Last modified: 2012-03-17 22:54:39 UTC
as per mailing list discussion:
This has not been universally agreed-upon. Input of current mo.wikipedians has
not been requested. Myself (acc't currently set to "moderated" on wikipedia-l),
Russ, and other less-active mo.wikipedians so far oppose this action, as do
other Wikipedians as they have expressed (Djordje, Slavik Ivanov).
We favour keeping the status quo, where the mainpage of mo.wiki is a portal, and
cyrillic content is hosted on mo.wiki.
We have discussed about this issue in beginning of December-2005
Moldovans all over the world have agreed with with us, here's one Oleg
Alexandrov aoleg at math.ucla.edu
have been impressed by Oleg, I'm happy what he don't forgot about his mother
Thank you wikipedia volunteers for doing great job !
Hope you'll fix this mistake soon, have a great new year !
"Moldovans around the world"... including you,
Oleg, and Liviu Androni... that's a grand total
of 3 people.
Compared to me, Russ, Vertaler, Dmitriid, and
co., that's a minority.
Yes, you discussed it on the mailing list.
Well, I can't post to the ML right now (my
account is set to status "moderated" even
though Anthere promised to change it),and Russ,
Vertaler, Dmitriid, and Elnoel are not signed
up for Wikipedia-l. In addition to those
Moldovan users, there are additional users who
support existance of Cyrillic at mo.wiki:
Gabix, Djordje Bozovic, Monedula, Miaow Miaow,
So please stop trying to enforce the false
impression that everybody agrees with you.
I call to administrators to get the real facts. And read the threads from
The "real facts" are that thousands of
Transdnistrians use Cyrillic on a daily basis.
Your bias against Santisti is not
constructive and based on political motives.
Just because they use Cyrillic doesn't mean
they're not people.
Now, even though Transnistria's independence
is only recognised by Armenia indirectly
(because Armenia recognises Nagorno-Karabakh,
which recognises Transnistria; Armenia is the
only universally-recognised country to
recognise Nagorno-Karabakh though),
nonetheless it is undeniable that Cyrillic is
indeed used there, and is still imparted to
young Santisti by educators there.
It seems important to me to emphasise that
even currently, the Main Page of mo.wiki uses
Latin, first, and Cyrillic, second. Every
official part of the site gives priority to
Latin script, because it is used by more
Now, Constanteanu and you both ahve said that
we can't call it "Moldovan" because "Moldovan
is not written in Cyrillic". Well, that's
bull. The publications pre-1989 in RSSM were
in which language then? They were in
_Moldovan_ even though they used Cyrillic.
PMR issues official documents in which 3
languages? Russian, Ukrainian, and
_Moldovan_, even though they use Cyrillic.
So quit your whining. And quit pretending
that everybody agrees with you, because they
Just because none of the supporters of
Cyrillic mowiki have come to wikipedia-l,
doesn't mean they don't exist. You can see
their existance at mo.wiki (especially Russ
and Gabix, who both have lots of
"Transdnistrians use Cyrillic on a daily basis."
Create your own(trans.) subdomain if you don't respect Moldovan law, don't use
our initials. Moldovans in Moldova what respect the law and write using latin
script are far more than in Transnitrian what are forced to write using
cyrillic(your government have no rules, "In the summer of 2004, the
Transnistrian authorities forcibly closed six schools that taught Moldovan
language using the Latin script." ->
Transnistrian 2004 census:
* Total population (including Tighina): 555.500
* Moldovans: 31.9%
That's 177,204 of Moldovans in Transnitria forced to write using cyrillic.
According to the 2004 census Moldovans: 76.1% from 3,388,071 ppl. That's
2,578,322 of Moldovans what use latin script in write.
So why must must 2,578,322 of people must see cyrillic on mo. just because of
177,204(these 177,204 is even lower because many still trying to write using
(i already have write this on the list, hope admins will take the right decision).
mo.wiki is not for "Republica Moldova", it is for the "Moldovan language" which
is also the official language of Transnistria, and was at one time the official
language of RSSM.
It's a bit strange to assume that every last one of those 177 thousand people
absolutely hate writing in Cyrillic and are "forced" to do it
And even though I use Latin to write English, I certainly wouldn't care much if
en.wp used Cyrillic. There is nothing wrong with "seeing Cyrillic". mo.wiki
splits evenly. It's not as if it has ONLY Cyrillic.
It has both.
