Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Siberian Wikipedia


Discussion finished, Result is CLOSE. --MF-Warburg(de) 12:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I propose to close this discussion within seven days from now, if there are no objections. --MF-Warburg(de) 10:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I was not alerted about this proposition and surely I have objections; there is no consensus in this discussion. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Like it or not, but it's the final decision. Nobody should alert you about this message. — Kalan ? 13:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
"if there are no objections" - but many persons in the "against" section definitely have objections. So this is only pesonal opinion of MF-Warburg. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Pages will not be imported to Incubator. Reason: "ru-sib" is an invalid language code which is not longer accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation. SPQRobin 01:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Addressing sockpuppetryEdit


This vote seems significantly compromised by the ongoing sockpuppetry. It is hereby requested that every user who casts a vote here, authorizes himself at any wiki where he works most, for example like this. After that, please mark your vote here as authorized like this. Wikipedia account should be created before the date of this proposal, that is before November 3, 2006. I suggest all votes not authorised within 7 days, that is by midnight GMT, November 24, 2006, to be stricken out. --Irpen 19:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Данное голосование оказалось существенно затронуто голосованием клонов. Просьба ко всем, кто проголосовал, авторизовать свой голос на той Википедии, с которой Вы пришли, например вот так. После этого, поставьте отметку под своим голосом со ссылкой на авторизацию, например вот так. Ваше имя на национальной Википедии должно было быть создано до начала данного голосования, т.е. до 3 ноября, 2006 года. Предлагается все голоса не авторизованные в течение ближайших 7 дней, т.е. до полуночи по Гринвичу 24 ноября, 2006 г, удалить. --Irpen 20:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I've semiprotected this page till morning, and filed the RFCU. Events around this page smell bad:( MaxSem 19:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion of this solution. --Irpen 20:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

We are completely disagree about the date 24 November, this is too quickly. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

И мы также против вычеркивания. Сокпапетов чекъюзеры и так чиркают, сторонка защищена от новых пользователей, чо ешшо надоть-то? Шшытайте авторизованных на вособицу, раз ужо так повелося, дык и всьо. And we are also against striking out. Sockpuppets are already striken out by the checkusers, the page is semi-protected, what more? Simply the authorized votes should be counted separatedly. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Close Siberian wikipediaEdit


Do not remove or edit out other user's comments as "incivil". This is stricly prohibited. Because of the scale of such practice on this page all further violations will result in immediate BLOCK. Only remove obvious personal attacks. However, this does not mean that you can use incivil lexics. Thank you for understanding.

Не удаляйте или редактируйте чужие сообщения в связи с «невежливостью» их написавшего. Это строжайше запрещено. Из-за масштаба, с которым подобное практикуется на этой странице, все последующие нарушения будут пресекаться немедленной БЛОКИРОВКОЙ. Разрешается удалять толлько несомненные личные оскорбления и мат, что, однако не означает, что хамить разрешается. Спасибо за понимание.

MaxSem 11:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)
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)
Admin this is not consensus, are you monarchist?)) Your mob is just flash, this is not insult. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Other comments:

  • "Yaroslav Zolotaryov" is trying to falsify this vote by DELETING the votes to close the "Siberian wikipedia" (e.g. check out his attempts to delete my vote No.60). IF YOU VOTED TO CLOSE THE "SIBERIAN WIKIPEDIA", PLEASE CHECK IF YOUR VOTE IS STILL LISTED AND NOT DELETED BY "YAROSLAV ZOLOTARYOV" --w:ru:Участник:Новый
To be fair, anyone who did not have at least one wikipedia account when the proposer, Paul Pogonyshev voted (that is 23:59, 2 November 2006, folks) is automatically suspect of being a one-purpose account. We will have to agree what date to start off from. I do not know why Irpen chose November 5th - perhaps that is because the history of the page now starts on the 4th? On the other hand, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion and to try to convince other users of your opinion.--Paul Pieniezny 00:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Here is the original edit. It was started in the parent page and later the votes were moved to this subpage. Some voters are registered on Nov 3. --Yms 10:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Again demagogy without any proofs. Better tell me, where are your contributions before the voting? The user itself was registered in ruwiki in a hour after voting. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Note that Zolotaryov defended Danpetre's vote here, even when it was pointed out that Danpetre had no previous contributions on Romanian Wikipedia. Danpetre only registered on November 17th. [3] --Paul Pieniezny 20:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
This not excuses this Novyj, who is definitely one-purpose account created in ruwiki even after voting here. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Why does the "oppose" vote count read "Oppose closing the Siberian wiki (62 votes, 47 signed)" ? There are only 40 to 50 "oppose" votes listed, with some of them not properly signed. Some unsigned votes contain the claims by the 3rd parties attributing these votes to the people they say they know. The "oppose" vote count should be corrected! --ExcaliburW

Arguments in support of closureEdit

Presentation of arguments in support of closureEdit

Arguments presented summarily here are repeated and discussed immediately below:

  1. There is no valid source that verify existing of Siberian language (was suggested as "original research") [4]
  2. No single paper book published
  3. Frivolous attitude
  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. There areother sources of purely technical pges, such as other various dates and two-leter internet domains. 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)
    • fake articles such as ru-sib:Дания ("Denmark") actually writen 90% in Belarussian language (I guess there are plenty of Belarussians in Siberia sent in gulags by Stalin, no?). Mikkalai 23:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Aggressive anti-russian position [8] [9]
    Quoting from the below "That's not your russian business what we want to do - just remember it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)". And this was uttered by the bureaucrat of the 'pedia.
    There is no agression in this words. Why the russians consider agression when somebody simply wants to be free from them?--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    The main page of "Siberian" wiki lacks Russian interwiki link. Isn't it funny? I foresee an "argument" that Russian main page also has no link to Siberian wiki, but the English, French or German main pages don't have it either, and this does not prevent Siberian wiki to have interwiki link to them. So it is evidently because of strict anti-Russian position of ru-sib. --Yms 18:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
    That's absolutely stunning and disgusting. Out of 85 linked Wikipedias, the Russian Wikipedia is not included. It was until 2 October, when none other than Yaroslav Zolotaryov removed the link in an edit labeled "minor." Edward Chernenko restored the link minutes later, and Yaroslav Zolotaryov responded by removing it again and protecting the page. On 29 November, Amire80 restored the link. Once again, Yaroslav Zolotaryov quickly removed it via a "minor" edit. This behavior is nothing short of disgraceful, and it accurately reflects the reason behind this Wikipedia's existence. —David Levy 20:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  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.
    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.
  7. Wikimedia should not provide facilities and resources to emerging languages. (This argument has not been used, but I am placing it here, as it is the only resonable argument agains RU-SIB I can think of. -- Petri Krohn 02:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC))
  8. Wikimedia should not provide facilities for the disreputable wannabe writers to exersize their writing skills in poetry and prose by publishing obscene poems and their own translations(!) of the great authors, such as Shakespeare and Shevchenko, into a languages those authors invent; especially if such "translations" are filled with obscenities (Shakespeare would have been caught dead saying "Motherfucker" as the "translator" implies he would) and poetry includes the death threats addressed to entire ethnicities. --Irpen 03:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  9. Wikimedia should not provide facilities and resources to the web-sites whose main mission is pursuing political agendas, especially when such are controversial and divisive, particularly promoting ethnic hatred and obscenity. If this is allowed, expect Ku-Klux-Klan asking the foundation for its own Wikipedia as well. --Irpen 03:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  10. There is a shady deal between the supporters of closure on Moldovan Wikipedia and the opposers of closure of Siberian Wikipedia. Here is the proof: Парни, Бонопарт повел войска! Надо поддержать румын! --YaroslavZolotaryov 19:24, 17 Грудень 2006 (UTC). Ttranslation: Lads, Bonopart is leading the troops! We ought to support the Romanians!. Feathered Serpent 10:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC), ru:User:Пернатый Змей, en:User:Feathered Serpent
  11. The Siberian Wikipedists are not familiar with their own language. They prefer Russian, see Siberian Wikipedia Main Page — Talk. Feathered Serpent 10:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC), ru:User:Пернатый Змей, en:User:Feathered Serpent

Repetition and discussion of the above presented arguments:

On argument 1 in support of closureEdit

1). There is no valid source that verify existing of Siberian language (was suggested as "original research") [10]

  • To prove this,, one of the most authoritative sources about world's languages mentions "Siberian" as a language family only, not as a single language [11]. This language family has nothing to do with Russian dialects or derivative languages. --Volkov 13:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Mr. Zolotaryov wrote in his blog in May 2005 that there is only one active speaker of this language and a dozen and a half passive speakers. --Yms 20:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
It was writtten about the Standard Siberian, represented in the wiki. But this Standard is based on the living dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
What we're discussing here is not the living dialects, but your invented non-living language represented in the wiki. --Yms 09:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
No, what we are discussing is standard form of those dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Since there is no standard on those dialects, what we are discussing here is your invented "language". --Yms 21:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
No, Volgota group have developed the standard. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:29, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Whatever you call yourself and your invention. --Yms 10:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
< - - - - - reset indent
Even if this standartisation is invention, it is not OR. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes it is, because even the dialect speakers might object to the new rules and insist on staying within the standard Russian language umbrella, as officially recognised by the world. --Kuban kazak 13:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
So you simply are against dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
In what way? I have nothing wrong with dialects, but if the scientific research (RESPECTED scientific research) tells my that Siberian dialects are Russian, then they are as far as I am concerned. I also speak a dialect, yet I have nothing wrong with writing in Russian. Neither should you. --Kuban kazak 09:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
And this is just negative attitude to making language standrard on the base of real people's speech. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
It's OK to make language standard of real people's speech, it's not OK when it's done by one person, artificially, in several months, without conducting a full-scale research by any university, peer reviewing of results, etc. etc. Also, when you normally codify people's speech, they usually don't threaten to sue you as some Siberians do in the LJ ;) --Yms 07:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
It was not done by one person, but discussion groups worked in LJ and later in Volgota. And about sues and even about this voting - this is only nationalistic paranoia, it is eveident that 80% are russians, or from ruwiki, or invited by russians. I have many proofs of total propaganda against siberian wiki in ruwiki, enwiki, and even in ukrwiki and belwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

samir74:Кстати, опыт первого месяца сибирской вольготы показывает, что языку практически любой русскоязычный обучается за месяц - сейчас там уже несколько чел, свободно пишущих без ошибок. [12]

Это показывает насколько сибирский - не русский. Знаете, выучить за месяц белорусский или србско-хорватский хрен получится. Carn ru 17:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Беларуский до степени "пишу со словарем" - вполне получится. Достаточно усвоить грамматические отличия и 300-400 отличающихся слов из наиболее употребимых. После этого в совершенстве язык знать не будешь, но что-то написать на нем сможешь, тем более будешь понимать. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

On argument 2 in support of closureEdit

2). No single paper book published

Actually a Russian paper book issued in 2005 "Abdicating from Russian name" has a full chapter about the Siberian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
I can't find anything with that title. Could you please provide the book's details (original title, author, publisher). Thanks already. - Ev 17:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
ISBN 5-89747-063-4 [13] The chapter about Siberian: [14] The author is anti-ukrainian chauvinist and wrote a full chapter about the language, considering that emerging of Siberian is similiar to Ukrainian. So even the enemies of the language recognize it's popularity. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely unbelievable. NOT A SINGLE BOOK has been published! Only a single chapter ABOUT this EMERGING language in some chauvinistic book. This argument ALONE is more that sufficient to closure of that project. --Oscar 6 18:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
But we have all the audience online - value of paper sources is rather low in our times. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

On argument 3 in support of closureEdit

3). Frivolous attitude

That's lie, based on xenophobic feelings to the language.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Nope, that's true, based on non-seriousness on common topics. --Yms 13:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Since you do not understand the language, you can not judge, what is serious and what is not. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
??? Who told you I don't understand the "language"? I do. --Yms 17:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
For sure, not, because this is not russian language. And according to your logic, you can see about every Slavic wikipedia - "it seems to me, that I understand this language, and the article is not serious". For sure, you recognize some words, but you can not undersntand all the text --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
So tell us the secret thuth - what means "Ебёна мать" in so-called "Siberian language"?
I do not know what you mean by so-called language, but in Siberian this means only exclamation when somebody sees something strange or new. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
No, you're wrong, it's not simply exclamation, it's "f... mother". Either your own knowledge of this "language" is far from perfect, or you're trying to hide the truth. Both are possible. --Yms 18:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
:))) Are you competent to make such statements? Here, a few lines above, I wrote that I understand it. All you need is to accept this information. If I recognized some words, I would write that "I recognize some words". But no, I understand the "language" as a whole. BTW, yes, I can understand almost every Slavic wikipedia, especially if it's as close to Russian as "Siberian". --Yms 18:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
< - - - - - reset indent
And you have no proofs that you really understand every Slavic language 100%. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Fortunately I don't need to know all 100% of all Slavic languages to understand "yebyona mat'" ;) BTW, there exists "kebenimat" in Hebrew too, being not so obscene as for a Russian ear, but it still doesn't claim to be serious. --Yms 18:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
And if it has some obscene meaning in Russian and Hebrew, why should it be definitly obscene in Siberian? Words change their meaning from one Slavic language to another, so your refrence to the meaning of Russian word can not verify anything. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
It should, because it derives from obscene stems which dont't lose their meanings in related dialects, like it or not. It's even not like in Hebrew (I told you, it's not obscene there), because in Hebrew there are no roots like "yeb" and "mat". --Yms 19:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
why do you believe that this stems are definite obscene? why words and phrases can not change their meanings? maybe in ancient times this was something obscene, but now this is simply exclamation in Siberian language without any specific meaning. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, I see you know what you're talking about, so please give me a brief history of how the "yob" root was developed in Siberian dialects, providing academic sources. --Yms 20:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
This is irrelevant to discussion. As codificator of the language I say to you, that in current language standard this is pure exclamation. Затертая метафора, которая от постоянного употребления в деревенском языке давно потеряла свою экспрессию. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
< - - - - - reset indent
It's worn out in the regular "Muscovite" country Russian no less than it is in Siberia, but nobody tries to codify it in that way. It means that your codification is either invalid, or intentionally frivolous as a whole (not just this article). --Yms 09:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
That is your business, what do you codify in Moscovia, so leave us alone in Siberia to decide what words should we have in the language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid, I can't fulfil your request. I'd prefer to see somebody professional to codify it if it's ever needed. --Yms 21:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
If you need my diploma, then yes, I am certified linguist. So this is professional, but unofficial, because Russian goverment do not support these researches. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't care about your papers. Let me judge about anybody's professional level by the things he says in discussions. --Yms 10:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
And that is only your opinion, based on negative attitude to the project. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Haha, the finest argument to close wikipedias - short size of article about it's language)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
I'd just want to say one thing which would help non-Slavs understand this issue (and other related issues as well): all Slavic languages are similar, more so than languages of most other Indo-European language groups. So similar that I, whose native language is Serbian, without ever learning any Russian (save for Russian alphabet) can well understand a simple text (such as a Wikipedia article) in Russian. So similar that even I, and certainly any Russian speaker will understand it even clearer, can see that, in the article on Hamlet in Siberian Wikipedia, Francisco's line Stand: who's there? is "translated" like Stop! Who's there, fucking mother?. Similarly, I looked up all other articles mentioned here and concluded that their presentation is correct. Nikola 02:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
But there are subtle diffrences, You'll notice for example here that some people felt offended by the word "zhid" used by Siberian because it's considered offensive in Russian, but in practily all other Slavic language it's perfectly neutral (Czech Židé, Polish Żydzi, Slovak Židia, Serbian Жидови, Ukrainian Жиди and so on and even some non Slavic ones like Romanian Jidani).
I'd imagine the Siberian language contains quite a few Turkic loan words that other Slavic nations consider obscene precisely for their association with Turks while in Siberia they're just part of normal daily life a no one cares about it.
One thing I especially like is when Croats start talking about subtle differences from Serbian. Unfortunately for you, both ебёна and мать are words with Proto-Indo-European roots, having nothing whatsoever with Turkish languages. Nikola 21:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
See, how many obscenities there are in Russian Wikipedia - here. And they are real in russian language, while in Siberian the meanings were changed. So maybe that's ruwiki which should be closed? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
All of the obscenities in Russian Wikipedia are justified - the article on хуй (could be translated in English as "dick") talks about the term, as does the article on the music group which uses the word in its name, or one on the phrase which includes it. The article on Hamlet in Siberian Wikipedia includes an insultive phrase without any justification. Nikola 21:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
So you may organize discussion about this article in Siberian wikipedia, if you do not like it, but this is not cause to closure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 4 in support of closureEdit

4). Small size

  • Most of content is empty stub [17]
  • 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)
Pure accusation to a new wiki without any proofs--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
How much "many" is in precents? Carn ru 18:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Go and count yourself. This is not horse race, I do not count sizes, I only know that we are filling the years constantly. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks to interwiki bots I've struck yet another motler lode of near-empty articles: over 600 internet domain suffixes (.ru, .bg, etc.)so, of (as of now) 6,690 articles you have 6,690 - 5,500 - (26*26=> 676) - (pages for centuries) - (pages for decades). So it is, like, 300-400 pages left, with about 100 with some decent text. Mikkalai 00:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
only about 200 domains, 5100 years, pages for decades are without internal links and they are not counted by counter. 40 centuries, many years are filled. So no more them 5300 stubs, and 1400 articles not about years, check the alphabetical list of articles in the wiki. This is pessimistic count, but about 300 years are filled with some information, so optimistic count of non-stub articles is 1700, all done in 3 months. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  • fake articles such as ru-sib:Дания ("Denmark") actually writen 90% in Belarussian language (I guess there are plenty of Belarussians in Siberia sent in gulags by Stalin, no?). Mikkalai 23:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Only one such article in the whole sibwiki, simply the translation was not finished. So this ending -s is totally false in the "argument" above. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, sure. But how come each time I look into zolotaryovopedia, I find something fishy? Probably my zolotaryovophobia... Mikkalai 20:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Probably. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 5 in support of closureEdit

5). Aggressive anti-russian position [18] [19]

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)
Nothing agressive. Note, that "Московиты" and russians is not the same, thus nothing anti-russian --A1 17:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually this way of argumentation can be used to prove anything: some word arbitrarily is claimed to be "abusive", and when for example we will not use it, they will claim some other word as abusive for sure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Quoting from the below "That's not your russian business what we want to do - just remember it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)". And this was uttered by the bureaucrat of the 'pedia.
There is no agression in this words. Why the russians consider agression when somebody simply wants to be free from them?--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 6 in support of closureEdit

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)
  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)

On arguments 7, 8 & 9 in support of closureEdit

7). Wikimedia should not provide facilities and resources to emerging languages. (This argument has not been used, but I am placing it here, as it is the only resonable argument agains RU-SIB I can think of. -- Petri Krohn 02:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC))

8). Wikimedia should not provide facilities for the disreputable wannabe writers to exersize their writing skills in poetry and prose by publishing obscene poems and their own translations(!) of the great authors, such as Shakespeare and Shevchenko, into a languages those authors invent; especially if such "translations" are filled with obscenities (Shakespeare would have been caught dead saying "Motherfucker" as the "translator" implies he would) and poetry includes the death threats addressed to entire ethnicities. --Irpen 03:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

9). Wikimedia should not provide facilities and resources to the web-sites whose main mission is pursuing political agendas, especially when such are controversial and divisive, particularly promoting ethnic hatred and obscenity. If this is allowed, expect Ku-Klux-Klan asking the foundation for its own Wikipedia as well. --Irpen 03:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Nothing ethnic hatred and obscenity. "Москаль" or "Московит" isn't ethnic - it is more social category. More of than, you could find these words even in Taras Shevchenko's poetry quite a lot, but I hope nobody will ask for closing ukrainian wiki because of Shevchenko's verses! --A1 17:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Well nobody closes en-wiki for some of the swear words that Hollywood actors use. However on talk pages of en-wiki, one usually gets banned when starting to drive hate by employing terms like Moscals or Hohols or Niggers. --Kuban kazak 09:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
But Moscal is not equal to "russian", no dictionary says that. It is equal to Russian only in paranoic minds of nationalistic Russians, driven from ruwiki "to stop separatists". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Big Ukrainian article explaining that Moscal is not a national abuse, but rather a political cliche: [20] (Russian language). --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The term Moscal obviously derives from the word Moscow, doesn't it? It is ethnic by its birth.
The word is obviously used as a derogatory term, even by the author of the named article, isn't it? And it has been commonly used as derogatory for quite a long time, right? And yes it is percepted as derogatory by Russians, in Moscow and in Siberia.
Regarding the article above, it is only very telling how somebody in Ukraine is easily using the ethnic term to call all negative features a person may have. --BeautifulFlying 02:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
You are not a linguist, (until of course you can provide an authentic dimploma and a statute from any respectable university/academy), hence that is mearely and authentic claim that IMO has no value. As proven below, the term has been excluded from the volcabulary of Belarusian for example. Also what may be a suitable term in dialect, is unsuitable when talking to people. Personally I would never call an American person a Yankee. One thing is when Russians among themselves use the terms Pendos, Yankistan etc. Another thing is when Americans use the term Yankee amongst themselves. But I doubt an American will be happy if he is reffered to as a Yankee. So you can call us Moscals on your Volgota all you like, but outside, in international zones, like Meta, I would expect some respect and kindness. --Kuban kazak 13:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
For sure, I am a linguist and have a diploma of Tomsk Univercity. Your constant lie make me constantly laugh, especcially when almost nobidy except russians believe in it. Moscal is more social term, and you have no proofs to identify Moscals from the verses with russians. Tales, slogans, and lie - these are speeches of "Kuban kazak". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
< - - - - - reset indent
In that case please scan in proof of both, that you are a linguist with appropriate staute (Dotsent, Kandidat whatever) and your diploma (btw I do suppose that you will claim it is a red-covered one, so an image of the cover as well). --Kuban kazak 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok)))))) The diploma is not here now, but it will be soon)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
The diploma: --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Wait a minute... You are not a linguist, you are a philologist. A philologist in the Russian education system, and I believe in any system, is not quite equal to what a linguist is. --BeautifulFlying 02:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
And the certificate of being a recognised linguist... with appropriate statute.--Kuban kazak 14:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean by recognized? This is discutable ground. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
You need to prove your claims before we believe you. Kazak 20:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
It is obvious from this duscussion, that you will not believe me in any case--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

On arguments 10 & 11 in support of closureEdit

10). There is a shady deal between the supporters of closure on Moldovan Wikipedia and the opposers of closure of Siberian Wikipedia. Here is the proof: Парни, Бонопарт повел войска! Надо поддержать румын! --YaroslavZolotaryov 19:24, 17 Грудень 2006 (UTC). Ttranslation: Lads, Bonopart is leading the troops! We ought to support the Romanians!. Feathered Serpent 10:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC), ru:User:Пернатый Змей, en:User:Feathered Serpent

Even if there is such a deal, it does not work - only 4-5 Romanians vote here, and only 3-4 Siberians there. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

11). The Siberian Wikipedists are not familiar with their own language. They prefer Russian, see Siberian Wikipedia Main Page — Talk. Feathered Serpent 10:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC), ru:User:Пернатый Змей, en:User:Feathered Serpent

We use russian only in conversations, in order than more people understand us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose to closure argumentsEdit

Presentation of arguments in opposition to closureEdit

Arguments presented summarily here are repeated and discussed immediately below:

  1. Siberian wikipedia has no articles about politics, and Russians are mentioned 2-3 times in it.
  2. Siberian language have more than 50 articles in online and offline media about it.
  3. There is offline newspaper in Tomsk in siberian language.
  4. Enemies of Sibwiki are nationalists and xenophobs.
  5. Sibwiki has more then 70 users and about 10 active editors from them.
  6. Sibwiki has 2000 articles, which are not stubs, and grows rapidly.
  7. Dictionary and grammar exist outside wikipedia in and ukrainian sites.
  8. The Siberian language is not an artificial language, but an (attempted) codification of existing dialects.
  9. Wikipedia is not the Russian Academy of Sciences and Jimbo Wales is not Lomonosov; Wikipedia has no authority over the Russian language or its dialects or orthography.
  10. The right of nations to self-determination is a fundamental human right and the basis of Lenin's national policy.
  11. Proposal is a result of mob action by Russian wikipedians and was possibly done in bad faith. The deletion of interwiki links to RU-SIB [21] is vandalism and indication of bad faith.
  12. Creation and use of a "Siberian" written language is a deplorable (= very bad) idea, but so was the creation and use of the Ukrainian language.
  13. POV discussions on the wiki content are not cause to close wikipedias--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  14. Because about 3/4 of votes for closure are Russians or have came from ruwiki, the results of the voting show nothing but ethnical solidarity of the Russians. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  15. If some wikipedia (f.e. Siberian one) will be closed because of political motivated flashmobes of some nation which does not like it, this will be precedent for more nationalistic flashmobes for close wikipedias. We know that there are many nations which have conflicts with each other. If it will be such precedent, more and more flashmobes will be organised to close more and more wikies - because of political and national problems, but not because of real necessity or innecessity of some wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  16. Many groups of starozhils (native speakers) are officially recognized in Russia (accroding to - lenski starozhily, yakutyany, kamenshiki (Altai group) are officially recoginized and recommended for apparent counting from Muscovite Russians. Current revival of Siberian self-perception also brings into existence the word "sibircy" for a Siberian non-Muscovite Russian. While the last word is not recognized officially, it is used widely together with words "Siberian Nation" - this nation has it's own flag, territory, why can not it have a language too? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Repetition and discussion of the above presented arguments:

On argument 1 in opposition to closureEdit

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)
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)
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)
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)

On argument 2 in opposition to closureEdit

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) - example of offline article. But this is not "OR or not OR" discussion. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
they call your group «сибирские националисты», you are really Siberian nationalist? Carn ru 12:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
The term 'Siberian nationalists' seems to be pretty welcome in the ru-sib WIkipedia: Category:Сибирски нацыоналисты --BeautifulFlying 00:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
And, existence of 50 articles in the media about the language project doesn't entitle the project to have it's own Wikipedia. --BeautifulFlying 00:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

On argument 3 in opposition to closureEdit

3). There is offline newspaper in Tomsk in siberian language.

Proof please. --ru:Участник:Boleslav1.
Maket --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
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? 09:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 4 in opposition to closureEdit

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. 09:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC) -- not logged in ACrush ?!/©
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
< - - - - - reset indent
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)
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)
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)
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)

On arguments 5 & 6 in opposition to closureEdit

5). Sibwiki has about 80 users and about 10 active editors from them.

