Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Moldovan Wikipedia

The following proposal for closing a WMF project is under discussion.

PLEASE READ CAREFULLY: THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL FOR CLOSING THE MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA (it is already closed). THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR THE DELETION (i.e. remove it completely from Wikimedia and the SiteMatrix) OF THE MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA AND ITS DOMAIN http://mo.wikipedia.org as per the Siberian Wikipedia precedent..

Arguments for:

• At Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Moldovan Wikipedia, it has been decided to close the so-called Moldovan Wikipedia.
• Moldovan Wikipedia (http://mo.wikipedia.org/) stays frozen for more than 4 years now
• This project cannot be restarted as there is no ISO code for the en:Moldovan language/ro:Limba moldovenească, there are no native speakers, and the language isn't sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki (the Romanian Wikipedia) - see Meta:Language_proposal_policy:

The identifiers mo and mol are deprecated, leaving ro and ron (639-2/T) and rum (639-2/B) the current language identifiers to be used for the variant of the Romanian language also known as Moldavian and Moldovan in English and moldave in French. (source: The Library of Congress - ISO 639-2 Registration Authority / SIL)

• NO CONTENT WILL BE LOST All articles on the so called Moldovan Wikipedia are old versions of Romanian Wikipedia articles (back in 2006), that were just automaticaly transliterated into the Cyrillic alphabet. There is no need for such a content, as there are various online tools that can automaticaly transilterate content into Cyrillic from any language written in the Latin alphabet. Even English if you want.

Compare Muzică (Romanian Wikipedia, October 2005) to Музикэ (Moldovan Wikipedia). That happened because the user who started this Wikipedia didn't speak the language, and couldn't create content on its own.

Now, if someone really wants to read all Romanian Wikipedia in Cyrillic he can do that here (the script was developed by Bogdan and is ready to be implemented as soon as anybody requests it).

• According to the Constitution of Moldova, the official language of Moldova is written with the Latin alphabet, not the Cyrillic alphabet (art. 13 of the Constitution).
• Wikipedia is often mocked in the Romanian-speaking media because of the so-called Moldovan Wikipedia, as an example of voluntary work gone bad (you can also have a look at this cause on causes.com, signed by 6700 people).

I propose that the mo subdomain should be taken down and redirected to the Romanian Wikipedia.

NOTE Moldovan language is not a dialect, or another standard language of a pluricentric language (like in the case of Croatian and Serbian), there is not even the slightest difference in the written form of the language in Moldova and the language in Romania. There is no Moldovan language standard. According to the national conception of Moldova, Moldovan is BY LAW just another name of the Romanian language: see Title I (DISPOZIŢII GENERALE) of the law on the Conception of the national politics of Moldova, and the 1989 Language Law that made the language official across Moldova. Reffer to en:Moldovan language and ro:Limba moldovenească for more sources on this issue and further reading.

I propose to close the discussion within a month from now, i.e. by Thursday, 24rd February, but this term can be prolonged if we fail to get enough feedback. The result of this discussion should also apply to the Moldovan Wiktionary, that is empty (only 11 pages, that are not actual dictionary entries, just Wikipedia articles). --Danutz 17:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Support

1. Danutz 17:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC) As the initiator of this proposal.
2. Afil 04:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
3. Support, since no content would be lost. - Xbspiro 03:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
4. As it does not meet the language policy, and no content would be lost, no reason the keep it archived. - Elekhh 15:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
5. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

1. This has been discussed before - mo.wp should not be closed until a compromise is reached allowing equal access to content in Cyrillic. This has been agreed to by members of the language subcommittee. It seems Danutz would like to have his cake and eat it too - exclude any users of Cyrillic alphabet from using ro.wp, while simultaneously ensuring they never have a Wiki of their own. This is unfair and wrong. --Node ue 19:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
2. Oppose as a matter of principle: you may hate certain books or disagree with them, you may even lock them up somewhere — but you don't burn them. Seb az86556 21:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
3. Oppose - I don't see any good reason to delete it. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Doesn't belong here; go to incubator, there's already a duscussion. Delete this page, it's pointless. Seb az86556 21:23, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

