on-hate-speech "articles" on history and nations, you manage to freak out even in articles on absolutely neutral topics (such as Hamlet). I must say that initially, I was mildly sympathetic to your cause and was curious as to how your experiment will progress. But you turned it into a travesty. -- en:User:Trapolator
    So this is the truth - there is no Russophobia in Sibwiki, only in imagination in minds of those it's readers, which hate Siberian language because of their political position - that's all. Your goal is not this imaginatory Russophobia, which was invented by you - but closure --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yaroslav, calm down, take a deep breath, and please reread everything I have written. You seem to be responding to someone else, not me. -- en:User:Trapolator
    No, just to you - you predict bad intentions to the all 10 active editors only because of your xenophobia to the project. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax, Kuban kazak and others. Guinness man 21:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support per above. The Siberian language does not exist. S.L. 22:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    So in what language the 6500 articles are written? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support Zolotaryov should play his games of national contempt in a different place. The Siberian language has neither existed nor it exists now. Fake languages belong elsewhere. Caine 07:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support I'm a lingvist and know that this language is a fake. (124.157.226.114 please identify yourself) (unidentyfied insigned anonymous)
    And how many anonymous "specialists" we can see among Muscovite xenophobes in this voting!)))--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Your charges of all participants in the Moscow imperialism as suffer from lack of proofs, as well as your reasons in favour of existence of the Siberian language. --Eraser 11:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But this is not voting about status of the Siberian language at all, but about siberian wikipedia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support. The so-called "Siberian language" is nothing more than an artificially contrived construct of obsolete Russian vernacular dialects mixed with some bastardized Ukrainian and Belorussian derivations. If someone crossed the Geordie or Redneck dialect and Jamaican Creole, and then tried to create an encyclopedia in a "language" thus born, that would be an equally ridiculous endeavor. --Dart evader 09:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support per above. The Siberian Wiki is simple waste of resources of WikiMedia's servers. --Eraser 11:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Strong Support per all above. --Volkov 13:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support per above. stassats 13:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support per Kneiphof and others. --Ptr ru 22:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC) (ru:User:Panther)[reply]
  34. Support per above. Khoikhoi 23:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support because of fraudulent opening by Yaroslav Zolotaryov (see here for a vote added by Yaroslav while he had already voted under his own name). Errabee 23:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This is vote of romanian Anclation, simply transferred from non-natural part, because it was two votings. This romanian exists, and even now votes in oppose to close Siberian wiki, see him in the oppose part of the vote.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't care whose vote it is, or why you moved it. You don't have the right to move other people's votes; that's called vote fraud. Other people can be quite capable of voting themselves; you only needed to alert them. Errabee 02:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But nobody alerted me about this for 5 months, and even if formally I may be not right, really I am right - this person exists and he voted for us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support strongly. It is not a language, but a slang of the internet community. Elk Salmon 15:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Slang of which language, Tatar ot Ukrainian?)))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Of Russian and Ukrainian. What you think phrase Афтар ты Жжеш is a slang of what langauge? Same with your invented language. You just making a slang. Elk Salmon 15:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Афтар ты Жжеш is russian slang of course. Do you know what the word "slang" means, and can you say what attributes of slang there are in siberian?--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Strong Support. Ridiculous project. --CodeMonk 02:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Strong Support. Siberian wikipedia isn't wikipedia. It is imbecility. With respect, w:ru:Участник:Nejron
  39. Support. Klingon is more of a real language in comparasion. --Cat out 12:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And theoretically - could here be Klingon-wiki opened? =) Carn ru 08:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Good morning! --qvvx 20:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Strong Support. "Siberian language" is original research of Yaroslav Zolotarev. It is not really language. --Nikolay Kolpakov 17:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. It's just a distorted variant of Russian language. There are no need to have such a wikipedia. A.M.D.F. 08:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Strong Support: 1. "Sibwiki" has nothing common with an encyclopaedia. 2. The language of "Sibwiki" is an obscene distorted Russian designed by Yaroslav Zolotarev. ru:User:Russianname ::Russianname 09:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And all this without any argument - this can be said about any wikipedia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC) So you would like to say that Engish or French wikipedia are written with is an obscene distorted Russian designed by Yaroslav Zolotarev? Nice statement, bravo. ru:User:Russianname Russianname 12:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Somebody can say that "English is an obscene distorted German designed by Chaucer" for example.
  43. Support. --Tassadar 11:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support. There are no any academical researches about the Siberian language, so it is original research itself (maybe, based on some dialects or something, but original instead). You can also check census data (2002) [13], there's no any "Siberian language" in the census. Please, also note, that there are a lot of support votes from well-known ruwiki participants. Does anybody thinks that all of them are "moskovite nationalists" and "xenophobes"? Ilya Voyager 13:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (a.k.a. w:ru:User:Ilya Voyager)[reply]
    Not all of them, but this is vote-stacking from ruwiki - many of them vote only because their friends told them to do this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    You should keep your conspiracy theories about the Moskals who ate all the salo to yourself. And speaking of vote stacking, an "oppose" vote by a troll permabanned on en.wiki is kinda interesting to observe. -- Grafikm fr 15:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This are not conspiracy theories - 1) there are two anouncements in ruwiki directly telling go ang vote for closure of sibwiki 2) 95% of voters for closure are Russians, when in pro-Siberian part we have real diversity of all the nations. So the anti-Siberian part is monotonous and majority of them have nationalistic motivation, but pro-Siberian part are people from various nations who want freedom and like freedom, even seeing all this lie and accusations, invented by your flashmob. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Among the people voting FOR the closure are one American, one Belgian (and that is not Kneiphof), one Dutchman, one Englishman, one Japanese, one South American and at least one (probably more) Ukrainian. Add Alex Bakharev and Mikkalai, who should not be classified as Russian. And two Siberians at least. Those whom you classify as non-Russian are not 5%, but 20% of the FORs. Most of the opposers of the closure are Ukrainian, Romanian and Belarusian. So the international picture is not at all as clear as you claim. --Paul Pieniezny 16:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    They are Russians, + several friends of Russians + several deletionists who simply like the word "delete")) all the same, 80% of voters are from ruwiki, when siberian voters are realy from different nations. We have even more Russians than Romanians, why do you like Romanians so much, only 2 of them came to support us? ))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And who invent conspiracy theories, this is some leaders of this flashmob - they say that all the wikipedia, where Russians are almost not mentioned, is the big conspiracy against russians - this is real conspiracy theory and you want to close real living wikipedia basing on this fantasy. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Diff please? ACrush ?!/© 20:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Just read the replics of Kuban Kozak - he even use the words "Ukrainian conspiracy" --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Strong Support. Siberian itself is an original research: a semi-professionaly constructed artificial language loosely based on the Russian dialects of Siberia. Project initiators are politically biased and show aggressive and provocative behaviour in other Wikipedias. Existance of sib-wiki is a shame on us all. --Dmitry Gerasimov 19:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    In what wikipedias we show provacative behavour? Voting against you in admin alections is a provocative behaviour? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. I don’t care about the political side of this dispute, but I do believe that sibwiki has gone a little bit too far. It is, in my view, a vehicle for propaganda rather than an attempt to create a free encyclopedia. While there are indeed some sane articles in Siberian Wikipedia, the overall course of the project is strongly influenced by politics, and therefore I cannot expect sibwiki to grow into a serious source of information. Although I must admit that I do not know Siberian, I know enough Russian to grasp the meaning of some of the “articles” there. Let’s take for example the now-famous Москальска сволоч. First and foremost, it is a poem, and as you might remember Wikipedia is not exactly the place for posting random poems. It appears however that sibwiki editors have a different opinion: they chose instead to place a notice at the top of the article stating that it will be moved to Siberian Wikisource, once it is created. Nice, eh? Now, this certainly is an insultive poem, telling us about innumerable hordes of evil Muscovites and their deep burning hatred towards all good and Siberian. Regardless of how Zolotaryov defines “москали”, this is still low-grade propaganda, totally unsuitable for an encyclopedia. So you might wonder why this “article” doesn’t get deleted. Guess what? The answer is simple: it was Zolotaryov himself who posted this! Understandably, he’s not going to remove his own creation. You need more examples? No problem, see Московиты, complete with a nice picture stating “thank God I am not a Muscovite”. And the best evidence to Zolotaryov’s position is the spectacular show he’s giving here, with all these accusations of xenophobia etc. To sum it all up: I do not oppose the existence of a Siberian Wikipedia per se, but in its current form it is not acceptable as a Wikimedia Foundation project, therefore I support the move to close sibwiki. --qvvx 20:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    How pervert logic do you have) Thank God I am not a Muscovite! --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The POV accusations are relevant to POV discussion on sibwiki, but not to it's closure. So you yourself do propaganda, wanting to close a wiki because of your political suspicions. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. There is no Siberian language, after I reviewed the demographics of Siberia, none of it said "Siberian" speakers so in case, I have to support the closing of Siberian wikipedia. Rakuten06 23:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Please review information about Siberian Slavic dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. I Support closing this section. It is absolute delirium. The manager ru wikipedia --Torin-ru 04:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Personal attack.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support Please this section is unfair; this is unpleasant see in the bigger Wikipedias this hoax Wiki. 7.000 bot made articles in few days? Please, this is a knowledge project, not a horse racing. --Taichi - (あ！) 06:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support Siberian language is falsification Aps
    No, it is not. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Strong Support. Stop this original research. w:ru:Участник:Dark-saber
    Personal attack. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    it's covered by me: Carn ru 09:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Strongest ever possible Support. Stop this original research. w:ru:Участник:Rombik Rombik 12:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Strong Support, WP exists for many reasons, but not to further some clique's desire for reassignment of nationality. CRCulver 19:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And not to further Russian Nationalist push their national POV. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support. This is a language constructed about a year ago, not significant enough to have its own wikipedia section. --Anton Khorev 20:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not true. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Absolute true. It was made on no basis in your LJ community. Elk Salmon 07:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Absolute lie. It was compiled from 500 dialect sources. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    lol, Thank you. You just have exposed yourself. Elk Salmon 11:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Where? Do you understand the word "source" properly? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support. Siberian language don't exist, is only a dialect of Russian. Same situation as Moldovan language which is a dialect of Romanian. Moldovan Wikipedia was voted for deletion (despite the opposition which came mainly from Russian nationalists, with no idea about Moldovan/Romanian language). Inventing new languages is a hobby in Wikipedia, but it is not the purpose of this project.--MariusM 02:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Marius, congratulations. You made my day. At least someone who is voting with his head. I salute you! --Paul Pieniezny 11:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Strong Support, having read this discussion thoroughly and having compared arguments and wannabe arguments from both sides. --Yms 06:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    ... and being from ruwiki, by the way...))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, it's my native language. --Yms 07:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support w:ru:Участник:DonaldDuck DonaldDuck

