Low Saxon/language and spelling conflict policy

working sheet/proposal

Please vote on Low Saxon/language and spelling conflict policy/Afstemmen.

Low Saxon spelling policy for Wikimedia projects

To avoid and/or resolve conflicts evolving out of differences in language and spelling of the Low Saxon language, the Low Saxon community of the Wikimedia projects enacts the following policy:

Every contributor is allowed and should be encouraged to deploy his personal style of language. Nobody shall be forbidden to use his preferred lexicon, grammatical style or spelling in non-content pages. But every contributor too shall be encouraged to make efforts on using a language which is intelligible to most other contributors.
The interface and the meta-parts of the content (templates, categories etc.) shall be made available in a spelling that is a compromise between the different spelling styles. This spelling should avoid all elements that are based on third-party influences (influences from German spelling or Dutch spelling etc.). The interface and the meta-parts of the content will use the compromise spelling per default, but will be made available in the most important alternate spelling styles too.
If there are contributors in discussions important to the future of the Low Saxon projects, who are writing in a way not intelligible to some other users, and those other users are requesting help in understanding the meaning of those posts, the administrators of the respective project have the duty to assist with setting the post into words or into a spelling intelligible to the requesting user(s).

Tweide versie

To avoid and/or resolve conflicts evolving out of differences in language and spelling of the Low Saxon language, the Low Saxon community of the Wikimedia projects enacts the following policy:

Everyone is encouraged to contribute, whatever their personal style of language. For the content pages (articles), contributors are encouraged to take note of local spelling policies (for instance, those writing in Drèents on the Dutch Low Saxon Wikipedia should at least try to approximate the Provincial States spelling for Drenthe). The language of quoted sources, however, should normally not be altered.
The interface and meta texts (templates, categories etc.) destined in equal part for an international audience of Low Saxon readers will be made available in Algemene Schryvwyse, a spelling devised to facilitate written communication between Low Saxon writers from different regions or countries. The interface and meta texts will use Algemene Schryvwyse by default, but may be made available in some of the most important alternate spellings too.
In discussions involving people whose local spelling systems vary widely, contributions may make use of these various systems so long as mutual understanding is not impeded. In case participants have difficulty understanding each other, they are encouraged to use Algemene Schryvwyse, or administrators will convert the spellings used into Algemene Schryvwyse.

[Noot: ik geleuve niet daw expliciet beleid huuft te maken oaver grammatica en woordgebruuk. Ok stelle ik veur umme van 'Low Saxon spelling policy for Wikimedia projects' of zowat te spreken, in plaatse van 'conflict'. Dit is allennig een veurstel van mien kaante; ik hoape te vernimmen wat aj d'rvan vienen! Ni'jluuseger 12:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)][reply]

Ni'jluuseger, du hest nu veel anders formuleert in dien tweide versie. Ik weet nu nich genau, wo du nu weerd op leggst, wat anders wesen mutt un wat blot anders schreven is. Kannst du nochmal seggen, wat di nu wichtig is, wat anders wesen schall? Wo kummt di dat op an? --::Slomox:: >< 20:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moi Slomox, mien veurgestelde wiesigingen koomt bename nehr op 't idee üm vör de non-content-bladsieden íene enkele schriefwiese te gebrüken (bevörbield de Algemene Schryvwyse), doraw alle dialect in künt schrieven. Mar dät lik mi allent 'n gut idee as völle mitwarkers 't dor mit iens bint.

Ik solle 't ok gut vienen as de non-content verschient in 't Platdüüts naar Sass én in 'n Nedersaksisch dialect. Want as gieniene sien stem üütbrengt, is ter ja gien draagvlak vör de Algemene Schryvwyse. En die Wikisource müt d'r toch kommen; die hef niks te lieden onder use verskillende dialecten. 't Giet ja üm de bornen en daar beslüte wi niet in wavvör dialect of schriefwiese 't müt.

Laaw beslüten over een deadline vör een stemming, want d'r is mank de gebrükers van nds en nds-nl vör so wiet a'k wete gien enkel beswaar tegen een mandielige, gesamelike Wikisource. Ni'jluuseger 23:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ik heff nu en drüdde versie maakt, de de eersten beiden tohoopbringt. Wi schullen uns een van de dree versies utsöken, de denn op nds-de, nds-nl, pdt(?) un nds-common översetten, un denn afstimmen. --::Slomox:: >< 12:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drüdde versie

To avoid and/or resolve conflicts evolving out of differences in language and spelling of the Low Saxon language, the Low Saxon community of the Wikimedia projects enacts the following policy:

Everyone is encouraged to contribute, whatever their personal style of language. For the content pages, contributors should take note of local spelling policies that may exist [Suggestion: '...of spelling standards that may exist for their dialect'].
The interface and meta texts (templates, categories etc.) will be made available in a common spelling devised to facilitate written communication between Low Saxon speakers from different regions. The interface and meta texts will use common spelling by default, but will be made available in the most important alternate spellings too.
In discussions involving people whose local spelling systems vary widely, contributions may make use of these various systems as long as mutual understanding is not impeded ['scienter' - legal jargon; 'deliberately' - unnecessary presumption of bad faith?]. In case participants have difficulty understanding each other, they are encouraged to use the common spelling, or administrators will make the text available in common spelling or the spelling fitting best to make the text understandable to the participants in the discussion.

