Razgovor:Slovio

message: Zašto se ne osnuje Wikipedija na sloviu kojoj će sdporo rasti broj članaka jer malo tko uči slovio.--Jolo,29. srpnja 2006.,14:32

message: Ja ne uređujem ovu Wikipediju jer ne znam dobro hrvatski; prijatelj mi je pomogao ovo prevesti. Ja sam iskusan urednik na engleskoj, hebrejskoj i ruskoj Wikipediji.
Ovaj članak je izbrisan iz engleske Wikipedije. Predložio sam njegovo brisanje jer nisam mogao pronaći ni jedan značajan vanjski izvor o ovom jeziku, osim njegovog web sitea slovio.com. Također je spomenut na nekoliko osobnih blogova i foruma, a rabi ga pomalo i nekolicina ljudi na portalu Slavopedia na Meti, ali dvojim da je to dostatno da bi potvrdilo njegovu značajnost. Cijelu raspravu o brisanju možete pročitati na engleskoj Wikipediji na ovom linku: :en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slovio (2nd nomination). --Amir E. Aharoni 00:12, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
===Glasovanje o brisanju===
Za
Protiv
#--Donatus 07:49, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
# Kubura 09:37, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
# -- Dvorsky 22:17, 19. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
Komentari
replies: text: Meni je u toj priči zanimljivo da je prilikom rasprave na en wiki ovaj isti suradnik izjavio: „This is not to say that i am waiting for this article to be deleted so i'd be able to tell all the other Wikipedias: "Hey, this was deleted from en-wiki, so you must delete it too."“ Sada čini upravo to što je rekao da mu nije cilj!? Vidio sam da je pokrenuo postupak za brisanje na sr wiki, ru wiki, pl wiki, es wiki, hu wiki, nl wiki, pt wiki. Koliko sam uspio vidjeti, do sada je, osim na en wiki, članak obrisan samo na bs wiki i to s obrazloženjem da je obrisan na en wiki (nakon što je pitanje pokrenuo ovaj suradnik) i bez ikakve druge rasprave.

text: No, zanemarivši tu pojedinost, mislim da bi članak o ovom umjetnom jeziku trebalo ostaviti. On ne može više štetiti, jer šteta je već napravljena (na en wiki stajao je od 2003. i otad su ga mnoge internetske stranice kopirale). Mogla bi se dodati rečenica na dnu članka o tome koliko mu je Wikipedija pomogla u promociji. Ako na engleskoj wikipediji može savršeno postojati klingonski jezik, :en:Neo (constructed language), :en:Mondial (language), :en:Lingua sistemfrater, :en:Lincos (language), :en:Glosa, :en:Europanto ili :en:UNI (language), ne vidim zašto je morao biti obrisan slovio. Ako jedan sveučilišni profesor, slavist, ne s bilo kojeg, nego sa Sveučilišta u Tübingenu (evo i popis znanstvenih radova tog istraživača ), može u svome članku posvetiti toliko mjesta ovom jeziku, nije mi jasno zašto Wikipedija o tome ne bi mogla imati članak. Mislim da je na engleskoj Wikipediji napravljena greška kad je odlučeno brisanje.--Donatus 07:49, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: :Thanks for your comment.

text: :I didn't explain myself well. When i say that i didn't wait for it to be deleted to go to the other Wikis and say that it was deleted, i meant that i really hoped that someone will come up with good sources. That didn't happen, so i am coming here now. Croatian Wikipedia can make its own decisions, i am just proposing.

text: :BergerPlansprachen.pdf was already discussed at the English wiki - it says practically nothing new about the language, but copies everything from slovio.com.