Oppose closing the Siberian wiki (55 votes, 43 identified)

  1. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC) This is ridicoulous, and this show only nationalistic views of the proposers.[reply]
    Actually:
    1. Siberian language is well-known, we have more than 50 articles in online and offline media about it, there is offline newspaper in Tomsk in siberian language.
    2. As to POV discussions, let them discuss in siberian wiki - nobody of them never tried to make POV discussion in sibwiki according to Wikipedia rules. So, if russians will see something not similiar to their nationalistic and xenophobic POV in Tatar Wikipedia or in Chechen wikipedia, they will ask for it's deletion?)))
    3. Sibwiki has more then 50 users and about 10 active editors from them.
    4. Nobody cares whom you consider troll.
    5. If you do not understand Siberian language and think that some words are obscene, who is guilty? That's only your ignorance. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Well known? give me one university publication that proves it.
    2. There is no POV in Tatar and Chechen wikipedias as far as I am concerned. For two reasons, I do not understand Tatar or Chechen, and I could not care about what Tatars and Chechens write there. But both Tatar and Chechen languages are well known, and as such I had and never have any prejudice against them
    3. Are you complaining or showing off. 10 users that actively work...makes a good joke...--Kuban kazak 19:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    4. But that is more thaen in many other wikipedias. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. This is not necessary, but they soon will be.
    2. Do you believe that you really understand siberian? This is different language, not Russian.
    3. That's true, check the statistics. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Please explain who are you referring to by "you".
    2. The point is, I think everybody here can understand that the nonsense that is written in there is ... well ... nonsense. Nothing ignorant. --Kuban kazak 19:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    3. And this is only your dream. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Anton Kazmyarchuk.
    If you have claims to contents and you don't know the language, tell them on talk page. Article "Московіты" was brought to NPOV with the help of actual discussion. Article "Москальска сволочь" tells us about a poem called that way - it's clear, that young language needs to have all the poems in it collected in wikisource, but since *** oppose creating of siberian wikisource, it's kept in wikipedia (the template upfront the page tells everyone about this).
    If you think "Московіты" is abuse you have no right to use it as a reason to. Russian wikipedia has articles about "Хохлы", "Кацапы", but somewhy no one proposes closing it. In the article, there's just a describtion of concept, btw, and no abusive text.
    Who cares how do you feel like, when you read word "Московіты"? If it's an abuse in Russian, that doesn't mean it must be obscene or abusive word in Siberian. Remember, they are different languages. If someone from Belarus finds word "Weisrussisch" (or something like that) from German abusive that's not the reason to close de.wiki.
    I LIKE THAT GUY!!
    He directly says that
    all the poems of young language will kept in wikipedia (till there is no wikisource)
    that means he will use Sibwiki not like encyclopedia, but in his own purposals
    Who cares how do you feel like, when you read word "Московіты"?
    This means he don't cares about NPOV
    By the way ruwiki says that Хохол (жен. хохлушка, хохлячка) — русское пренебрежительное прозвище украинцев. And have not text like "Бладарю, Восподи, чо я не московит!" and "Обнакновенно слово "московит" корыстуют, кода бессудют чужеядсво Москвы к вобласям Россеи и Сибири." Carn ru 10:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Ottorahn 01:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Every "anti-Russian position" can be discharged for strong pressure, boorishness & threatening by so called Russian "patriots" in Wikipedia.
    2. Like many other ru-sib users I don't share some of the "anti-Russian" expressions, but I like Siberian & want to read & write Siberian. Like many others, who recreate their own poetry, literature & science, to correct historic errors. You have to hold it in respect.
    3. Even from aesthetic point of view, a lot of Russian words, freely used in Wiki, probably are more obscene than this true popular language. --Ottorahn 01:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Sataniuk 02:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I personally hate the chaos being processed in Russian-wikipedia all the time. That's why this proposal is insulting for me. What right do you have to say to anybody about someone's dishonesty, when the anarchia in Russian-wikipedia (supported by sysops there) keeps going on? I like siberian language, i respect heavy work of Yaroslav, i'm sure that there're no problem with POVs - NPOVs in siberian wikipedia, i hate руССких свиней, которые сцут в чужих подьездах (not connected to any person here, in common sense). No way, i oppose this shit proposal -- Sataniuk 02:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • You are only allowed to vote once. By the way, considering the fact that no one seems to delete the POV and obscenities on the Siberian wikipedia, I suggest your problem with anarchy and sysops on Russian wikipedia may be due to the fact that you have a problem discerning POV and obscenities. Note that this user calls Russians SSwine, while one of Yaroslav's friends on LiveJournal uses a Swastika flag as his avatar. --Paul Pieniezny 00:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Swastika is old Siberian sign of sun. Sibwiki has not POV and obscenities. You do not understand the language, you do not understand the culture - how can you judge us? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    So, nothing to do with racism? Here's just two discussions:[14] and [[15]] Otto Rahn also got a nice avatar. I agree this is going far but you were the one accusing other people of being racists and xenophobes.--Paul Pieniezny 12:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    You make me laugh))))))))))) it's very funny))) 1) those discussions from LJ have no relation to sibwiki, and this people do not write to us, you simply pick 2 random discussions where swastika is used and Ottorahn presents 2) Do you believe that every wiki should be closed, when one of it's admins participated in some blog discussion where there is a swastika?)))) 3) we are not rascists but have many mongoloids in the movement, because buryats and kazakhs support Siberian freedom. I myself is mixture of white Slavic colonist and native Siberian aborigen with race close to American indians. Actually unity of mogols and Slavs is steadpoint of Oblastnik's program for centuries. And we have several mongoloids who votes "oppose" sibwiki closure in this vote - but support part is all white - so maybe you are racists????? This last "accusation" is very-very funny for me))))--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And I do not accuse you of racism - that is you who accuse me, and invent my "crimes" from nothing. That's you who is accusator and want to close the wikipedia, only because one cited verse seems bad for you. All the fantasy which nationalistic Russians invent by this cause is very far from real contents of sibwiki, and this are just accusations similiar to Hitler's and Stalin's against dissidents in their states. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussions prove that your assertion about the Swastika were at least incorrect. You are calling the opposers of the Siberian wiki xenophobes, but it turns out some of your Magnificent Ten are xenophobes and anti-semites. --Paul Pieniezny 11:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    hahaha, and one of our admins is Jew)))) Such antisemitic wiki we have)))))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Slaver 06:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Сыбірская мова мае такое ж права на існаваньне, як і іншыя! І не маскалям вырашаць яе лёс![reply]
    Nationalistic, very xenophobic statement Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Да что вы говорите)) Если кто-то говорит, что не москалям что-то решать, он ксенофоб уже? Do you believe that anybody who want decide what to do without Moscow, is a xenophobe? Maybe Americans are the greatest xenophobes in your opinion - they never ask Moscow what they must do. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Zlobny 07:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Siberian wiki should exist. And moskal chauvinist trolls should keep silence and live in reservation.[reply]
    Nationalistic, very xenophobic statement Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I think reservation will be a fine place for moscal chauvinists. They would play balaika and drink Vodka in reservation, and dream about great Russia and Power of Victorious Moscals, and nobody will interfere them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This is exactly the xenophobia that is the reason why Siberian wiki has to go. Calling Russians moskals is equivelent of calling a black people NIGGERS. I wonder who here is being not only chauvinist but also rascist, of course what else can one expect from these people? --Kuban kazak 15:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Dear Kuban kazak! I didn't mean Russian people in whole, but moskal chauvinist trolls. And no more. Moskals and Russians are different groups and multitudes. If you suppose, that I meant all Russians - it's upon you, it's your personal problem. --Zlobny 07:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Nationalistic, very xenophobic statement. This shows the real level of people who involved in support of Sibwiki.Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And their level is very high. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    We have our own languages and you have no rights teach belorussians, ukrainians and siberians what words to use. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    If an African-American was to learn that Russians refer to Black people as negr he'd probably be greatly offended.
    Totally agree! Kneiphof 15:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    hahaha, will you order to belorussians what words should they have in vocabulary and to moldavanians in what alphabet they should write?)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It's okay, you can call me москаль. I am from Moskaw, i am quite smart, and like fast temp of live. "Негр" is more like "Negro", not "Nigger", therefore if one don't like if i call him such in russia - i wouldn't. We in Russia don't have such a problems with afro-people and "негр" is normal. No one would oppose his skin color is very dark. I wouldn't oppose that my ass is white, till it's hairy enough i don't mind if you call me snowy. Then you say smth its very important why do you say it. Carn ru 20:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    and this conclsion about my motiffs is totally invented. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Opposing the closure of the Siberian language Wikipedia. - Anclation
  8. Oppose the closure. Don Alessandro 08:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose I AM STRONGLY AGAINST CLOSING OF SIBERIAN WIKIPEDIA, because there are not russian!It is a slavic nation with 20-25 mln speakers (more, than in Bavaria!) 89.48.151.186 14:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)[reply]
    "It is a slavic nation with 20-25 mln speakers" do you can provide any independant sources that support this statement? Kneiphof 15:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, this is works of Siberian Oblastnik Thinkers,. And to believe that we are separate nation - this is our human's right, we do not want to be in the same nation with you and with those who are similiar to you. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Rubbish, not over 20 users of one internet community which inveted this slang. Elk Salmon 15:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Rubbish, we have tradition from 19 century. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    XIX century? live journal wasn't exist that time! Elk Salmon 12:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But Siberian Oblastniks existed, please read any book about this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    You mean those books you wrote yourself? Elk Salmon 07:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No))) Books of Potanin, Yadrincev, etc, Can you type "областники" in Google and do not ask stupid questions here? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Potanin and Yadrincev wrote in Russian. Like other Russian writers from Siberia. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But they wrote about Siberian Nation, and now this nation has it's own language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose, strong oppose. The Siberian Wikipedia should not be closed only because it does not please some Russians and does not fit their Moscow-centric point of view. Peoples around Moscow have long suffered from Moscow rule and Russification policies. Enough is enough. Other languages and identities also have a right to exist even if they 'betray' (in Russian chauvinist terms) the Russian identity and the pan-Russian idea. Andrusiak --212.109.36.242 09:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied insigned anonymous) (that's Andusiak from ukr. wiki--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]