6). Sibwiki has 2500 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)
Just open your eyes. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
And many of them are filled. All the same, the 1400 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)
Actually there are about 900 articles, and less than 200 of them have more than 3 sentences. Mikkalai 02:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
After 3 weeks this things are improved. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

On argument 7 in opposition to closureEdit

7). Dictionary and grammar exist outside wikipedia in and ukrainian sites

Did any exist elsewhere before volgota? 09:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)-- not logged in ACrush ?!/©
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)
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)
Do you mean siberian dialect dictionaries? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
< - - - - - reset indent
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)
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)
2/3, no, that's general rules, but exceptions can apply. What would happedn if Padonki manage to get a majority, will the admin of wiki still tolerate them? Victorius crowd...So were Napoleon's soldiers prior to 1812. --Kuban kazak 18:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
If Padonki manage this, it will be Padonki wikipedia. You are really against democracy, and all you cries for political correctnes are in vain, just because you yourself are not politically correct to urkainians, belorussians and siberians. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Where am I not politically correct to Ukrainians, Belarusians or Siberians? Have you ever heard me use the term Hohol, or bydlo wrt to my opponets. Have I ever called a person from the Caucasus a Churka? Have I ever called a black person a Nigger or a Jew Zhid? NO. BTW for your information, my wife happens to be from Western Ukraine, and my children happen to be half-Ukrainian. Also if I was biased towards Ukrainians, would Ukrainian wikipedians in en wiki NOT praise for hard work to the hundreds of Ukrainian-related articles that I created and edited. If you want me to get some Ukrainians or Belarusians or Armenians or Azerbaijanis or Georgians or hundreds of other wiki people to stand for me that can be arranged. And at the same time probably adding more and more votes to the closure support.... See Slava, unlike you I can defend criticisment and prove people wrong, which you obviousely can't. --Kuban kazak 14:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
For example, speaking about "Svidomy Ukrainian conspiracy" here. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Well if that is called not being politcially correct, then do read some of your comments, Muscovite flashmob is thus equally unpolitically correct, as is Putin Slaves, or Imperialist Chauvinists. Really don't even try it. Accusing your accusers will not work here. You will make a lot of noise, but prove - nothing. --Kuban kazak 08:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Just who have a lot of noise, but prove - nothing, this is those, who want to close a living wiki, and have in proofs only links to 3-5 articles, meaning of which they do not understand, and long speeches, that's all that you have. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
< - - - - - reset indent
I'll just quote my passage and annotate it:
Scientific letters to Nature or request grants from different Scientific circles when carrying out the research and development of the language on Volgota (1), that you did first come to Russians and asked us in good faith support instead of nationalist circles in Ukraine and Belarus (2), that you did not have the blog of Samir74 and never wrote any rubbish in there (like exporting oil to bypass Moscow) (3). That someone actually oversaw the research of Volgota and judged it as satisfactory...(4). Or criticised you to which you responded(5). That you were able to go to every single place in Siberia and sample the dialect when researching(6). That your research group consisted of intellectual people with higher education, with a respectable scientific past(7). That you served your citizen's duty to the Motherland for two years, or have appropriate exemption (e.g. Voennaya Kafedra)(8). That you have no hostility towards Russia or Russians (including those in Moscow) whatsoever(9), and thus if a war breaks out with Siberia and Moscow, you will thus not raise weapon on those you are not hostile to and will fight to make sure that Russian territorial integrity is restored(10). There you go, 10 points of which only two are just thrown in for the humour. of it. --Kuban kazak 13:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Absolute rubbish irrelevant to the voting, but relevant to your nationalistic paranoia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Points 1,4,5,6 and 7 are w.r.t. people making their minds up on what to vote, the remaining points 4 and 9 are particular to the ru-wiki voters, which constitute the larges majority, and 8 and 10 I threw in for the laugh of it, quite the opposite of paranoia btw, but nonetheless interesting. --Kuban kazak 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
So you yourself recognize, that this is only Russian national trollfest, where ruwiki voters constitutes majority. But I do not care what Russians think about me, because I am not a Russian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
So you live in Russia, hold Russian citizenship but not Russian? So what are you? What nationality does your birth certificate say? And the remaining 5 points are still to be answered.--Kuban kazak 14:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I will not answer all of them at all, because you are not a KGB investigator, and I am not under your investigation --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 8 in opposition to closureEdit

8). The Siberian language is not an artificial language, but an (attempted) codification of existing dialects.

I don't even want to call this language 'Siberian' as it is not. And, this language IS artificial. If the attempt intended to codify any individual naturally exisitng dialect, and without any political agenda, I would totally support creation of a Wikipdeia for such a project. However, Zolotaryov's language is a mixture of dialectisms and his own inventions, and therefore it is an artificial language. --BeautifulFlying 01:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

On argument 9 in opposition to closureEdit

9). Wikipedia is not the Russian Academy of Sciences and Jimbo Wales is not Lomonosov; Wikipedia has no authority over the Russian language or its dialects or orthography.

For that matter Wikipedia is not and neither is Yarosalv Zolotoryov Lomonosov. --Kuban kazak 23:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
First and foremost Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Therefore, using it for POV-pushing an idea like the sib wiki does is unacceptable. -- Grafikm fr 00:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Please do not confuse Wikipedia with Wikimedia. Yes, each Wikipedia needs to be NPOV, but Wikimedia as a whole is highly POV. Each individual Wikipedia pushes the importance of the particular language. Together the Wikipedias push a POV on the importance of literacy. The most POV of all is the English language Wikipedia, which pushes for Anglo-Saxon world domination. -- Petri Krohn 02:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Except in en-wiki there will be people who will challenge articles such as en:International English. The admin in en-wiki is neutral and thoughtful about whether offensive language can be used or not. I doubt that Zolotoryov would escape blockage if he used the term Moscal in en-wiki! As for Literacy, Sib wiki lacks any, except for that silly little poem moscalska Svoloch. --Kuban kazak 18:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 10 in opposition to closureEdit

10). The right of nations to self-determination is a fundamental human right and the basis of Lenin's national policy.

Sure thing, but Wikipedia is not a propaganda instrument to advocate independence, because it is contrary to WP:NPOV among others. -- Grafikm fr 00:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Self-determination is not about independence, but about the right of people to themself decide on their national affiliation. It equally applies to the right of Transdnestria and South Ossetia to be part of Russia. The moral principle states, that it is not for Moscow to dictate how people in Kiev or in Tomsk write their form of Russian. Extended to a Wikipedia policy, it might mean that it is not a privilege of the contributors to the Russian Wikipedia to dictate the faith of the Siberian Wikipedia, or for the Romanian Wikipedia to delete the Moldovian Wikipedia. -- Petri Krohn 02:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
We are not only Russians, and I am not from Moscow. If you do check up on the nationalities of support voters you will find quite a strong variance. --Kuban kazak 18:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
90% from ruwiki, where there are many announcements go and vote against free Sibwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Not really, 90%, I for one am almost absent from ru-wiki. I take it more of a 60%. And as for sibwiki being free, with an admin like you... Its like Latvia being a free country (on paper), except to the 40% of the population who have to put up with their apraheid policies.--Kuban kazak 08:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
<- - - - - reset indent
And that is not your business, what do they do in Latvia without Russia, and what do we do in sibwiki without ruwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Ahh did not like the analogy, probably because its the truth right. What are we talking about ...ah yes "sibwiki". Well if you want a free wiki then its en. There you get admins from all over the globe and same with editors. In sib-wiki...much like Latvia, if someone would like to delete that nonsense anthem or Moskalska Svoloch, I doubt that will ever happen. --Kuban kazak 13:22, 16, November 2006 (UTC)
That's not right, actually Moscalska scoloch is under AFD discussion with the score 3:3 --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
So there are three people who oppose its deletion, I wonder why? --Kuban kazak 14:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Their position is not your business. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
This argument can't be taken into account, as there's no nation speaking Zolotaryov's language. --BeautifulFlying 21:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

On argument 11 in opposition to closureEdit

11). Proposal is a result of mob action by Russian wikipedians and was possibly done in bad faith. The deletion of interwiki links to RU-SIB [22] is vandalism and indication of bad faith.

Wrong, see my comment on the bottom, about five paragraphs. The proposal was done for three reasons (of which I was one of the initiators): Siberian Language research was not professional by any world linguistic standards, hence OR. The credibility of this research is non-existant and because of the low quality of articles that we have seen starting with Hamlet and Pushkin and ending with Mosckalska Svoloch and a poor parody on the Ukrainian (Siberian) National Anthem (What remains astonishing is that despite a week and a half of exposing these articles, nobody from sib-wiki actually agreed that they are poor quality, and nobody in that time attempted to fix them). Finally of course is the political hysteria that neither sib-wiki nor Zolotoryov nor about 3/4 of the oppose voters seem to able to live without. And as we have seen in Zolotoryov's resposes, instead of attemting a civilised democratic debate he spent the last week and half defending usage of the term Moscal in English, and at the same time polluting his LJ with feaces like how half of Russia will speak Siberian and the rest Ukrainian. I am sorry but who are the flash-mobbers? Its like a children's saying in Russian: Кот так обзываеться, тот сам так называеться. --Kuban kazak 23:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Quality of articles is disputable question and it not vindicates flashmobs and iwiki deleting, and even if proven, it is not cause to close the wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
In your case it is, because it is the credibility of high quality articles that saved other wikis from closure. If i were you I'd spend less time trying to persuade people about nonsense, and at least repair those articles like Hamlet and Pushkin, and remove that silly poem and anthem. Such material is simply unencyclopedic and that is a reason for deletion. --Kuban kazak 18:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
haha, there are about 50 doubtful articles from 6690 - those with verses etc. Their existence is possibly reason for AFD discussions in sibwiki, but not for closure. Currently no AFD discsussion resulted in deletion of any of them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes because 5 and half thousand of those articles are just empty year templates. As for the rest, just for the fun compare the quality of your top articles with that of en-wiki...And why am I not surprised that nobody put Moscalska Svoloch for deletion... because your same argument of only 10 users, of whom more than half would agree with what you write under your xenophobic-nationalist penname of Samir74. --Kuban kazak 14:00, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
They are not empty, and about the quality - that's because the wiki is only opened. We will not delete articles because of threats of the Russian Nationalists like you. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
How kind of you, calling me a nationalist, oddly enough, whilst I do love my country and will stand for its integrity, I have no problem with any of its many minorities speaking their languages and opening their wiki. The problem is I am yet to hear anywhere outside wikispace that such minority as Siberian and such language exists. --Kuban kazak 08:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
This is also not right a) existence of Siberian Nation is main point of Oblastnik's theories from the middle of 19 century, they even had an independent state in 1918 b) specific features of local dialects are also well-proven fact. Actually your insults and political accusations are almost only "facts" which you use. And to hide this, you use the maximum eloquence as possible. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
< - - - - - reset indent
Whatever happened in 1918 or even before is ancient history. That's like saying that East Germans are a separate nation and deserve their independence, then to make their own wiki based on the East German accent/dialect and then to start a load of articles like Wessi Schwein. I can imagine quite a few East Germans might share that POV, but are they representetive of the whole ex-DDR people and will the rest of the ex-DDR people acknowledge the new language. NO! You know that, I know that. Same with Siberia, nation does not exist as such, ethnographic research that is 150 years old... get a life. And as for the same thing outside wikispace...that is right. --Kuban kazak 13:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
And that is only your interpretation of these facts, when we have totally other interpretation of them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Uhmmm, not really, if East Germans do get round to doing that, I doubt you will support them, although in their case, the East German nationalism as such does exist and is proven, as are the Prussian dialects. Also, if I was to believe you, you could have made more effort to write a decent national anthem than a parody of a Ukrainian one. --Kuban kazak 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
I do not know the German situation well so I can not answer you. but the German situation has no relation to the Siberian. As to the verse which you suppose to be an anthem, this is just free translation of the Ukrainian anthem, so you are wrong again. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
So now Ukraine is Siberia? I am even more puzzled. --Kuban kazak 14:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
No, but this is free translation of ukrainian hymn. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

On argument 12 in opposition to closureEdit

12). Creation and use of a "Siberian" written language is a deplorable (= very bad) idea, but so was the creation and use of the Ukrainian language.

  • This argument was deleted by closure supporter 19:29, 14 November 2006: [23], now restored. -- Petri Krohn 23:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely nothing to compare. 100 years ago, when the notion of Ukrainian language was still not accepted officially in Russia, the whole big literature in Ukrainian already existed for almost a century, with such prominent authors as Kotlyarevsky, Shevchenko, Lesya Ukrainka or Ivan Franko. Even Ukrainian operas were written (Lysenko, Hulak-Artemovsky). Ukrainian was not created by some blogger in a couple of months. --Yms 07:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

On arguments 13 & 14 in opposition to closureEdit

13). POV discussions on the wiki content are not cause to close wikipedias--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

14). Because about 3/4 of votes for closure are Russians or have came from ruwiki, the results of the voting show nothing but ethnical solidarity of the Russians. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and because 3/4 of the votes opposing the closure are either Romanian, Ukrainian or Belarusian voters, they show nothing but nationalist solidarity of those nations, for their mutual "freindship" against Russia and Russians. --Kuban kazak 18:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
These are different nations, but you are one nation, and majority of votes of closurers are driven under slogans of national solidarity. Please do not strike off arguments and do not modify messages of others. I think all the arguments for closure are stupid, but I do not strike them off --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
It's untrue. Two most widespread reasons agaist ru-sib are:
  • ru-sib is really not a Wikipedia (inaccurate, deliberately non-NPOV, obscene etc.), and IMCO ru-sib isn't yet, despite many weeks since that discussions.
  • "Siberian" is really not a language (a dialect, a conlang, a distorted mix of different languages/dialects etc.)
These arguments does not matter to our national solidarity, if it ever exists :) Incnis Mrsi 02:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
But this "arguments" are invented by people from ruwiki, and supported 80% by people from ruwiki, this is russian flame war. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
You cannot judge on the people's ethnic identity simply by the fact that they contribute to Russian wiki. --Yms 11:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
They belong to Russian culture all the same, this culture killed real dialects, and now it wants to kill their resurrection. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Zolotaryov, IMHO it's ru-sib who kills real dialects tying it to your padonki-like venture in world's public oppinion! I read about your linguo-project with interest when it just appeared. Maybe, there was some people (like MaminSiberyak) who really want to develop (or reconstruct) some authentic language. But your currect project ru-sib is not a linguistic, nor is it an encyclopedia! Resign your administratorship, it would help Siberian dialects' image. Incnis Mrsi 14:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
it is proven that Mamin Siberyak was only ruwiki sockpuppet, he even did not say what are his other accounts. And other arguments are only russian fantasies, this was already proven in this discussion, and this personal accusations as well. The truth is that you want to close first Russian dialect wiki and invent from nothing many lies only because you want to close it because of your dialectophobia - this is proven by your deeds, but not words. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I have no dialectophobia. Generally, there is no russian nationalistic flashmob, only a flashmob against lie and dirty intrigues. Concerning User:MaminSiberyak, let us pass to Support vote number 8 discussion, where Zolotaryov's defamatory insinuations will be demolished. Incnis Mrsi 19:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
You cannot judge about the culture I belong to (born in a Ukrainian-Romanian-Austrian-Jewish-Russian city, now living in Israel). --Yms 18:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
On the argument 14: because Russian language is the closest to Zolotaryov's langauge, by reading the content of the ru-sib WIkipedia Russians perhaps understand the absurdity that lies in the core of Zolotaryov's project better than others. In addition, Russians obviuosly and understandably are irritated by the aggressive anti-Russian content such as the articles Москальска сволочь and Россея. This content is not occasionally added by some vandals to discredit the ru-sib Wikipedia, but intentionally published by Zolotaryov to propagate, God know what, his agenda, or himself as a writer. Such content of the ru-sib Wikipedia is the best propaganda for Russians to vote for closure of it. --BeautifulFlying 21:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

On argument 15 in opposition to closureEdit

15). If some wikipedia (f.e. Siberian one) will be closed because of political motivated flashmobes of some nation which does not like it, this will be precedent for more nationalistic flashmobes for close wikipedias. We know that there are many nations which have conflicts with each other. If it will be such precedent, more and more flashmobes will be organised to close more and more wikies - because of political and national problems, but not because of real necessity or innecessity of some wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Give me a source outside Volgota that confirms there is a "conflict" in Siberia....Kuban kazak 22:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Or that there is a nation of Siberia for that matter. --Kuban kazak 22:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
There is conflict in Wikipedia, and the conflict is national, that's enough. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

On argument 16 in opposition to closureEdit

16). Many groups of starozhils (native speakers) are officially recognized in Russia (accroding to - lenski starozhily, yakutyany, kamenshiki (Altai group) are officially recoginized and recommended for apparent counting from Muscovite Russians. Current revival of Siberian self-perception also brings into existence the word "sibircy" for a Siberian non-Muscovite Russian. While the last word is not recognized officially, it is used widely together with words "Siberian Nation" - this nation has it's own flag, territory, why can not it have a language too? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Starozhils are NOT native speakers of Zolotaryov's language. Most of them are native speakres of Russian, and although many of them do use the dialect words and expressions more than other Russians, their core language is Russian. Some starozhil groups also use words that were adopted from the local native people's languages, which eventually leads to differntiation of the dialects, that's why all these starozhil groups are listed under separate ETHNICAL TITLES on the list above. These are not separate nations. Not mentioning that there is NO (except from some people's imagination) Siberian nation with its own flag and territory. This argument is false and intentionally misleading. --BeautifulFlying 21:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Evident lie. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
What are you calling 'lie'? Do you claim that the starozhils speak the language you are inventing? This would be a lie for sure. The lie is also stating that the words "Siberian Nation" are used widely — Yaroslav, this is only your fantasy. There's no nation that is using Volgota flag, there's no nation having its own territory in Siberia, and your language is not Siberian. --BeautifulFlying 09:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
С этим типом спорить абсолютно бесполезно! Если его загнать в угол, он тотчас объявляет оппонентов лжецами, националистами и т.д. и попросту увиливает от ихних аргументов. Жаль, что этот маразм до сих пор продолжается лишь из-за зловредности некоторых украинцев на Вмкипедии и неосведомленности большинства иностранцев насчет реалий ситуации в Сибири. Золотарев капитализирует на том, что для многих тут его чушь кажется вполне правдоподобной. Это только нам очевидна полная абсурдность данной ситуации. Kazak 04:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you are right. Well, I'm not arguing with Zolotaryov as much as I'm trying to present valid and sound facts here for the community to judge on the validity of his arguments. It looks like many folks here have been largely misled by the claims that everything Siberian is related to the language Zolotaryov invented. Being a Siberian myself, I'm disgusted by seeing this shuffle of facts. --BeautifulFlying 01:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Please make any proofs except personal attacks, that the language is not identical to Siberian and Northern Russian dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Look, I'm not making personal attacks. You are presenting arguments that I consider questionsable, and I do have a right to question them. From my experience of living in Siberia, I can tell that the starozhils have been speaking Russian language, certainly with local specifics, primarily in the volabulary, secondarily in grammar. However, their core language is Russian, and their literary language is that of en:Pushkin and en:Tolstoy. No matter how colloquial their daily life speaking is, they write in what is commonly known as Russian language.
You have invented the language we are discussing, and you are supposed to present proofs that it's based on such and such dialects. Where are your publications with a thorough analysis of these dialects and of your invention, where is any SCIENTIFIC discussion on the subject that would come to a conclusion that the language you invented is identical to what people speak in Siberia? Do they exist? So far the only references you provided are online blogs and forums, and articles from tabloid press. --BeautifulFlying 21:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, please present proofs that the dialects that the starozhils speak are different enough from the Russian language to be considered separate languages. --BeautifulFlying 21:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Instead of talking so much, please open any Northern Russian dialect vocabulary and you will see the proofs. Why I should collect them for you? This is you who must prove that Siberian language is not Siberian, because you are accusator. Instead of that your group mixes absurd political accusations with personal attacks. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yaroslav, please don't try to shut me up. I will be talking as much as I feel I must.
You are the initiator of this project, and you claim that the language you invented is identical to what people naturally speak in Siberia, and that the language they speak is not Russian. This contradicts with the common scientific knowledge. Since you are proposing an idea that demands certain status, but contradicts with the common scientific knowledge, this places you in the position of having to present the proofs and substantiation for your idea. This is a common scientific practice, and I don't understand why you are resisting this, and why this request makes you respond rudely. Is this because you don't have any proofs for your theory? --BeautifulFlying 01:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Support closing the Siberian wiki (194 votes, 188 signed, 175 authenticated)Edit