The language of quoted sources, however, should normally not be altered. Dat is en generelle Saak, de nich Deel vun disse Policy wesen mutt.

contributions may make use of these various systems as long as mutual understanding is not impeded. We should reformulate this sentence. At the moment it would not allow users to use their preferred spelling, if that spelling would impede understanding. But many people are not able to switch between many different styles of writing. Most people are happy, that they are able to write Low Saxon at all. It took them long to learn to write Low Saxon at all and they are only able to use this one style. These people should not be scared off. We should only take measures to disallow people to use spelling styles hard to read deliberately. Perhaps we should add the word scienter to the end of the sentence.

Ik bün mi nich seker, wat wi den naam van de schrievwies in de policy rinschrieven schöölt. Reckt nich eenfach a spelling devised to facilitate written communication between Low Saxon writers from different regions or countries? Un ik bün mi ok noch nich seker, wat Algemene Schryvwyse de beste option is, ik heff dat eerstmal rutnamen. --::Slomox:: >< 12:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ik viene de darde versie wal best; ik heb dor noch 'n paar dinger bi ezet (küj weerümmedreien of anpassen aj wilt). 't Probleem op dit mement is dät gieniene behalve ieë en ikke hier sien miening over egeven hef; wi kunt beter op use praatblatsieden (nds en nds-nl) vragen of de mitwarkers fedüsie hebt in een common spelling.

Ik wil vöral gien tied verbrüken an een mandielige schriefwiese - of twei, drei ummesettings van alle teksten - as 'r ja gieniene wakker van lig of interesse vör hef. La-we 't vragen in use praatkefees en, als gieniene een common spelling wil, gewoon Nord-Neddersassisch (Sass) en Nederlaans-Nedersaksisch (Drèentse schriefwiese of so wat) naast menare gebrüken. Ni'jluuseger 20:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[Suggestion: '...of spelling standards that may exist for their dialect'] I thought, local was related to local spelling policies of the projects, but you meant something else in the tweide versie, it seems. I think we should refer to spelling policies of the project here. If the spelling policy of the project says use local spelling of your dialect that will have the same effect. We don't know specific spelling standards for single dialects in Germany like you do in the Netherlands. So I suggest to change it to contributors should take note of local spelling policies of the project, that may exist.

To de Saak mit scienter: Dat is legal jargon, aver dat seggt good, wat ik utdrücken wull. De Lüüd schöölt nich bewusst (scienter) Schrievwiesen bruken, de swoor to lesen sünd. To'n Bispeel is de Artikel nds:Gulfhuus to Anfang in de Schrievwies vun Holger Weigelt wesen (Gulfhuus&oldid=1317). Disse Schrievwies is swoor to lesen un warrt vun meist nüms schreven as vun Holger Weigelt sülvst (villicht noch en poor annere Lüüd, weet ik nich). Wenn en Schriever blot disse Schrievwies kennt un anners nix schrieven kann, denn schall he nich utslaten warrn. Aver wenn he ok anners kann, denn schall he nich bewusst so schrieven. Ik bün dor för dat wi scienter stahn laat (wi mööt de policy ja liekers noch op nds-de un nds-nl översetten, dor köönt wi denn annere Wöör bruken).

Wat du anners noch ännert hest, sütt allens good ut. --::Slomox:: >< 15:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Local spelling policies of the projects: now verstao ik oe, dät is prima.

Dan sol ik noch seggen as long as mutual understanding is not unnecessarily hampered, umme niet van kwaad wark uut te gahn. En 'scienter', wol ik seggen, is een woord dät haaste gieniene kent (ik binne op-egrüüit mit Engels en kenden 't niet; 't is ja ok Latien). Ik sette een berichien in 't Praotkefee. Ni'jluuseger 18:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wy huven op sich neet sovoele systeemteksen voer byvoerbeeld Wikisource te vertalen, wy hemmen de baosis al van de nds-nl- en nds-wiki's, dat kü-w daor uuk gebruyken (dan mü-j in de voerkoeren by "taal" allinnig effen angeven welke taal je hemmen willen), voer onderlinge kommunikasie lik m'n de Algemene Schryvwyse dan wel wat. De Vosbergenspelling ha-k persoonlijk beter evunnen mar volgens myn bi-jülle daor neet so wys mee (an de ene kaante uuk wel logisch want dee tekens staon neet op 't toetsenbord). ('t siet der nog vremd uyt so mar dat went wel) Servien 10:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Veurbeelden

NL: De boer was hellig, hij begun te schrouwen en te schellen, mar 't was allemaole veur niks want der zat gienene te luusteren.
AS: De buur was hellig, hij begün te schrouwen en te schellen, mar 't was allemaole voer niks want der sat gienene te luysteren.
VS: De bůůr was hellig, hij begün te schrouwen en te schellen, mar 't was allemåle vöör niks want der sat gienene te lüüsteren.

Wat daan wardn mut

Extension:Multilang installeren (onderstütt tekst in verschedene spraken op ene sied, de bruker kriggt dat to seen, wat he as sien spraak in de instellingen instellt hett)
Extension:LanguageSelector installeren? (bruker kann op elk sied de spraak van de sied utsöken un wesseln; nich good för den cache)