    Dear anonimous user, most people from Russian wikipedia are supporters of language diversity. We even have a project to support the creation of wikipedias in the minoraty languages of Russia and ex-USSR and to help them to get started. Ask people from Chavash, Bashkir, Tatar, Ossetic wikipedias if you don't believe. The point is that siberian is not a real language, but a conlang that is just a tool of pussophobic extremeists. Kneiphof 15:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Excuse me, we discuss politics or adequacy of notability for "siberian language" to have its own wiki? --ru:Участник:Boleslav1 09:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    We discuss politically-biased Muscovites who want to close sibwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    We discuss your unimaginably offenssive distortion of Siberian dialects of Russian language. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC) Russianname - don't broke the numeration plz.[reply]
    No, we not discuss your fantasies about the ancient and highly developed Siberian Language Standard. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Your project is unnotable bullshit. And its deletion has no deal with emperial manners of Russians. My POV, for example, - is a destruction of all national borders and abolishment of nationalities. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    Your mouth is filled with personal attacks, and you accuse me in personal attacking after that? You fight against freedom and defend Russian Empire here and you say that you are not a Russian Nationalist? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Unlike you, I am not a nationalist. I just want to ensure the rule compliance. Wikipedia - is not a publisher of original research. Your "language" is actually an original research. Kindling national dissension is prohibitable by law. Publishing funny materials worthy of uncyclopedia is prohibited by wiki rules. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1 09:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    This is lie, many times refuted, but you simply repeat it more and more.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yaroslav can you say what exactly is a lie in this comment? --DmRodionov 10:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Language is not OR, it is proven in all wikipedias except Russian 2. We do not kindle national dissention. 3. Materials of sibwiki are funny only for russian nationalists. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    3. Not only. It is funny for everybody who speak russian. A lot of your puns are great! For example "Хнюканне Еремы". If you will make a sole project like uncyclopedia, it will have a potential to outrun russian ucyclopedia and even padonki movement. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    Not, it is not funny, but you want to push your POV about it to all the russians. So this is you who insult russians but not me. And about uncyclopedia in siberian, we think about it, but after the wikisource --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't have to think about it - uncyclopedia is already here! It is called ru-sib.wikipedia.org. --83.237.242.146 11:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And this is personal attack from anonymous IP. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose the closure. Support linguistic and cultural diversity, the essence of Wikipedia. - Ivan Sidorsky 09:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose Opposing the closure of the Siberian language Wikipedia. - None_Smilodon
  12. Oppose The young languages should be supported by Wikipedians. If people listen to the empire nationalist supports of Rus-patriots there were no Belarusian and many other languages at all. If Wikipedians want to be neutral, they shouldn't oppose the new Wikis. Hey, men, what's the matter with Sib-wiki? Just work in your Rus-Wiki, show us the positive work. And, b.t.w., words "маскалі" and "жыды" are the generic names in Belarusian of Muscovites and Jews respectively. So - would you like to close Belarusian Wikis and oppose other "not-труъ" languages?:) Mienski
    Are you sure? What about "рускі" and "яўрэй"? There aren't abusive and were stated in all dictionaries (unlike "маскалі" and "жыды"). --DmRodionov 10:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Words жыды and маскалі are not stated by normative RBD (of 94th). They now belong to coloquial, word жыды is used without antisemitic context, but маскалі is derogatory for people who do not recognize belarusian language and state. These words originally were exported from belarusian language in the times of early SU, in late 20s ( probably in 1929 [16]). So now these words do not belong to literary belarusian language. I think you must be satisfied with my answer. Thanks for attention -- 82.209.209.243 21:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your detailled answer. I only wanted to show, that so rich language as Belarusian has much more words for other nationalities, as only 2 abusive. --DmRodionov 10:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't miss my point or interpret it upside down. Even when word жыды belongs to coloquial it's not a derogatory, as i have stated in my post. Word маскалі is, word жыды is not. All is simple. -- 82.209.209.162 00:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And this is only POV and Afd discussion, irrelevant here. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Конечно, вы пытаетесь затравить человека, который на 98-99% процентов знает белорусский язык, и считаете, что Вы, верно, знаете этот язык лучше этого носителя языка, который (к слову) перечитал уйму литературы по вопросу. Лучше сотрите этот ваш комментарий, им вы позорите себя. -- Viacheslav Volnehov 11:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I'`m sorry, but I still waiting for an answer to my question. And i would delighted to recieve it from a man, who knows this language so good. --DmRodionov 13:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose the closure. The SibWiki must exist. Every national wiki reflects mentality of the nation and attitude towards its neighbours, which is not always kind. The RuWiki has "strange" articles about Ruthenians and Ukrainians. So let us close it? --Bacsi 10:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    User Bacsi seems like a one-purpose account - Cannot find a wiki with this user. Googling on "User:Bacsi" reveals that the name was used twice in the same way already. The first one is a mass IP disruption on a Hungarian forum ([17])--Paul Pieniezny 00:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Excuuse me, but it's a sh.t that you stated. All the users (newly registered or not) have a full right to vote here. If there is a rule that forbids them to vote, bring the link to it. You CAN'T prove whether the user exists by googlin its username -- 82.209.209.162 01:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The vote I took away was the double vote by Sataniuk. Check the diffs. There are four three opponents here with red links who did not state from which wiki they come and who could not be traced to another wiki (just look, we are NOT questioning every red link here). For all we know, these accounts could be sockpuppets or meatpuppets. That is why votes by one-purpose accounts are frowned upon. If this person turns up again and mentions his or her wiki, I will gladly take back my objection (and so will Errabee, I am sure). You did not read my text very well, by the way, I did not claim existence or non-existence of the user, I pointed out that this name has a particularly messy past - being used before to rig a vote.--Paul Pieniezny 02:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose Long live SibWiki! --Aliaks 11:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Не любо. Хотя сибирские говоры, положенные в основу языка, немного отличаются от тех, какими говорил (и говорит) мой дед, однако структура языка сдаётся мне правильной и обоснованной. Мне очень неприятно то, что группа раздолбаев так развизжалась из-за того, что совершенно ясно собираются закрывать недоделанную эрратив вики. При чем тут сибирский язык? Советская эпоха явно не научила вас, дорогие москали, уважению к соседним народам. Вячеслав Волнёхов -- Viacheslav Volnehov 11:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    В принципе я был бы не против википедии на языке - "зонтике" сибирских диалектов (я вообще люблю малые языки, и почти всегда голосую за википедии на них), но печальная правда заключается в том, что нынешний сибирский язык - просто инструмент в руках экстремистов-русофобов. Думаю, пара примеров вполне убедительна ([18][19]) Kneiphof 15:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Это единственные два места где московиты вообще где-либо упоминаются на всей большой сибвике)))) Кроме того, у вас нет оснований утверждать, что московиты=русские. Все высосано из пальца, абсолютно. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Да вообще они классно придумали - видите ли им не нравится что мы там пишем. Сегодня им не нравится, что сибиряки пишут, а завтра им башкиры или каракалпаки не понравятся? И они всех закрывать будут, что ли? Ваще молодцы. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Башкиры и их язык действительно существуют, а вы свою падонкаффскую шнягу придумали. --83.237.242.146 13:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Сибиряки и их диалект действительно существуют, а вы свои наезды высасываете из пальца. И, вероятно, из пальца, которым только что ковырялись в заднице. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    You never feeled any respect for language of Sierian oblast writers like Yadrincev, the language of Sibwiki is obscete distortion of Siberian dialect and Russian norm. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yadrincev was chaldon and spoke siberian language at home, and you, moscal, shut up about our glorious national thinkers like Yadrincev, whom you took to prison because he wanted freedom for Siberia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Samir, you are really inhabitual user of abusive language. Please use siberian foul language. Просим, просим! --ru:Участник:Boleslav1
    So this is you who continues personal attacks. Actually all this "voting" is only attack page. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Strong Oppose--AlefZet 12:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Strong Oppose--Bonaparte
    comment: vicious troll indefinitely banned in en:wikipeida. Mikkalai 21:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strong Oppose No pasaran! Venceremos! --Cyclodol 16:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Strong Oppose, The Siberian wiki definitely has the right to exist, be Siberian a language of its own or a dialect of Russian --Czalex 17:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Strong Oppose Steel archer 18:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Oppose Yakudza 18:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Oppose. Let people work. I'll work to make their articles more neutral. --AndyVolykhov 18:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Oppose--Tarih 19:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Ultra Extreme Strong Oppose per Zolotaryov, Kazmyarchuk, Ottorahn, Czalex and other users. -- PornEater 20:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This account was created for one purpose only: to vote here. No such account exists on en:wiki. Please check for sockpuppetry. Errabee 13:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose per Zolotaryov, Kazmyarchuk, Ottorahn, Czalex and other users. -- Onano(0^10^(-9)) 20:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This account was created for one purpose only: to vote here. No such account exists on en:wiki. Please check for sockpuppetry. Errabee 13:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Oppose --Nefis 07:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Oppose -- I oppose closing of Siberian Wikipedia. People in both side of the arguments accept that this language exists and is spoken by millions of people. There are active users and a community to benefit from this project. If there are some POV materials in few article, point them out and try to correct them, not asking for the closure of this project. Please keep the politics out of this. Mehrdad 09:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Millions of people spoke on "dirty english" - so lets create en-dirty wikipedia? Carn ru 09:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But if the people, talk on "dirty english" you can easily find - there is no native speakers of Siberian language - 'coz they just talk on russian on the different local dialects. It's normal, Not normal - mess all that dialects into one "language". Carn ru 09:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That's your nationalistic language which is dirty, but not Siberian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Oppose It is art, and closing would be the wandalism w:ru:Участник:Asp
  29. Oppose Нет, конечно, закрывать Сибирскую википедию нельзя, она должна развиваться, поскольку язык существует, что бы там не говорили флеш-моберы из Москвы. тот самый --213.210.76.97 17:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous) (that's Misha from Siberian wiki--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]
    No one use this language apart a few close friends of Zolotaryov. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Ты мне еще поговори тут, я Золотоарева не видел ни разу и не знаю кто это такой, но я полностью поддерживаю Сибирскую википедию. тот самый --213.210.76.97 17:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Оскорбления и угрозы скрыты мной: Carn ru 06:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Я смотрю, ты тут всем каменты правишь? Не много ли на себя берешь? (insigned 213.210.76.97)