  1. Paul Pogonyshev 23:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC) (nominator) authentification diff
  2. I can confirm all of the above. MountainBlueAllah 00:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff to home wiki added my Irpen. 18:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    Since I cannot find any history before November 4th, I hereby vote again, in SUPPORT of closing. --Paul Pieniezny 20:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Authorization and certification of this vote was given both at English and at Dutch Wikipedia. We do not want some Pan Gerwazy to come here and vote "oppose", do we?--Paul Pieniezny 20:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Since I have just noticed User:Irpen wants only accounts from November 5th, and I edited anonymously on West-Vloams (and Russian, and German) at that time, I have replaced it with a link to Dutch wiki. Principle remains the same. No one should think I have voted twice.--Paul Pieniezny 21:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    "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)
    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)
    So you want to destroy their nations, you yourself have said this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    Muscovite this is human who fight for Moscow empire, like you. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    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 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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    Perhaps it is because Russians understand the issues in their own country best of all. And you, sir, are a Russian, whether you like it or not. w:en:User:Kazak 15 November 2006
  4. Strongly support All articles is POV-pushing, original research and looks as articles from Uncyclopedia. -- 07:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Sorry it was me. Forgot to login --Morpheios Melas 07:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC) authentication diff added by Irpen. 18:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Lie and propaganda from anonimous troll. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    Its not lie and you know that --Morpheios Melas 08:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    That's lie and you know that, and everybody can easily check it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Of course anybody cat can check! :)--Morpheios Melas 09:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    And see that you lie) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Quite the contrary --Morpheios Melas 10:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, quite the contrary --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    But he lies, and everybody can check this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    No it you tell lies. And it was more than once proved in this discussion. --Morpheios Melas 06:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Just the discussion shows that you tell lies and propaganda. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    it's a lie! --Morpheios Melas 09:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    No!)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Yes! --Morpheios Melas 10:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    No)). How clever admins ruwiki has!)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    More clever than in (witch will be closed soon). Heh! --Morpheios Melas 10:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    childness? Carn ru 15:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  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) (my identification can be found here --ru:Участник:Boleslav1 19:18, 18 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)
    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)
    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)
    Yeah! Maybe some mythical russian nationalists also write "lies" in your siberian wikipedia? Maybe russian nationalists deleted a link to 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)
    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)
    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. -- 11:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, this template - [24] Where you cowardly deleted the language #58, the Siberian, because you hate it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Mae culpa. fixd. Anyway - you started the war against 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)
    Stop accusing about agression, it was the Russian en-wiki community that started this off. The first stone was thrown in by ME. [25], on a fully genuine basis, not agression, but about ending xenophobia. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Do you think the proposal to close because of one word is not agression? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Weak Support. I have nothing against siberian language itself: it is a new created language, as you can see on 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 in my opinion is strongly provocative. --DmRodionov 08:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication [26] added by --DmRodionov 23:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    But you mistranslate the words "літературна мова", which is equal to "Language Standard". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    I think, that both translations are ok. But it is only a trifle. --DmRodionov 08:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  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. -- 09:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)
  8. sadly, but support. I'm disappointed in siberian wikipedia. --MaminSiberyak 10:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC) authentication added by Irpen. 02:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
    User with almost no edits in sibwiki articles, maybe created by russians in provocative goals. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    And all this story only verifies my first assumption. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Yes and your next assumption is that this is done on the orders of FSB... original. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    The ru-sib:User:MaminSiberyak explicitly states at his page that User:MaminSiberyak is also his account, and versa. Here is a diff, proving that it's User:MaminSiberyak who gave this Support vote number 8. I don't know was this user so useful in ru-sib or not, but his talk page shows evidenlty good faith. There is no ruwiki sockpuppet here, but there is an inexpert wiki admin here and/or a blatant liar! Incnis Mrsi 19:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    authentication diff added ny Irpen. 19:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    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 and ukrainian sites, 4) the fourth point is mere lie and troll accusations. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  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) Authentication diff added by Irpen. 05:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    All the 6500 articles are crap? It is obvious that you lie. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Yes, ALL of them! --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  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) Auth MaxiMaxiMax 04:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    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, because it's HOLY SHIT CRAP? -- 14:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  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) auth --Yms 16:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
    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. -- 14:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    I think he not knows "siberian" because it DOES NOT EXIST as a language. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support per nomination and per MaxiMaxiMax & Ghirlandajo. --Kaganer 14:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff to my home wiki --Kaganer 20:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    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)
    Oddly enough the first time you said something that bears compleate and utter truth. --Kuban kazak 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry --Kuban kazak 13:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  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):::authentication diff
    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)
    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)
    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)
    "Siberian" IS conlang. Stop talking nonsence. -- 17:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, this is project of dialect standardisation, stop talking nonsence yourself. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  16. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax, Kuban kazak and others. Vlad2000Plus 16:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Authentication diff to home wiki added Vlad2000Plus 15:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    I hereby confirm that the vote is mine. -- Grafikm fr 01:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  18. Strongly Support per nomination - closing the Siberian wiki as language vandalizm. Alexandrov 16:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff --DmRodionov 12:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  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 . And yes, I had real fun to read their Calegory:Poetry. But still voting to close. Mikkalai 17:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Authentification diff
    Bunch of demagogy without real arguments, based only on your feelings. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    "Ебьона мать, опеть припьорся дык!" Mikkalai 01:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    That only illustrates that you have no arguments, only feelings and suspicions. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support. Not a real language. --Ornil Authentification diff 17:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    I hereby confirm that the vote is mine.Ezhiki 21:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  22. Support. per Alex Bakharev, see Comments. ";Siberian language" is no more than pseudoscience. ru:User:Typhoonbreath 18:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth diff added by Yms 14:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  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: [27]). 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. #! 18:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Totally xenophobic view. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  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, (telling all this make me feel i am sockpuppet, trying to become real man) Carn ru 20:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 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. -- 20:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)
    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)
  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. 21:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC) -- en:User:Trapolator
    And your opinion is cause for POV discussion in sibwiki, but not for sibwiki closure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
  26. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax, Kuban kazak and others. Guinness man 21:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry Guinness man 22:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  27. Support per above. The Siberian language does not exist. S.L. 22:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth diff added by Yms 14:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
    So in what language the 6500 articles are written? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    • Support I'm a lingvist and know that this language is a fake. ( 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)
    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)
    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)
    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) I'm revoking my vote. Unfortunately, there are too many well-known vote-riggers (like Maximaximax, Irpen, Rombik, etc.) on this side. I cannot enjoy that sort of company, sorry. --Dart evader 10:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  29. Support per above. The Siberian Wiki is simple waste of resources of WikiMedia's servers. --Eraser 11:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC) Vote authorized here.
  30. Strong Support per all above. --Volkov 13:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC) Vote authorized here.
  31. Support per above. stassats 13:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry stassats 11:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support per Kneiphof and others. --Ptr ru 22:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC) (ru:User:Panther)
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry --Ptr ru 16:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support per above. Khoikhoi 23:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC) authentication
  34. 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) auth --Yms 16:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
  35. Support strongly. It is not a language, but a slang of the internet community. Elk Salmon 15:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC) auth diff added by Yms 14:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
    Slang of which language, Tatar ot Ukrainian?)))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
  36. Strong Support. Ridiculous project. --CodeMonk 02:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC) authentication
  37. Strong Support. Siberian wikipedia isn't wikipedia. It is imbecility. With respect [28]w:ru:Участник:Nejron
  38. Support. Klingon is more of a real language in comparasion. --Cat out 12:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    And theoretically - could here be Klingon-wiki opened? =) Carn ru 08:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    Good morning! --qvvx 20:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  39. Strong Support. "Siberian language" is original research of Yaroslav Zolotarev. It is not really language. --Nikolay Kolpakov 17:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorized here --Nikolay Kolpakov 02:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  40. 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)
    Vote authorized here A.M.D.F. 08:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  41. 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)
    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)
    Somebody can say that "English is an obscene distorted German designed by Chaucer" for example.----- Someone would say that "padonki" speak their national language. Russianname 16:57, 23 November 2006 (UTC) My vote authorization [29] Russianname 16:57, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  42. Support. --Tassadar 11:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC) [30]
  43. 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) [31], 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) Confirmation
    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)
    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 is kinda interesting to observe. -- Grafikm fr 15:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    Diff please? ACrush ?!/© 20:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Just read the replics of Kuban Kozak - he even use the words "Ukrainian conspiracy" --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  44. 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)
    Vote authorized. --Dmitry Gerasimov 18:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Of course not. But repeatedly labeling me and other users xenophobs and nationalists for no reason surely is. --Dmitry Gerasimov 18:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  45. 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)
    How pervert logic do you have) Thank God I am not a Muscovite! --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  46. 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)
    Please review information about Siberian Slavic dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  47. I Support closing this section. It is absolute delirium. The manager ru wikipedia --Torin-ru 04:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Vote authorized authentication--Torin-ru 07:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Personal attack.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  48. 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). My authorization: [32]
  49. Support Siberian language is falsification Aps
    - false voice [33]
    No, [34]. --Irpen 22:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, it is not. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  50. Strong Support. Stop this original research. w:ru:Участник:Dark-saber
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry --w:ru:Участник:Dark-saber
    Personal attack. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    it's covered by me: Carn ru 09:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  51. Strongest ever possible Support. Stop this nonsense original research, please. Rombik 07:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC), also known as ru:User:Rombik, uk:User:Rombik, en:User:Rombik, commons:User:Rombik (see diff at Ru-wiki where I admit my identity with my Meta account).
  52. 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) auth diff added by Yms 14:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
    And not to further Russian Nationalist push their national POV. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  53. 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)
    authorised here --Anton Khorev 21:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    This is not true. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Absolute true. It was made on no basis in your LJ community. Elk Salmon 07:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Absolute lie. It was compiled from 500 dialect sources. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    lol, Thank you. You just have exposed yourself. Elk Salmon 11:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Where? Do you understand the word "source" properly? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  54. 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) auth diff added by Yms 14:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    BTW, existence of Moldovan wikipedia is much, much more grounded, see Alex Bakharev's comment in the 'Comment' section. Mr. Zolotaryov is simply using Wikipedia to promote his own project. --Yms 10:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    Do you or Alex Bakharev know "Moldovan" language? Moldovan Wikipedia was created by a 16 year old kid from USA with little knowledge about "Moldovan" language (self-declared mo-2). He is registered also at Romanian Wikipedia, where he defined his language as "Romanian-Moldovan" [35]. Comparing with Moldovan wikipedia, the Siberian one is a more serious project, however I feel is still an artificial one. We don't have separate wikipedias in Argentinian, Chilean, Bolivian, Mexican, Venezuelan, Spanish language, we should not have separate Romanian/Moldovan wikipedias or separate Russian/Siberian wikipedias. I am also against "Bosnian" wikipedia, before the war in Yugoslavia nobody told about an existence of "Bosnian" language. I understand that people from Bosnia hate Milosevici, but they can hate him in Serbian language. Those who hate Putin, hate him in Russian language! We should not mix politics with linguistics.--MariusM 13:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
    I have no information about creation of Moldovan Wikipedia, I only judge about the language which was one of three main languages of the city I lived in for 28 years (Czernowitz). I'm agree that now it's considered just the same as Romanian, but still can confirm that what Bakharev wrote is 100% true. It does not mean that I support existence of Moldovan wiki :) --Yms 21:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  55. Strong Support, having read this discussion thoroughly and having compared arguments and wannabe arguments from both sides. --Yms 06:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    confirmed here. --Yms 06:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    ... and being from ruwiki, by the way...))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Sure, it's my native language. --Yms 07:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  56. Support confirmed here.w:ru:Участник:DonaldDuckDonaldDuck
  57. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax Serebr 12:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC) (ru:User:Serebr)
    Vote authorized [36] against sockpuppetry Serebr 21:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support Strong Support. No such language. w:ru:Участник:Exile
  59. Support I strongly support closing the so-called "Siberian wikipedia". My arguments: (1) the "Siberian language" does not exist; (2) the wikipedia articles written in the so-called "Siberian language" cannot be understood by anybody, with a possible exception of the person who wrote them; (3) "Siberian wikipedia" project creates a dangerous precedent of a marginalized group misusing the Wikipedia resources for the propaganda of their cause --w:ru:Участник:Новый
    There is no suсh user in ruwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    "Yaroslav Zolotaryov" attempted to nullify my vote above. --w:ru:Участник:Новый
    Again - this is no such user in ruwiki, so you do not say truth about yourself, and maybe you are sockpuppet --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    This is getting ridiculous. What is the use of this vote, if this fellow, "Yaroslav Zolotaryov" allows himself to delete any vote he does not like, by just saying "you do not say truth about yourself, and maybe you are sockpuppet"? --w:ru:Участник:Новый
    No, only about those, who have no account in ruwiki) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    Account created in a hour after voting. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    Wiki does not synchronize itself instantly. "Yaroslav Zolotaryov" should stop trying to falsify this vote. Falsifying the language would not work for "Yaroslav Zolotaryov" either. --w:ru:Участник:Новый
    How pathetic)) And where are the contributions of this Новый before the voting? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  60. Support. Time to end this nonsense. w:en:User:Kazak (Authentication diff to home wiki.)
  61. Support I strongly support the move to close the Siberian Wiki. The quasi-language used to write it is a non-existent language, composed out of distorted Ukrainian and Russian words. It lacks a consistent grammar. Some of the articles quoted above are nothing but a string of slurs, offensive to Russians, Jews and Ukrainians. Allowing the Siberian wikipedia clowns to use the Wikipedia resources will expose Wikipedia to a possibility of hate speech/hate crime lawsuits in many countries --w:en:User:ExcaliburW
    Siberian language has consistent grammar, there are two grammars in use in sibwiki - the full grammar and the learn-grammar. About the articles, you can try to improve them yourself, but they do not contain hatespeech or offencive words. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  62. Close it. As far as I can tell, having spoken with a number of friends from that part of the world and talking to some local professors, there is not a Siberian language. Based on my (limited) understanding of Russian, the Siberian wikipedia is a misuse of foundation resources and a cesspool, and I don't see any convincing arguments for keeping it. --Improv 02:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC) Validated as per here
    But there are siberian dialects, and this information is verifiable. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    There are probably smaller dialects within those dialects as well - Wikipedias should exist for languages, not dialect. If we took English, for example, and split the British, American, Australian, Indian, and other parts of the world that speak English into separate Wikis, we would lose a lot of valuable collaboration. Wikis are not for nations, regions, or dialects. When you see things like Taiwan and China sharing a wiki, despite their different writing systems (classical versus reformed Chinese characters), you should understand it as inspiration that you can work together with the greater Russian community, and everyone who can read/speak/write Russian will be better off for it because less effort will be duplicated and the Russian Wikipedia will have more good content. --Improv 17:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    But Russian wikipedia do not use Siberian and Northern Russian dialect words, so this part of human knowledge will be lost without the sibwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    Wikipedia and Wiktionary are not the same thing. Encyclopedic knowledge is not about using a few words, it's about adequately covering a topic. If you want word coverage, add the words you care about to the Russian wikipedia, noting them as being from a dialect. For topic coverage, little or nothing conceptual will be lost if dialect words are not used. --Improv 09:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  63. Support Support closing of this offensive project that threatens to bring the foundation to a disrepute. If it were an innocent attempt to promote something, I would have tolerated it. What has been made out of it is the hate-speech site full of ethnic slurs, obscenities, original research and propaganda. One article translates Shakespeare's Hamlet with the translator putting the words like "motherfucker" into the mouth of the greatest poet of all. Article about Pushkin calls his main hero as someone "who has nothing to do and fucks around left and right". This "Wikipedia" includes the Zolotaryov's "poetry" with death threats addressed to different ethnicities, pictures with extreme ethnic jokes, etc. Zolotaryov can publish his amateur exercises in poetry at pay sites. He can also hire a provider to host his xenophobic views. Ku-Klux-Klan does not have a Wikipedia. Neither should other xenophobes. I am skeptical about this vote's being hijacked by socks and flash-mobs but I am leaving my opinion for the record. Since when is the foundation willing to be associated with the web-sites that promote nothing but ethnic hatred and obscenity? --Irpen 03:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry --Irpen 19:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    It was already proven in the discsussion, that all this hate-speech site full of ethnic slurs, obscenities, original research and propaganda - only fantasies of the accusators. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    Zolotaryov's claims of innocense are false. Examples follow.
    • Obsenity:
      • "Fuckoff the Muscovites", an edit summary by the very user above, Zolotaryov himself, a so called "admin".
      • "Motherfucker, says Marcellus from Hamlet written by Shakespeare (Zolotaryov's translation).
      • Pushkin article calls Onegin "a noble who has nothing to do so he screws the chicks around him."
    • Hate speech:
      • this image, with a poster: "Thank you god, that I'm not a Muscovite"
      • This "poem" by the very Zolotaryov above graciously entitles the "Muscovite Scum".
      • This "poem" also by Zolotaryov himself, saying: "from Ural to Chukchi all the land will be ours and lest the death meets the rest" and also "We will cover out path with corpses".
    Need I say more? Wikimedia's sites hosting obscenities, hate speach and even death threats are bound to undemine the reputation of the foundation. --Irpen 07:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    All this examples are based on misunderstanding or falsified. The obscenity to muscovite vandals maybe was error, but they vandalised the wiki about 10 days constantly. Marcellus do not say Motherfucker, you simply translate this incorrectly. All the same, the translations are 10% of wikipedia, and now there are big discssion in wikipedia itself, maybe exclude them from the wiki. You can improve the Pushkin article if you want. Poster is only example and illustration, but not article. The poem is only example and it is now under AFD discussion. The next verse is also only example. Ok, if we will delete the 30 verses, will the antisibwiki crowd disapear? I doubt, the verses is only pretext for them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    All these examples (and many others, quoted above) antagonize and offend Jews, Ukrainians, Russians and people of other ethnicities, living in Siberia and other places. You should not be allowed to continue spreading your hatred, antisemitism and rusophobia through Wikipedia. This is not what Wikipedia is for. --w:ru:Участник:Новый
    Marcellus does say vulgarities in what the "Siberian wikipedia" purports to present as a translation of Act I, Scene I from The Tragedy of Hamlet ... by W.Shakespeare: Act_I_Scene_I. Eg. the original line by Marcellus reading "Peace! break thee off! Look where it comes again!" is translated by Zolotaryov & Ko as "Ебьона мать, опеть припьорся дык!". The latter literally means "Fucking [fucked] mother, [it] came again". Obviously, such "translation" is useless. It only serves to provoke, antagonize and offend. Same can be said about other "translations" in the "Siberian wikipedia" - see more examples above. --w:ru:Участник:Новый
    Your translation does not take into account that "dyk" cannot be used to connect a swear and a normal sentence. I would suggest the translation "Fuck your mother, there is the dick again." --Paul Pieniezny 11:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    hahaha- firstly you have used russian language for finding there "obscenities", but now you use even english to make your paranoia complete!)))))))))) What about Chinese. maybe using Chinese language you will find even more bad words which are similiar to some bad Chinese words))))))) You a the funniest from the crowd, Pan Pieniezny))))--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    Nothing of it, we have a lot of Jews, Russians, Ukrainians and others in the wiki. All the "obsenities" are your fantasies. You just want to close it because of your political anti-democratic position, inventing obscenities and offences. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Support While ru-sib has created some Belarusian articles, based on what I have seen at EN, but even then, something isn't right about it. Wikipedia should not be the testing ground for conlangs, let alone new languages. Zscout370 23:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support To all baove, the name of the language is false: indigenious population of Siberia is not Russians, and Siberian language is not Russian. there are Finnic, Turkic, Altaic and other peoples, and now Zolotaryov finalizes the colonization in language, too. Mukadderat 00:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC) [ diff] to home wiki.
    Sıbır Türkleri Sıbır oturduğu başka halklarla hem ilişki hem de işbirliği kurmak istiyorlar, bu işbirliğini Gaspiralı bile istemiş. --Nefis 11:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    Bundan başka, Siberian language is not Russian. This is Russians who say about Siberian "russian dialect". Actually this is Ukrainian and Pomor languages mixed with Turk and Altaic languages of Siberia. Turkic roots are about 20-25% in Siberian language. It is impossible to get free from colonialism without unity of all nations of Siberia, where Turkis now have 5-10% of population. Işte böyle. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  65. Support OR. Obvious, encyclopedia dramatica level trolling, specifically material that will be intentionally offensive to Russians, while it can be claimed to admins that Russians don't understand as "it's a dialect." Self-aggrandisement regarding a personal project. Wierd and inappropriate political overtones. Utterly lacking potential as an wikipedia. Dsol 10:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    Actually all acusations about "politics" and "obscenity" are about 15-20 articles, and links to them are repeated constantly by accusation part. So definitely even they are for deletion, it is irrelevent to wikipedia itself. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    Try responding to the comments I actually wrote. Dsol 11:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    I respond to them. They characterize situation "in general", while the factual base are these 10-15 doubtful articles, repeated from discussion to discussion, while they are about 0,2% of the wiki --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    What Dsol meant was, respond to ALL of the points of his argument, not just your interpretation of ONE of them. Kazak 23:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  66. Support! Antikon 10:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC) (ru:User:Antikon)
    User's first and only edit. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Account confirmation diff added by --DmRodionov 12:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support, per nom. --BACbKA 12:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    I'm not a sockpuppet (confirmed: diff), and this is not my first and only edit. Read my user page for more. --BACbKA 19:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  68. Strongly support closure per nomination. This "language project" (as even Zolotaryov agrees that this so-called "language" was developed by himself in 2005, many opposers who talk about "siberian nation" and it's "native language" simply misunderstand the situation) simply isn't notable. I have nothing against various dialects and languages which are in use in Russia, and I have nothing against valuable and notable language projects too. But this so-called 'siberian language' isn't neither notable nor natural. There is no person in the whole world who could use this "Siberian Wikipedia" as a source of encyclopedic information. Has Wikimedia Foundation any need to host such a project which consists only of 1) Zolotaryov's poems written in abusive slang 2) machine-made translations - nothing more than Pig Latin 3) articles full of russophobia 4) bot-uploaded stubs? I doubt. Edward Chernenko 14:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    Where have you seen the machine-made translations, I wonder?))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    As a highly qualified programmer I know that it's not problem to convert the words by your quite simple 'rules' which describe how to change russian text to make it siberian text. You work as a bot yourself just because you're unable to write it. Edward Chernenko 11:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    haha, maybe the funniest from russian dreams about sibwiki)))))--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    Account confirmation: [37]. Edward Chernenko 18:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support-Greenvert 15:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)-[38]-I hereby confirm that the vote is mine.-Greenvert 07:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  70. SupportSvetko 16:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC) (look here for confirmation of my voteSvetko 14:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC))
  71. Support. The "Siberian wiki" is definitely a promo action of this original project. There are no native speakers, there is neither large group of researchers. The wiki itself is just a plain POV-pushing tool, and its organisers use POV-pushing techniques everywhere as well. Sometimes successfully (like it was when the wiki was opened), sometimes not (when the deceitful "Siberian language" article was removed). Hopefully, this time they won't succeed. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 18:00, 15 November 2006 (UTC) Identity confirmation. (If my Meta-contributions is not enough :-) ) Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 14:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
    Actually everybody can be accused in Pov-pushing, so this is no argument at all. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support — --Denis Sacharnych 18:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    It is lie. See also w:ru:User:Denis Sacharnych and w:udm:User:Denis. This user - Bureaucrat and SysOp in the Udmurt wikipedia. --Kaganer 20:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Yes, I am. My signature you can see here is real. See also:
    * udm
    * ru
    --Denis Sacharnych 15:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support --Valodzkaconfirm, see comment 23:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  74. Support per above, especially argument 1 and this. en:Ev proof - Ev 02:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  75. Support — I explained my vote in #Support arguments section. Nikola 02:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    I have answered in the same section. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorised. Nikola 14:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  76. Support per above, especially argument 1. -Lone Guardian 05:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC) confirmation vote Lone Guardian 04:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  77. Support, The existence such Wikipedia is simply immoral.It is necessary, therefore to close in a near future!Also this section Wikipedia is created in obvious false language. The concept the Siberian language does not exist!--Юлия Таллирдиева 11:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Look my personal page and contribution in Russian Wiki.--Юлия Таллирдиева 07:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    Look it!--Юлия Таллирдиева 07:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  78. Support. VanHelsing.16 12:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC) (confirmation)
  79. Support per nomination. -- Esp2 18:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC) Confirmed. -- Esp2 15:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  80. Support What worries me is an attitude of sibwikians: their behavior that of a cornered wolf: instead of addressing criticism and promising to address the pointed problems, most responses boil down to "you all who vote to close are either idiots or russian chauvinists". Also, judging from their last 500 new pages it seems that this is a personal 'pedia of 3-4 persons, so hardly wasting of community resources is warranted.
    Also, looks like some of their major contribs genuinely don't understand the problem of "original research", as shown in the following text:
    А если кого-то смущает, что статья неэнциклопедична, то я ведь могу и настоящую статью написать, с лингвистическим и филологическим анализом данного стихотворения и с подробными комментариями (в нейтральном стиле). Сделать? <Zolotaryov>
    About "moskalska svoloch" ("muscovite scum") article; summary: "if someone is bothered that the article is nonencyclopedic, I may write a real one"
    Notice also it is written (in talk page) in standard Russian :-) Ilqram 19:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    We think, that the article is notable for sibwiki, because it is about the verse originally written in siberian language. And because the verse was already published outside the wiki, this is not OR. All the same, this discussion is for sibwiki AFD discussion, but not for this voting. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  81. Support - Agree with most arguments presented here and reading the content. The project appears to be a one man platform for expressing an intolerant political agenda. --Yurik 09:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Apparently Yaroslav has problems counting: meta, en, plus over 3 million bot-edits across all wikies (see YurikBot). Even this weak attempt to discredit my vote supports my claim. --Yurik 20:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  82. Support - I can't understand why ru-sib must exist. --Movses 11:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC) (diff)
    Again two votes from russians. What does this voting reveal? We know that there are many Russians in the world even without this voting))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    That I'm Russian it's your fantasy. I'm not Russian. --Movses 11:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    But you are from ruwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, my main contribution (around one thousand edits) in ukrainian wiki. In ruwiki I have around one hundred edits. --Movses 11:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Hm. But Yaroslav, your native language is Russian and you edited some articles in ruwiki too. Does that mean that you're Russian? Or you belong to some mystical "siberian nation"? :-) Edward Chernenko 13:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    On meta ? Yes, but in other wiki I have more than thousand edits. See above. --Movses 11:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  83. Support as per nomination. Olessi 21:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC) (WP:EN)
    authorization diff - authorisation in the signature of user.--Nikolay Kolpakov 17:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  84. Support per all above. —dima/s-ko/ 22:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC) (authorization diff)
  85. Support per nom. The language simply is not well-known enough (or debatably even existent), nor is the wiki active enough to warrant keeping. AmiDaniel 07:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC) - authorization on enwiki.
    the wiki is more active than the majority of wikipedias - +10/+15 articles a day, and living community. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    That statistic may, however, be quite misleading. When I hit Special:Random, I retrieve primarily page such as this, which, though I don't speak Serbian, appears to me as though the vast majority of articles on the site are generic, template-based articles on years. While it is surely more active than some other wikis, its slight degree in activity over other wikis does not allow us to turn a blind eye to the fact that the language is not a "real" language. (For instance, the exceptional level of activity on the Simple English Wikipedia justifies keeping it, although the language is, well, not really a language of its own.) I'm sorry, but I find the many arguments in support of closure far more convincing than the 10-15 "articles" being created each day. (As another note, all of the 6,760 articles on the wiki have been created by only 70 users, with an average of 3.16 edits per page .. that's not activity.) AmiDaniel 04:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  86. Support. I am of Russian and Ukrainian descent. I am very upset that so many good Ukrainian wikipedia users get involved by Mr. Zolotaryov's use of their bad feelings about Russians to fuel his absurd project. OckhamTheFox 09:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC) Vote authorized here.Support rusib is just a waste of time. imagine how would it be with australian, canadian, american wikis ro:Ilie.--Ilie Moromete 10:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  87. Agree.. 13:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Get an account, or interwiki to your userpage--Kuban kazak 14:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  88. Support. I do not speak Russian, but I am a linguist, and I am satisfied by the arguments presented above. Siberia covers such a vast area that I'm skeptical that there is a single Russian dialect, let alone one which is standardized. And leaving aside linguistic issues, it appears that this wiki is being used to advance a political agenda. If Siberian contributors feel that their political views are not being adequately represented on the Russian Wikipedia, then this is an issue to tackle within the Russian Wikipedia itself, not outside it. [vote confirmation]Psychonaut 13:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  89. Support I don't know about Russian or Siberian. I'm more confortable on the romance area. But as far as I have been able to read the discussion, pro-siberian-wiki users have not been able to name a single paper, book or dictonary outside the internet that justifies the existence of the language. This makes the whole thing original research and against wiki policies. Ecelan 19:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  90. Support closure. Initially, I was indifferent to the situation with this language, although it was apparently obvious fake. I knew about the votes and thought I'd rather be neutral and not interfere. But somehow I had got to read all this discussion and glanced at quite a number of ru-sib articles... Whew, the only impression I have now is that there is nothing more but political propaganda and apery. I'm inclined to agree with Irpen's argumentation now, sorry, folks. --Maksym 23:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff added by Irpen. 18:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  91. Strong support. I think anyone with sound way of thinking is able to see that this wiki is pure blatant violation of wikipedia spirit, goals and rules. link to authentication diff on my home wiki. AstroNomer-ru 23:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Almost no contributions in ruwiki, the account was dead from the last year, and no for some reasons "revived" just in voting time=> possible puppet. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    Outrageous claim, particularly as it is made by someone who at LiveJournal explained his followers how to take an account with Meta.wikimedia well after the vote had started. Have a look at Astronomer's last 500 (!) contributions: [39]. He was absent from November 23rd 2005 until September 23rd 2006 - so the user re-appeared well before the vote here.--Paul Pieniezny 09:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Even russian admin Maximaximax acknoledges that this is possible sockpupput of MountainBlue Allah - see, MaxSem section --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  92. Support per nomination. vote confirmationw:ru:User:Neko 00:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  93. Siberian language is not real language. This language khow only it founders. I live in Sebiria and was not hear about this language. --BelomoeFF 11:32, 19 November 2006 (GMT+5). Authentication diff added by Irpen. 18:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  94. Support closure per above. APL 09:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC) authentication diff
  95. Support. Nonexistent language, as is the so-called "Moldovan language" Greier 19:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  96. Support This encyclopedia is almost as much of a joke as th Moldovan one. TSO1D 23:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  97. Support. Nonexistent language --Glaue2dk Authentication of User in Ru-Wiki10:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  98. Support per Boleslav1, Maximaximax, Kuban kazak, and others. SibWiki is a severe violation of NOR and NPOV policies and must be closed. Alexei Kouprianov 10:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC) My vote is confirmed here, on my RuWiki talk page. Alexei Kouprianov 10:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  99. Support --B1mbo 16:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC) - Vote authorized here.
  100. Support. I would stay neutral, if it was a pure linguistic project, but it serves as a primitive propaganda platform in which 80% of information condradicts to worldwide accepted historical facts. Nobody needs such an artificial project, close it down.[vote confirmation] -- Voevoda 14:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    Haha, so what sentence is correct - 1) 99% of sibwiki are year stubs or b) 80% of sibwiki is OR?))) This is contradiction)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    I guess the following sentence is correct: 80% of non-stubs in Sibwiki are bullshit. Voevoda 21:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  101. Support "Siberian language" is a disgusting fake. -- Vote confirmation: here --Kkrylov 23:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  102. Support - FrancisTyers 18:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication here (I think)
  103. Support. this lang is quasi-language and greated for attackes some nation --exlex 22:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC) confirmation vote --exlex 23:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
  104. Support. confirmation vote Иваныч 00:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  105. Support closure per above. Аuthentication diff Ace^eVg 21:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  106. Support. Closure per Irpen. Wikism 12:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff added by Irpen. 18:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  107. Support closure per above. Authentication diff. Ilyadok 18:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  108. Support closure per above. "SibLang" is a protracted joke. Authentication diff. StasFomin 19:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  109. Support closure: the arguments to keep ru-sib wiki aren't good enough (vote confirmation, diff). --DIG 02:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  110. Support. (authentication) Shattered 09:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  111. Support closure. (authentication) Kusma 11:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  112. Support closureauthentification. Agathoclea 12:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  113. Support closure. Authentification User:SFelix
  114. Support closure. Authentification --Dmitri Lytov 06:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  115. Support closure per above. (authentication) MarkV 08:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  116. Support closure. (authentication) - Introvert 23:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    Comment, I know I am going to be harsh on this and I know I'm joining in late and there's been enough said already, but this is how I feel about the issue.
    This "siberian language" wiki project has nothing to do with encyclopaedia. It is nothing more than an unhealthy prank, a frivolous exercise of those having too much time on their hands, foul play which has nothing to do with humanistic ideas, with sharing true knowledge, with education. The people who engage in such activity confuse permissiveness for openness, dissolution for diversity of opinions, laxity for freedom.
    The enterprise like this, the mere attitude like this is an abuse, an insult to all serious participants of the project, both active and potential.
    It drives serious contributors away from wikipedia -- I am talking about people of great skill and knowledge who also do have the energy and desire to contribute to wikipedia. Yet not only I am seeing such people staying away from even starting working on wikipedia, way too often. I am, sadly, seeing people with their great desire to share the often unique, invaluable information in their possession, people who's already had contributed thousands or tens of thousands of edits, sometimes making significant sacrifices to their personal lives and careers -- I am seeing such people leaving the project out of deep frustration and sheer disappointment at such like activities.
    This tendency alone can lower the reputability of wikipedia as an accurate and credible resource beyond repair. Wikipedia shall be protected rigorously from such unworthy activity.
    That said, I want to recognize who engage in this unhealthy project as often creative and talented and energetic people who may have temporarily lost the clarity of their way. I would want to welcome them to wikipedia -- but not until they've had their attitude changed, not until they will have stopped abusing wikipedia, stopped misusing it for some personal goals which do not go along, which defeat the purpose of the encyclopaedia. - Introvert 23:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    New vote from ruwiki, full of fantasies. Who really has quit wikipedia because of Siberian? Who would remember about siberian wiki with 10 contributors, unless those russian hysteria in the votings? I guess nobody))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    Ok, for what it's worth, I work on the Russian wikipedia (perhaps on a par with en-wiki), and I relate to the past events on the English wikipedia. And how does any of this make a difference in regard to my vote? I am certainly very far from giving this stuff enough weight to suggest that the people have left the project because of siberian. What I am saying, is that this whole activity falls under the detestable kind that is damaging to wikipedia and therefore it should be culled the soonest. Hard to believe in good intentions, sorry. - Introvert 04:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
    "It drives serious contributors away from wikipedia" this is definetely your words, and they are wrong, because nobody was driven away because of siberian. As to words "the people who engage in such activity confuse permissiveness for openness, dissolution for diversity of opinions, laxity for freedom", - they do not correspond with your own behaviour - actually you are a Russian, who participate in ethnical flashmob for closure wikipedia in a language similiar to Russian, just because your mob does not want any openess to us, your mob does not want diversity of opinions and because of this organises POV discussions and accusations, your mob does not like freedom, and invent accussations from nothing. Definitely this is against freedom to close a wikipedia because there is something strange for Russians in the wiki. So it is not only hard to believe good intentions, but I see direct hypocrisity in your words. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  117. Support closure. This Wikipedia should not have been created in the first place. --Ru.spider 14:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    Authentication diff in ru wiki --Ru.spider 14:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  118. Support closure. Unlike flashmobbers from Romania, I was born and still live in Siberia, thus being one of the supposed millions of speakers. Three words: no such language. In any form. Sorry for voting late: this page is always protected.
    Feathered Serpent 08:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC) (en:User:Feathered Serpent in English Wikipedia, ru:User:Пернатый Змей in Russian Wikipedia.)
    Authentication diff in ru-wiki, Authentication diff in en-wiki
  119. Support closure. I was shocked (and I still am) that such nonsensical project was created in the first place. (authorization) --Oscar 6 22:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  120. Support closure. I guess, Syberian artificial language fans have the right to play with it. But they should not use Wikipedia as a free of charge hosting. (authorization) Xyctka 13:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  121. Strongly Support closure. Please see the authorization here. I was born in the Russian Far East, was raised and lived most of my life in the Siberian city of Barnaul, and I traveled to quite a few places throughout Siberia, western and eastern parts, and spent quite a lot of time doing this, and NEVER encountered this langauge. It's a purely artificial language, and this is easy to proof through a simple online research. I was in the beginning excited about this new language as a nice scientific entertainment project, however, here are the primary reasons for me to support the closure of the r-sib WIkipedia section:
    • this turns out to be purely an OR, a project largely pedaled by a single individual (Yaroslav Zolotaryov), with a support of a handful of followers;
    • the majority of articles are BLANK stubs about years, try a random article: – this is a fraudulent way to artificially inflate the number of articles;
    • violation of the NPOV principle: most articles that are not blank serve as an avenue for the project initiator’s Moscal-phobic views, such as Москальска сволочь. The language developer’s claims on what he means by the term ‘Moscals’ are contradictory in different occurrences, but the dry remainder seems to be this is a derogatory way to call any Russian-speaking person who doesn’t like the developer’s views on the current state of the "Siberian" Wikipedia. It is often used in conjunction with the words 'fascist', 'chauvinist' etc. The word Moscal is a derogatory word for Russians in the Ukrainian and Belorussian languages, and it is percepted derogatory by Russians – so it cannot be non-derogatory in the Siberian language that derives from the above mentioned Slavonic languages.
    • Zolotaryov doesn’t seem to avoid using this M** word to call his opponents in the discussion on this page, which serves as an example of his general negative attitude.
    • the vocabulary of the "Siberian" language is full of words that are obscene in the East Slavonic languages. They are widely used in the classics translations into the "Siberian", such as Hamlet and Evgeny Onegin. The developer claims these words are not obscene in the language he developed, but the origin of the "Siberian" language makes this claim inadequate.
    • the attitude of Zolotaryov and his followers at the ru-sib Wikipedia main discussion page about this problem is, again, very hysteric, please see О ситуации на Мете, О войне, Москали сочиняют новые правила для голосования практически на ходу etc. Ironically, the discussions regarding the ru-sib Wiki situation among its supporters on the pages above are all in Russian, which leaves no room for misinterpretation of the meanings.
    • While I still consider the "Siberian" langauge a legitimate hobby for its creators, Wikipedia is not the right place for such projects. --BeautifulFlying 20:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  122. Support closure. Remaining of "Siberian Wikipedia" in the present state harms to Wikipedia's image and is intolerable. At least the current project administration is unable (and evidently unwilling) to enforce NPOV and factual accuracy (as any other accuracy) regardless of linguistical questions! This administration should be dismissed as soon as possible, as incompatible and possibly even hostile to fundamental Wikipedia goals. See my arguments (many factual data), also serving as my authentication. Incnis Mrsi 00:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    All the 10 new votes above have came from ruwiki because of constantly political propaganda in ruwiki against us, the "arguments" are repitition of lie already refuted by us in this voting. It is ridiculous how russian opposers, being totally politicized, accuse sib-wiki in politization --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    My own political views are irrelevant, and are far from Muscovite chauvinism. I also is not responsible for another Russians' conductship here, but here is almost no chauvinism expressed IMHO. I only demand to stop a politicized project, not because it is opposing my own views, but because I consider Wikipedia an inappropriate place for any separatist propaganda. Had your a correct Russian Federation's map, I probably should even not interfere at all. Incnis Mrsi 15:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    hahaha, a fine reason for closure of wikipedias - every wikipedia which does not have Russian Federation map should be closed))) because it is anti-russian politicized wiki)))))))) you are ridiculous. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    Mr, Zolotaryov, does the Siberian state(=держава) exist at this time de jure or de facto? Incnis Mrsi 18:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    Just this question shows how politicized mind you have. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    Dear YaroslavZolotaryov, I haven't seen any propaganda in the Russian Wikipedia. I found your project by accident, I got excited about it at first (as I said above), then I got extremely disappointed after reading the articles in ru-sib Wikipedia. I found out about this voting through discussion pages at ru-sib Wikipedia, and I your behavior on this page was the last straw that encouraged me to make my voting decision. I will appreciate it if you please refrain from your further Russo-phobic assumption. Thank you. --BeautifulFlying 19:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    I can show 5-7 diffs with direct propaganda and vote-stacking in ruwiki, probably there are more, I did not explore. Since you support the direct and obvious lie which we have already refuted, please refrain from further Siberian-language-phobic assuptions more))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    Do you admit that your allegations about "constantly political propaganda" actually mean "5-7 diffs"? Or, probably, as many as 10 diffs? --Yms 19:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    To YaroslavZolotaryov: Whatever. I didn't see any propaganda in the Russian Wikipedia, and I'm not interested in looking for it. Your side IS using propaganda, and if your opponents are using propaganda - that's fine with me. I don't have phobia of "Siberian" language as such, but I'm feeling disappointed with the current content of the "Siberian" Wikipedia, and with the attitude of its proponents, and here I'm supporting my own view at the issue. I don't find your arguments and your attitude on this page or anywhere else convincing or constructive, so you have lost a potential supporter. --BeautifulFlying 19:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  123. Support closure. (authentication) --the wrong man 08:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  124. Strong Support. Siberian language is fictional. --AndyTerry 17:15, 17 December 2006 (UTC) - authentification --AndyTerry 17:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  125. Support closure. I've never heard of an siberian language. My siberian friends told me that there are some siberian dialects, but not a language. Wikipedia is not the right place to spread Zolotaryov's invention. (authentication) --Obersachse 10:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  126. Strong Support. 'Siberian' is not a language, it's provocation. --Azh7 11:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Auth: [40].
  127. Strong Support per above. Nevermind 12:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  128. Strong Support There is no such dialect. The "language" is entirely constructed.auth:[41]--Nxx 12:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  129. Support. The arguments have been comprehensively rehearsed. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, and until the "Siberian language" (its purely linguistic merits, and the proponents' attitude, aside) gets more recognition, notably in the academic community, it has no place in Wikipedia on a par with actually existing languages or plain vanilla conlangs. Edricson 17:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff
  130. Support per Edricson & above. --Mitrius 17:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Authentification diff.
  131. Strong Support. nejron 18:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Authentication diff 1, Authentication diff 2, Authentication diff 3.
  132. Support (auth). --Vladimir Volokhonsky 05:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  133. Support Gilgamesh 08:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  134. Support per Kneiphof and others. (auth)--FHen 16:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  135. Support per Kneiphof and others. (auth)--Hayk 16:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  136. Strong Support Less than original research, I suspect this borders with a hoax. Odedee 03:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC) Here's my authentication diff in HE WP. Odedee 03:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  137. Support -- if the en: article was deleted, why is the wikipedia alive (heck, how it got created in the first place)? (auth) Duja 15:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  138. Support --Maqs 21:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC) (auth).
  139. Support Nothing to add to the arguments given above. Xyboi 12:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC) (auth.)
  140. Support (Auth.)--Erwin85 14:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  141. Support authentification diff. Serguei S. Dukachev 17:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  142. Support authentification--Aldux 21:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  143. Support closing the Siberian wiki authentification diff. --Jaro.p 17:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  144. Support (auth. diff) - VasilievVV 21:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  145. Support. There is no siberian language. Vinograd19 talk (auth. diff)
  146. Support We don't have Wikipedias for individual dialects, and this is not even a legitimate Russian dialect. It's an obscure artificial dialect spoken by almost no one (and spoken natively by no one). As established above, not a single book has been published in this so-called "language." This Wikipedia's creation (under suspicious circumstances) was spearheaded on behalf of the "Siberian language movement" by the self-proclaimed codifier thereof. I agree with Odedee that this borders on an outright hoax. At best, it's an outrageous abuse of Wikimedia resources and an embarrassment to the Foundation and its supporters. (authentication) —David Levy 17:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  147. Support. Nothing more can be said. (auth). MaxSem 17:17, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  148. Support All arguments were described. (Auth) GreLI 16:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  149. Support Given small target audience for project - it can be possible for interested parties to host it on their own resources and promote it without 10000's of interlinks on Wikipedia articles. (Auth) --TAG.Odessa 04:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  150. Support. (auth) I doubt this artifical language have gained enough popularity to keep even an article covering it on Wikipedia, not to mention giving it's creators a personal Wiki-sandbox to play with. -- Himself 18:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  151. Support Auth ST47 19:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
  152. Support. I do completely and ultimately support closure of the "Siberian" Wikipedia. Tholomeo (Authorization) 21:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
    Support --Johannes Rohr 23:16, 13 January 2007 (UTC) (Auth Auth II) Revoking my earlier vote. Whatever reservations I may have about this project, I find some of the hysteria seen here completely inappropriate.--Johannes Rohr 18:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC) Leaving my former statement here, for reasons of transparency: Despite deep sympathy for everything Siberian. The number of speakers given by Yaroslav of North Russian dialects that he attempts to codify lacks any credibility. The vast majority of the current population of Siberia & the Russian Far East are relative newcomers, that arrived with the boom of the extractive industries, most notably oil industry. So, e.g. in Western Siberia, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous okrug, of the roughly two million inhabitants, some 2 percent are indigenous Khanty and Mansi, some 95+ percent are people referred to by the indigenous as neftyaniki, i.e. people who came to Siberia with the oil industry, many from the Caucasus, Tatarstan or Bashkortostan. This speak standard Russian, plus their eventual native language (Tatar, Baskhir, Azeri etc.). There is reportedly also a small number of "starozhily" who descend from Russian old-settlers. Maybe some of them have preserved the dialects that Yaroslav has built his "Siberian language" upon. I don't know. However, in either case, these Sibiryaki make up no more than a tiny percentage of Siberia's current population. 20 million is by no means a reasonable estimate. This combined with many other factors make me conclude that this is not only original research but highly inaccurate original research. Sorry again. The Siberian oblastnichestvo or regionalism remains a deeply fascinating historical subject, just as the Northern Russian dialects. I would certainly welcome a Wikipedia edition in Northern Russian/Siberian dialects, not least because the Russian language has remarkably few dialects and the Northern one is likely threatened by extinction. We also have a plethora of Wikipedias in German dialects, and absolutely no-one would see this as a sign of "separatism". However, this potential Wikipedia should be called something lik "Northern Russian" or "Pomor" rather than "Siberian". Siberia has many languages. The clearly dominant one is standard Russian. As a wild guess, I would say that Sakha or Buryat are likely to have more speakers than the North Russian dialect/language/whateveryoucallit.
    We consider native speaker anybody who is descendant of Northern dialect speaker, despite of is he russified or not. And second name of this wiki is just North Russian (the full name is North Russian|Siberian), actually we have only one siberian writer in the wiki, but the majority of others are Northern Russians. Pomor language has no only 3000 thousand words, and 5-7 texts, Pomor have the same bad relations with Muscovite Russians like Siberians, so I see no reason for a separate Pomot wikipedia - the Siberian (Northern Russian) wiki is both Pomor and Siberian and Northern Russian wikipedia. Actually we think that both Pomor and Siberian are dialects of one Northern Russian language which should be restored. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
    Quoting Yaroslav Zolotaryov: We consider native speaker anybody who is descendant of Northern dialect speaker, despite of is he russified or not.
    Mind you, you cannot count someone as a native speaker of a language that he/she does not speak. Descent and language are two different cups of tea. --Johannes Rohr 20:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
    Just because you yourself speak that the Northern language is "threatened by extinction", so in this request I mentioned all the people who should speak him, including russified ones. Imagine situation when Germany is for 300 years occupied by England and only some Germans in rural areas remember German words but majority of Germans speak English - is English native language of those englishfied Germans? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:58, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
    Quoting from en:First language: A first language, native language, or mother tongue is the first language that a person learned. According to this definition, as well as to my understanding, you simply cannot be native speaker of a language that you don't speak. (It's called native speaker for a reason.) If I would go 300 years back in history and see what languages my ancestors spoke, I will find a whole variety. According to your definition, I would be a native speaker of (now near-extinct) Silesian German, of Sorbian plus probably ancient baltic Prussian (extinct). I cannot call that anything but ridiculous.--Johannes Rohr 14:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  153. Support Unbelievable that we even have this discussion. What a waste of WikiMedia resources! Futurix 13:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC) (Authorization)
  154. Support (Auths from my acc.s: commons it en ru) Wikimedia foundation makes a bloody IDIOTISM by deciding these things by voting. A vote of an unknown person from the crowd means nothing. Wikimedia could have called/emailed/faxed any linguistic institution/university in Siberia and in Russia and listen to the opinion of trustworthy specialists if there is any so called "siberian language". For example, Tomsk State University (the same city where Zolotaryov lives). Instead, we saw here (when they voted opening the secion) a "democratic" procedure. If democracy had to decide on Galilleo's question, that time the crowd would have voted "the Earth is flat and the sun goes around it". As a result, here we saw a fraud and a flash-mob voting. Shame on Wikimedia foundation. Siberiano 20:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  155. Support. It's fine if it's a legitimate dialect with actual published resources, but this is someone's pet project and personal soapbox and it brings the hardworking folks at the Wikimedia Foundation into disrepute. Grandmasterka 03:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC) (Authentication) Grandmasterka 03:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    Let them do not disrepute themselves. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  156. Support. Wikimedia is not the place for this. Nowhere remotely near enough evidence has been shown that this dialect/dialect group is legitimately different. Hopefully someone can sort through all the mess here and decide based on the evidence, not sockpuppettry. (Authentication). - Taxman 04:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    en:Northern Russian Dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    Does not exist. --Johannes Rohr 08:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    Ah, yes, en:Northern Russian dialects. The full name, under which the wiki was requested, was "Northern Russian/Siberian". In the main page you can see message "both Pomor and Siberian languages/dialects" are allowed. Actually some writers in ru-sib wiki write in european northern-russian style, some writers in siberian, so argument about "invented language" is senceless - this is just Northern Russian wikipedia with allowed diversity. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  157. Support. No POV forks, including this one. (authentication) Angr 08:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  158. Support auth--Ilya K 20:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  159. Support, the whole "language" seems to be the work of a small group. authentication Consciousen: 19:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  160. Support. Linguistically dubious, but above all, unencyclopedic in content. Personal soapbox project of a very small group, too little genuine interest in real encyclopedia building; some instances of blatantly unencylopedic content demonstrate lack of commitment to Wikipedia ideals. Future Perfect at Sunrise 10:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC) - authentification
  161. Support - Its language is merely a dialect of Russian language. further more Dialects of Wikipedia edition are mostly have distinct difference from Its standard language and has a proper name. but in case of this language, It does not have any distinct difference from its standard language nor have a proper name. so I support strongly this proposal. -- Alpha for knowledge (Talk / Contributions) 00:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC) confirmation diff on enwiki
    While this project undoubteldy has flaws, saying that the Northern dialect wasn't distinct simply doesn't hold water. While I never actually heard anyone speaking it (it may be alive only in some extremely remote villages), what I remember from linguistic classes at university is, that it has a number of unique traits. One could even say, that it is probably the only truely distinct dialect in contemporary Russian. Take for instances the definite article, which is postfixed to the noun. The Russian language, like almost all other Slavic languages, does not have any articles. The only exceptions are Bulgarian/Macedonian. But while Bulgarian has articles, it has completely lost declension of nouns and adjectives. So the only slavic idiom in which articles and declension coexist is the Russian Northern dialect. Further I remember that there were some grammatical constructions, which are completely alien to standard Russian (and sound quite funny, in fact). Sorry for being unable to quote. I finished university 9 years ago and I don't remember where exactly I read that. There are other phonetic features, which seem quite distinct to me, as the presevation of East Slavic forms, which have been replaced by their South slavic / church slavonic equivalents in standard Russian. E.g. "ужо" instead of "уже". The former is, btw., used in 19th century Russian literally to mark a character as a uneducated rural person. --Johannes Rohr 20:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
    Just because the language in sibwiki is cleaned up from Church Slavonic, it has 50-70% of differences from so called standard Russian (which actually is completely non-Russian language of artificial origin). Differences from Ukrainian are about 30%. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  162. Support. Some guys have contrived a language and promote it using Wikipedia. Free Wikipedia from stuff like that! Sergei 22:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetry Sergei 22:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  163.   Support No strongly supportive evidence that it is a distinct language. (I propose a simpler one time authentication method of linking from our user page at a project to our user page on meta.) --Pmsyyz 01:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
  164. Support. Like there is no cabal, there is no "Siberian language". And Russian Wikipedia excists already. Never, ever have I heard of Siberian language, well, until this. --Roosa (Talk) 11:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
  165. Strong Support. Constructed language, POV, anti-Russian texts. What else? --Dstary 01:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
    Authorization--Dstary 02:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
  166. Support strongly. Unlike most (if not all) the people from the opposing camp, I was actually born in Siberia and spend most of my life there. And I've never encountered this travesty of a language prior to seeing it here. Siberia is ethnically diverse. Aside from Russians, there are Ukrainians, Belarussians, Kazakhs, Tatars, Germans, Estonians, etc. However, they all speak standard Russian in addition to whatever native language they posess. The pages on the so-called Siberian WP are full of disparaging and hateful rherotic. The article for Russia (Россея) refers to the country as the "empire of evil" and the "prison of peoples". Furthermore, according to it, vodka an herring are the main symbols of the Russian mentality. I will also point out that Zolotarev refers to people supporting the closure of this project as scum (мразь). And then, of course, there is this ridiculous notion that a (poorly) constructed language created by people with nothing better to do is notable enough to be recognized by WP. Not a single publication; not a single native speaker. The fact that this debate is still open is ludicrous.Close this profanity down already. Vote authorization. Óðinn 11:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
  167. Support of course. I lived more than half of my life in Siberia. Went to a Ukraine-language kindergarten for a couple of years cause there were no places in others. I used to speak half Russian-half Ukranian after that for some time, LOL! My father had a Khanty friend, a real deer-owner and all that stuff. And I never ever heard of "Siberian language". It would be great to have one, but alas, there's none. And Wikipedia is not for creating languages - its for providing information to peoples already having their language. --CopperKettle 15:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC) diff
  168. Support. Say NO to nazi and facsism! [42] --Pauk 23:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
  169. Support. Strongly oppose this project. Ingwar JR 10:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  170. Support closure of this "project" Нечего хренотой всякой заниматься. Kaliy 18:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  171. Support. Абсолютно искусственный проект абсолютно несуществующего, никем не используемого в реальной жизни языка, с грубейшими нарушениями законодательства--Sk-ru 19:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC) .authorization
  172. Support. (Authorization) putnik 15:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  173. Support per arguments #3, 4, 5, 8, 9. — D V S [?!], 16:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC).
    Vote authorized here against sockpuppetryD V S [?!], 16:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC).
  174. Support Authorization --Dennis Myts (117) 08:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  175. Support Dark Magus 20:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  176. Support Authorization --Alexander Sokolov 12:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
  177. Support. Wikimedia is not the place for children's games. authenticationAlma Pater 21:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
  178. Support (authentification) Andrey Fedichkin 07:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  179. Support (authentification) for argument 7. A language which has just been created or is being created, a language which cannot be the only way for some two people to communicate (since anyone knowing Zolotaryov's language speaks Russian in fact) - such a language can have sections in Wiktionary or Wikisource, but not in Wikipedia. Enciclopaedias are made for spreading knowledge, not for linguistic exercises. Ilana 08:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  180. Support. (authentification) I guess Wikipedia is not the site for political experiments. It's possible to move "sib"-content to Wikia projects. --Egor 08:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  181. Support. Insignificant artificial language section used for promoting ideology of its creator (auth). --Fusanari Shimizu 12:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  182. Support. The sirs to close very long time ago are time you :) --Afinogenoff 05:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Vote Is authorized.--Afinogenoff 05:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  183. Support --Janneman 08:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC) (authentification)
  184. Support Like Ilana & Egor, see above. When will the voting be closed, finally? --SibFreak 12:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC) (Authentification)
  185. Support (authentification) Vir iv 08:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  186. Support Reason just db-nonsense (for auth, look at my profile) Leotsarev 23:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  187. Strong Support. I have nothing against artificial languages itself, while it's kinda neutral experiment (e. g., esperanto or slovio), but siberian is not of this kind. The only project's aim is to offend "russian imperialists" in unpardonably rough form. Undisguised сoarse invective used to outrage any group has nothing to do with Wikipedia. uBaHoB 22:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC) P. S. I join to Ilana, Egor and SibFreak: when will this voting be closed? Half a year is enough, isn't it? How long this absurd could last? Do people deciding for or against this project after all Zolotarev's accusations and demagogy still think of to close this project or not?! I wouldn't believe in narrow-mindedness, or biliousness of those, who make a decision, but don't they really understand that every day of project existance is free advertisement for these separatists! Я ничего не имею против искуственных языков, если это нейтральные эксперименты (например, эсперанто или словио), но сибирский говор носит совершенно иной характер. Едиственная цель этого проекта — оскорбить «русских империалистов», причем в непростительно грубой форме. Неприкрытой ругани, ипользуемой для оскорбления любой группы людей нечего делать в Википедии. P. S. Присоединяюсь к Ilana, Egor и SibFreak: когда же это голосование будет закрыто? Полгода достаточно, разве нет? Как долго этот абсурд может продолжаться? Неужели люди, решающие судьбу проекта, после всех нападок со стороны Золотарева и его демагогии всё еще думают, закрывать проект или нет?! Не хотелось бы верить в недалекость или предвзятость людей, принимающих решение, но неужели они не понимают, что каждый день существования проекта — это бесплатная реклама для этих сепаратистов! (auth)
  188. Support, mainly for reasons #1, 2, 4, 5, 6. --Head 23:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
  189. Support, for reasons 1, (strongly) 2, 5 (and Zolotaryov's own diatribes on this page against everyone who doesn't agree with him lend little credence to his project), and (strongly) 7-9 as one argument for closure: this wiki should be on Wikia, not Wikipedia. Note also that this is a wiki in a language deemed not notable enough for a page on the enwiki... Toki Pona, anyone? - (), 14:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC) (authentication)
    • Note: w:Toki Pona has since been restored :-/ - (), 15:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
  190. Strongly Support. A kind of artificial language, that have been created as a joke, and then was classicalized as a language indeed. Too much politic support of sib from the western ultras. - Zac allan 13:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
  191. Strongly Support, authentication Gdn 09:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
  192. Strongly Support Конст. Карасёв 15:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Vote ia autorized on my talk page
  193. Strongly Support authentification Lockal 10:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  194. Strongly Support (authentication) --A. B. (talk) 02:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way - does not that the ru-sib project qualify for [[[:w:en:Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion|Speedy Deletion]]] as an obvious hoax? Looks like in this case it is feasible to appeal to the board of trustees to finish that obscene circus off? Elephas 23:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Oppose closing the Siberian wiki (108 votes, 96 signed, 63 authenticated))Edit