"mo.wiki is not for "Republica Moldova", it is for the "Moldovan language" which
is also the official language of Transnistria,"
I also have give you the number of Moldavians in each country(or whatever
Transnistria are), if you notice that ;p
I call to respect the rule of majority.
I stop posting here until some admin will come and say smth..
This isn't the place to be having this discussion. Resolving LATER for now.
Please go and get consensus for this change on the affected project, make sure
it's clear and obvious to us, then re-open this bug _with a URL to the page I
(In reply to comment #9)
> This isn't the place to be having this discussion. Resolving LATER for now.
> Please go and get consensus for this change on the affected project, make sure
> it's clear and obvious to us, then re-open this bug _with a URL to the page I
Believe me, that'll never happen.
#3 Node_ue tries to hide the facts. Counting from _wikipedia-l_ (since october), people who are
for the move mo->mo-cyr:
1. Oleg Alexandrov (Moldova)
3. Adrenalin (Moldova)
4. Field Nothing (Moldova)
5. Arbeo M
6. Liviu Andronic (Moldova)
7. V. Ivanov
I tried contacting user Russ, no reply from him at all (he is a korean, claims to know ru-1,
doesn't even claim to know romanian/moldovan). User Vertaler and Dmitriid are inactive.
Have a look also at: http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Паӂина_принчипалэ_-_кирилик . User Node_
ue claims that the opinion only of the contributors should be considered, but why should we be
forced to write something in an alphabet we don't use just to get mo.wikipedia moved to mo-cyr.
wikipedia ? I urge you to take a look at the page mentioned and at the archives of wikipedia-l
(though I understand that it takes a lot of time...). Just think of the current situation, only
node_ue and russ are active, russ doesn't know romanian/moldovan and just transliterates by hand
(with a lot of mistakes) the text from the ro.wikipedia, Node_ue doesn't romanian/moldovan well
enough, can probably read some of it but when it comes to writing makes a lot of inadmissible
mistakes. So how come ? Two users copying with the introduction of mistakes (from the
tranlisteration)the ro.wikipedia, one doesn't know romanian/moldovan at all, the other one
barely knows it and they represent Moldova on wikipedia ? Let them edit mo-cyr.
Whether or not Vertaler or Dmitriid are "active" on mo.wiki is entirely
irrelevant, as not a single one of the users you cited as supporting you is active.
Also, Slavik Ivanov seems to oppose rather than support a move.
Also supporting that Wikipedia are Djorje Vozovic and KIT.
So let's re-evaluate:
1. Oleg Alexandrov (USA)
2. Ronline (Romania)
3. Adrenalin (Moldova)
4. Field Nothing (Moldova)
5. Arbeo M (Germany)
6. Liviu Andronic (France)
1. Node_ue (USA)
2. Slavik Ivanov (Russia)
3. Djordje Vozovic (Zlatibor)
4. Russ (Russia/Korea)
5. Dmitriid (Moldova)
6. Vertaler (Moldova)
7. Elnoel (Moldova)
8. Monedula (Russia)
9. Miaow Miaow (Czech Republic)
10. OldakQuill (UK?)
11. Nechtanc (USA)
12. KIT (Russia)
13. Gabix (Belarus)
And Field, remember that this is a Wiki. If there is an error, either tell us
what it is, correct it, or don't complain.
Oh, and while I may not know all of the errors myself,,, I know a great deal of
them, for example "aceasta" is sometimes spelt wrong, "regiune" is often spelt
wrong... most misspellings relate to 3 vowels in a row, or to "iu", "io", or
"ia" (Russ only recently understood the basic rules for those). Other than that,
misspellings seem in general to be related to the use of "soft sign", which is a
difficult issue still, hopefully soon I can get ahold of the orthographic
#14, I'm sorry but that's BS. V.Ivanov - http://mail.wikipedia.org/
pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-December/042947.html . And where exactly did he
oppose the move ?
And OK, let's relist it if you want to take into account Wikipedia users
1. Oleg Alexandrov
7. Ivanov V.
19. Just a tag
What are we talking about here ? Supporting THE wikipedia ? Or not
approving A MOVE ? Do you see the difference ?
Anyway, should I list more ? And don't tell me your crap, those users that
YOU listed did not say a SINGLE word on wikipedia-l, you were the ONLY
user against the decision to move. Oleg Alexandrov and Liviu Andronic are
both citizens of Republic of Moldova, and nobody knows where Dmitriid,
Veraler or Elnoel are from, I really would like to speak to them, but I'm
sure they will support a move mo->mo-cyr, remember this is wikipedia and
not uncyclopedia, what YOU make out of wikipedia is something that
resembles uncyclopedia very closely.