    Да нет, в самый раз. Оскорбления вообще-то непозволительны. Сим постом предупреждаю вас о недопустимости такого поведения.
    From this ip (213.210.76.97) some man call Russianname "dirty Muskovian fascist". User is warned about about inadmissibility of such words. Carn ru 10:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you sure that Meta has the same rues as Russian wikipedia? Are you Meta administrator? 70% of what the enemies of Sibwiki are saying here are insults like "shit", "dirty language", "filth" etc, and this nazist Russianname is the first user of this words. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    If you see some directly addressed insulting - just did as i done. (see major limits of meta in Meta:Policy)
    Read Incivility - maybe then you realize what you are doing. Carn ru 10:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Oppose --Memty 20:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong Oppose -- as per Czalex, AndyVolykhov, Zolotaryov and others. There are multiple wikipedias in both dialects and constructed languages, that are nowhere close to Siberian wiki with its' thousands of original articles. The POV issues are no reason for closure as they are to be addressed within the Siberian wiki itself, which the opponents are free to do. -- keethraxx — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.105.194.103 (talk) User:Keethraxx doesn't exist on En:wiki, nor on Meta. --Dart evader 07:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong Oppose The Siberian wikipedia must exist.--82.117.191.81 06:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)[reply]
  31. Oppose--Even artificial or dead languages have their own right for existence. But this language, I believe, is spoken among Siberian population. And it should not be a problem if it differs from Russian Troublemaker 09:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    It had been never spoken. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Lie. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    how about some more anonymous votes from different IP? Carn ru 10:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not know who made them. Maybe it were your friends from ruwiki? A ridiculous way to make compromate to siberian language movement. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I think we should not count such votes from both sides 'couse such counting may lead to misuse of voting. Not delete them, just don't count. Like i did with 4 above. Carn ru 10:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    UNIDENTYFIED ANONYMOUS PLEASE IDENTIFY YORSELF! Carn ru 11:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I think some anonymous votes should be taken into account, but some not --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Some animals are more equal than others? Sataniuk's vote was counted twice.--Paul Pieniezny 00:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Some people support us and they are real, but they do not know how to subscribe properly. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Symmetrical on the other side. Carn ru 08:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Strong Oppose --Kojpiš Anton 14:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Again: no mention elsewhere of this user name. Possible one-purpose account. Note that the total "identified" includes such accounts. --Paul Pieniezny 00:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    He is ru-sib:User:Kojpiš_Anton_(coipish.livejournal.com%, and well-known belorussian nationalist in the Internet. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC) Examples of articles written by Coipish for siberians, articles, which you want to delete, because you hate diversity: ru-sib:Алгебра,ru-sib:Исак Ньютон. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, this is Coipition Tong. I withdraw my comment about the one-purpose account. Though of course, I think people may be interested to know that these articles were written about one every minute:[20] So, what is wrong with their bot? Have a look at one of them, where the two "Siberian" names (OR by Yaroslav and the 10) are used in the Siberian "definition", but the two names everybody around the world knows, are used in the texts under the pictures: [21]--193.190.172.92 (yes, Belgium) 10:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Signing with user name now: --Paul Pieniezny 10:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    From what did you take that they was written in one minute? Koipish wrote them at home and then pasted to the wiki as usual. Do you want to close every wiki where somebody pasts articles, prepared at home? As to Chaplin, we simply have different versions of his name in current version of the language. You are really very sophisticated in inventing bad intentions of sibwiki users)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong Oppose -- Whatever would linguists decide about siberian language, it's a very fine and interesting language project. Maybe it is a conlang, i don't know, but it's living, it has an active support team and it's wiki is larger then ones of many "natural" languages. It's very interesting what's going to grow out of it. And there's no reason to make the point all *shudder* political...
  33. Strong Oppose Don't you think, that closers of sib wikipedia are just kseunophobs? They have nothing to do with linguistics --Petro Bato 15:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yet another single purpose account. Created account on ru-sib.wiki 10 minutes earlier. Errabee 02:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Check IP, he is from Ukraine. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Mind you, if that is all you know about him (and he was not on any other wiki a few minutes before voting here), the fact that his IP is Ukrainian actually strengthens the suspicion that this is a one-purpose account. --Paul Pieniezny 11:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Oppose I am a real contributor there. And it's quite serious. --Amir E. Aharoni 20:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Strong Oppose--Alex K 07:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC) Alex Kov[reply]
  36. Strong Oppose - Siberian is alive and very beautiful language. The attepmt to close siberian wiki looks like a demonstration of chauvinism or nazism --A1 08:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The language has been never spoken. And definitely it is not beatiful, it is dirty, full of filth. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This is your nazist mouth which is full of filth. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Just wondering: are Nazism accusations and existence of Siberian language equally grounded? --Yms 11:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Oppose - NPOV is an issue, but in and of itself is not a good reason to close the project. There is bias, sure, but the way to fix it is to go ahead and participate in the edits, just as we do on en-wiki and ru-wiki, for example. The fact that the language is artificial is not by itself a problem (we have other wikis on artificial languages), and its "virtually unknown" status is debateful, so I would suggest to assume good faith here. -- int19h
  38. Strong Oppose - I'm surprised to see how insistant Russian phobes are. They just can not sleep when some nation rejects their "brotherhood". Yes, there is Siberian nation, there is Siberian language. Othervise - there would be very quite on this page. Oleh Petriv
    Everybody fears anything. Zolotaryov fears imperialism, you fears Russian "brotherhood", i fear extremism. Carn ru 14:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    But you can not prove extremism in sibwiki, so your fear is just phobia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it really so?? Oh! I must consult with my psychologist without delay! Carn ru 15:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    For sure. And the best name for your discussion manner is just demagogy, because you have no arguments, only irony and invented accusations. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I can forgive your unambiguity and oblivion, but please, don't harp about same things on the thrid circle. You have already told almost all i wanted, so why mill the wind? Carn ru 20:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Because you are still here so I participate in the discussion. If you do not want to speak with me then leave the discussion, and accuse me of personal attack when I am only defending our wiki this is personal attack itself. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Oppose. Why all the commotion, it's just the wiki in constructed language, after all?? Yury Tarasievich 17:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Oppose If the reason for closing is the "artificial" origin of the language - what about Esperanto Wiki? But in general, here we can see a consecutive assault from russian nationalists. They had already made a propagandist machine from Russian Wiki, and now victimize all former USSR nations in the English Wiki: one of the prominent examples was a flash-mob for establishment of russian transliteration for ukrainian names in English language (Kiev instead ukrainian Kyiv, etc.). And now we can observe a routine action in this direction.--Shao 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Shao, it is primary sourсe. See ACrush position. Carn ru 20:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No, just secondary, the language is not codified in the wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Unlike Esperanto, so-called "Siberian Language" is not notible. When I was at school I created by own secret language with the original writing system and vast vocabulary. Now I almost forgot that amusement, but it seems that Samir Zolotaryov hadn't enough fun with this in his childhood. --en:User:Boleslav1 20:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Siberian language is notable and there are many discussions about it both in offline and online Russian media. 2. The notability policy deals with content of wikipedia articles, but not with problem of closure wikipedias. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Сибирский язык достоен своей Викепедди. Если вы не знаете сибирского языка, то это сугубо ваши личные проблемы, Сибирска Википеддя тут не при чом.--82.117.191.67 18:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)[reply]
    • Oppose. Look at all this hysteria! What is the problem with Siberian language Wikipedia? It doesn’t hurt anyone, if someone doesn’t like it they don’t have to read it. Live and let live! --70.29.185.77 21:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)17:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)[reply]
  41. Oppose. Proposal done in bad faith. -- Petri Krohn 00:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC) (en:User:Petri Krohn)[reply]
    • Oppose За Википедию и за Сибирский язык. Существует много других википедий, которые московские фашисты почему-то закрывать не спешат, почему? Из ответа на этот вопрос будет ясен и ответ по сабжу.--195.208.167.231 11:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Оскорбления скрыты мной: Carn ru 09:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Никаких оскорблений нет, поскольку я конкретно про каких-либо персонажей не говорю, пожалуйста, не передергивай, мальчик. Есть только констатация фактов, ведь многие из тех, кто против Сибирской Википедии состоят в нацистских и фашистских организациях типа ДПНИ, КПРФ, АКМ и прочих коммуняцко-путинских новообразованиях. А лично ты, на мой взгляд, не дорос до того чтобы поправлять мои мысли, впредь не правь мои мессаджи, будь любезен.--195.208.167.231 11:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Ну как же не быть любезным с таким грозным дедушкой ;) Вы бы так бы и сказали что ничего конкретного вы в виду не имеете - я бы и не беспокоился, только мне интересно - как там у вас с ростом, хватает чтоб зарегить на мете аккаунт и дать ссылку на какой-нибудь свой другой аккаунт с вкладом? А то ведь вы как аноним проходите. Заранее пожалуйста. =) Carn ru 13:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Since more and more opponents of the closure are calling the other side fascists and nazis:[22] and [[23]]. Ghouros and Otto Rahn are two of the people whom the owner of this language works with. Have a good look, part of it is in English. --Paul Pieniezny 01:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Because you want to destroy our work because of your political ideas, so you are similiar to nazists and commnunists. Further, many Muscovites in the voting are real memebers of ultra-right organisations. It is very funny how you take from LJ the same userpics with swastiks, where people simply have fun with them and do not discuss the siberian wikipedia))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Oppose Ruzgar 08:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Strong Oppose If you give power to Russians they will want to close all slavic lanagueges on Wikipedia Oleg Kikta 11:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Strong Oppose for obvious reasons --Baku87 11:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I'm not going to vote here as I'm unfamiliar with the the Siberian language and only have a passive understanding of Russian. But I'd like to point out the ironic similarity with the vote for the so called "moldovan wikipedia" above, and invite everyone to compare how a certain group of people voted for keeping it open even though it was strikingly obvious they had no idea about the subject. For extra points find some of them voting here and compare the arguments they make.