Votes 1-30Edit

  1. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC) This is ridicoulous, and this show only nationalistic views of the proposers. auth: [43]
    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)
    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)
    1. But that is more thaen in many other wikipedias. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    1. Yes but those wikipedians write in languages that are scholarly recognised. And the rip off from Ukrainian anthem that you made is just rediculous, a parody and a spit in the face to many Ukrainians "Ешшо Сибирь-та не задохла". Вот именно, что ешшо, а значит рано или поздно вся эта ахинея накроеться медным тазом...--Kuban kazak 11:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    1. Strong Oppose-- 09:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied insigned anonymous)
    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)
    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)
    1. And this is only your dream. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    1. I sleep well at nights, and do not remember my dreams, thank you! It seems that you have quite a few nightmares on the other hand. Please don't go OT. --Kuban kazak 11:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. --Anton Kazmyarchuk. auth [44] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    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
    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)
    He dont cares about your POV. But the article describes russian imperialism in totally neutral way. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Strong Oppose-- 09:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)
  3. --Ottorahn 01:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [45] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  4. --Sataniuk 02:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Account created much earlier the voting --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 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)
    • 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)
    • 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)
    So, nothing to do with racism? Here's just two discussions:[46] and [[47]] 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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    hahaha, and one of our admins is Jew)))) Such antisemitic wiki we have)))))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  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! auth [48] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    Nationalistic, very xenophobic statement Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  6. --Zlobny 07:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Siberian wiki should exist. And moskal chauvinist trolls should keep silence and live in reservation. auth [49] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    Nationalistic, very xenophobic statement Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    Nationalistic, very xenophobic statement. This shows the real level of people who involved in support of Sibwiki.Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    And their level is very high. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    and this conclsion about my motiffs is totally invented. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  7. Opposing the closure of the Siberian language Wikipedia. - Anclation auth [50] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC) User didn't confirm his/her vote or identity --Yms 07:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC) Real and active user, who also did not confirm that this is impersonator, so AGF. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose the closure. Don Alessandro 08:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [51] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 23:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 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!) 14:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)
    "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)
    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)
    Rubbish, not over 20 users of one internet community which inveted this slang. Elk Salmon 15:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    Rubbish, we have tradition from 19 century. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    XIX century? live journal wasn't exist that time! Elk Salmon 12:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    But Siberian Oblastniks existed, please read any book about this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    You mean those books you wrote yourself? Elk Salmon 07:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Potanin and Yadrincev wrote in Russian. Like other Russian writers from Siberia. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    But they wrote about Siberian Nation, and now this nation has it's own language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  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 09:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC) (this message was created on Nov 3 2006, but I was anonymous at that time, so I am re-signing now and the system automatically enters a new date) auth [52]by Yaroslav Zolotaryov. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    How can your ignorance of the Siberian language allow declaring it a conlang? A conlang is an artificial language developed based on specific phonetic and morphological changes of a base language. In contrast, the Siberian language is based on the REAL dialects. Following your way of thinking, the Russian language can also be declared a conlang (as it was created based on the real dialects and even worse: the Russian uses a huge percentage of the Church Slavonic borrowings whereas its basic Eastern-Slav vocabulary is seriously reduced). --Andrusiak 09:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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.
    No, we not discuss your fantasies about the ancient and highly developed Siberian Language Standard. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    Yaroslav can you say what exactly is a lie in this comment? --DmRodionov 10:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    You don't have to think about it - uncyclopedia is already here! It is called -- 11:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    And this is personal attack from anonymous IP. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose the closure. Support linguistic and cultural diversity, the essence of Wikipedia. - Ivan Sidorsky 09:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth[53] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose Opposing the closure of the Siberian language Wikipedia. - None_Smilodon (Authorized [54]by --Ottorahn 19:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC))
  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 auth [55] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC) The user didn't confirm his/her vote or identity. --Yms 07:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC) Done. --Yakudza 00:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    You are right that word "маскалі" in Belarusian is NOW non-normative. But also you should know that it WASN'T. And I think that people in Siberia COULD say "маскаль" to name a man from the West (Moskovia), whithout trying to say something obscured. Anyway, I'm not a Siberian so I can't prove it with 100%-guarantee. You too. Why do you insert your nose in the lexics questions of language you don't know? Mienski 08:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
    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 [56]). So now these words do not belong to literary belarusian language. I think you must be satisfied with my answer. Thanks for attention -- 21:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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. -- 00:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    Выбачайце, маскалі, але якога ... вы тут рэжаце мой голас? Няхай Вам Бандэра прысніцца, руспаты хрэнавы. Mienski 22:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
    And this is only POV and Afd discussion, irrelevant here. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Translation: Of course you are trying to convince a person who appears to be a 98-99% Belarusian Speaker that you surely know his language better than him, who, might I add, just read a load of literature on the matter. Better for you to delete your comment as you only shame yourself with it.
    The you go Slava: MOSCAL IS DERAGOTORY WORD IN BELARUSIAN!.--Kuban kazak 11:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Can't say the same about Yaroslav. --Kuban kazak 11:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    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 ([57])--Paul Pieniezny 00:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    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 -- 01:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  14. Oppose Long live SibWiki! --Aliaks 11:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [58] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  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)
    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 ([59][60]) Kneiphof 15:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    Башкиры и их язык действительно существуют, а вы свою падонкаффскую шнягу придумали. -- 13:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    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)
  16. Strong Oppose--AlefZet 12:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC) confirmation [61] added by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  17. Strong Oppose--Bonaparte auth [62] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
    comment: vicious troll indefinitely banned in en:wikipeida. Mikkalai 21:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  18. Strong Oppose No pasaran! Venceremos! --Cyclodol 16:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [63] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  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) auth [64] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC) The user didn't confirm his/her vote or identity. --Yms 07:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC) I have confirmed my identity, see user page.--Czalex 20:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  20. Strong Oppose Steel archer 18:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [65] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)The user didn't confirm his/her vote or identity. --Yms 07:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC) See his user page in ukwiki, where he says that he is an active sibwiki contributor: [66] --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  21. Oppose Yakudza 18:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [67] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  22. Oppose. Let people work. I'll work to make their articles more neutral. --AndyVolykhov 18:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC) auth [68] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  23. Oppose--Tarih I confirm my vote[69]19:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  24. Ultra Extreme Strong Oppose per Zolotaryov, Kazmyarchuk, Ottorahn, Czalex and other users. -- PornEater 20:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
  25. Oppose per Zolotaryov, Kazmyarchuk, Ottorahn, Czalex and other users. -- Onano(0^10^(-9)) 20:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    And just to have an additional contribution, he wrote an obscenity on Mountainblue allah's talk page. [70] --Paul Pieniezny 11:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  26. Oppose --Nefis 07:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC) auth [71] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  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) auth [72] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 23:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Millions of people spoke on "dirty english" - so lets create en-dirty wikipedia? Carn ru 09:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    That's your nationalistic language which is dirty, but not Siberian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  28. Oppose It is art, and closing would be the wandalism w:ru:Участник:Asp auth [73]
    Oppose Нет, конечно, закрывать Сибирскую википедию нельзя, она должна развиваться, поскольку язык существует, что бы там не говорили флеш-моберы из Москвы. тот самый -- 17:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous) (that's Misha from Siberian wiki--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC))
    No one use this dirty language apart a few close friends of Zolotaryov. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Ты мне еще поговори тут, [personal attack removed], я Золотоарева не видел ни разу и не знаю кто это такой, но я полностью поддерживаю Сибирскую википедию. тот самый -- 17:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Оскорбления и угрозы скрыты мной: Carn ru 06:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    Я смотрю, ты тут всем каменты правишь? Не много ли на себя берешь? тот самый --
    Да нет, в самый раз. Оскорбления вообще-то непозволительны. Сим постом предупреждаю вас о недопустимости такого поведения.
    From this ip ( some man call Russianname "dirty Muskovian fascist". User is warned about about inadmissibility of such words. Carn ru 10:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    То есть называть сибирский язык "грязным", что сделал мой комментатор под ником Russianname - это не оскорбление десятков людей, что владеют сибирским языком и пишут на нем статьи в Сибирскую википедию?! А называние вещей своими именами, то есть московских фашистов - фашистами - это вдруг стало оскорблением? Идите, почитайте, основные признаки фашизма, как раз коментатор моей мессаги на мой взгляд этими признаками и обладает, по его отношению к десяткам людей - сибирякам это видно весьма отчетливо, поэтому мне пришлось применить к нему этот термин. Если вам не нравится слово "Фашизм/фашист" и т.д. то советую вам сходить и в статье про "фашизм" везде скрыть это слово, или иначе, судя по вашей логике, получается оскорбление Гитлера или Геббельса. Удачи в благих начинаниях, очисти вику от фашистской скверны! тот самый-- 14:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    User has deleted <!-- --> so his insulting words are seem again. If he himself would'n edit his words - I don't know what to do. Если кто-то НА ВАШ ВЗГЛЯД чем-то обладает, то так и пишите. А когда вы говорите "ты-козёл" это оскорбление(а вы ещё на какие-то неопределённые угрозы выражаете). И никто не будет вырезать слово козёл из статьи про козлов. Люди зачастую обладают совершенно антагонистическими позициями, и вежливость, которая является признаком высокой культуры, позволяет им таки общаться между собой, а не бить морды. Мне интересно, как вы могли не заметить, что слово dirty из фразы вашего оппонента я тоже убрал, а? Странно это. Логика - если все кидают мусор, то и я навалю свою кучку. А правильным будет - скрыть всё то о чём вы сказали, раз уж заметили. Сделаем вики чище и всё такое.
    Я красным выделил личные оскорбления, которые вы адресно нанесли другому участнику. В том что это оскорбления сомнений нет(про "грязный фашист"), в том что они обращены к другому лицу тоже сомнений нет. Если вы сами не исправите ваши слова, то это уже будет не моя головная боль, я попробую переложить данную проблему на плечи того кто обладает возможностями добиться выполнения своих решений. Если я что-то сделал не так, то сам готов за это ответить.
    Если бы вы привели дифф, где юзер сам называет себя фашистом, то вы могли бы его так называть. А вы толкуете его действия, предполагая из них какие-то его качества, явно отрицательные. При том что вы явно предвзято судите(это значит лишь что предмет спора вам так близок, что вызывает сильные эмоции) и вы никогда не сможете доказать исходя из чего человек совершал данные действия - то необходимо воздержаться от утверждающих реплик. Говорите "я думаю что, ..." и т.п. Речь, повторяю, про культуру общения, а не про качества вашего оппонента или сибирского языка. Carn ru 17:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Since it is discutable, what is insult and what is not, it is better that you will delete nothing, otherwise when siberians will begin to delete what we consider insult, half of this discussion will be deleted. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Ты тут бред не разводи, пожалуйста, если мы начнем стирать с той же степенью паранойи, которую ты проявляешь, мы вынесем половину этого обсуждения. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  29. Oppose --Memty 20:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC) auth [74] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC) The user didn't confirm his/her vote or identity. --Yms 09:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC) Well-known and active user, who have received the alert but does not do nothing because you invent new procedures in order to win. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  30. 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 (talk • contribs) . User:Keethraxx doesn't exist on En:wiki, nor on Meta. --Dart evader 07:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC) -- My user account exists and was registered long before this discussion, although I never bothered to create a user page until now. --keethraxx auth [75] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Proof that keethraxx only took an account with English wiki after Dart evader complained: [76] --Paul Pieniezny 23:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC) My mistake. Until recnetly, the user had only one contribution, on 2006/11/11, and the link I indicated shows his account created on 2006/06/11, which I wrongly interpreted as November 6th. Apologies.--Paul Pieniezny 01:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Still a very strange case: the account was created in June but the user didn't make any edits in meta and en wiki until this voting. --Yms 09:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Strong Oppose The Siberian wikipedia must exist.-- 06:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)
  31. Let hundred colors blossom. The culture it remains culture even if its carrier is the limited quantity of people.--HalanTul 00:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Total 35, 26 authorized, 30 signed. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I can find only 25 authorized. Voevoda 15:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
striking out Steel Archer is complete nonsense - he is contributor from july 2006. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Votes 31-60Edit