Maybe latin1 - cyrilic and cyrilic - latin conversions can be handled
Well, it feels good to be Moldovan again. And probably
Oleg will feel similarly when he finds it out. Thanks
Ok, let's review the "moldovans" that Mark (en:User:Node_ue) cites as supporters:
- Dmitriid (mo:User:Dmitriid):
* all edits in moldovan language text are figure corrections or categorizing.
* politically active, but in english, which is weird on a non-english wiki for
which native speakers are available.
* native russian (not that I have a personal problem with this, but this
discussion puts great emphasis on "moldovan ethnicity")
- Vertaler :
* contributed one article. In addition, some 20 minor edits (corrections).
- Elnoel :
* no edit, nothing, nada
Let's not forget this is a "moldovan language" wikipedia, and not a wikipedia
for people living in Moldova. So, let's judge people by their ability to contribute.
In conclusion: I see no moldovan-speaking editor supporting Mark (a.k.a.
The next step in this dispute / farce would be about WIKT:MO: a project with
actual 11 registered users ([[wiktionary:mo:special:Statistics]]) and about 4200
id's (only some dozens *not* made by
The "quilified" voters who disliked a Cyrillic WP:MO: also should not hesitate
to close / change this project as well.
Toţi participanţii trebuie să fie cunoscători ai limbii moldoveneşti/române, ei
fiind potenţialii contribuitori (fiecare utilizator va fi contactat în mod
individual ca să-i fie verificată identitatea şi cunoaşterea limbii). Fiecare
participant trebuie să aibă la activ minimum 25 editări pe mo.wikipedia.org sau
All participants (to the vote) must know the Moldovan/Romanian language being
the potencial contributors (every user will be contacted individualy in order to
verify the identity and the knowledge of the language. All participants (to the
vote) must have a minimum of 25 edits at mo.wikipedia.org sau ro.wikipedia.org.
Please do not hesitate to open another Mozilla request.
best regards reinhardt [[user:gangleri]]
As requested in comment #9, consensus was reached (http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Wikipedia:Alegeri). The Romanian/Moldovan speaking community participated in the
vote. The eligibility conditions are laied down in comment #19. The results are as
The existance of a Moldovan language Wikipedia:
In case of the maintainance of a Wikipedia in such a language written in Cyrillic,
would mo-cyr.wiki or ro-cyr.wiki, instead of mo.wiki, be a proper name for it:
Note: Please take into account that this vote was contested on Wikipedia-I by Node_
ue ["fairness in voting" discussion].
Thus, I would like to know whether it is possible through this bug report to
definitely shutdown the Moldovan Wikipedia, instead of just "Move mo to mo-cyr, set
up new Latin-based mo"? Or is it necessary to re-open this discussion on Wikipedia-
I (this topic was several times discussed on Wikipedia-I)? Or is there any other
way of liberating the mo.wikipedia.org domain?
(In reply to comment #20)
the url is
[[mo:Wikipedia:Alegeri]] with comments on [[mo:Wikipedia_talk:Alegeri]]
> Note: Please take into account that this vote was contested on Wikipedia-I by
> ue ["fairness in voting" discussion].
BTW: I also contested the validity of this voting (especially the shutdown) at
This topic is very emotional. The poeple living in the historical region of
Moldova (now split between more countries) are very proud and many of them feel
no antagonism being Moldovans (from regional perspective) and also being
Romanians. As far as I know it was never disputed that the great majority are
writing in Latin script and that writing in Cyrillic was (re-)introduced in the
Stalin era based mainly on political objectives and on obscure linguistic
theories promoted during this time in the USSR.
Beside main languages Wikipedia Foundation operates projects in dialects
especially where writing in this variants has a great historical tradition. 'mo'
/ 'mo-lat' and 'mo-cyr' could ilustrate the local countryside / regional
treasures without being a 100% translation of the Romanian projects. Such a
compromise would neither close all doors to the minority writing still in /
reading only Cyrillic nor should it be regarded as an offense to the voters of
No more ideas about this. Best wishes in a 'wiki' spirit to the contributors of
>BTW: I also contested the validity of this voting (especially the shutdown) at
I ommitted it. My excuses.
I cannot not agree with your arguments, except the mo-lat. Moldovan dialect was
never written in Latin script (to my knowledge). This is why mo.wiki is so
contested. Mo-cyr - as I said on Wikipedia-I - should well be *the* compromise and
the neutral solution. Everything will calm down if this happens.