  • Indeed. I find it unbelievable that both questions are disputable at the same time. On one side we had an honest effort to establish Wikipedia on a semi-artificial variant of language that has thousands of book published on, on which hundreds of thousands of people that got some sort of instruction and thousands more are educated every year, with many normative documents published in reliable sources, etc. On the other side we have a completely artificial language that does not exist outside livejournal and a few personal websites. With no single paper book published, no publications on grammar (and of course no normative documents published anywhere), nor any native speakers whatsoever. One wiki is filled by neutral articles the other with ethnic slurs, obscene verses and other crap. If the future of MO wiki is disputable, then there is nothing to discuss about the Siberian one - it just should be speedy closed. If the Siberian is to be open for discussion then there is nothing to discuss about Moldavian - it just should be speedy kept. Alex Bakharev 14:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • And of course, it also works the other way round. Quite a number of people are opposing the closure who were in favour of closing the Moldavian Wiki. The only reason why they are doing so is so obvious, that I do not even have to mention it. --Paul Pieniezny 22:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • lupus in fabula

I couldn't help but notice that, while many of the votes seem fine, there are quite a few that don't really seem related to the topic. Apparently some don't really care about the issue and the arguments, instead beliving this to be some sort of a "free-for-all" forum to throw insults and invectives around and attack real and percived enemies of Russia (some troll even came here just to share with everybody how he feels about Belarusians and Ukrainians, given the current political cliamte I'm suppries it hasn't mentioned Georgians yet).

The argument about wating resources doesn't seem plausible, a few thousand "articles", several senetences each, doesn't really seem significant. Also I don't really how the "Siberian" wiki undermines the reputation of our Russian one, just like what's written in for example Afrikaanas doesn't seen to bother Germans. What hurts the Russian community much more is the reliance on shoddy characters. (unsigned comment)

What hurts the Russian community is that this is first language developed from Russian dialects - but soon you will see many of them))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So far, you've been the one insulting every person attempting to close the Siberian Wikipedia, with remarks like "Muscovite xenophobes", "troll accusations", "Lie and propaganda from anonimous troll". These insults are blockable offenses. -- Grafikm fr 13:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Xenophobes and lie is not insults, when the opposite part does not cease offenses. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Read up on en:WP:NPA and en:WP:TROLL. You will find it makes a nice read. Besides, that does not excuse your behaviour. -- Grafikm fr 15:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But xenophobe is not a personal attack, only defining of position - "Everything which is not our is bad". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments to diffs

First of all - sorry for my mistakes. You are wellcome to edit them if you want to. Москальска сволоч can be translate as "Moscow's scum" ("Москаль" means not directly Moscower, but russian man, that are loyal to Moscow, it is a stereotypical figure)


Скоко есь в белом свете сволочных москальов,

All the Moscow scum in the wide world is

Пошти все вони нас ненавидют,

Almost all of them hate us (by their heart)

Трудовых и вольготных сибирских людьов,

Working, freely Siberian people

Скоко могут, все времьо кручинют.

With all their's might all the time they feal (great) sorrow

Безотступно сгребатса москальско ворйо

Come running they here, thiefs, and don't want return

Кабы грабить исправы сибирски,

(Thet want) plunder Siberian (?people)

Безотступно прихоит тупо сволочйо

Bothersome comming meaningless scum

Иш шары-те раззявили склизки!

See how they gape their slippery mouth (?at our goods)

Им готованной дох от сибирской земи,

They will die out of Siberian winter

Станут, блядь, гадовать требухою,

Will they, f*ck, (?trade\eat) offal

И во весь касной скоп розговьонной клятни

(?In all their damned clan)

Мы хурньом превотяжной кукою.

(?We will strongly bite with smth.)