  1. 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) auth [77] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC) The user didn't confirm his/her vote or identity. --Yms 09:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    It had been never spoken. Russianname 12:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Lie. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Strong Oppose-- 09:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)
    • Strong Oppose-- 09:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)
    • Strong Oppose-- 09:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)
    • Strong Oppose-- 09:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC) (unidentyfied anonymous)
    how about some more anonymous votes from different IP? Carn ru 10:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    I think some anonymous votes should be taken into account, but some not --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Some animals are more equal than others? Sataniuk's vote was counted twice.--Paul Pieniezny 00:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Symmetrical on the other side. Carn ru 08:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Strong Oppose --Kojpiš Anton 14:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC) auth [78] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    He is ru-sib:User:Kojpiš_Anton_(, 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)
    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:[79] 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: [80]-- (yes, Belgium) 10:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Signing with user name now: --Paul Pieniezny 10:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    • 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...
  3. 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) auth [81] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    Yet another single purpose account. Created account on 10 minutes earlier. Errabee 02:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Check IP, he is from Ukraine. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    See his contrbs on ukwiki --Ilya K 18:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose I am a real contributor there. And it's quite serious. --Amir E. Aharoni 20:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (authorisation) (authorized by Ottorahn)
  5. Strong Oppose--Alex K 07:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC) Alex Kov, [82] auth by --A1
  6. 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) auth [83] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    This is your nazist mouth which is full of filth. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    Just wondering: are Nazism accusations and existence of Siberian language equally grounded? --Yms 11:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    He is nazist, because he wants to organize political persecutions because of national and linguistic differences. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    You don't want to answer my question, I got it. --Yms 17:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, I have answered it. And what have you got from it, this is your business. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 23:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  7. 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
    Vote authorized against sockpuppetry. int19h 09:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  8. 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. Bryndza--Bryndza 19:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC) auth [84] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
    Everybody fears anything. Zolotaryov fears imperialism, you fears Russian "brotherhood", i fear extremism. Carn ru 14:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    But you can not prove extremism in sibwiki, so your fear is just phobia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Is it really so?? Oh! I must consult with my psychologist without delay! Carn ru 15:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    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)
    Тут один "умный" человек из нато предложил считать каждый случай когда россия кому-то отключает газ по причине неплатежей считать атакой и применением оружия. Ну вот ты недалеко от него ушёл. Личная нападка - нападка на личность, а не на идею или сущность типа вашего "языка". Даже не знаю что тебе посоветовать учить - логику или английский. Carn ru 18:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. Why all the commotion, it's just the wiki in constructed language, after all?? Yury Tarasievich 17:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC) Vote confirmation.
  10. 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) Vote confirmation --Shao 19:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
    Shao, it is primary sourсe. See ACrush position. Carn ru 20:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    No, just secondary, the language is not codified in the wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    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)
    • Oppose Сибирский язык достоен своей Викепедди. Если вы не знаете сибирского языка, то это сугубо ваши личные проблемы, Сибирска Википеддя тут не при чом.-- 18:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)
    • 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! -- 21:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)17:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)(unidentyfied anonymous)
  11. Oppose. Proposal done in bad faith. -- Petri Krohn 00:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC) (en:User:Petri Krohn) authentication (authorized by Ottorahn)
    • 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.-- 11:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    Оскорбления скрыты мной: Carn ru 09:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    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.-- 11:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    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)
    Since more and more opponents of the closure are calling the other side fascists and nazis:[85] and [[86]]. 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)
    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)
  12. 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) auth [87] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    Siberia was never populated by Slavics before the empire. Elk Salmon 12:14, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    False, Novgorodians came to Siberia in 11 century. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Source please. It's something new. I wonder how mongols, tatars and other local nations, very powerful so easy let them live there? Elk Salmon 22:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    It is well-known fact. Go and fulfill your education, this is irrelevant to the discussion, so I do not want teach you without money and search sources for you)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
    Strong Oppose for obvious reasons --Baku87 11:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 22:47, 26 November 2006 Jon Harald Søby (Talk | contribs) blocked "Baku87 (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (sockpuppet) Khoikhoi 23:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  13. Strong Oppose. Кынчне, jя нjе падтрiмле етуje протjвсjёг вiпдкоji. Ласкувjё, даjе жватjе е прjіjатjі. Осыбjістjе тычетjе коршовнікjе User:Carn_ru, еjй болдjуй jе адjiнуйje заспобоченje. Нjес'тjё рабітj чёв, та? -- Stepsha Kovcelovje 19:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC) auth [88] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC) Confirmation from meta to meta has no sense. --Yms 08:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Maybe I'am "болдjуй", but format of "Siberian language" don't fit to encyclopedia. There is many other wiki-projects. Carn ru 19:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Are you sure that you really understand what our seriban friend said about you? Maybe you will edit his message as usual?--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 23:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Who told you he is Serbian and writes in Serbian? ;) It seems your understanding of Slavic languages besides Russian and your invented "language" is very limited. It's just another imitated pseudo-Slavic language. Your experiments are interesting, but I'm not sure Wikipedia was created for them. Your languages are not so mature as, e.g., Lojban. --Yms 10:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    Жватjей та Cібjір'jё! Let Syberia, syberian language and syberian people live! -- 11:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    User:Stepsha Kovcelovje has an invented pseudo-Slavic surname and ethnicity ("mezherechsk" :)). No account ouside meta; this one was created on Nov 10 only to vote here. Apparent sockpuppet. --Yms 08:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Oppose Siberian is a regional dialect, which has come into existance as a result of a mixture of languages of Russian and Ukranian migrants into Siberia in 16-18 centuries. I do not understand, why should not Siberian Wikipedia had right to exist, while we have Sicilian, Neapolitan, Aragonese, Platt Deutch, etc. wikis? Just because Russian nationalists go crazy about it? And because they are numerous and so may dominate the poll? If we go on with such a logic, all the ethnic and linguistic minorities of the world should shut up and sit quietly. Using their languages and dialects only in ther own kitchens and not daring to promote and develop them. Pirveli 15:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
    Either you seriously misunderstand the problem or try to feed the trolls (and after seeing Bonaparte in the oppose list, nothing will surprise me). In any case, please refrain from personal attacks such as "Russian nationalists" and things like that.
    There are, indeed, several dialects in Siberia, of various origins. This is not a disputed fact. What is a disputed fact is that Zolotarev took them all, put them together in a some sort of mix that does not exist as a spoken tongue, and tries to sell it as the unique Siberian language, with some slurs to boot. Languages like Aragonese, etc. are real languages that evolved to a more or less standard dialect. This "language", on the other hand, is 2 years old and falls under WP:NOR policy. Sure, the source dialect are not OR, but this wiki is not using them.
    So, if would would ask for a chaldean wiki, it would be perfectly OK, but asking for a wiki in an original research "language" is not. Hope it clears things a bit -- Grafikm fr 21:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
    All this concept of "invention" is invented itself, and copied by Russian Nationalists from Tubeckoy's concept of "invented" Ukrainian language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    have changed my mind --Ilya K 19:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  15. Oppose --Sasa Stefanovic 15:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC) auth [90]by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  16. Oppose Siberian Wikipedia is a great project, thanks to its authors. Moskali, hands off! --Oleg Nitz 09:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Who the fuck are you calling moskali, you little bitch? 09:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Be more concrete and less rude, please. What are you asking about? --Oleg Nitz 09:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  17. Oppose --Oleksii0 09:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC) auth [91] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  18. Oppose --Dorobantu 18:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's only edit. -- Grafikm fr 19:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  19. Oppose --Павло Вознюк-Останній 09:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC) auth [92] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  20. Oppose --OlegMarchuk 09:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC) auth [93] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  21. Oppose --w:en:user:yyy 10:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC) (auth)
    Vote authorized here (i have multiple IP adresses) - 19:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    I think there is no need to authorize votes for the ours - this rule was invented by "closurers" whithout our consent. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  22. Oppose Siberian is a regional dialect.Ionut blesneag 19:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's only edit. -- Grafikm fr 19:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  23. Strong Oppose let the Siberians resolve the shortcomming of their wikipedia themeselves, I highly doubt if anyone of them asked you for your fraternal aid. --Tabib 12:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit... -- Grafikm fr 13:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    The same can be said about 50% of russian votes, because they came from ruwiki. He is from turk wiki I think, because many Turks support us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  24. Strong Oppose from Romanian Wikipedia - Adrian ach 18:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's only edit. -- Grafikm fr 19:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Just go to romanian wikipedia and see. There are 50 users in the "support closure" part who has no contributions in Meta. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    After this imposture, one better use caution. -- Grafikm fr 19:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    I know romanian a bit and can help you. - this is danpetre. Your russian friends pimp votes against us in the whole big ruwiki and even in enwiki. Why romainans can not vote in our support? I you, Russians, want that people love you, do not demand "political correctness", but just stay at your home and do not touch other nations - siberians, romanians, ukrainians, latvians... That's not your russian business what we want to do - just remember it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Yaroslav, if you continue on personal attacks and ethnic insults, I will make a point of reporting each and everyone of them to admins... Believe me, il will be quite a sight... As for Mauco, he happens to be a user, but he admitted he did not vote here, so it was an impostor. What if there are more? -- Grafikm fr 19:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Where have you seen personal attack in this message? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    If he was an impostor, so maybe it was imperialists's provocation. Cui prodest? Who is interested to have impostors in "oppose" part? Only "support" part.--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Read up on en:Occam's razor. Why not be simpler and suppose it is a sock and/or meatpuppet invasion? -- Grafikm fr 19:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    If you have not good faith to us and to our wiki, why should we have good faith to you? I think this pseudo-Mauco is antisiberian provocative puppet. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    You're free to think whatever you wish. However, it is in any case a puppet (and there are probably many others) and their votes don't count. -- Grafikm fr 19:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  25. Strong Oppose----Parvus7 18:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  26. Strong OpposeArthurN 19:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  27. Strong Oppose --Blonda ioana 19:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  28. Strong Oppose as per Yaroslav. --Laura neacsu 19:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  29. Oppose--Danpetre 19:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote moved to end of the queue. And user's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 19:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    50 voters in the "support" part not only have no edits in Meta, but several of them even have no edits in ruwiki, and I do not know from what hole did they appear? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    From en wiki maybe??? You know, there are other wikis too :) -- Grafikm fr 19:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Total 36, signed 30, authorized 17 --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I can find only 17 authorized. Voevoda 14:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, here - 17 it was error, but there - 26, counting Steel Archer. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Votes 61-90Edit

  1. Per Bonaparte's request on Romanian wikipedia Oppose --Flomar 19:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose why not to let them have it? --Nelu craciun 19:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Irpen 19:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Oppose Turks are against Russians on this matter. There is Siberian language. --Turk mali 19:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 19:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 22:47, 26 November 2006 Jon Harald Søby (Talk | contribs) blocked "Turk mali (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (sockpuppet) Khoikhoi 23:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Oppose --Vladyslav Savelo 03:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC) auth [94] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose --Ahonc 11:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC) auth [95] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose project with a potential, and articles are much better than corresponding ones in Russian Wikipedia. ro en pl Remigiu
    A gift from Siberians to those Romanians who maybe will support us: ru-sib:Румыния --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    This was anonymous User: The real user Remigiu lives in Poland, has a meta account as User:Michał P. and never voted here. I asked him to comment this, he didn't yet answer. --Yms 12:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    There are no proofs that this is not Remigiu, so please do not nullify this vote. It is signed, but not authorized. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
    ;-)))) See this history entry and you will see the proof that this was NOT Remigiu, but some anonymous User: --Yms 06:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
    But it may be non-logined Remigiu --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
    "There may be more things in heaven and earth, Horatio"... but until he confirms it, it is not. --Yms 23:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose From Romanians against Moskalsii --Medenagan 17:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 18:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Oppose Every minority has the right of its own Wikipedia - from Belgium fr:User:Jmfayard-Fauxnez
    Inexisting user on French Wikipedia (in case you doubted) [96] -- Grafikm fr 18:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Anonymous User: --Yms 12:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    Now, that is interesting. This is one of eight Versatel IPs of a clinic in Tournai, Belgium. However: [97], [98] and [99]. So, this could simply be a translator posting from a clinic, or ... Boney who wanted a Belgian vote. Perfectly illustrates the need for real authentication to an established account.--Paul Pieniezny 20:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose As per all above, let them free to have their own Wikipedia, free Siberia! also from Romanian Wikipedia --Marcioana 18:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 18:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Oppose Сибирский язык достоен своей Викепедди.--Vladimirovich 20:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 21:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 22:47, 26 November 2006 Jon Harald Søby (Talk | contribs) blocked "Vladimirovich (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (sockpuppet) Khoikhoi 23:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose--Fragueur 20:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 21:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  9. OpposeOk, once I got around and looked at more of the content of ru-sib, I realize this: there is a lot of things that can be improved and some things are good. So, I took my fathers approach: I became part of the solution. I created an account and with the help of Mr. Zolotaryov, we added an article on the Belarusian leader, Lukashenko. It is a short stub, but I feel that if we can get stubs, without anything offensive to anyone, and NPOV, this could be the good starting point of the wiki. While I am not sure how the interwiki links will be addressed on EN Wikipedia, but I just hope that what I am doing is going to help ru-sib grow. Zscout370 21:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC) (auth [100].
  10. Strong OpposeTengu 0:42, 19 November 2006
    User's first edit. -- Grafikm fr 21:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  11. Strong Oppose--Radoo 10:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --DmRodionov 11:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  12. Strong OpposeEmiliano Juarez Martinez 10:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --DmRodionov 11:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  13. Strong Oppose from Polish Wikipedia--Woytyla 17:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. Registered with Meta 1 minute before voting here. --Paul Pieniezny 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  14. Oppose We let them come in Sweden. --Sven Sweden 17:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. Registered with Meta 1 minute before voting here. I request a check for possible sockpuppetry here. --Paul Pieniezny 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  15. Oppose --Juanita 19:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. Registered with Meta 1 minute before voting here. --Paul Pieniezny 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  16. Strong Oppose----Bush 19:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first and only edit. --Yms 11:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Oppose Dimitar Velev -BULGARIA
      Anonymous User: --Yms 11:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  17. Oppose--Inge S 17:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. Registered with Meta 2 minutes before voting here. --Paul Pieniezny 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  18. Oppose against soviets--Cesko 17:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    User's first edit. Registered with Meta 1 minute before voting here. --Paul Pieniezny 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    All Romanians must support the cause of Siberians, they are a nation oppressed by moskals. Oppose to all Russian chauvinism. --Cristina b. 10:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    • User's first edit. --DmRodionov 11:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    • And registered with Meta two minutes before voting here. --Paul Pieniezny 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 19:19, 19 November 2006 Jon Harald Søby (Talk | contribs) blocked "Cristina b. (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (sockpuppet of User:Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti?) Khoikhoi 02:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  19. Oppose--AndriyK 17:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vote authorised [101] --AndriyK 18:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vicious edit warrior, previousely banned by wiki arbcom for two vote frauds, locked page redirects, also went on a massive crusade by edit warring over tags and other issues. Anyone interested I offer you to look into the article histories of the following to see the full picture. en:Russian Architecture, en:St Volodymyr's Cathedral and en:Battle of the Dnieper. --Kuban kazak 18:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  20. Oppose Freddie Mercury 18:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC) Пущай живёт
    Autorizo mi voto / Авторизирую свой голос. Freddie Mercury 21:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  21. Oppose Live and let live. If it's an emerging language, see the Esperanto and Interlingua Wikipedias for precedents. If it's (near) identical to standard Russian, see the Moldavian and Serbo-Croatian/Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian cases for precedents.--Theios tou Euthymiou 14:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC) (en:User:Euthymios [102])
    • This account is too young to be considered qualified to contribute to this discussion. --Improv 02:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Where are the rules about age of accounts in these votings? There are none of them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    You accepted that single-purpose accounts should not vote when you chased [w:ru:Участник:Новый] away. Where are the edits of [:en:User:Euthymios] before the vote started? Besides, most of his actions on Meta do not seem to be very helpful (he actually closed the Moldovian voting yesterday without being an admin!), and are starting to look like stalking of User:Khoikhoi. --Paul Pieniezny 10:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    But this Новый was created after his vote, when Euthymios does many things except voting for Siberians. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Opening an account after the vote started is too easy. It can be done to avoid the semi-protection and accusations of sockpuppetry. Vote stuffing. Irpen told you from the start that there had to be a link to an account established before the vote started. --Paul Pieniezny 17:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    I can vote under my old meta account which was about way before this vote started (User:Telex, I used to be en:User:Telex as is obvious from the diff above [103]) if you really think it is necessary. This can be proven if you want, so you can request any feat - just make the request on my talkpage, I'm not really following this discussion.--Theios tou Euthymiou 08:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    Your vote as Telex would be OK as far as being established, but since his account has been blocked indefinitely you will not be able to confirm your vote. Did you not know that? I thought Telex would not have mixed his vote with those two banned users, so I wonder what happened. --Paul Pieniezny 20:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    I can still edit the talkpage at enwiki [104]. Can you credit the vote to this account now?--Telex 21:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    I knew. That is why I posted there. You say you had the account blocked in order not to be accused of sockpuppeting. Why did you not just use the old account? You cannot have it both ways, posing as a newbie and then claiming an established name. Your second contribution as Theios tou Euthymiou at Meta was to claim that you were in fact ... [105] [:mo:User:Vizitator_din_versiunea_engleza]. --Paul Pieniezny 13:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    I don't get it, who claimed to be a newbie? I changed username, something many people do and there's nothing wrong with that - we are not bound to remain with our first accounts forever and the arbitrator who blocked the Telex account on the English Wikipedia on my request for that purpose agreed with me. And, I claimed to be vizitator din versiunea englaza at the Moldavian Wikipedia (no such account exists an the English Wikipedia or Meta). We are allowed to have different usernames on different Wikimedia sites you know. Anyway, could you stop trolling my vote - my vote not going to make that much of a difference anyway. You don't get to decide whether I can or cannot vote - that's for the steward closing this poll to decide and he can decide whether the opinion of the person with my unique IP who has not double voted should be taken into consideration. If you believe I am a sockpuppet of someone of have double voted, feel free to request an IP check. I have voted and given my reasons for it and from here onwards I have nothing more to explain or say. Have a nice day...--Theios tou Euthymiou 20:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  22. Oppose : I really don't understand this war. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 11:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC) – Identity confirmation stood seven minutes on my user page on FR Wikipedia and I hope it will be enough to give a proof that Héhésippe Cormier on Meta-Wiki is the same than others... That's really bad. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 13:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
    Please do understand, if you're voting. --Yms 06:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    Am I free to make my own choice? That doesn't seem, with remarks of this kind for all oppose votes, and a system where votes have to be confirmed with a complexical identity confirmation on each local Wikimedia project. If confirmation appears for this vote, why not, for example, confirmation for each vote in the current steward votes?   Hégésippe | ±Θ± 13:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
    You are certainly free to make your choice even if you don't understand the point (as you wrote it before). No complicated confirmation required, the people can choose any method to show that meta accounts correspond to real wiki users - e.g. cross-linking their user pages with meta pages is OK. Authentication links just make it easier to check this info. Your account in meta is not dubious at all, because it existed long before the voting began. --Yms 23:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
    I have to add that I am not persuaded by any of the arguments used for the closure proposal. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 13:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
    If you are not persuaded by such arguments as #6 (voting fraud), I think you don't mind if I delete your vote and some other votes from here, so nobody will see them. Is it OK? --Yms 23:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
    I have also a question: why was this wiki created when we see the strange circumstances of its birth? Note that I don't forget that I have voted against the creation... Hégésippe | ±Θ± 20:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    The wiki was created because vote fraud and lies did succeed in convicting the Wikimedia foundation to create it. Yes, successful fraud happens in wiki, not only in real life. --Yms 09:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  23. Oppose a) It makes an impression as if a minority is being oppressed by majority. b) if the Siberian language is dead, the Sib-wiki will eventually perish, otherwise, let it live and grow. c) Haven't we heared something like that in the Ems ykaz and similar "declarations" of inexistence of Ukrainian language? So, my conclusion is: Let Sib-wiki live and good luck to its contributors (I've already authorized my vote on the Talk page, see uk:Користувач:VictorAnyakin as vell) --VictorAnyakin 15:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Oh, really? The Ems Ukaz was issued in 1876, when Ukrainian literature was well-established de facto. Can you remember any authors in "Siberian" like Ukrainians Shevchenko, Kotlyarevsky, Grebinka, Kvitka-Osnovyanenko, etc. etc., who lived before Ems Ukaz? Even Ukrainian opera existed before 1876! There is nothing like that with this one-year-old homebrew language, defined as non-natural by Zolotaryov himself. --Yms 17:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    We have real pre-codified tradition from bylins, chastushkas, and other folk sources. History of the Northern Slavic Language can be seen from 8-9 centuries AC. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    google:"Northern Slavic Language" google scholar:"Northern Slavic Language" --Yms 06:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  24. Strong Oppose - Here is a list of Wikipedia languages that are often thought to be "dialects" of some other more well-known language: Scottish, Walloon, Neopolitan, Asturian, Sicilian, West Frisian, Nether Saxon, High German, Limburgish, Lombardian, Sardinian, Venetian, Arpitan, Emilia, Deitsch, Low German, Zeelandic.
    The list is obviously tongue-in-cheek. If those wikis are allowed to exist, then Siberian Wikipedia also has the right to exist as a separate Wiki in its own right. --Jose77 04:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC) auth [106] by Yaroslav Zolotaryov. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
    I happen to be a contributor at one of these small wikis. We have far more contributors (all of them speak the dialect fluently) and yet the growth of the wiki is much slower. Because we work seriously and codify the language as we work on it. If two or three of us die or quit the project because of other pressing work, the wiki will go on. And of course, most of the dialects you mention have been described in grammars, their presence has been marked in literature, songs and local newspapers for many years. In the case of West-Vlams for 500 years (some say 900 years - there is a little bit of text from the 11th century that nobody knows whether it is West-Vlams or Kentish dialect). We do not have discussions about dirty double Dutch and we do not create inexistant national anthems parodying the French or English one. We will have articles about swear words, but we will not use them in translations of Shakespeare and Sartre (I do not mention Pushkin and Garcia Lorca yet, but I am busy on some translations of their poems) I am sure most of these small wikis do not use bots. Otherwise we would all have 5,000 articles now.--Paul Pieniezny 13:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    The same is with siberian and northern russian dialects which are well described, and have ancient text in them from 9 century. As to the "obscenities" - you have invented them, just like you say that well-known East Slavic word "dyk" comes from english "dick". Only a perverted mind could invent this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    The comparison is absolutely scandalous. There are one million people who claim to be native speakers of West-Vlaams. Zolotaryov's language originated in 2005. There are NO native speakers. As for that "dyk": he took it from Belorusian, the only evidence here is about a particle "dak" that does not occur in the grammatical environment it was used in the Hamlet article. Basically, this project is not encyclopaedic - no body is going to consult this wiki to know<< more about a subject, or how Siberians see a particular phenomenon. The only ones who will consult it will be Russophobes from various countries bordering on Russia who want to know Zolotaryov's latest anti-Russian joke.--Paul Pieniezny 08:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    Only standard was originated in 2005, but the dialect itself exists from 8-9 century. And all dialect speakers are native speakers of this. Only intolerance of Russian majority makes the thing political, because only Ukrainians and Belorussians - more developed Eastern Slavic nations - support it. And only the closurers want to make the discussion political - actually we have no political articles in wiki, except some examples of verses. All the rest are encyclopedic articles made by real Northern dialect native speakers. The accusation of -phobia can be always reversed into the accusating part. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
    Some hunters from the Novgorod region crossing the Northern Ural mountain, does not mean that a Slavic language was spoken in the 8th or 9th century. Where were they or their descendants when Ermak entered Siberia? These hunters either returned or assimilated into the native Siberian population, as Finnish hunters did before and after them. The Slavic history of Siberia started after Ermak, and without the massive immigration during the 19th and 20th centuries, there would be little Slavic culture in Siberia today. As for the oldest text in West-Flemish, it can be found at the end of [107]. By the way, I wonder why Russophobia should be considered a measure of development.--Paul Pieniezny 12:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
    FWIW, the Russian Census of 2002 (--Paul Pieniezny 11:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC) did actually count the number of Pomors. The Turkish voter who wanted to reserve "Siberian language" for the indigenous people, should have a good look at columns BS and CJ, which prove him right. 15 people in the whole of "Asian" Russia claimed to be Pomors. As an East Slavic group they were beaten into sixth place (behind the Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians and Cossacks) by the ... Rusyn, who numbered 30. Many indigenous peoples are more numerous than that. Another caveat: most linguists see differences between the languages of Kiev, Belarus and present-day Russia only from the 12th century, so there could not have been any distinct "Siberian" at that time either.--Paul Pieniezny 11:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  25. Oppose Slade 17:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC) (confirmation)
    • Oppose Steel archer 19:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC) Steel archer already voted (18:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC) diff.) - Ev 19:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  26. Strong Oppose-- Maksym Ye. 19:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC) Here is authorization, sick muscovites.
  27. Oppose The language dose exist! Ant it is a political chauvinism behind efforts to close great wiki:((( Authorization - [108] TestPilot 22:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  28. Oppose Some people here claimed they can understand all Slavic languages just because they are native speacers of only one of them. I'm a native speaker of two but sometimes I can't understand my countrymates (Ukrainians) who speak another dialect. And you should have seen Russians trying to understand at least meaning of what was said in standard Ukrainian. After all every language was a dialect of some other language once. The Church Slavonic (aka Old Russian, Old Bulgarian) died and gave birth to at lest half a dozen tongues and this process is permanent for every language with a large number of native spekers (German, Arabic etc). And every language should be preserved irrespective of its history. --Aledubr 19:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC) auth [109] by --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  29. Strong OpposeMustafa Akalp 22:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  30. Oppose - UP3 18:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Total 31, 14 confirmed, 30 signed --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Votes 91 etcEdit