But please explain, what do you mean by "it's pointless"? Why does this page not belong here? We already had a page here Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Siberian Wikipedia, and that belonged here. Now why does this page not belong here? I can't find any discussion about the deletion of the domain mo.wikipedia.org at the Incubator, only a discussion about the deletion of the Moldovan language Incubator. What is pointless? Here we discuss the termination/deletion/removal from Sitematrix of the mo.wikipedia.org domain. What does this have to do with the Incubator?--Danutz 21:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Ten days is simply not enough time for comments; besides you, me, and Seb, there's almost nobody watching this proposal. Plus, the previous resolution has been to merge this project with the Romanian wiki; have we ensured that this process is done first before we move on? :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, TCNSV. In the past it was agreed^{[dubious - citation needed]} that mo.wp can and should be removed once a solution is established that respects the linguistic rights of all speakers of this language, meaning that anybody who is interested in reading ro.wp in Cyrillic could do so easily (i.e., without having to make a lot of requests or search for off-site tools - so, an on-site tab or a subdomain portal) and could also be able to edit the encyclopedia (that is the point of a Wiki, after all). ro.wp administrators have consistently refused, suggesting that the only way such compromises could occur were if the Russian army occupied Bucharest. Fine, but how does anybody expect a compromise if they aren't willing to give a little? What it comes down to is this: these people do not want to compromise, they want it their way or no way at all, and they are willing to do anything to get it. --Node ue 08:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Please donnot make interpretation of the previous discussion and please donnot judge ro.wiki on the basis of 1 user (people say many things when they are mad, but that does not mean it is the official POV of the Romanian Wikipedia community). The previos decision was to close mo.wiki, without any subtexts, conditions or other hidden agenda.--Danutz 21:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I see ten days is too little time. I thought it will imediately span attention, but it did not. Anyway, I changed it to a month (and we will change it even further if necessary). About merging, I wrote up here that all articles were transliterated from old versions of Romanian Wikipedia pages, so the content is actually already present in the Romanian Wikipedia (of course it was edited and reedited during this years, but that is only for the best). Also I provided a link to a tool that permits viewing articles with the Cyrillic alphabet, allthough I doubt very much anybody would want that (the tool was developed following the discussion; actually I found the tool in the previous discussion. It was developed by en:User:Bogdangiusca).

There are no people interested in reading (even less so editing) in Cyrillic, still we do provide a tool to do this. All content is already present in the Romanian Wikipedia. Cyrillic script lacks any official recognition, it is just used by a group of people that unilaterally declared independence (the situation is comparable/equal to that of the Siberian language, where a group of people, lacking official recognition unilaterally created a language). The Moldovan Wikipedia was created automatically and edited by people who don't speak the language. If someone will want (in the future) to edit in Romanian-Cyrillic he can propose the creation of a new Wikipedia (or the addition of a script in the ro.wiki), but only by submitting to the official policy. I never understood why we should create conditions for the use of Romanian-Cyrillic a priori, without being requested by actual speakers. --Danutz 22:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, the Cyrillic system is still in de facto official use in Transnistria. (Although I do not know what the actual situation is there.) I think it would be the best to include an option in the preferences to render pages in Cyrillic script instead of Latin, just like the Serbian Wikipedia does. Btw, you can use the sitenotice to draw bigger attention, but you are probably aware of this, as you have edited it a few times already. - Xbspiro 03:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that (adding an option in preferences) is a very good option, however nobody requested it. Normally we would wait for people to request such an option, because the script is already developed (see above the tool I linked on this page, that was developed by Romanian wikipedian Bogdangiusca following the previous discussion). That shouldn't be a problem, because these are only technical aspects. About the sitenotice, I didn't want to add a message in the Romanian sitenotice, at least for now, because I feared that by doing so, international users in this discussion would be misrepresented by the number of Romanian users (and some might argue the results because of that). However, I have a strong feeling that the entire Wikipedia community is sick and tired with this Moldovan Wikipedia, and that's why I hope many international users will vote for the deletion.--Danutz 05:28, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Danutz, it's really hilarious that you compare Transnistria to the "Siberian language" situation. Transnistria, while not recognized by any UN members, is certainly not controlled by the Moldovan government, and is recognized by some non-UN member states. People in Transnistria do use Cyrillic as their primary script. In the case of the invented "Siberian language", it was not taught in schools (as is the case of Moldovan), nor was it used by a de facto independent republic (as is the case of Moldovan); it existed only in the imaginations of a group of hoaxers. There are webpages in Moldovan Cyrillic, textbooks, literature books, etc. There is much controversy surrounding Transnistria, certainly, and you and I may certainly disagree on the facts of that situation, but I don't think it is a good faith representation to compare it to Siberian, a language that was invented by a hobbyist with no corresponding political movement or dispute, let alone a territory under its control ("legally" or otherwise). --Node ue 19:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Node, I really don't want to discuss the situation in Transnistria. I havn't met any people on the Internet that come from Transnistria and speak Romanian - allthough Moldovans are a relative majority there, they live mostly on the country-side, while those very few who live in cities (where there would be at least a chance to get Internet access) study mostly in Romanian language schools (with Latin script), because there are also such schools in Transnistria.