It's very strong poetry, woe is me that i can feel it, but cant translate, till the meaning of some words is missing to me. Carn, en 85.21.92.222 19:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So you yourself say that you do not understand half of words, how can you say is the verse obscene or not? And this is simple example of poetry. If somebody recites Horst Wessel in example, is this fascism propaganda? Actually you only want to be political censor of sibwiki, with all your Muscovite mob. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say SOME words are missing. Be more intent to opponents words.
Yaroslav Zolotaryov oftenly arguing ad hominem, hurling an accusations, if it is remembered that he is sibwiki bureaucrat and Incubator admin, thoose are not proper behaviour, till his point of view have great effect on Sibwiki's future, spurning NPOV. Carn ru 10:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is not argument ad hominem, but real truth: 1) you do not understand the language, this translation shows this 2) you are against it, because your nationalistic russian friends told you to be against, and because you hate it in political reasons. That's why you search for Russophobia in wiki, where Russians are almost not mentioned. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
50% is great for a person who TOTALLY don't understand the language, and have great problema with English. ;) Carn ru 11:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you want to close wiki based on your 50% understanding of one of it's texts? This is plain nationalism and xenophobia - nothing personal, I am only explaining your position. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you want to muddle my words with argumens of other users? %) I like that non-polite poetry. I want sibwiki to be closed 'couse you can't proove exsistence of a language(like adherent of esperanto and klingon can). If wiki-society wouldn't close sibwiki there would be another wikis based on shady constructed languages with suspicious (non-academic?) goals. You are leader of the sibwiki, and very aggresive man - this is another point not to save sibwiki, 'cos you haven't reform POV (or pseudo-POV) articles the way it comply with stated opinions, but prefer to raise heated debate against "lying xenofobs". High position oblige non-emotional, constructive point of view. Carn ru 08:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All your suspicions only reveals your xenophobia and hate to every attempr to make the language based on russian dialects. Tales, full of paranoia - that's non-emotional and constructive point of view about all this voting, similiar to a Stalin judge - accusations invented from nothing and suspicions - all what you have. Only to you I seem to be agressive - because you invent russophobia for all the wiki where only one verse is cited -- and this verse is not Russophobic but simply anticolonial. Next goal of your mob will be ukrainian wikisource with Shevchenko anticolonial verses, I bet. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the main admin and activist of sibwiki was ACrush - then, honestly, i wouldn't mind for sibwiki to be "museum of local lore". I'am not a first man who is talking about your agression, so don't disfigure reality in your vain goals. You bet - you loose =) You can't read in my heart, nor in the heart of another voting peoples, so don't utter a falsehood, even if it is based on your stereotype of a "man, voting against Sibwiki", or if it's just a populist demagogical speech - 'couse you wouldn't seduce anyone with such cheap arguments.
Siberia not a strange land for me - it is a beautiful austere country. Don't be selfish, it isn't only your Fatherland. Carn ru 18:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And that's very simple accusation - "you seem very agressive to me, because you defend your position" Who are agressive? Those who want to close a wiki for a one verse. Who are rude? Those, who invent accusations and say about the truth "blatant lie". Who have stereotypes? Those who came from ruwiki to vote against us only because leaders of russian wiki-community told them so. Who are demagoges? you, who after clear attack against our wiki accuse us in agression. Who are agressors? We, who only write the articles, or you, who want delete them? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I applaud you for your eloquent oratory. Pitifully here is no tribune for you. Carn ru 10:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you can say nothing against it, and irony is your last refuge. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is no irony. Your speech was very emotional. It might be irony, if i were said that the part, in which ru-wiki users by the wave of their leader hand submissively go and vote here in a support of closing Sibwiki, like a lambs make me cry.
If you want to continue "defend your position" you can imagine that my words is an concealed assault: "Do you see any connection between defending your own innermost Truth and the Neutral Point Of View?" Carn ru 14:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, my speech only states the truth - who is agressor here and who suffers from your agression. And claiming that NPOV is only on your side this is agression too. Do you see any connection between defending your own innermost Truth and the Neutral Point Of View? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just hate lies, I have no innermost Truth. So I can make a compromise. Carn ru 20:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But the sentence "Sibwiki is rusophobic" is definite lie - Russians are almost not mentioned in Sibwiki. Even this verse is not about Russians, but about colonial politics of some Russian goverments. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Yaroslav, but this is not how an encyclopedia works. Have you ever heard about notability criteria and the need for references? Where was your "song" published, performed, written about, except on ru-sib? Are you aware that Wikipedia is not a vehicle of promotion for anything? For me, it's not even your publishing this trash in the first place, but your defending it and your apparent failure to realize how far you deviate from a normal wikipedia process - that is what makes me think that your project's proper place is somewhere off Wikimedia servers. -- en:User:Trapolator

No, this was published in Volgota and in LJ. Since this is verse written originally in Siberian language, this make the verse notable for Siberian Wikipedia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notification. Both are headed by him. Elk Salmon 07:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But these are different sources, so wiki article is secondary source. And all the discussion is irrelevant to the voting. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that simple, you can't create a page yourself and then claim that it's a secondary source. A true source would be an academic work, for instance, not LJ or some yellow-press leaflets. -- Grafikm fr 10:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These criteria are different for different national wikipedias, as far as people from ukrainian and dutch wiki informed me. All the same, the Afd discussion is not for Meta, but for sibwiki itself. Please became our editor and then participate in Afd discussions. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, I meditated about your accusation about that when I say "lie" to something this is attack. Maybe I simply do not know more gentle english word for "not truth"? Because I am just trying to say "это неправда", and this sentence is quite gentle in russian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Try "this is not quite right", "I don't think it's true", "thoose are contrary to facts, [facts]".. etc. Use "according to [this] source i must deny your words" etc. =) Carn ru 12:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But неправда is separate substance but not simply "you are not right". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments

Can I just add something, the term Moskal or Muscovite in the way it is used here is DERAGATORY. Its like calling a black man - a nigger, yet the people that oppose the closure of sibirian wiki OPENELY use the term througout, even Zolotaryov himself. The true analogy of this would be if some white South African nationalists decide to create their separate wiki based on the white southafrican dialect that they use (officially) to then write xenophobic and racist articles on various issues. This is exactly what is going on at Sib wiki. --Kuban kazak 21:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This has been already in the disscussion, but just to clear it up over here too. The word moskal (just as another one zhid which was also seen as problematic) is used in most slavic languages and not considered offensive (in fact the word yevrey used in Russian as neutral one is considered offensive in other languages). Presenting the usage of those word as proof of malicous intent is equally absurd as if African-Americans were protest that the word used to describe Black people in other languages sounds offensive to them. (62.75.221.178)
True as that might be, in Russian it is offensive, and hence any word translated to English should not be used. Just because the word Negr in Russian is not considered offensive, does that mean that the black wikipedians have to tolerate this. Same here, what goes on in Polish or Belarusian languages is one thing, but use of such a term in ENGLISH is offensive for us Russians. --Kuban kazak 18:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But we do not use this word in ENGLISH, but in Siberian, where it has not offencive meaning. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do you really want me to count how many times did you and your henchmen used the terms Moskal and Muscouvite on this voting alone, which happens to be in English? --Kuban kazak 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure that Muscovite is offencive word in English? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think one can be humiliated by word only if deep in his mind he really thinks that insulting words are correct. So words are not derogatory, somebody just trying to humiliate another by using them.
Still i don't know connotation to what derogatory meanings has word "москаль". It is just a stereotype, like "хохол". You may call me a nationalist - it won't be true, but I don't see any derogatory connotations in word "негр"("nigger") itself. Different people would have different stereotypes. I don't mean anything offensive than i using this word, for me it means that i am talking to a friend without formality. If I meet misundestanding - I'll ask his pardon, but it never happens to a friends, 'couse I'am preety cheerful snowy =)
In a FORMAL place, like encyclopedia, there is no place for offencive words. Maybe then all the "language" is offencive. But who will decide they are offencive? Ones who feel emotional distress when they read it? Exasperate majority?
Is there thinking person with authority resolute enough to claim responsibility for the right decision? Carn ru 22:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So you dislike the language and that's why you think the words of the language are offencive, that's all. All the anti-siberian mob is simply xenophobic, that's clear. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First - you just don't understend the thing i was talking about. You can find in my text arguments that supports your position, but you prefer to see only phrases you dislike. :lol:
Second

Это искусственный язык созданный Золотарёвым с приятелями. Они просто взяли все словари жаргонных словечек сибири и местных диалектизмов, смешали их в одну кучу (неряшливо причём - в отличие от грамотных искусственных языков вроде эсперанто там нет ни внятной грамматики, ни устойчивого словаря) и получили "язык". Потом залилили антимоскальским соусом и подают как язык, на котором говорят миллионы сибиряков. --Boleslav1 トーク 22:08, 3 ноября 2006 (UTC)

На мете Золотарев утверждал, что этот язык является родным для миллионов сибиряков, поскольку он создан на основе сибирских диалектов. Он, похоже, не замечает, что по той же логике язык падонкафф является родным для всех (имхо > 100 миллионов) русскоговорящих людей, так как в языке падонкафф присутствует весь спектр нецензурной лексики русского языка. Но самое смешное в том, что миллионы предполагаемых носителей «сибирского языка» даже не знают о его существовании. :-) Typhoonbreath 00:32, 4 ноября 2006 (UTC)