  1. Strong Oppose --Monk 13:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC) aka User:Monkbel
  2. Oppose! Нехер лихорадно гребовать говор. Запор Википедди-той на сибирском е изгоня целай народницы, што супротив людьских правов и татьба на цело людство. Сибирска кыска ить уперьот! Ramir (ru:User:Ramir, b:ru:User:Ramir, en:User:Ramir …)
  3. Oppose I do not see a reason why it really has to be closed. Wikipedia exists in a lot of languages, even distinct ones. (see authorization at my user talk page)--VictorAnyakin 13:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose The language dose exist! Ant it is a political chauvinism behind efforts to close great wiki:((( Authorization - [110] TestPilot 10:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose Siberian Wikipedia is a marvellous creative endeavour, its destruction is a disgusting act of cowardice and vandalism. Especially so, because it is politically motivated. The fascistic crowd cheering destruction of this Wiki would be just as happy at Nazi rallies, burning books. Tiphareth 00:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC), see my authorisation at my talk page
  6. Oppose I, myself, have know a Siberian Volga German family speaking a Siberian dialect complete with the 'okanye', 'Dyk's, 'ayda's, odd grammar and obsceneties (from the POV of someone knowing only 'Great Russian') - they do deserve an own wikipedia, HOWEVER, it should be edited by actual speakers of the dialects - as it's the case in the Bavarian wikipedia for example, not by two weirdos or Ukrainian nationalists. Though these dialects exists, words like Moskal' or the month names are borrowed from ukrainian and belarusian languages - that's so wrong. To make it short: Keep it, but not in the current state. The dialects of Russian need a better coverage in the english wikipedia. Too bad hardly any speaker (i.e. rural Siberians) have access to the internet. INTERNAZI 17:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
    Moskal’ is certainly not a Siberian word (unlike the equivalent word блошник — bloshnik), but moskali understand Ukrainian better than they do Siberian! Ramir 11:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose Not like it - not use it! Why you not vote for closing e.g. anglo-saxon wiki? (sorry, forgot to log in) --Dmitry Petuk 12:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Oppose I'm pretty sure Siberian is a language at this point, regardless of when it was created or whatever or who created it. Besides, Zolotaroff has shown his credentials as a linguist with an actual image of his university degree in linguistics. Also, given the amount of pages (even if you exclude the year articles and day articles, there are more than a few!), I would be hard-pressed to say that we should just lay waste to all of the effort these people have put into this Wiki. Why not live and let live? Yaroslav, I have a proposal. Even if these things are a part of your language, since they are obviously contentious, it may ease the debate a little if you can replace them with synonyms. Similar examples can be found elsewhere -- while a swastika is a sign of good luck in some Eastern cultures, they are gradually abandoning it because they know some people find it offensive. Sure, the Muscovites are not being nice about it, but why not take the high road? If they have less ammunition, there is a better chance we can keep the Wikipedia in this very beautiful language (It reads to me like a "softer", more delicate relative of Russian). --Node ue 00:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
    Actually, we have not any articles accusing Muscovites in the wiki. We have several verses criticizing despotism of Russian goverment; we have an article about political cliche "Moscal". But all of this is not abusive for Russians as a whole - this is only political, but not national critics. You can see many Russians voting in opposition to close the wiki, even contributing to the wiki itself, even several Russians directly from Moscow, who contribute to the wiki. We have in the Russian wikipedia now discussion in the talk page of article Russophobia, where not only me, but ver many Russians and Jews testify, that Russian ultra-rights often say "Russophobia" every time when Russian goverment is criticized, in the Ruwiki article "Russophobia" they even say that Lermontov, Shevchenko and Novodvorskaya are russophobes, but this people only are against Muscovite despotisim but not against Russians as a whole, if they will be good people with democratic behavior. The same you can see in the voting: they try to accuse us in Russophobia, just because they understand under words "Russophobia" simple resistance to Muscovite despotism. Because this is important for Siberian wiki users, we will never bow under their accusations, and we will never delete some political critics just because they invent some Russophobia accusations based on it. Here in Russian Internet, we, national-democrats, constantly hear this Russophobia accusations in forums, LJ, blog discussions, in our sites, etc. And we constantly explain our position - we are not against Russians as a nation, but we are against despotism of Russian rulers. If Wikipedia will support this usual Russian conservators' trick, we will simply go to Ukraine, where our orange friends have already prepared a wikisite for us, but for sure sibwiki team will not take into account such an obvious lie. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
    So-called "siberian language" is a misnomer. I grew up in Siberia. --Sergei 20:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Total 7, 7 signed, 7 authetificated --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

  1. Oppose I do not see a reason why it really has to be closed. Wikipedia exists in a lot of languages, even distinct ones Ergil Osin 11:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  1. Oppose Actually, no serious reason to be closed. Ilie--Ilie Moromete 15:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  1. Oppose. I'm sibirian-born. Don't see any reason why this project should be closed. Especialy when you see such unprecedental pressure in russsian wiki from administrators, who totally ignore community opinion in this subject.--Poa 15:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
  1. Oppose. Since this project is running excellently, why should it be closed? If there are people who dislike the language, that should not be a reason for closing this wiki. IJzeren Jan 13:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Some unadopted votesEdit

  • Oppose Small nations must be protected and supported to develop their own culture: Siberians against Russian chauvinism, Montenegrins against Serbian chauvinism and Moldovans against Romanian chauvinism. Not to mention that there are a lot of articles (about 6500). Mauco 12:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC) This vote is made by an impostor as per this. Stricken out. --Irpen 18:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    • But maybe it was some other Mauco? it should be checked. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
      • The Mauco in question redirects his meta page to en wiki page. So either it's the same Mauco (and he said it's not) or an impostor. You wouldn't redirect your page otherwise. -- Grafikm fr 19:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
        • No surprise for me that Bony is helping a hand here. There are still a lot of one-purpose accounts here. I found one who took an account on the 6th and thought it would not be checked ... --Paul Pieniezny 23:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Quotes of Russian soldiers in Chechnya
    "I remember a Chechen female sniper. We just tore her apart with two armored personnel carriers, having tied her ankles with steel cables. There was a lot of blood, but the boys needed it." - russian soldier
    Violence has severely affected Russian society with the increase of terrorist attacks since 1995. The school massacre in the Ossetian town of Beslan caused shock and awe in all of Russia and beyond. It culminated a series of terrorist attacks whose foundations were laid in the history of the two Chechen wars in which Russian troops brought havoc to Chechen society. Though terrorism is usually regarded as a iolation of basic Islamic principles, today Islam is effectively used in Russia by radical nationalist factions to justify their political strategies.
    On 1 September 2004 the festive beginning of a new school year in Russia turned into a national tragedy. A group of about 30 armed men and two women wearing explosive belts seized a secondary school in the small town of Beslan near Vladikavkaz in Northern Ossetia. Teachers, pupils, and their relatives were taken hostages. Their number reached about 1300 and consisted mostly of children. The hostage- takers demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops from neighbouring Chechnya. Russian commandos and local militia surrounded the school. In a bloody assault that ensued on 3 September most hostages were freed, but in the fighting the school was destroyed, leaving most terrorists together with 11 Russian soldiers and 344 civilians killed and many others injured. Some of the terrorists escaped. The impact of the Beslan massacre in Russia is comparable to that of the 9/11 attacks in the United States. Russians felt and expressed solidarity with the Beslan victims. The State Bank opened an account for numerous donations to be transferred to them and a special Internet site on Beslan was created ( About 135,000 people took part in an anti-terrorist demonstration held near the Kremlin in Moscow on 7 September. The official Russian media blamed “international Islamic terrorists” for carrying out the Beslan assault and named al-Qaida as responsible for it. At the same time fears from “Caucasians” and Islam in general grew. A Levada-Center poll indicated that 33% of Russians were in favour of preventing Chechens from entering Russian towns. In Moscow, over 10,000 Muslim migrants were detained by the police, among them the Daghestani cosmonaut Magomed Tolboev who was taken for a Chechen. --Mauco 18:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
    Please explain HOW is this relevant?--Kuban kazak 11:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    Let him vote himself on the matter. --Kuban kazak 11:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    He simply do not know how to do this properly: [111]--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    If the guy simply does not know how to vote, simply teach him how to do it. It makes no sense to count the votes of those people who are not capable of identifying themselves. I am sure, many of such "voters" are the fakes. --Anonymnous
    That is directly vote frauding, and don't give external links, get him in here with an account and then have him restore his vote himself. --Kuban kazak 20:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


There is article in ru-wiki ru:Сибирский искусственный язык

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)
    • 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)
    • 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)

You've really hit the nail on the head here an I can't stress enough some Russians also notice this. Perhaps there are many relevent and insightfull comments here dealing with the topic, but unfortuntley they're all covered by under piles of mildly relevent rumblings of a few Russian crusaders, making as much noise as possible and attacking just about everyone around and appealing to emotions. It seems almost as if they were trying to provoke every one who looks at this page to vote in support of the Siberian wiki so that they can later pat themeselves on their backs and say "everyone is against us Belarusians and Ukrainains and Georgian and Latvians and Turks and Jews and Azers and Armenians and Turks".
The most active supporters of the closing here seem much less intersted in the Siberian wiki itself then in a general trollfest, making broad propaganda claims full of logical and factual mistakes. It's not even clear to me are they ignorant or do they do this so in malice beliving them to be neccesary to score points. One recuring theme I think everyone noticed is how they're constantly trying to portray mr. Zolotaryov as an antisemite even though several people already explained this issue in great detail. In the words of their German comrade Lügen, Lügen, Lügen ... nach der zehnten Lüge glauben sie die Leute schon.
But the single thing I found the most absurd is how they pretend themeselves to be offended on this disscussion page while themeselves making comments such as this one [112]. If any one was to write feces such as in a disscussion in the Latvian Wikipedia or most any other he'd be permabanned on the spot, but apparently here no one cares about that sort of stuff. Probably around a hundred Russians must have read this by now and not a single one felt it neccesary to defend the honor of his nation and explain that this an action of just one troll. I understand that the silent majority of Russians probably don't agree with such a description of the Soviet crimes, but it seems that they just think that "people like that have their uses".

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)

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)
Xenophobes and lie is not insults, when the opposite part does not cease offenses. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
It isn't xenophobia, as you aren't a foreigner to Russians, and neither are the Russians and Ukrainians of Siberia (Siberians). It's just hard for even moderately serious people to tolerate such utter nonsense as you are insisting upon here. Kazak 07:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
There is no nonsence in my words, but nonsence is in brains of Russian nationalists. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments to diffsEdit

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 19:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
I applaud you for your eloquent oratory. Pitifully here is no tribune for you. Carn ru 10:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
So you can say nothing against it, and irony is your last refuge. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
I just hate lies, I have no innermost Truth. So I can make a compromise. Carn ru 20:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
Yeah, wiki is not alive - it cant fell and be rusophobic. I think YOU are rusophobic and separatist. Carn ru 18:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
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)

Notification. Both are headed by him. Elk Salmon 07:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
But неправда is separate substance but not simply "you are not right". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Further commentsEdit

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)
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. (
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)
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)
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)
Are you sure that Muscovite is offencive word in English? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I feel offended, in interests of common respect to other people, would it not be a reason not to use the term? I mean I doubt that you will call a black person on the street in Russia a Negr. Or a Jewish person Zhid? So why this double standards? All the more reasons to close your silly excuse for a wiki IMO.--Kuban kazak 13:29, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
But Zhyd is absolutely correct word in Siberian, just like in Polish language for example. We use the word Zhyd too, and if it is offencive in Russian it is not offencive in Siberian. Maybe you want to go to the Polish wiki and delete every artcles about Jews, where they are constantly called Zhydy? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
However I would not expect a Pole to use that word in English, or particulary say it to a face of a jew. For two reasons there is a term jewish, and because he will probably now that if the Jew is from ex-USSR he might be offended. Its like using the term Yankee for the Americans, depending on the connotation and who uses it. I mean I can call Ukrainians Little Russians but I am not exactly sure they will like that. Why should the word Moscal have any different standard? IF WE ARE OFFENDED BY IT, and if we specifically asked you to STOP USING THAT TERM. Out of GOOD FAITH RESPECT reasons shouldn't that be enough for you to remove all references to that term. --Kuban kazak 10:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I do not see any good faith from Moscal side, for example you want to delete our wiki by invented reasons. And if this word is not offencive both in english and siberian, I do not see any reason to speak according to russian norms. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Yet another reason to close sibwiki and strip Zolotoryov of his admin status on meta: Uncompromising to other users, rejects offers of consensus, sets bad faith examples as an admin. Молодец Слава, этими словами нырнул в грязь. --Kuban kazak 20:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
The same can be said about you - you not only reject offers of consensus, and are uncompromising to siberian wiki team, but you even want to delete the whole siberian wiki instead of find consensus with us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

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)

I don't know about "negr", but i am Jewish and i am not offended by "zhydy", OK? I know that Zolotaryov is not an antisemite. --Amir E. Aharoni 14:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

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)

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:

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) 09:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC) (Carn ru 09:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC))
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)

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)

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)
You are right about one thing, xenophobic vandals, like those voting against the closure here. --Kuban kazak 18:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Personal attack against 40 persons. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

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)
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)
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)
/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)
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)
А мы тут не в подкидного дурака играем, короче) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
What difference does that make to me, look at the people who are opposing the closure, the same people who oppose the opening of be-wiki in standard Belarusian rather than some random archaic term that is not even regulated by any official body. The people who oppose opening of Moldavian wiki. Both cases, they ignore official rules just to satisfy their political agenda Yet here it seems that double standards on everything that is not supportive of dismemberment and destruction of our nation is of course impressive. They oppose Modavian and literal Belarusian because of the historical ties with Russia and Russian language. Yet they support Sib-wiki in this synthetic language that nobody outside Sibwiki speaks and knows of because of the same political agenda. Slava/Samir if you think I am wrong, then do an audio recording of yourself singing the Russian National Anthem so that I can hear how much honesty there are in your voice, I might even change my vote if you really are not xenophobic to Russia (which is the nation that you live in and civilisation that you are part of) and Russians.--Kuban kazak 13:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)
Yaroslav, 1) your "Siberian language" has very weak connection with Siberians 2) Siberia is more loyal to RF then Chechnya. Carn ru 07:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Well you can make any hypothesis that you like, personally I have nothing against Chechen wiki. And yes I did fight to rid it from the terrorist scum in 1999-2000 as part of a Cossack Volunteer regiment. And yes it is loyal to the RF, which means now there can finally be lasting peace in the region. And no my goal is not Siberians, I have nothing against Buryat or Yakut wikis, and if notified will support them against assaults of closure for low activity. However I do have issues with wikis that are xenophobic and draw circus a for support. Look at your double standards, you went to every single Uk wiki user to get their help, maybe I should do the same with ru-wiki and all of my en-wiki colleagues. --Kuban kazak 13:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
No, I only notified 2-3 ukrainians, and the others have come themselves. When ruwiki organised really great propaganda. publishing announcements everywhere, deleting interwikies to siberian wiki in en and ru wikipedias. This is very bad idea to delete interwiki to the wiki which you do not like - if this will not be stopped, every nations which are in conflict will begin interwiki wars in enwiki. And this is your moscal invention now. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
So you are saying that there is a war going on? Funny, no reference here or here, or even in this place [113]I wonder why? Read my comments about the deliberate illusion of Siberio-Muscouvite War. So don't have Double Standards on real nations and nationalities and those that are make belief ones. BTW I do not think that in Arabic wikipedia anyone is deleating interwiki link to Hebrew or vice versa, nor are Armenians and Azeris neither are Moldovans and Romanians. And if I further your thoughts ru wiki should not have ANY interwiki links. BTW to people reading this, this is not the first time what Zolotoryov has said completely contradicts the reality, but then that's the whole point of "Siberian" wiki altogether!--Kuban kazak 12:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
No, I am said that your group are deleting our inerwikies in enwiki, and this is truth, which I can proove by diffs. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments: problem with constructed languagesEdit

Compare this project to West-Vlams: [114]. 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 [115]. 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)

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)
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)
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)
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. -- 09:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)--Paul Pieniezny 10:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
"Ruwiki is filled with examples of russian songs for example" [116] 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)
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)
And ATTITUDE is very general word, and everybody can be accused in some ATTITUDE. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
"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)
in context of sibwiki, for sure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Plz, read again my last words. =) Carn ru 13:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
And you call my feeling xenophobic because you can win the discussion? :lol: Carn ru 07:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
So I am an agressor without presumption of innocence? Carn ru 09:16, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
Brilliant sample of lop-sided logic. Carn ru 10:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
That's true and you can not hide it by demagogy. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
It is demagogy to change the topic several times only to hide the obvious thing - you are agressor aganist many peacefull and working people of Siberian Wikipedia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Really? You seem to be not very peacefull. Carn ru 20:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

And you seem be only edit war organiser with all your conduct. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

You can'r read in my heart, so better keep silence, then tell everybody things, that in principle can not be prooved. =) Carn ru 12:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

But this is not about your heart but about your conduct. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

My conduct can be shown by diffs, but you concoct motives of my behavior. Don't do so 'coz you'll never know them for sure. The reapiting of such "reading in hearts" reveal you as dishonest debater. Carn ru 11:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


And we have already shown all the diffs where you modify messages of the opposite part. That's you who is dishonest debater and provocator - you even speak about me as about troll. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Everybody can tell what have I done. But nobody can say why. I have already told you, that I like cleaness and clear structure of a text, but you prefer not to belive me, but continue hurling an unproofable accusations. Anyway, it's your deal what to say. Carn ru 16:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Just leave us alone, do not interfere in our wiki and in our messages - it is so easy. Do not touch anything, which belongs to other persons - their words, their wiki - is not this simple? Why moscals do not understand such a simple thing like property? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
You doesn't seem to understand free encyclopedia principle. Anyway - it is simple not to set your iwiki in "dirty imperialistic Moskal" wiki? What was you talking about not touching anything, which belongs to other persons, heh? Carn ru 09:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
We set iwiki according to the common wikipedia rules, but you want to close especcially us - only because we do not want to be your slaves. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
double standards, heh? I wasn't offer you position of my slave =) Carn ru 18:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
This is you who have double standards, because you delete our interwiki. We do interwiki according the rules, but you delete them against the rules, because of your double standards. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
So, then your wiki is claimed for deletion by the rules - it's aggression against your property, and then you set iwiki by the rules - it's not aggression against others property, but it's normal. =) IT IS double standards. Carn ru 07:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
When you are modifying our words, this is against the property, when you want to close our wiki, this is against the liberty, when you are deleting iwikies to non-closed wiki, this is against the law - and no double standrards at all. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I am glad that you say we have no double standrards. (shake hands) Carn ru 19:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Do not be similiar to Morpheios Melas, it is obvious that I was speaking about abscence of double standards in sibwiki. But you are just against rules when you delete the interwikies. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I haven't delete iwiki at all. Don't lie please. Carn ru 18:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
You in plural sence, for sure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
To me it is quite apparent that this Mr. Zolotarev has no valid arguments for his case whatsoever, judging by his frequent resorting to nonsensical insults and statements to the effect of "liar" and "сам дурак" instead of logically justifying his positions, in addition to a habit of using old, refuted arguments of his as proof several lines on. Case in point: Zolotarev continually claims thousands of articles for his Wikipedia, even though w:en:User:Mikkalai showed that the vast majority of these have no content at all. Neither has Zolotarev been able to prove that anyone other than him, his friends, a handful of nationalistically-oriented LiveJournal users are aware of the existence this so-called language. The "Siberian nation" of millions, which he claims to represent, has for some reason yet to make any kind of statement of unity or separatism against the "moskalska svoloch". Honestly, I can't see why the administration of Wikipedia has tolerated this idiocy thus far. And isn't there some sort of rule against newly created users with no Wikipedia experience voting in such elections? This reminds me of the old w:en:Michael of Chernigov scenario where some Ukrainian nationalists brought in dozens of friends from a forum as one-time voters, causing months of confusion. w:en:User:Kazak

To me it is quite apparent that all the accusators have no valid arguments for his case whatsoever, judging by his frequent resorting to nonsensical insults and statements to the effect of "liar" and "сам дурак" instead of logically justifying his positions, in addition to a habit of using old, refuted arguments of his as proof several lines on. As to articles, just in this conversation with Mikkalai was proved that he is wrong, you simply do not want to see this. All the rest of your message is attempts to push to the administration. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Ну-ну, опять двадцать пять. "Сам дурак". Слушайте, господин Золотарев, мой Вам совет - get a life. Хотите нести чушь и "бороться с москалями" - откройте свой собственный сайт на личные деньги. Хотите принести пользу - сделайте аккаунт на русской или английской Википедии и пишите там на здоровье. Еесли Вы там откроете тему настоящих и легитимных сибирских диалектов, все будут только рады. Но нести откровенный бред, который ни нам, ни пользователям Википедии, ни страждущим под московским гнетом сибирякам не нужен, не надо. А то забили свою голову какой-то глупостью, и теперь разносите ее куда попало. w:en:User:Kazak
Весь вышеприведенный текст состоит из сплошной ругани, большей частью персональной, и ничего не доказывает, кроме озлобленности его автора. Кстати Казак - это не кукла Кубанского Казака? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Уже было давно проверенно на ен-вики, казаков то много в России. А вот сколько у вас кукл действительно интересно бы знать. --Kuban kazak 18:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Вы мне наверно, не поверите, но ни одной) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Какая такая ругань? Золотарев, Вы хоть какие-то конкретные доказательства своим словам и обвинениям способны навести, или и впредь будете изрекать свои опусы абстрактно и свысока? Вы еще тот, об озлобленности рассуждать - сами придумали свой язык из озлобленности к "москалям". Вот так злоба. Скорее бы с этой гнусной провокацией покончить. Kazak 23:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Ну ругань-то очевидна - "чушь", "бред" и прочая. Да и сами лаетесь - "гнусная провокация". Язык не придуман и озлобленности к русским как таковым у нас нет, а вот злость русских национал-патриотов вроде вас нам совершенно непонятна. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Я - национал-патриот? Боже упаси. Провокация заключается в том, что Вы в абсолютном большинстве случаев даже не отвечаете толком на аргументы противников, то ли в силу незнания английского, то ли из-за осознания собственной неправоты. А "язык" Вы именно выдумали, слепивши вместе несколько архаических диалектов и приписавши образовавшуюся кашу всей Сибири. Тот факт что никто на Вашем "языке" не разговаривает только подчеркивает всю нелепость того, чем Вы занимаетесь. Еще показательно то что те, кто голосуют за Вас являются или (1) украинскими и белорусскими националистами, или (2) гуманистически настроенными иностранцами которые сути дела не понимают, или же (3) "куклами" Ваших соратников по "Вольготе". Вам что, больше делать нечего? Почему бы не бороться за сохранение настоящих русских диалектов? Я был бы только за, например, поморскую Википедию. А Вы, вместо того чтобы делом заняться, творите Бог знает что. Неужели Вам не стыдно? Kazak 21:15, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Сибирская википедия и есть поморская, туда входят все источники на поморском, которые нам известны. Сибирский же язык является кодификацией группы диалектов, что в лингвистике совершенно нормально. Впрочем, какой смысл с вами разговаривать, вы все равно ориентируетесь только на мнение вашей группы и никаких аргументов не слушаете. Именно поэтому вам и кажется, что мы "не отвечаем", уши-то закрыты. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Может Ваша каша-малаша частично и основана на поморском, но она не есть поморский диалект. И в лингвистике стандартизация принята на основе живых диалектов при официальной поддержке, да и то не всегда. Вы - не член Академии наук, а тем не менее сибирские диалекты - и так встречающиеся только в глухой деревенщине - вымирают. Вместо того чтобы эти диалекты изучать и беречь, Ваша же группа (теоретически, ибо не имеет силенок на то в силу своей ничтожности) хочет истребить их индивидуальную уникальность, смешав их всех в ваш так званый язык. А я Вас слушаю, слушаю внимательно. И психологию Вашу тоже понимаю, даже сочувствую, ибо несложно слабому человеку заболеть этой болезнью. Эвон Вы поспешили обозвать мои обвинения "руганью" и "лаем", не поинтересовавшись даже чем они обоснованы и легитимны ли они. А ответ очевиден, по крайней мере всем кроме Вас - и вон только Ваша гордыня не дает Вам признать что Ваше дело - абсолютно никому не нужная чушь. Kazak 22:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Мы наоборот считаем плюсом, что группа работает не от официальной российской науки. Ругань остается руганью независимо от ваших мотивов. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Это Ваши проблемы и не мое дело. Остается лишь тот факт, что официально Вы не признаны никем. Kazak 16:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The deliberate illusion of Siberio-Muscouvite warEdit