text: :Klingon is a notable language, and i am not a fan of it. As for other constructed languages in the English WP - i may propose the deletion of some of them in the future. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:11, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: ::I don't think the Berger's article has been discussed properly at the en wiki. The fact that a notable slavist is including the language in his article, for me is enough to leave this article here. I'm just suggesting to include a notice in our article about wikipedia's role in promoting this language (as it apeares from the discussion at en wiki). I think some Berger's critical positions on slovio should also be included in this article. I'm not a fan of slovio (or any constructed language), and I don't really see the point of inventing them, but I think the information about this one shouldn't be deleted (btw, I noticed we live in the same country :).--Donatus 09:24, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: :::Israel?? --Amir E. Aharoni 10:13, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
Za umjetni jezik slovio sam čuo i bez wikipedije, i od svih umjetnih slavenskih jezika, taj je najpoznatiji. To mu daje na značaju. Brisanje stranice o slovio je veliki propust na en.wiki, jedna velika pogrješka, jedna velika glupost. Wikipedija je enciklopedija, koja ovakve stvari uključiva. Kubura 09:37, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)

text: If you think that deleting Slovio from en.wiki was a big mistake, you are welcome to create it again, but you need to prove its notability first. --Amir E. Aharoni
replies: text: :There have been a lot of attempts to unite the Slavic language and in the end most failed. It is virtually impossible to create a Slavic language that every ethnic group would gladly accept. First the disputes between the former Yugoslav states, then the Czech Republic and Slovakia, disputes between Russia and Ukraine, such a feat would be impossible. I see Slovio as a farce that someone personally is trying to use wikipedia to spread his or her own ideas. Yes, this might look like Amir is trying to delete the article due to his disliking of the idea, but he has listed a few important facts such as that Slovio is virtually not found as a registered language. Slovio should be placed, in the article, as an attempt or as an idea for a language. Korisnik:Kubura might have heard of other similar projects under a "Slo..." or "Sla..." name but where have you heard of Slovio (serious question, not sarcasm)? Thank you, Vseferovic 18:09, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: ::I think (and I stated that earlyer) that Slovio is as useless as any other constructed language (and boring, too, as it hasn't got his own history and culture), but I am against deleting the article. If the author of the language used the wikipedia for promoting the language, it has already been done, and the language is now known. I agree there shuold be said in the article that Slovio is an attempt or an idea for a language. It is totally irrelevant if it is ever going to be widely accepted. It's a phenomenon that really exists and has gained some publicity through internet (slovio.com and wikipedia), and that happened in the past. The damage is done, and we can but register it.--Donatus 19:26, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
thread_title:  Prijedlog za brisanje 

message: Za
Protiv
#--Donatus 07:49, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
# Kubura 09:37, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
# -- Dvorsky 22:17, 19. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
Komentari
replies: text: Meni je u toj priči zanimljivo da je prilikom rasprave na en wiki ovaj isti suradnik izjavio: „This is not to say that i am waiting for this article to be deleted so i'd be able to tell all the other Wikipedias: "Hey, this was deleted from en-wiki, so you must delete it too."“ Sada čini upravo to što je rekao da mu nije cilj!? Vidio sam da je pokrenuo postupak za brisanje na sr wiki, ru wiki, pl wiki, es wiki, hu wiki, nl wiki, pt wiki. Koliko sam uspio vidjeti, do sada je, osim na en wiki, članak obrisan samo na bs wiki i to s obrazloženjem da je obrisan na en wiki (nakon što je pitanje pokrenuo ovaj suradnik) i bez ikakve druge rasprave.