Anyway that was just a thought to explain why I don't think we will find users interested in editing in Cyrillic at any point. But if we will have interest for such a content, we will add an option, we will make the documentation. What you should understand is that some Romanian speakers, especially in Moldova might find the Cyrillic option ofending (because of its history) so we cannot risk loosing editors in the Romanian Wikipedia if we don't get nothing in exchange (but as soon as we will have requests, we will add this functionality, as it is allready developed).

The idea here is just deleting the Moldovan Wikipedia, but I donnot see were it was agreed that Romanian Wikipedia should insert a Cyrillic option. It was not the precondition to close the Moldovan Wikipedia. I repeat, we will enhance ro.wiki with this functionality when requested (and proportional with the request): Remember, our goal is NOT to promote Cyrillic alphabet for the Romanian language by any means, and that was not the consensus of the last discussion (I don't want to sound ofending, please don't take it personaly, but you should not play with words). The decision was to close the Moldovan Wikipedia (unconditionally). Some even argued to move it on another domain, but it lacked interest from the community. Now, as of 2011, that is even impossible, because mo.wiki does not comply to the language policy.

In short just remember: we cannot transform Wikipedia in a tool that promotes the interest of a separatist group. Of course we will add Cyrillic functionality, as soon as requested and proportional with the request (after all that is a condition to start a new Wikipedia). But I (personally) will not stand for the use Wikipedia as a propaganda tool. We find native Cyrillic users, ok. But we don't do something without being requested, especialy if it could offend existing users (you must understand it is very risky, is not that I, or other old Wikipedia users, have something with the Cyrillic script.--Danutz 21:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, please donnot spam, I understand you don't have any interest in this discussion taking place, but please donnot vandalize it. Donnot vandalize the arguments above: they are part of this proposal. If you change them, than the proposal has no object. Add you comments here.--Danutz 21:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: WE ARE NOT TALKING HERE ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF THE MOLDOVAN LANGUAGE, OR THE USE OF THE CYRILLIC SCRIPT. HERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE DELETION OF THE MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Allthough I put a note up there about the Moldovan language for those who have no clue about the situation, this discussion is not about the Moldovan language, nor about the use of the Cyrillic script in Transnistria. Please refer to the arguments above, that is, that (1) there is no interest in writing a Wikipedia in Cyrillic and there are no prespectives for that, (2) such a Wikipedia does not meet the Wikimedia language policy and (3) no content will be lost, as there are no original articles in mo.wikipedia.org (but we can make a backup to the database if you really want). Our rationale here is not to talk endlessly on the Moldovan language and Transnistria (althoug these are very interesting subjects), but to talk on the proposal for deletion of the Moldovan Wikipedia. From now on, any comments that focus on the existence of the Moldovan language or the use of the script in Transnistria will be moved in the discussion page of this proposal. There you can discuss endlessly if you want, however the idea of this proposal is to keep it relevant. Please don't find this offending, your opinions are very important and we all want to hear them, but here on the main page we should focus on the subject, that is the proposal to delete the Molodvan Wikipedia. Thank you for your understanding. --Danutz 00:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Just because we read what you write does not mean we are compelled to agree with you. You are beginning to come off as "disagrees with me = is stupid." We've heard you. Seb az86556 04:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

P.S. You move people's comments, I'll move them back; you are not going to censor anyone to get your way. Seb az86556 04:50, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Moved to talkpage.