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 [117], 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)

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)
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)
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)
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)
Definitely!? Do you know that Original Research is not allowed on wikipedia? Elk Salmon 11:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
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. -- 12:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
You are wrong. I was reading your LJ. Elk Salmon 12:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
So you have read some blog and decided to delete wikipedia with 7000 articles and 60 users? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Big community, that inventing a new language that based on the anti Russian terms invented far away on the west from Moscow, while Siberia is a far away to east of Moscow, is not an argument. Language should be real, not a recently made up in the garage. Elk Salmon 22:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
"Anti-russian terms" these words only make evident your paranoia. No, this is real language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Only-only-only. Come on. Stop it, please. ACrush ?!/© 08:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Just you stop your hate and unprovoked agression. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
"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)
So why ACrush came to defend their agression? For sure my words are directed to the whole crowd of those, who want to delete us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
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 ([[118]]). 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)
Grafik, you forgot to say why Bonaparte got perma-banned, it was not just "disruption": [119]--Paul Pieniezny 01:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
That's Russians who want this problems. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Where is all the circus?Edit

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

Probably because nobody answers to the term Moscal... Thought about that? I for one do not like feeding trolls.--Kuban kazak 18:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
For the admin reading this:
Despite my attempt to make the opposing party use of politically correct terminology (a core Good Faith and wikiettiquete policy), such as avoidance of the offensive word MOSCAL (Moskal, Muscovite etc) these people instead of trying to keep a civilised tone, began defending their usage of the term. Combined with the continued building of the Siberian nation illusion, based on a language that THEY invented is humilating for wikipedia as a global humanitarian encylopedia. This is a direct reason why it should be stopped. And this is not aggression, but instead an answer to the combined Sib/ukr aggression. --Kuban kazak 18:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The word Moscal is not offensive in Ukrainian, Belorussian and Siberian language, and who cares what words Moscals declare offencive? Maybe soon you will declare the word Siberian offencive? Who knows? We did not any agression, but you want to close the wiki, all initiative is yours. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes it is if it is offensive to us! Hence in interests of being politically correct (a core issue in wikietiquete) it should not be used! Do you ever see the word Negr escaping the mouths of Russian politicians or the word Moscal out of Ukrainian or Belarusian ones (apart from the nationalist scums)? Why do you not? --Kuban kazak 13:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you do know any convertible terms? Carn ru 06:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I know more convertible term: go home to your Moscow and leave sibwiki alone - you do not know the language and should not dictate to us what words to use. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I am not from Moscow, and Russia is a free country, therefore you cannot force me to go or not to go anywhere I choose, even Siberia btw, which is part of Russia! --Kuban kazak 13:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
So does ruwiki want to dictate to every wikipedia written in language, which is used in Russia? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
One of many, I wanted you to take into consideration opinions of other people of your country, but any advice you perceive as "dictation of Russian imperialism". There can't be mutual work in such climate, moving to NPOV entail reciprocal concession. Carn ru 08:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
You want dictate to us not only content of articles, but also meaning of words, and after that you say about "mutual work"? What a hypocrisity! --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Не глупите. Вы - единственный арбитр своего так называемого "языка", что есть доказательство его придуманности. Kazak 07:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Откройте глаза, и вы увидите, как много людей меня здесь поддерживает. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Вас поддерживают (1) украинские и белорусские националисты, очевидно желающие насолить клятым москалям, (2) гуманисты, толком не уразумевшие сути дела, (3) редкие сторонники сбережения сибирских диалектов, не понимающие что есть Ваше творение на самом деле (проект сепаратизма), (4) "куклы", которых Вы и Ваши соратники используете ради фальсифицирования выборов. Нас же поддерживают здравосмислящие люди и да, некоторые русские националисты. Без них в любом случае не обошлось бы, но на Вашей стороне националистов намного больше. Kazak 15:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Great deletions made by accusatorsEdit and Elk Salmon continuously delete messages of others in the voting about proposal to closure of Siberian Wikipedia. Because all sides in this voting use rude expressions like "shit", "vandals", "fascists", "filth", "dirty" and others, if the Siberian part will begin to delete messages just like Carn_ru does, all the voting will became a mess. No Meta policy that they cite has any text about deletions. Remember, that many people in the voting do not know English well, and may speak uncivil words simply not knowing how to say what they want properly. If this practice will not stop, I fear this voting will became a total chaos by mutual reedits of Siberians and Russians. Soon our team will be obliged to delete 90% of texts of the attacking part, because all of them are full of incivility. Our deletions will be great and will provoke further complaints from people whose texts we will delete.

On the other side, because this "voting" is completely vote-stacked from ruwiki (see [120]), filled with insults from both parts, I propose to stop it and revote after a year, when all the sides will be possibly more quiet. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Please diff's of all messages I "deleted". Carn ru 16:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[121] - two attempts to delete words of Misha and one attempt to delete words of anonymous person, And Elk Salmon deleted my words in the section above. End with this, guys, because if we will begin to delete obscenities, all the voting will be empty, because there are almost nothing here, but obscenities against us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
your link don't work. please post here diffs then I'am deleting messages.
there was only one action that formaly can be posed as deletion - then I replace your message "proofs?" with proofs. So, what have i deleted? I would like to restore such messages. Carn ru 17:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
obscenities is addressed insulting like "you are shit"
unaddressed insults like "some dirty fasict moskals here" seem to be not obscenities, to my pity.
so you beter cover with <!-- --> all the obscenities, and I'll say you if you do something wrong. Carn ru 17:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Why do not work? There are even two discussions between you and two persons, whose messages you deleted. Once again - since the understanding what is insult and what is not, is different between you and we, it is better not to begin this edit war, when all two parties will only delete and restore messages, hide and unhide. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Examples of hiding messages - [122]
Further attempts of Carn Ru to change messages of others [123]
--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Are you God to determine what is insult and what is not? Let all the messages will be in that form, in which their owner did them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, i like cleanness. And structured text (so i edited yours right now). If you don't know what "insult", "abuse" means - see any deed about defence honor and dignity. It is international juridical concept.
You said "Carn_ru does delete messages". Can you corroborate this? Carn ru 19:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Hide them is delete from view of others. The understanding of what is abuse in every case is different between us, and discussions about abuses will provoke only edit wars in this voting, Therefore it is better do not change any message of others - hide it, make it in different color, incorporate remarks, etc - this will only porovoke edit wars, and this was you who begin this practice in this voting. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:08, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Hide != delete. But maybe I have hided someones message? Whole of it, not only insulting parts?
BTW "You - anonymous troll" - is abuse.
edit wars - game i dont play. don't like jogtrot.
There is clear juridical concept of abuse. All we need - choose country for law defenition - USA will fit, I think. Carn ru 19:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
There is clear concept of consensus and property of everybody to it's own words, and all that you do is organising edit war and provocate development of the conflict. So you should be stopped with all your juridical concepts)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
You lied about messages, I have "deleted", so i think your incivility behavior should be stopped, so what? Nothing at all. You continue personal attacks, lies and calling for groups and blocks.
"property of everybody to it's own words" is copyright. So, write your own paper book on and about Siberian language - it will solve many problems of this young Siberian grab bag language. Carn ru 05:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
You hide or edit them. Who call for blocks, me or you? This is you who invent incivility for block me, and all this speech which you have said is only persinal attack and call for block. Nothing but hate and falsification - this is all which we can see from the attack part in this voting. Hands off our property! Hands off our messages! Do not edit them by your Muscovite hands! We are free people, but not slaves of Muscovites who want to edit our messages even in Meta voting! --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
"groups and blocks" - это группы и блоки, :lol: Золотарёв, давай, начинай уже отвечать за гнилой базар - хоть одно моё слово где я говорил о твоей блокировке. Please diffs or quote then I talk about your blocking. Давай, не безобразничай, подтверждай - что конкретно я фальсифицировал. Diffs of my falsification with proofs that it is falsification. И нехрен тут лозунгами размахивать, юный организатор "сибирских националистов" тут конкретная (и в недалёком прошлом корректная) беседа для выяснения конкретных обстоятельств. Тебя хоть раз кто-то рабом назвал? Ну так какого фига ты кречишь что ты не раб? Комплексы замучали? Что, твои сообщения даже викифицировать нельзя?
Have you made wiki cleaner with this your edit? Ну что, будешь кричать про то какой я фашисткий империалист, или таки сподобишься доказать свои (пока) пустые крикливые обвинения? =) Carn ru 06:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
1. You changed your call for block to a more neutral expression several mintutes ago - [124]
2. You hide and edit messages of your opponents, while we do not do this - so this is attempt to falsificate he words which we have said. 3. The russian part of this message is full of russian criminal threats, which you do using russian criminal slang. 4. If you do not want that I will call you an imperialst, then leave our wikipedia and our messages alone. That's you who want dictate your will to siberians - changing their messages, trying to close their wikipedia. So you are truly imperialist with all your attempts to dictate - even in this vote you can not conduct yourself without violence, hidding and editing words of your opponents and provoking edit war from our side. So who is guilty when people say that Muscovites are agressive - people or Muscovites? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
1) I have. So f*cking what? Nothing =) I really don't know what to do to block this person. (который "тот самый") So, then i was saying about blocking YOU? Another lie you forgot to proof, isn't it?
2) So when your friend call someone "dirty moskal fashist" - it's OK? Which fact I am falsificating? :lol: Maybe I am covering some negative characteristics of your friend? "dirty moskal fashist" is obvious personal attack.
3) threats? lie. Just criminal slang word-game around word "конкретный" and appeal that you prove your words.
4) this a message on a level "if you don't want that me support closure of Sibwiki - close it by yourelf"
If you call me imperialist, then you wouldn't mind if I call you extremist.
you still haven't proof anything =) Carn ru 12:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I prove everything, because it is obvious 1) the calls for blocks from your side existed 2) no, it is not, but "xenophobic vandals", "troll", "dirty language" and other expressions, used by Muscovites, definitely are 3) nothing of it, we work at the wiki, but you want to stop our work, only for imperialistic goals - to subdue us and to dictate us what to do, what words should we have in the language, etc. That's your group who began the voting, so you are guilty in all the conflict. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
First of all. Moscal is a highly insulting word, that has been made by Russophobic nationalists towards Russians. Second. Please show diffs of messages and votes that have been deleted by me. Elk Salmon 21:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
This is only your POV. You was just deleting my word "Moscal". Give me sources that Moscal is definitely insult. I have refrence to Dal Dictionary, where it is said that Siberians use word Moscal without insulting context. So you, Moscal, better give proofs when you will speak huynya next time. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
2) Yes it is. [125]. 3) Consult with a dictionary =) We are guilty but you provoke us - so you are guilty, but God created us - so he is guilty :lol: =)))))
notification: "huynya" ~ "bullshit"; +in some Siberian dialects moskal may be as no offensive like "негр"(Nergo), but then you are talking on English - it is offensive in the same value. Carn ru
No, Moscal, the word Moscal is insult only among Moscals. And the diff which you, Moscal, show is only deletion made by admin after your 3-days Moscal histeria, this is not refrence to any dictionary, even to any Moscal dictionary, so you, Moscal, did not prove anything. You only can speak your Moscal demagogy without any proofs. Please, Moscal, give me link to the English dictionary where Moscal or Muscovite are insults. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Лезет, в общем, в чужой монастырь со своим "сибирским" уставом. Carn ru 06:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Like I said again it is a POLITICALLY INCORRECT TERM (which is why neither Ukrainian nor Belarusian politicians ever use that term, apart from nationalist half-brained scum) and if the founder of Siberian wiki cannot even be politically correct, what does that tell you about Siberian wiki? --Kuban kazak 13:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Any refs about politically incorrectnes of this term in English or Siberian, please? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe because no English language publications use this term even those orignating from Ukraine or Belarus... I wonder why? As for refs for Siberian, then I do not speak Buryat, but I am sure that the term is absent altogether there.--Kuban kazak 13:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
So the fact is that term is not politically incorrect both in english and siberian language, independently from the reasons. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok then, why don't you go to UK or USA find a Russian community and say, in English, to them, that they are Moskals, find a Jewish community and call them Zhidy. (Just go to Brighton Beach and you'll kill two hares that way) and then go to Moscow, find a Russian person of Black origin (they did manage to find one when shooting Zhmurki so there must be some :) and call him a Negr. Now if you get smiles in return let me know. Finally go to Moscow and find an English speaking guide and call him a Moscal. Now then if in all four situations the party will not be offended then come back here and say that I proved that Moscal is not offensive to people in English. Alternatively I can come up to the black wikipedians and tell them that just because in Russian its alright to use the term Negr, do mind that from now on I will reffer to you as Negrs, and all of the US based wikipedians as Yankees (including J.Wales himself) and then give them a link to this page and ask them based on your conduct here alone to voice their vote. How about that? How many US wikipedians are there? How many of them are going to appreciate such an approach from a foreigner? Do you really want that? --Kuban kazak 12:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
But Siberian is a different language, and not Russian, зарубите это себе на носу. And all your examples are simply invented. There is only one fact: you can not judge Siberian by your Russian language experience. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Заруби себе на носу, Сибирского языка НЕТУ! Есть Бурятский язык, он действительно Сибирский! А про вашу кашу можно и не говорить, мне оскарбитильно когда Москалем называют. Ты вообще хам какой-то вырос. Это кто тебя таким сделал? --Kuban kazak 12:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Как же нету, когда мы на нем пишем-то) А хама, в зеркале увидите, определенно)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Elk, he said that I am deleting messages, I asked for proofs, and he begun to tell that is deleting covering insulting parts of messages. He said that it is me who invent incivility for block him, then I asked for proofs that i was saying about his blocking, he begun to tell just that calls for blocks from my side existed. So don't count his words as something serious. Don't feed the trolls. Carn ru 09:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I am said that you are hiding them, but your friend Elk is deleting them. Your friend Grafik has already told about my blocking too. And name me "troll" this is definite abuse when Moscal is not. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I said that personal attacks and ethnic slurs are blockable offenses, which is not the same thing... -- Grafikm fr 16:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
It is very strange to read about your personal conflicts here. There are personal pages for such things. In any case - even if an insult have been occured - such thing, caused by a single user is not a reason for sclosing whole language project! Otherwise I should have too manz reasons for closing russian wikipedia, for example, what is nonsense of course. --A1 21:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Please Calm DownEdit

I invite you guys to calm down and give a break. This is not any good for this community. I guess a moderation is required. I kindly request from all of you to stop this war. Please... --Dbl2010 18:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's stop the voting for a given period and then revote - this is the best way to calm down I think. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Dbl2010 Moderation would be grate! Can you call one? Carn ru 18:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am working on it. --Dbl2010 18:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes, I agree, the first thing is: calm down - moderation: to my pov: yes, there is definitely too much political stuff in here and if it was to me I would just delete the whole thread. My impression (after having had a look at the wikipedia) was that Siberian is quite well going from the changes and number of editors. We have other wikis in dialects that are not considered to be languages so personally I don't see why this wiki should not exist. If there is pov contents it can be marked as such and therefore improved. I don't know much more about Siberian, but considering how many people live there and its history I could well imagine that there is something like a different language - but: I don't know - this means: we will need to read up on this, try to understand and try to get things as objective as possible. Be aware that any kind of vote is only about povs ... and that in an npov environment ... funny, right? Thank you for calming down and understanding. --Sabine 20:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. So can this organisers of POV discussions in Meta be stopped? They will not cease insults and agression, and discussing their politics themselves, this is obvious. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Sabine.
I started supporting this project out of linguistic curiosity, but i was surprised to find real content there. There are indeed certain POV problems there, but they are minor. Everyone is welcome to edit the articles they find offensive, propose deletion, etc. --Amir E. Aharoni 10:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
If using insults and ethnic slurs on a regular basis is a minor POV problem for you, I think that you might need to revise your perceptions :) -- Grafikm fr 12:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I prupose to delete words "грязный московский фашист" from [126]. Carn ru 13:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. MaxSem 15:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Silly, it should have been kept. It is actually very telling that people who use swastikas and the like on the forum where they exchange information and where Yaroslav Zolotaryov recruited support (and explained how to vote here) all come here and call the other side xenophobic and chauvinist. --Paul Pieniezny 20:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
haha, you still walk and forums and search for links with random swastikas??)) There are a lot of porno in the forums too, why you did not use this links? All the same, the porno and the swastikas has no relation to siberian wiki, actually this is only personal attack against Otto Rahn, done in bad faith and definitely against Wikipedia rules. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
When Zolotarev uses expressions like "заебали москали" ("the Moscals start to f*** me up" is an approximate translation) in edit summaries on his own wiki (diff), this alone cannot be interpreted as a mark of seriousness... -- Grafikm fr 22:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
And this is only against vandal Moscals which constantly want to delete something in sibwiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Notification. English is very limited on insults. So In English Moscal will be roughly equal to F***ing Russians. So translation of this sentence (comment to the diff about page protection) will be "F***ing Russian start to f*** up me".Elk Salmon 22:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
And this is only your translation. Siberian is very rich on insults, and if I will began really insult Muscovites in Siberian Language, your ears will became tubes according to the famous Russian Pogovorka. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
You can always try, be sure I've heard some really good ones in my life... But the problem is not here. Using such an insulting edit summary on a wiki shows you have no understanding of a civil behaviour. On a well-established wiki, such an edit summary would lead to at least a stern warning. But on your NOR-violating stuff, oh well... -- Grafikm fr 12:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Again - you can not make good remarks about stylistics of the language because you do not know it. And the fact that you do them testifies that you are real Moscal imperialists. Что является наглостью, так это то, с каким хамством вы лезете в наш язык, как будто это ваш собственный. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from personal attacks such as "real Moscal imperialists", which incidentally, only shows your helpless rage in face of a cold logic.
As for "not knowing a language"... in case you don't know, languages are divided into families, quite close one to each other. If you think I can't read your "dialect" you're heavily mistaken. And a slur remains a slur in any dialect of a given language, the present example being no exception. -- Grafikm fr 15:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
All this complicated meditations about families only try to hide one thing - this is not your language, you do not know it, and you can not judge siberian text using analogies from russian language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
A slur is a slur in any language, you should know that... -- Grafikm fr 11:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
But you do not understand the language and can not say what is slur. For example zhyd in Polish is normal word, but in Russian offencive, etc. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Какой-такой "наш язык"? Сами придумали, сами и приписали его двадцати миллинонам людей? w:en:User:Kazak 11:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Хватит врать-то. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
На себя посмотри, врун то кто? Тебе перепись России дать где нет ни одного упоминания Сибирской национальности и языка?--Kuban kazak 18:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
При чем тут национальность, когда язык не нами придуман? Вы отличаете национальность от языка? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
А там родной язык тоже был, только вот вашего Сибирского там я не нашел. [127]. А уж про то кто его придумал хватит врать а? Ваша шайка из Волготы(tm) без одной научно-лингвистической статьи, без единого признания, изпользуя хз какие стандарты...если даже такие были...Мне лапшу на уши можешь не вешать. --Kuban kazak 14:15, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
"Такого фейка я ещё не видел" =) Carn ru 20:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Это вы про группу аргументов в поддержку закрытия, да?:-) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Вы догадливы как всегда =) Carn ru 20:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Как это, хватит врать? Где вранье? Конкретные примеры укажите пожалуйста, господин хороший. А то больно увиливаете от темы.
Умилило - на юзерпэйдже сего субъекта обозначено, что "сибирский язык" у него - родной, а русским он владеет "почти как родным". Откуда, интересно, берутся этакие типы? w:en:User:Kazak 23:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Мы не сами придумали язык, он обобщение языка народного. Вот какой язык придуман в академиях, так это так называемый "русский". --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Только вот на общепризнанном "так называемом русском" говорит почти вся страна, а на никем не признанном "сибирском" не говорит никто. И лжете Вы, причем нагло, что "сибирский" Вам родной, а русский - нет. Kazak 22:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
В данном случае неважно, кто там на вашем языке временно говорит. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
То есть, Вы признаете что цели Вашого проекта - политические? Kazak 15:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

How they inventing this langaugeEdit

Here is several links to Zolotorev's LJ showing how they really "respecting" sources that he so constantly talking about. This discussion that called "Project of orthography" does not contain any references to verified sources. They just discussing what letters are better to use. Here is they even making a poll where just 15 members selecting new orthographic (language reform after a three months of existence!) rules between several proposals. Here is he reporting on the language making work. Here is he reporting on personally invented rules in his own "schoolbook". Zolotorev, I would like to hear comments. Elk Salmon 23:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

And this is some links to blogs and research gropus where the actual research was done. Just this links testify that siberian is not OR which we did in Wikipedia, but something already developed outside the Wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
You don't seem to know what OR is. According to the policy, "original research is a term used in Wikipedia to refer to material that has not been published by a reliable source". Since this "language" was not published by any reliable source such as a university paper or something similar, it still falls under OR. -- Grafikm fr 12:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
But information about the language was published by media sources. All the same, lack of academical researches is not cause to close a wikipedia, and no wiki were closed because of it. The goal of OR policy is select from multitudines of idiots who want to push their inventions. But if even Siberian standardisation is an invention, it is very popular invention - just see how many people votes for us, how many discussions we have about it in the Internet, etc. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Which explains why not a single university body recognises this language. (And never will!) --Kuban kazak 13:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
For sure this researches are prohibited in Russia, so we made them independently --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
ENGLISH SOURCES! Western University research. And also research is not prohibited in Russia, maybe state universities will never give money for this kind of ludicrous research, but there are thousands of indepedent research groups funded by the private sector. However none have still recognised you. (AND NEVER WILL!)--Kuban kazak 13:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, I am just owner of a small private research group)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Which lacks any world recognition, so until then...tsk...tsk. --Kuban kazak 11:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
According to Occam's razor principle, any complicated conspiracy theory is necessarily false... :) -- Grafikm fr 15:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Yaroslav, UFO seems to be a very popular invention, since a lot of people believes in it. But it does not make it true. And popular press is quite often considered as an unreliable source, because of inherent POV problems and factual errors. Look how many people are discussing on the Internet about World of Warcraft, but that does not mean it really exists... Consequently, unless serious academic sources are provided, this "language" cannot be recognized as such. Because the only two conlangs having a well-developed wiki (Eo and interlingua, namely) are much older and widely recognized. This is not the case of this Siberian "language". -- Grafikm fr 15:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
You are wrong, there are many conlangs in wikipedia except esperanto and interlingua --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

All you who know Russian laugh at the "дык" thing that Zolotaryon "invented"? You want a source in English that it exists? Here you go: The Northern Russian pragmatic particle dak. In this dissertation it is spelled "dak", because that's how it sounds in that particular place, but the usage that it describes is quite the same as Zolotaryov describes in his grammar, which you call artificial. Note that this dissertation has nothing to do with Zolotaryov - it scientifically documents a Northern Russian dialect, which is significantly different in both vocabulary and grammar from the Russian of Moscow (hence "Moskali", which is taken by some as an insult, but i was born in Moscow, and it doesn't offend me). There are many more papers written about northern Russian dialects. Now what is the crime in taking the language of little-educated villagers and making it into a literary language in which you can write an encyclopedia?

It is true that Zolotaryov's work seems haphazard and it is true that this two-months old Wikipedia has a few articles which are, at best, laughing matter (such as "Hamlet" and "Eugene Onegin"). So you are welcome to improve it, like i am doing! --Amir E. Aharoni 21:29, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Because stuffing together (and haphazardly as you said) a lot of dialects and declaring it as a new language is OR, it's just as simple. -- Grafikm fr 22:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Many literary languages were once a bunch of dialects stuck together. I don't want to open a Pandora's box, but that's just what Bulgarians are claiming about the Macedonian language. To some extent the same can be said about Malay, Urdu and Norwegian. For those languages there were well-organized government commissions of linguists. However, just like France is not so keen about Occitan, i don't expect Russia to organize a government commission that will codify a language that may pose a political threat, so a few activists are doing it by themselves. You can call it OR, but if nobody else does it, the dialects will die. I just hate it when languages die.
As for POV problems - only a few articles have them and the community is trying to work them out and you are welcome to join. Just go on and check for yourself - there are a lot of articles with good encyclopedic content. --Amir E. Aharoni 06:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Amir - FIRST they become languages - SECOND they get encyclopedia. "Siberian" trying to become language by means of ru-sib-wiki. Carn ru 08:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
A language is a dialect with an army and navy. The ru-sib-wiki is not a means to make Northern Russian into a language, because it already is a language. It is a language, because people speak it; that is a fact and i provided you one academic source in English, and there are many more - Google for it or visit your favorite library. No-one has ever written an encyclopedia in it, and now somebody is trying and some standardization is necessary.
I am active in the Hebrew language Wikipedia. The spelling standards for modern Hebrew are not rigid and so the Hebrew Wikipedia community decides on the spelling by vote. Is that also original research? Should the Hebrew Wikipedia be closed because of that? --Amir E. Aharoni 09:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
"You can call it OR, but if nobody else does it, the dialects will die. I just hate it when languages die." Did you notice what important switch contrary to logic you made there? Interestingly, the treatise you quoted says literally "Some of the phenomena attested by Merkur’ev in the dialects of the Murmansk oblast in his data from the 1950s and 1960s were not found in the new data." Did not stop the author from using them, which probably explains why I have no problem at all understanding some of the quotes, but a lot of trouble interpreting a few others.
Dialects do not really "die", they are absorbed into greater units. There is indeed a good reason to talk about "the dialect of Northern Russia and Siberia" - because the dialects that were once spoken in that geographical area have convalesced into one dialect band, with the actual speech much closer to general Russian. As a linguist I am telling you you are trying to have your cake and eat it: you are using the similarity between the speech of the people living there NOW, to claim that you can just take elements from ancient Northern Russian dialects to fill the gaps in the Siberian dialects and of course, while we are at it, let us use Belarusian and Ukrainian as well. Occitan is NOT a dialect of French, that is "incorrect". Both linguistic forms developed independently from Latin spoken in France. The way you argue, Breton would also be a dialect of French. --Paul Pieniezny 10:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
We do not use Belarussian and Ukrainian words in Siberian. And Northern Russian is NOT a dialect of Russian Starndard, which is completely invented on the base of Old Church Slavonian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
[On dak] Note the answer to conclusive questions (from page 494). Dak is a particle which effects a connection between two contiguous expressions. The use in the "famous" Hamlet passage does not seem to fall into that category. Two remarks here: 1) Zolotaryov has not chosen the Northern Russian version of this word, but the Belarusian one. On what grounds? Are you really sure there is no connection with the English word "dick"? 2) the same thing "it is a particle" is being said about "-to" here. However, that does not stop Zolotaryov from claiming that "-to" as a post-substantive ARTICLE and using it everywehere in that way. Hence the assertion that Zolotaryov is gathering from far and away all sorts of unconnected elements in order to make the "language" as different from general Russian as possible. --Paul Pieniezny 10:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
1)No, dyk is correctly used everywhere, you simply do not know the syntaxis. About the connection between dyk and dick you make me laugh again) 2)-to is something in the middle of article and particle, and this is described by scientists. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Two studies by different researchers in different places and different decades arrived at different results. Nothing is shocking here - it would be more surprising if the results were identical. However everyone agrees, that something is significantly different in those dialects from the dialect of Moscow, which had the luck of becoming the language of Lomonosov and Pushkin. Pushkin himself, btw, wasn't quite sure about spelling - read his own notes to Ruslan and Lyudmila, for which he was harshly criticized at the time but was later accepted as the standard.
I totally agree that the quality of Zolotaryov's scientific work is arguable. I have not checked Zolotaryov's academic credentials (but according to Wikipedia, Vuk Stefanović Karadžić was also mostly self-taught). I haven't finished my degree in Linguistics either - i hope to finish it this semester - but in ru-sib-wiki i mostly help with technical matters, out of linguistic curiosity and support for the idea.
The thing with Zolotaryov is that i don't know anyone else who is actively promoting the revival of Northern Russian as a literary language, and any argument about the principle is purely political. Without such activists Ukrainian and Belarusian would never become literary languages either.
Occitan may not be a dialect of French, and Breton certainly isn't one, but for many years the French government was reluctant to recognize them, because it was worried about national unity (and it still is). But local activists worked hard to promote them, and today they have literature and wikipedias. All languages, including Russian and French and even Latin developed from languages of uneducated villagers and they have the right for a wikipedia.
As for Northern Russian, I hope that someone will show up who has Zolotaryov's passion about the matter, but also has better scientific authority. Nevertheless, there's still no reason to close the project, just because its founder looks like a weirdo and doesn't talk like an Oxford (or MGU) professor. --Amir E. Aharoni 10:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Ethnic slurs are a blockable offense, no matter what? Trouble is, apparently people don't enforce it on Meta... -- Grafikm fr 11:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
And this slurs are completely invented. If I will begin analyze ruwiki using analigies with Siberian language and so wide metaphoras as you use, I will find lots of ethnic slurs against many nations. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
All ethnic slurs put aside, "Ебьона мать" or "заебали" are slurs regardless of any ethnic consideration. Your proficient use of them is not justified by any siberian "particularity"... -- Grafikm fr 19:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Again: this is not russian language. You simply think, that the language is russian. but you are wrong. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I would sure like to see some scientific references to a Slavic language that is not russian (sic) that exists in Siberia, Mr. Zolotarev. Since you claim to have a legitimate separate language on your hands, surely you will be able to present some proof. Incidentally, I would bet that you won't respond - but in any case, how can we argue? After all, we're not the ones who made the damn "language" up. But be prepared, Mr. Zolotarev - if I call you what seems like an obscenity, don't be offended - I'm only using my local dialect of English, so it will not really be an insult. Who will you be to judge then? I won't be speaking English when I do it. Kazak 21:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
The sources about Northern Russian dialects are valid, and they are language, which exist in North and Siberia separately from Russian Standard. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but the point is that while those dialects are valid because they are living and natural, your "standartization" of them is not because it is artificial and no one speaks it natively, in addition to the "small" detail that no one outside your group and a few individual Ukrainian and Belarusan nationalists recognizes it as legitimate. Kazak 22:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Information for outsidersEdit