text: No, zanemarivši tu pojedinost, mislim da bi članak o ovom umjetnom jeziku trebalo ostaviti. On ne može više štetiti, jer šteta je već napravljena (na en wiki stajao je od 2003. i otad su ga mnoge internetske stranice kopirale). Mogla bi se dodati rečenica na dnu članka o tome koliko mu je Wikipedija pomogla u promociji. Ako na engleskoj wikipediji može savršeno postojati klingonski jezik, :en:Neo (constructed language), :en:Mondial (language), :en:Lingua sistemfrater, :en:Lincos (language), :en:Glosa, :en:Europanto ili :en:UNI (language), ne vidim zašto je morao biti obrisan slovio. Ako jedan sveučilišni profesor, slavist, ne s bilo kojeg, nego sa Sveučilišta u Tübingenu (evo i popis znanstvenih radova tog istraživača ), može u svome članku posvetiti toliko mjesta ovom jeziku, nije mi jasno zašto Wikipedija o tome ne bi mogla imati članak. Mislim da je na engleskoj Wikipediji napravljena greška kad je odlučeno brisanje.--Donatus 07:49, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: :Thanks for your comment.

text: :I didn't explain myself well. When i say that i didn't wait for it to be deleted to go to the other Wikis and say that it was deleted, i meant that i really hoped that someone will come up with good sources. That didn't happen, so i am coming here now. Croatian Wikipedia can make its own decisions, i am just proposing.

text: :BergerPlansprachen.pdf was already discussed at the English wiki - it says practically nothing new about the language, but copies everything from slovio.com.

text: :Klingon is a notable language, and i am not a fan of it. As for other constructed languages in the English WP - i may propose the deletion of some of them in the future. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:11, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: ::I don't think the Berger's article has been discussed properly at the en wiki. The fact that a notable slavist is including the language in his article, for me is enough to leave this article here. I'm just suggesting to include a notice in our article about wikipedia's role in promoting this language (as it apeares from the discussion at en wiki). I think some Berger's critical positions on slovio should also be included in this article. I'm not a fan of slovio (or any constructed language), and I don't really see the point of inventing them, but I think the information about this one shouldn't be deleted (btw, I noticed we live in the same country :).--Donatus 09:24, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: :::Israel?? --Amir E. Aharoni 10:13, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
Za umjetni jezik slovio sam čuo i bez wikipedije, i od svih umjetnih slavenskih jezika, taj je najpoznatiji. To mu daje na značaju. Brisanje stranice o slovio je veliki propust na en.wiki, jedna velika pogrješka, jedna velika glupost. Wikipedija je enciklopedija, koja ovakve stvari uključiva. Kubura 09:37, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)

text: If you think that deleting Slovio from en.wiki was a big mistake, you are welcome to create it again, but you need to prove its notability first. --Amir E. Aharoni
replies: text: :There have been a lot of attempts to unite the Slavic language and in the end most failed. It is virtually impossible to create a Slavic language that every ethnic group would gladly accept. First the disputes between the former Yugoslav states, then the Czech Republic and Slovakia, disputes between Russia and Ukraine, such a feat would be impossible. I see Slovio as a farce that someone personally is trying to use wikipedia to spread his or her own ideas. Yes, this might look like Amir is trying to delete the article due to his disliking of the idea, but he has listed a few important facts such as that Slovio is virtually not found as a registered language. Slovio should be placed, in the article, as an attempt or as an idea for a language. Korisnik:Kubura might have heard of other similar projects under a "Slo..." or "Sla..." name but where have you heard of Slovio (serious question, not sarcasm)? Thank you, Vseferovic 18:09, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
replies: text: ::I think (and I stated that earlyer) that Slovio is as useless as any other constructed language (and boring, too, as it hasn't got his own history and culture), but I am against deleting the article. If the author of the language used the wikipedia for promoting the language, it has already been done, and the language is now known. I agree there shuold be said in the article that Slovio is an attempt or an idea for a language. It is totally irrelevant if it is ever going to be widely accepted. It's a phenomenon that really exists and has gained some publicity through internet (slovio.com and wikipedia), and that happened in the past. The damage is done, and we can but register it.--Donatus 19:26, 6. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
thread_title: Glasovanje o brisanju

message: Neodgovrajaući sadržaj???? Ma koje su ovo ludarije? Kubura 13:19, 13. kolovoz 2007. (CEST)
thread_title:  Neodgovrajaući sadržaj????