85.21.92.222 09:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC) (Carn ru 09:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]
No, that is you who totally do not understand all the contents of Siberian wiki, your own words show this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Contine hurling an accusation, please, it is very nice. more often use the word total and that's all - it sounds great =) Carn ru 09:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
haha. do you belive that make your words painetd in blue is more usefull? You simply repaet the same accusations, based in your misunderstanding and ignorance, and that's really all. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have ONE argument YOU dont HEAR so i have to REPEAT it:
"Siberian language" is Original Research. Carn ru 12:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And this argument is fake, you even do not understand what is OR. Please read the WIkipedia policy before speaking nonsece here. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deliberate exaggerration of its size. 6 hours ago during my vote I checked it had some 4,500 articles (as reported on their main page). Of which at least 4,300 were year articles, at least from 2300 BC to 2006. Smart move, I must say. Right now they already have 6,567 articles! The growth that surpasses english wikipedia. I can nothing but guess they are running bots or something to artificially inflate themselves. Mikkalai 21:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please check story of the milestone page, sibwiki has 5000 articles about years, from them many are filled, and about 1600 normal articles, even without years this is not small size, remember that we have only 1 month and that we are constantly attacked by xenophobic vandals. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are right about one thing, xenophobic vandals, like those voting against the closure here. --Kuban kazak 18:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Personal attack against 40 persons. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a position that only you and your friends can judge anything about Siberian language. I know russian and can understand it's dialects. (Carn_ru)

But how can you judge about the language,when you do not know it? If you will delete my comments, I will ask Meta admins to stop the vote. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Золотарёв, во-первых вы крайне небрежно относитесь к вики-разметке, когда идёт голосование, важно чтоб нумерация оставалась сквозной.
Во-вторых вы, наверное, не понимаете смысла секций "Аргументы сторон".
В этой секции кратко выражаются аргументы сторон, м.б. факты, их подтверждающие, обсуждение идёт ниже.
Я заменил ваше сообщение "Доказательства?" на сами доказательства, с которыми вы были ознакомленны задолго до того как появилась эта строка текста. (ваш вопрос я рассматриваю как демагогическую провокацию)
Впредь буду аккуратней, да. А вы заметили что я не REmove ваше второе сообщение, а просто MOVE в первое? Можете поменять их местами, если вам так больше нравится.
Очень интересно получается - сами вы правите сообщения, а когда кто-то ещё правит, то вы сразу к админам. Некрасиво-с. Carn ru 16:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Я никаких ваших сообщений не правлю, но вы регулярно стираете мои. Если там наверху идет дискуссия, то ничто не должно стираться. Здесь нет никаких правил о закрытии каких=то секций для дискуссий, но есть правило не стирать чужие комменты. Вы не только лезете в дела сибирской вики, но еще и тут хозяйничать собрались? Воистине, кто тут позорит русскую нацию, так это руспаты. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
/me Моет руки =) (Золотарёв так и не понял что сообщения не стирались, а переностились, кроме замены "Proofs?" на доказательства. ) Carn ru 18:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Хотел бы я еще подметить кое-что, Слава тут создает имидж, что якобы уже идет война гражданская между Москвой и Сибирью и принцип тут, кто не с нами тот против нас. Только Слава один раз достаточно сказать, я думаю любой человек посмотрит то чего вы тут написали а потом посмотрит на СМИ про Сибирь и как будто ничего не происходит... потом прочитает наши аргументы и догадается, что вся ваша ахинея специально сделана чтобы нагнуть нервы... Зря ты с этого козыря пошел, уж шестерка, даже козырная, легко бьеться в большой игре. --Kuban kazak 18:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
А мы тут не в подкидного дурака играем, короче) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yaroslav states that everybody who votes against siberian wikipedia is Muscovite xenophobe and Russian imperialist. But as you can see above, some of these "xenophobes" voted against closure of Chechen wikipedia. Do you really think that Russian imperialists would support the language of a break-away republic? Kneiphof 16:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, some of this people are simply disinformated. But the idea of closing because of politics is totally imperialistic. As to Chechnya 1) you do this specially because now your goal is only Siberians 2) Chechnya us now completely loyal respublic in RF with loyal goverment. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: problem with constructed languages

Compare this project to West-Vlams: [24]. There is controversy about both the languages. However, most Dutch-speaking people believe that there is something called "West-Vlaams". Every inhabitant of the Dutch-speaking part of Flanders and many inhabitants of the Netherlands believe they can recognize a West-Fleming after ten words pronounced. That clearly is not the case with Siberian. Variation in the Russian language area is fairly monotone, with some exceptions like many people in the South pronouncing the "g" in the "Ukrainian" way, and with some idiosyncracies in the North and in Siberia, caused by the particular Eurasian landscape there (villages isolated in winter) which created dialect drift. However, just as in the United States, these regional variations, which were minor compared to Western Europe anyway, are getting less and less marked because of the impact of mass communication. (The Siberian nationalists are of course calling this the effect of Sovietization - that kind of claim always receives a welcome ear in some circles outside Russia). It is not me who's inventing this, it can be found in virtually every book on the Russian language and on Russian cultural history. Now look at Western Europe, in our case West-Vlams. The people who want to make a Wiki in that language face a daunting, probably impossible task: they need to reconcile dialects (spoken by a total of only one million people in an area smaller than Kaliningrad) where some have a click sound system distinguishing click-k from click-t, some have only click-k and some have no click sounds, some have a gender difference between masculine and feminine and most have not, some accept the direct object as subject of a passive voice and some do not, a small number of dialects use "dan" after a comparative object but most do not, and one dialect even uses the English word order in subordinate clauses. They are still busy at trying to reconcile the vocabulary, as that quoted page shows. Now, what are Yaroslav Zolotaryov and his Magnificent Ten doing? They are facing exactly the opposite problem: they have to look everywhere in Siberia (amongst others: using speech samples recorded in Siberia fifty years ago or more) to find some minor deviation from the Russian norm - which they then proclaim to be "ye olde Siberian tongue". Because the vocabulary they then end up with is not enough to write articles, they have to fill in the blanks with back formations based on Ukrainian and Belarusian (thy also spell phonologically, so as to deviate as much from Russian as possible). Is that a problem? Well, actually only for them. The problem starts when the output turns out be Russophobic and trashy articles which they then try to link to other interwikis. Would people who have just put enormous work into a Westvlams, Chechen or Kanuri article on Hamlet wish his or her work to be linked to the Siberian obscenity? I doubt that very much. The project also faces a major internal problem: how to explain that "ye olde Siberian tongue" is so close to Russian? After all, the Moskals only came to plunder the land (I quote from [25]. No wonder the linguistic part is rather underdeveloped. Instead of creating the Siberian language, which is only derived from the language of plunderers anyway, and calling everyone who objects, even non-Russians, "xenophobes", maybe they had better try to learn Evenk? --Paul Pieniezny 22:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are no Russophobic articles in sibwiki, and we have totally enough dictionary of 15 000 words. You have almost no information about Siberian language, and movement, and Wikipedia. So how can you make those conclusions that you have made? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course "Moskals who plunder Siberian land" is POV. Of course the "Siberian" version of the French NTM phrase (saying it in French because they have an abbreviation for it) is an obscenity. And it is a disgrace for Polish Wikipedia that their Hamlet article is linked to that one. One more thing however, that I should have said above: one supporter of closure stated that this Siberian wikipedia is like making a Texan wikipedia out of some deviant forms of English in Texan villages settled by Germans. But that is not what this project is like. It is much WORSE. Imagine Yaroslav Zolotaryov looking for minor deviations from Standard American English in the Western prairie states and finding some in Wyoming (villages settled by Swedes), Minnesota (villages settled by Dutch and Norwegians) and Texas (villages settled by Germans) and trying to construct a language out of that, filling up the holes with back formations from ... Pennsylvania Dutch and then writing articles calling all Americans Yanks (er, weren't they originally Dutch?) who plundered the Prairie land. That is the kind of Original Research involved here. --Paul Pieniezny 01:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have already answered all this. 1) Moscals who plunder are mentioned only in one verse citation, and not in article 2) there is no policy to delete wikipedias even if they have POV 3) you can not know what is obscenity if you do not know the language 4) your political attitude to the wiki is irrelevant to discussion 5) you are free to make POV discussions in sibwiki, but you want political repressions against it and you want to close it, but not to free the wiki from POV. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is not only in a verse. It is also in the definition: "Верш сказыват про сволочных москальов, которы грабют сибирской край." грабют, "plunder" and not грабили бы (are claimed to plunder) which would be NPOV. I am free to discuss that? But you WP:OWN this language, for all I know you might claim that that tense does not exist in Siberian. --193.190.172.92 09:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)--Paul Pieniezny 10:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So this is anticolonial verse as is written in it's header - "this is verse about Muscovites who plunder" - do you think that all the russians plunder? Yes, this is example of political poetry, actually only one example in the whole wiki, but even this example is not russophobic, and there is nothing about russians in this verse at all. If one of wikipedias will be deleted because of citing of a political verse, what a noise will be, when everybody will demand to delete wikipedias where there are some texts not according to his political POV! --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is becoming clear is that "Moskal" for you sometimes means an inhabitant of Moscow (no problem with that, in a sense I was once one), sometimes a Russian, and sometimes not every Russian, but only a сволочны Russian. The argument about this song is not only about the POV but also about its OR. Some guy we will call A sending an e-mail to a guy called B, (both living in Ukraine) who then sends it to LiveJournal does not mean the thing is found in literature. In the meantime, you are so busy running stubs to create even more articles that the obscenity on the Hamlet page is still there. In any normal wikipedia that would have been deleted days ago. --Paul Pieniezny 10:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That is example of verse, published not only in LJ but in several sites like Volgota. Ruwiki is filled with examples of russian songs for example. When the siberian Wikisource will be opened, we plan to transfer it to the wikisource. All the same, 1) russians are not even mentioned in this verse, but you invent meaning of this word in agressive manner ("What is becoming clear is that"), 2) this is POV discussion which can be done in sibwiki, but not cause for closure it. Never wikipedias were closed becuase of POV discussion, and if the siberian will be closed because of it, this will be for sure bad for Wikipedia as a whole. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Ruwiki is filled with examples of russian songs for example" [26] there text ABOUT song is bigger then a song itself. I don't think wikis can be closed 'couse of POV, maybe becouse of ATTITUDE, then POV isn't moving closer to NPOV. Carn ru 20:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you can simply go to this place and propose more neutral variant, why don't you do this? This song is better for Wikisource, I know, but we have no Wikisource now. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And ATTITUDE is very general word, and everybody can be accused in some ATTITUDE. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's correct. That's why it isn't my argument, it's just opinion. 'couse you can never know shurely why one did something and what he was thinking about. Carn ru 10:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you yourself recognize, that anti-siberian part has only opinions and xenophobic feelings, but not facts and arguments. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"anti-siberian"? Haven't seen anything similar to it. Some people above appear to be against wiki on "Siberian language", but no one of them, I guess, is against Siberia. Carn ru 14:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
in context of sibwiki, for sure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Plz, read again my last words. =) Carn ru 13:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have read them - you only try to change the topic because you can not win the discussion. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And you call my feeling xenophobic because you can win the discussion? :lol: Carn ru 07:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, just because you hate us for unknown reason. Remember, that you are agressor here, you want to close my wiki, but I do not want to close the yours. So I have presumption of innocence, but you can not prove any guilts invented by you - that's why you use all manners of a sophist - that's why your imperia loose many of it's colonies, and that's why you will loose and this wikiwar too: every nation want to do it's own work, but you only want to subdue all the nations. So why are you offended, when siberians, ukrainians and belorussians call you moscali? Look at yourself - we did not any harm to you, but you have come to destroy our wikihouses. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So I am an agressor without presumption of innocence? Carn ru 09:16, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For sure. You want to destroy me, but I did not want to destroy you. So I am in better position according to the justice. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant sample of lop-sided logic. Carn ru 10:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's true and you can not hide it by demagogy. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is demagogy to say that presumption of innocence is for each and everybody, not just for you? Carn ru 11:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The deliberate illusion of Siberio-Muscouvite war