Still, the Romanian/Moldovan language community desires a change:
Either a complete shutdown, either a move and *no* setting up of a new Latin-based
mo. At least I do and I am quite tired that nothing happens for already so much
time. This Wikipedia domain shouldn't exist.
What concerns mo.wiktionary, this definitely has to be shutdown. It is absurd. I
will open a Wikipedia-I discussion sometime later.
Sorry, Liviu Andronic, but why do you claim that "Moldovan dialect was never
written in Latin script"? Do you think that inter-bellum Romania (which included
Bessarabia and Bukovine) used some form of Cyrillic script? No way!
What you might say is that Moldovans remained in the USSR (in Ukraine, Russia,
etc.) kept on writing using Cyrillic. [[User:Dpotop]]
Well, Dpotop, as far as I am aware, inter-bellum Romania used Romanian as a state
language. And I do not think there was any problem of Moldovan as a separate
language at that time (not in Romania). So, Bessarabia and Bukovine both used
Romanian language in writing. As for the Moldovan *dialect*, it was most probably
spoken at that time, as it is now in Moldova. A dialect is "not necessarily written
" ([[Dialect]]), and I can hardly imagine myself anyone seriously writing the
phrase: "Nu tak şi faşim amu?" instead of "Păi ce facem acum?". What concerns the
Moldovan language as known during the communist era, it was an artificial language
and specifically a slightly modified version of Romanian written with a Cyrillic
alphabet (different from that used before 1860s). We didn't use "ШЫ ШИ" in actual
writing, but "ШИ ЧЕ". Thus, even in the communist era the Moldovan dialect wasn't
written. I might be wrong. Please correct me if so.
The Moldovan Wikipedia has since been closed, so this is no longer relevant. Further, this would now need to go through the standard process for opening a new subdomain at [[m:Requests_for_new_languages]].
(In reply to comment #25)
> The Moldovan Wikipedia has since been closed, so this is no longer relevant.
I strongly disagree with the « WONTFIX » resolution for this request. Since discussion started about the topic no significant contributors of that wiki disagread with the subject of this request
« Move mo to mo-cyr, set up new Latin-based mo » .
The subject was never ever changes, see
> Further, this would now need to go through the standard process for opening a
> new subdomain at [[m:Requests_for_new_languages]].
This is a very strange argumentation regarding projects of the Wikimedia Foundation which are created according to the spirit of the
It is not fair to the people who build that wiki to find again and again other arguments to camuflate the « delaying tactics » they are practicing because they have a strong repulsion ( http://www.dict.cc/deutsch-englisch/Abneigung.html ) against a certain topic.
As far as I understand Wikimedia Foundation is a place a place of tolerance where people are meeting willing to collaborate on certein topics and is neither a place where people are obstructed from topics they want to contribute nor is it a place where people are kept in leading-strings ( http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/leading-strings.html ) .
Refering to the [[m:Requests_for_new_languages]] Jesse Martin should know that is neither the case here that « mo » is a new language (in the sence of a new project) nor that this rule is applicable because it was introduced later. Such practice is used in jurisdiction as well.
Best regards Reinhardt [[user:Gangleri]]
Issues of "fairness" don't apply. The language subcommittee was set up to manage new wikis to prevent many known problems, including political repression by out-voting, attempts to falsify votes by creating many accounts per person, empty wikis that even today attract vandalism, spam, and bias, takeover of a small wiki by another language or political group or a group of friends, widespread personal attacks or political bias, and so forth. Thus far, no approved wiki has had such issues. If you're concerned about fairness, it would also be unfair to those who did go through the process for approval if we made an exception for Moldovan.
The subcommittee's scope does not exclude wikis that were discussed before its creation ([[m:Langcom#Scope]]). It does not make sense to allow some wikis to develop these problems simply because they were discussed earlier. This is not a delaying tactic nor a case of intolerance, and the subcommittee at least is not part of an anti-Moldovan conspiracy. In fact, the process has remained essentially unchanged since its implementation in 2006, other than fine-tuning. Despite intermittent complaints about slowness, requests are processed faster now than ever before (an average of 1 per week since December 2006).
You draw a comparison to retrospective law, but that is not a valid comparison. Applying the new rules to all new wikis does not violate anyone's rights or freedoms.
If you want to discuss this further, please do so on [[m:talk:langcom]].