I must say, having read some of the counter arguments that the opposite party raises, I can only have one thing to say, all of this is BS in every shape and form. First notice the terminology they use: "Imperialist","chauvinist","Muscouvite","Moskal","Putin Slaves"(I like that one :) and of course what really stands out "fighting for the Muscouvite Empire".

What should a third person see? That there is a a civil war between an oppresed "Siberian Nation", whose borders are not specified, nor has anyone actually heard of the Siberian "declaration of independence", let alone witnessed ANY conflicts or tensions, in Siberia, or for that matter anywhere outside wikispace and LJ. I mean do for the fun of it google for Siberian nation, and see if anything about the Siberian identity issues come up.

So one of the key arguments against Siberian wiki is that neither the Siberian nation nor language as such do not exist and are completely made up. I mean in Siberia you have thousands of nationalities that rightfully could claim as Siberians: Buryats, Tuvians, Khakassians, Altay, Yevenks ... Russians and, well easier to ask what nationalities do we not have living in Siberia? Siberia was conquered by a Cossack Yermak back in the times of Ivan the Terrible and has been part of Russia since. The only war that took place after that was the Russian Civil War in the 1917-1922, but even that was hardly nationalistic, only a political struggle. So out of what hole did this "Siberian nationalism" come out? And even more statling is how did this "Siberian Language" (which again has ZERO refrences outside the internet) managed to account for so many Ukrainisms? That is despite the fact that Ukraine happens to be on the opposite side of Moscow from Siberia. (An odd point to note down is the nationalities of the people who are voting against the closure and the amount of Ukrainians amongst them). Finally what is "Siberian" nationality. In the 2002 Russian census i surely could find any reference to them [27], what I would like to see is Mr. Zolotoryov's birth certificate for that matter, and under what nationality is he written.

Finally, as the icing on the cake, if there was a civil war going on, wouldn't the press, Russian and Western report any of this? Or at least on the Siberian identity crisis that is apparentely going on. I think one can conclude from this, that the circuis that most of the opposing voters have created based on ethno and political show. Made ENTIRELY out of LiveJournal BS. And to have that representing wikipedia is just a classic case of what the founders of wiki were worried about when they started it off, that it would be used as a political tribune in the most idiotic of cases, of which this is!

PS: More than 3/4 of the people voting to close this pseudo-encyclopedia are not from Moscow, I personally come from the Kuban area and do not even consider myself Great Ruthenian, a Cossack instead. --Kuban kazak 19:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just add one point, that the Siberian language and the website Volgota is actually headed by Zolotoryov himself, so basically he himself created this language, he himself is now writing it. This, IMO, is a TOTAL violation of the NOR policy and I do not understand how the Meta admin sanctioned this to begin in the first place. However if one remembers how he frauded the vote to create a majority of users... and at the same time according to him only 10 regularly work... Pathetic. --Kuban kazak 21:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is not argument for close a wiki, even if it has no nations - compare with wikies in articial languages. All this political accusations and all our "russophobia" are totaly invented by you. And who use Wikipedia as political tribune and even want to closure our wikipedia because of politics - this is just you and your company. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So can I invent now my own language based on nothing and request a wiki for it? Elk Salmon 07:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely. But will 50 persons vote for you, and will 10 persons regularly write in your wikipedia, as in Siberian case? Will be many publications about your wikipedia? (we have about 5 for sibwiki - in 1 month). --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely!? Do you know that Original Research is not allowed on wikipedia? Elk Salmon 11:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Siberian language is not OR, it was proven during discussions about it's opening. You simply want to revote the first vote, but you will fail again - we now have even more supporters than in that time. --62.68.146.96 12:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please read what is your leader has said - it was collected from 500 siberian dialects (most of them actually should be called slangs) out of thousands slangs in dialects in Russia (every village has something special in slang. it's usual for east slavs.). But it is not true. You did not collected those slangs. You did not made a porridge from them. You just made your own. It was invented on your live journal, where you were inventing terms and words on your own comfort and feeling. Elk Salmon 12:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And you completely did not understood what I was speaking about, or did not read my text. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Supporters? If you mean anon IPs or permabanned disruptors like Bonaparte, one should not be proud or boast of such a support... -- Grafikm fr 18:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The anon IPs are siberians who support the wiki, but do not know the language yet, so they can not write from sibwiki account. And we have many supporters who are not anons, though moscals has only crowd, brung in from ruwiki under nationalist slogans. Only hate, only xenophobia, only agression - that's all what have the moscals.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Only-only-only. Come on. Stop it, please. ACrush ?!/© 08:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just you stop your hate and unprovoked agression. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There was no one word, which can be interpret like hateness or agression from ACrush side. You stop your groundless accusatory yells. Carn ru 10:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And that was not discussion with ACrush, but with all the accusators. And your agression is evident - you want to delete our wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Come on. Stop it, please." - "Just you stop your hate and unprovoked agression." - not a discussion with ACrush? In fact, it is. But you always can edit your words (it is a very gentle hint). Carn ru 11:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting for your Nationalist Romanian supporters: it turns out that Syldavian (the language used by Balkanic people in Tintin's adventures) is in fact ... Moldavian ([[28]]). I hope they will now realize that they cannot possibly support Siberian and oppose Syldavian/Moldavian at the same time? Compared to Siberian, Syldavian has a whole treatise written about it, has existed for sixty years, has millions of people who have read texts in it, hundreds of thousands have heard it (pronounced in the film versions) and it is has hundreds of possible supporters. And if we accept Siberian and Syldavian, we also have to accept Bordurian and Prlwytzkofsky. --Paul Pieniezny 17:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Grafik, you forgot to say why Bonaparte got perma-banned, it was not just "disruption": [29]--Paul Pieniezny 01:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We will discuss our problems with Romainians without Russian "helpers", ok? Russia already had helped to Moldova, organising permanent war in it's borders. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, are you sure it is not the other way round? Having problems with Russians and getting help from Bonaparte? The people whom Errabee challenged as one-purpose accounts, haven't answered yet. --Paul Pieniezny 11:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is all the circus?

Today I see too few (personal attack removed) here. What's up with (personal attack removed)? Where is my comon morning's amusement, to answer to their silly questions? I am disappointed. )))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Siberian_Wikipedia&oldid=466082"