If I am right, Siberian is want-to-be standardized northern Russian dialect? --Millosh 08:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

No, it's an artificial language used for propaganda of Siberian separatism. MaxSem 08:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
No, that is not right. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I supposed :) Who are the proponents of the language in the sense of area? People from Sankt Peterburg or people from Novosibirsk/Irkutsk/Yakutsk...? --Millosh 08:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
About half of us are from Siberia and half of us are from Northern Russia, actually this version of Siberian widely uses lexics of many northern russian dialects. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Don't lie, what about the armies of anonymous Ukrainian nazis you recruit from forums? Especially for voting. Csman 10:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Do not lie yourself, there are only ukrainian wiki-users here. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I wonder why the Ukrainians care. They must know alot about Siberia and its regional dialects. Or not. Kazak 01:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, I have a question: What do people (Wikipedians) from Russia think about Wikipedias based on Russian dialects? --Millosh 08:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

As a Russian Wikipedian: there are no dialects in the Russian language worth creating an encyclopedia in. That, of course, does not apply to respected languages of hundreds of other ethnic groups in and around Russia: Belorussian, Chuvash, Chechen, etc., which have their own culture and languages created before 2005, unlike this so-called "siberian" scam (nothing to do with real-life Siberia). Csman 10:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
They want to close the first from those Wikipedias, saying that the language is artificial and obscene for them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 08:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Let them say what do they think about that. MaxSem mention that it is intended to use this language as "propaganda of Siberian separatism". Is there some evidences for that? (Sources in Russian are OK for me.) And what area is affected with that separatism? --Millosh
No, true program of movement, assocosiated with the language, Volgota, has not separatist statements: OAS and SNLF in general also do not insist on separatism, but only on development of Siberian nation and culture. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
You can read also Kulehov's manifesto, explaining political program of SNLF more widely. There are no separatist claims even in Kulehov's work, but only anticolonial critics of Putin's goverment: He explained both history of Sibeian national movement and our goals. These are main documents of modern Oblastniks. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Not a single established Russian Wikipedia user from Siberia confirmed mr. Zolotaryov's claims of this language's existance (at least of all discussions I've seen). MaxSem 08:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
That's because most of them live in big cities, who watch TV from Moscow and have studied standard Moscow Russian in school. The language that Zolotaryov calls "Siberian" is the language of villages that are hardly reached by telephone lines, let alone the Internet, and even there it is dying. Zolotaryov probably exaggerates the number of speakers, but it is still not a reason not to allow a Wikipedia in it to exist. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Max, may you give me a response about Russian dialect Wikipedias? --Millosh 09:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps I could give you one. Theoretically speaking I very much like the idea of a Wikipedia based on some Russian dialect, for it could somehow contribute to cultural and linguistic diversity in my country and in the world. But as a realist, a linguist and a person who has travelled a lot throughout Russia, I must admit that there would be no practical reason in such a project. The sad thing is that all Russian dialects are functionally limited to oral communication and none of them has any established standards, even to the humble degree that Plattdeutsch can boast. --Dmitry Gerasimov 20:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
But we have enough Siberian Wikipedia users from Siberia)) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
The Hebrew language was only used in religious books for 2000 years. Than E. Ben-Yehuda came and decided to revive it as a modern spoken language. He had to decide about modern grammar rules, and he had to invent a lot of new words, so the language could be used "to buy train tickets" (as T. Hertzel said). Ben-Yehuda worked almost alone and everyone thought that he is insane. He started writing a Hebrew dictionary when he didn't even have a word for "dictionary".
And you know what, if you ask me, most of Hebrew literature written in Ben-Yehuda's time looks very artificial to me. H. N. Bialik is considered the greatest Hebrew poet, but the style of his verses is totally artificial, because he was one of the pioneers of writing secular poetry in a language that was used for nothing but prayers.
So no-one can really define whether this "Siberian language" project is an artificial language or a standardization of dialects. By definition it's a bit of both, just as every planned language is. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
The fact is, people first started to actually speak Ben-Yehuda's Hebrew and after that the language got itself a Wikipedia. Not the other way round. :) --Dmitry Gerasimov 20:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems that I understood the point after reading Kulehov's work: Siberian is a young national-wakening movement. According to Wikipedian tradition related to similar cases (Moldovan, Serbo-Croatian, ...?) I may almost guarantee that this Wikipedia will not be closed. However, I think that Wikimedia projects are not the place for national constituion and I think that I'll start to make a policy draft against such cases. --Millosh 10:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

To avoid any imsunderstanding by the community, please let me post a transcript of the Kulehov's text that YaroslavZolotaryov is referring to:
Manifesto of the Siberian Freedom Movement.

Reasoning from that:

1. Siberia is an indivisible Northern Asian cultural and economic complex that was developing for thousands of years.

2. Since the ancient times this complex was formed by peoples of different languages and cultures, but there have always been common Siberian cultural components.

3. The Siberian region needs reintegration and overcoming of the colonial economic subordinance to other countries.

4. The Siberian region needs political unity and all-Siberian authorities.

5. The Siberian region needs creation of modern independent national culture based on the cultural and lingual traditions of starozhil peoples of Siberia, including those of Slavic starozhil peoples.

6. Any starozhil people of Siberia has a right for independent ethnical development within the united Siberian Nation.

The Movement of Siberian Freedom aims at:

1. Formation of Siberian nation as an institute of civil society in Siberia.
2. Development of self-identification of the Siberian Slavic ethnos.

The following minimum program is suggested to reach the above goals:

1. Educational activities on collection and distribution of truthful information about Siberia and Siberian peoples.
2. Organization of public discussions on problems of development of the Siberian regional self-identification and political unity.
3. Development of literary language on the base of East Slavic dialects of Siberia.
4. Support of Siberians from all starozhil peoples of the region in all their good undertakings aimed at revival of the Siberian Motherland.
The term Volgota is translated as Freeedom here. It's hard to translate the term starozhil, which in general is roughly equal to old-resident, or old-timer in English; the meaning of the word in Russian largely depends on the context, and I'm not sure I understand what exactly the movement is referring to in this manifesto.
To me, the manifesto sounds political enough. At least the reason 4. A new political unity? Isn't Siberia united already, being a part of Russia? What kind of new unity is needed? Accordingly, the goals of this organizations are political (formation of a nation in Siberia). And, accordingly, development of the new language is a part of a political program. Finally, the ru-sib Wikipedia is one of the tools in this political agenda as well. --BeautifulFlying 23:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Siberian Movement and its Manifesto isn't related to Siberian Wikipedia. --Ottorahn 23:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
YaroslavZolotaryov is referring above to this manifesto in relation to this discussion. Based on existence of the many-times-mentioned biased articles in the ru-sib Wikipedia, as well as by the manifesto content, it's fair to conclude that Zolotaryov's language and Zolotaryov's section in Wikipedia are related to the movement and its agenda. --BeautifulFlying 00:23, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
The first draft of proposed policy is done: Wikimedia projects are not the place for national constitution. --Millosh 11:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
The status of not well constututed artificial language for siberian is doubtfull - we have vocabulary of 15 000 words, developed grammar and strong dialect background. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
So, it is not well constituted [artificial] language (15.000 words are not so much; grammar should exist in the "version 1.0"; you need orthography, too). And draft has some problems: I didn't say what is needed to be good constituted (new) langauge -- grammar, dictionary, orthography, orthoepy. Also, examples are related with the question "what it would be if we are deciding now should we open new Wikipedia?". Siberian Wikipedia is opened and it is not reasonable to close the project which has possibilities to grow up and language may become well constitued. For the cases like Siberian is, I would give the condition: up to 10.000 references on Google, you should grow exponentially per year (if you have 10 pages now, next year you should have 100, through two years 1000 and through three years 10.000 pages). If you don't pass such condition, you should move your project to Wikia. --Millosh 12:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Can I throw in a fact that half of their articles are empty stubs, like all of the years. And nearely all (99%) [128] are empty content. (They go from 3000bc to 2100 so thus their total amount of non-stub articles is 6660 - 5100) = 1660. So I cannot foresee this kind of projection wrt to google hits. Particulary if the remaining artilcles are going to be done in the manner of the infamous Hamlet or Pushkin or Moscalska Svoloch. (Muscouvite bitch)...And if only 10 people are working on that (ref Zolotaryov himself). Sorry but I can't see this language getting anywhere off the drawing board. I mean even if we believe Zolotaryov that its based around local dialects, what says that the dialect speakers will follow this wikipedia particulary with the strong anti-Russian POV of its current admin, or wether this "alternative literal template" for their spoken language will suit them better than Russian. Particulary with making offensive words like Moscal, Zhid, Negor (Russian, Jew, Black Person) dictionary. Add a ton of politics on top of that and it really does become complete nonsense for wikimedia resources going into "projects" such as this one. I mean IF this language does recieve widespread use in Siberia (that was the first big if) and IF it has no issues with grammar or language or volcabulary (Second big if, as there is no telling that the Volgota version of the dialect will be wellcomed or the offensive terminology) and if there will actually be people willing to make the wikipedia neutral enough and resourcefull (unlike the current state with its utter nonsense like the spoken examples of Hamlet and Pushkin) than IMO it should be considered for opening. However so far NONE of these points can be addressed, and like you said about with wiki not being national constitutions, that is the exact reason why I am advocating its closure. And contrary to Zolotoryovs numerous remarks, there is no chauvinism in my agenda, I would not have double standards if someone wanted to create a wiki in my local Kuban Balachka. --Kuban kazak 12:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Number of articles are not relevant. Small Wikipedias have small number of articles. I didn't talk about Google hits related to Wikipedia, but related to language. The same is for all technical Wikipedian issues (number of contributors). --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe better query is "aromanian language" romance (1330 hits) "siberian language" slavic (202 hits). --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I think that the only question is related what to do with current situation. Siberian Wikipedia would not pass if the voting is about her openining. But, now, there is one project which works, no matter how many articles it has (1.000 is very good number). --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, dialect Wikipedia is completely OK, so if we are talking about some specific Russian dialect which has good linguistic description (whatever the name is) -- such Wikipedia should pass. --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, I am completely unsure about differences between Russian dialects. For example, differences in South Slavic dialect continuum are very big. I know just a small amount of Russian dialectology (such is St.Peterburg "chto" instead of standard "shto" and this is significant enough difference if this is not the only difference!). But, as I know to read Russian I can say that it is much more easy for me to read Siberian then Ukrainan or Belorussian. So, some words from some Russian dialectologist(s) would be very helpful. In other words, if some dialect has significant enough differences toward standard Russian, then this dialect should have it's own Wikipedia. (The same is for your local Kuban Balachka.) --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
But, the main problem with Siberian Wikipedia is the motivation for making Wikipedia. If the motivation is linguistic and Siberian Wikipedia intends to deal with particular dialect, then it is dialect Wikipedia, which is OK. However, particular intention is national constitution... However, if my model would be accepted, the situation is completely unclear and related to the first condition, but, also with "pre-condition" which says that "guide doesn't deal with artificial languages". It seems that in this case it is not so easy to make good rational conclusion. --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
My only suggestion is to try to make a general rule based on this case. And the way to do so is (1) if the case is not clear according to primary rules (i.e. my proposal), then (2) project may be opened conditionally, but (3) if it wouldn't pass conditions through some time, it should be moved on Wikia. --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
So, the questions are: (1) what is "not clear case"?, (2) what are the conditions? and (3) what time is needed for conditions. --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Please, try to think globally when you are solving your local problem. --Millosh 13:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Intentions are very doubtfull ground. For sure, the national constution is not main goal, and for some users of sibwiki like Jew Amir from Moscow this is not a goal in a whole. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
15 000 is enough. many artificial or rare language have much less. We have orthography and orthoepy too, there are a sketch included in the wiki. And we have 53700 refrences in the Google after 1 month: [129] So) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
That google number is a joke. Have a look at this one: [130] 14 googles, 9 uniques, among whom 4 live journals, and two wikipedia related sites. --Paul Pieniezny 12:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I suppose I am not allowed to edit my own text? ;>) Actually, replacing -Samir with -livejournal nets 1 fourth actual external reference: IceRocket Hoax, where an inhabitant of ... Novosibirsk exclaims "Такого фейка я еще не видел." (such a fake I have never seen before). That is what real people from Siberia think about the project. --Paul Pieniezny 12:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
You simply have modified the request very strictly, so it do not show majority of sites. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
[131] - request on words Сибирская Википедия (siberian wikipedia) - 27800 --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

- request on words Википедия на сибирском языке (wikipedia in siberian language 14100. So we are really very popular. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem with just looking for Siberian Wikipedia (without quotation marks, as you did) is that much of what is found is just pages in Wikipedia, like this one. That is self-reference (not that you will bother about that, because you are very good at original research). And of course, without quotation marks Google also finds articles in which both the words occur, unconnected to each other. The correct way to google is with quotation marks, and adding -wiki. That one only finds 15 instances. Needless to say, most of them are still sites connected to you. The rest treats it as a good joke.--Paul Pieniezny 00:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Just try requests in Russian language, as I do, because Sibwiki is discussed in russian-speaking space, almost no link leads to wiki or Volgota, but people discuss the language and the wiki over all the russian-speking net, if you will combine different requests, there are more than 100 000 instances. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
What the hell are you talking about? Did you have a look at my link? I put "Sibirskaya wikipedia" in Cyrillic and -wiki in Latin letters, for obvious reasons. And by the way, you know what, it does not matter: drop the "-wiki" and you get 22 unique sites, four of which are wikipedia pages like this one. Eleven are from livejournal, and the ones not by you and your contributors are all negative comment on your project. Of course, Yandex and Rambler sometimes find pages that google does not (because of grammatical case etc). I checked yandex ("Сибирская википедия") and found one link apart from your livejournal ([[133]]) Rambler finds 20 documents on 10 sites. Very impressive. --Paul Pieniezny 16:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
That is because you use "" brackets in the query, Try [134] - still 10300, and if you will follow the links, it is obvious, that just sibwiki is discussed in 90% of links. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
90%? Another argumentum ad googlum. It is manifestly incorrect: the first two are railroad tables and the third one is about cats. Even this one gets counted:[135] After scrolling through ten pages, I think that at least 70% of the hits are NOT about "Siberian Wikipedia" (as one entity). The rest (apart from the 20-40 I found above) comes from LiveJournal (again!) or from Russian Wikipedia mirrors (they survive the -wiki tag , because they mention their own name on the page in Cyrillic). Note that Wikipedia itself ([136]) suggests searching in newsgoups. I did just that, with your Russian phrase without wiki filter or brackets. I found two messages, neither of which concerns your project. "Siberian wikipedia" (English version), again without brackets, got 138 messages, 126 uniques. Only one (a message quoting Wikizine) is about the project (oh, and there is also one mesage about Siberian phonetics and connecting that with a Germanic conlang, no mention of your project or Siberian wikipedia I am afraid) Read what the English Wikipedia article I quoted says about words and names with a very low hit number in Usenet groups. About Yandex, day before yesterday I wrote "Имперская семья Германии" in an article I just created on Russian wiki. 12 hours later that phrase could be found on Yandex. It is gone now (I corrected the mistake in the article), but can still be found on Rambler. 5 minutes of inattention equals 1 year of POV and obscenity pushing. Or is that part of a conspiracy as well? --Paul Pieniezny 19:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
On the first page of this query there are only 2 links not about sibwiki, on the second - 2 from 10, on the third - 4 from 10, so your counting is not right. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
On the first page out of 10 hits for сибирская википедия -wiki there are 8 hits where "сибирская википедия" is found as one unit. These are real, certain hits (note again: LiveJournal and mirrors mostly) which were also found in my version with the quotation marks. There are two where they are split up. [137] and [138] As is plain to see, both are about railroads. The next one where the two words are not connected is about Siberian cats. From page three on, the two words are generally not connected, but because of the Google algorithm, there are 6 real links to the project on that third Google result page. But the links that are listed a bit lower, have a much lower relevancy. Page 7 for instance, has all ten links with the two words split up, and zero relevancy: not ONE page connected to the project. It starts with something about astronomy on wikipedia and ends with "Первая компьютерная мышь, фото из "Википедии" ... 13.11 11:29 Сибирские мэры объединились против единороссов ..." (=the first computer mouse, as shown on Wikipedia - Siberian mayors unite against "One Russia"). Result page twelve has ONE relevant page, the livejournal of a user called Paulus, one of those defending the project there. Page thirteen: nothing relevant. Cudos to Google for putting the relevant ones first - so that Zolotaryov really thought it was 90% relevant. Actually, browsing further than the first ten result pages makes me think that my 70% IRrelevancy is much too low an estimate. Note that Zolotaryov is strangely silent on my reference to Wikipedia's article about search engines, by the way. --Paul Pieniezny 13:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I think what people need to understand is not wether or not sib-wiki is a real or fake language, but the form in which it is presented. I mean enough with the conspiracy theories about politics and flash mobs. Here are three indepedent arguments (or in view of Mr. Zolotoryov war fronts)

  1. Linguo-Scientifical one
  2. Credebility
  3. Politics

So far Zolotoryov managed to really promote himself as a combatant in the third one. I mean, I would not be lying, I would have supported Sib-wiki fromt the start had he followed the correct way of developing it instead of organising nationalist flash mobs on voting and LJ.
First of all a langauge takes decades to develop, and even more does its grammar, orthography, morphology, lexus and volcabulary. I mean in the history of the USSR, there are dozen examples when indegious nationalities were given their language. For example it took a century for Latvians to develop their language, it took decades for Chukchi to develop theirs. Now then, I'll use my Kuban Balachka as an example. If I wanted to carry out research on the dialect, the first thing I would have done is consulted professional lingusts, foreign and domestic. Russia is a free country and particulary local University branches which study local traditions might even agree to fund me. Second, there exists a practice of how to document a dialect, its not as simple as writing things down. In my Kuban Balachka, if you go in the north of Krasnodar kray, people will be speaking a mixed Don with heavy Ukrainismed Hs and Pshts. In the south (Karachaevo-Cherkessia) the dialect consists of many words borrowed from Caucasus tribes, and with heavy Caucasus accents. So what do we take as a standard, even if we do find a medium, there will be so many contradicting terminology that instantly some of the people will find the language template that is offered unsuitable. So if such a project is to be undertaken it will require thousands of people, not a rag-tag group like Volgota, but a proper massive research project. Now that was Krasnodar Kray, multiply the area of it and the population by 100 and 20 respectfully and it really further lowers just how credible is Zolotoryov's research, makes me think that he really did go to every village in Siberia....
Then of course comes criticisment, so far in 90% of the cases Zolotoryov refused to answer on them and changed the subject with accusations of flashmobs etc. I mean what kind of a scientist can get world recognition if he cannot defend his research against criticisment, without losing his head, that's why one requires refrences, recognition and support from influencial linguistic centres. In other words there is quite a lot of effort involved, publishing papers, writing letters to main scientific magazines (e.g. Nature). However so far I do not even know if the man has a higher education to begin with. Last but no least is of course the attitude of the man to his work, instead of taking an aggressive role, he should have explained all of the points carefully and backed them up with refrences, accounts, documentaries. I mean for all I know he could have though everything up with his Volgota comrades over a bottle.
Then comes of course personal approach, if I was in Zolotoryov's shoes, and even if I got this kind of criticisment, I would have immediately made sure that the main criticisment issues, such as articles Pushkin or Hamlet were very well expanded and cleansed from the feaces that currentely makes up those articles. Yet so far this proposal is running into its second week and the only progress Zolotoryov has made is to try to convince people why is it OK to insult Russians with the word Moskal in English. Any sensible person would not even allow this kind of language to slip from his mouth to avoid unnecessary troll-feeding and politisation, and would have made sure that his supporters also used correct language and form. The last thing he needs is for someone to bite into a week side. Yet for one and a half weeks instead of actually taking down the term, he continues to openely use it.
Which really brings us to the last point, even if he had not used any science as such, instead of coming to Ukrainians why not come to ru-wiki and explain his position, I mean if he had not had any of that political slant and just came with research alone, and with shown enthusiasm that he is willing to use wikipedia to develop it than he would immediately got a load of support, even I would have supported him. And of course the scope of articles, instead of making crap like Moscalska Svoloch, or Hamlet, make a real attempt to write good articles and actively destroying any emergence of politics, but no, instead he made sure that his version of the language contained potentially offensive terms, he made sure that his supporters had (well if not russophobia) then mutual friendship against Russia. Now imagine if someone did that with my Kuban Balachka. I would have distanced myself from it as far as possible. yet Zolotoryov, instead of taking in the arguments against himself and actually attempting to fix some of the problems acts like those problems do not exist altogether, and continues to pollute LJ and wiki with meaningless poltical crap, starting from how oil should be exported from Siberia to bypass Mosocow and ending with claims that eventually ru-wiki will cease to exist after half of Russia will speak Siberian and the other Ukrainian. Politics and ethonographical research DO NOT GO TOGETHER! There are 70 years of USSR admin that left four civil wars about incorrect ethonographic distribution and their politisation.
Now then where do we stand with all this? Well IMO, the reputation of people that really do speak the Siberian dialects has suffered a tremendous smash. Right now I give more respect to Belarusian nationalists using the 2005rev in their wiki than I do to this wikipedia, and 95% of that rests on its founder who has proven himself to be arrogant, rude and IMO a flashmobber. And really the losers here are not us, because even if Sib-wiki is not closed, it will be isolated and with no impulse to go on I cannot see any potential for Siberian dialect to ever become a world recognised language. I mean I will go back to en and ru wiki and write articles. Whilst real Siberian people will look at what has been written about their sib-wiki in disgust and avoid it altogether. And wrt to Yaroslav, then despite all of his accusations of flashmobbing, it really serves him to look into a mirror. I actually expected some good arguments from him, to have a proper democratic debate, but personally with what I have seen here ... dissapointing. --Kuban kazak 20:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Bunch of political accusations mostly irrelevant to the voting --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
EXACTLY when one cannot defend criticism about the credebility and professionalism of the Volgota research, one can only attempt to think they are irrelevant to the voitng. THEY ARE RELEVANT and if you do not answer to them, then it PROVES that not only are you unprofessional (and my comments about your arrogance) but so is your whole Siberian wiki! --Kuban kazak 18:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
You are simply repeat the same already refuted arguments more and more, trying to fill the page with the greatest amounts of lie as possible. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
That is had you read the passage... you would understand its quite the opposite. And politics is only one of the criticisment... Truth hurts does it not?--Kuban kazak 13:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Just because you have not facts, only links to several doubtful articles, your speeches are so great - they are devoted to hiding the truth. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh so what you are saying, that you did write Scientific letters to Nature or request grants from different Scientific circles, that you did first come to Russians and asked us in good faith support that you did have the blog of Samir74 and never wrote any rubbish in there. That someone actually oversaw the research of Volgota and judged it as satisfactory... Well the only problem here is that neither one of those statements that I wrote above (a very condensed form of my passage) is true for you.--Kuban kazak 08:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
For sure, all is lie. 1. I did not write any letters or request grants, please give any link which prooves this. 2. I did not understand all pasages about Russians at all. Who are Russians, your friends with fofudyas? We have a lot of Russians right in Volgota. My blog is just my own blog, and it has no deal with all this. As to Volgota research, we have a lot of discussions about it just in the Net, which is very easy to prove. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Again Net, LJ, wiki discussions as opposed to scientific correspondance are like a pawn and a queen on a chessboard and in terms of credebility the former have none. Also thanks for acknowledging that you did not publish scientific papers, (if I deciphered your english correctely). As for your blog it works wrt to your reputation, as for Russians, well it seams you have picked up a separate Siberian identity, yet you contradict yourself by saying that we are all Slavic peoples with one goal and rich history (the peaceful approach) and then at the same time poems like Moscalska Svoloch. So to settle the contradiction: What nationality is written in your birth certificate? Are you hostile to Russians even those that live in Moscow? Are you a law-abiding citizen of Russia? And what is your definition of the term Russian (Russky)? --Kuban kazak 19:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
This is not russian court and you are not a procuror, so I will not answer at all. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
It would be nice if you did. Your habit of not responding to questions or criticism is highly annoying and gets neither you nor us anywhere. Here you are supposed to be justifying your project to the Wikipedia community - all we are getting is a bunch of arrogant nonsense sprinkled with insults. Please get serious. Kazak 15:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
How can I be serious reading this ridicolous accusations mixed with nationalistic paranoidal conspiracy theories? You invent sheer nonsence about the wibwiki, and then you think that you win in this discsussion, where you fight with your own dreams))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Slava, nobody is fighting anything, our arguments are well enough inbedded in the text and so far you are yet to prove a single one of them wrong. So the only person who should worry about fighting is you, for we are peaceful people and do not share your agression as you so initmately put here От Урала до чукчов всю земю - нам, Пусь чужы задыхают в коркоте... --Kuban kazak 20:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
haha, peacefull people who want to close peacefull wikipedia. Only some paranoic mind could invent that any text from sibwiki is agressive or hurtfull. But you have collected 3-4 quotes and repeat them from sentence to sentence, this is not argumentation at all, and we have already answered to everything. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 23:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

A view from LatviaEdit

Siberian language aside, I really loved the part about how the USSR gave us our language. Thank God, you did not have an entire century to develop it, only a half never the less during the time your idols did quite a lot deporting hundreds of thousands of Latvians and heavily colonizing the country with Russians, reducing the native population to just over 50% of the country. I find it absolutely mind blowing that 15 years after the collapse of the soviet union there still are people like this.
BTW I'd like to invite everyone to take a look en:User:Kuban kazak just to see what sort of person you're dealing with. Чья бы корова мычала, а твоя бы молчала.
And I quote SIBERIAN LANGUAGE ASIDE, go to the talk page and discuss your grievences about the 1940 deflowering of your virgin nation. There is enough OT in this encyclopedia already. BTW the first textbook about Latvian was published in 1864 in Riga in RUSSIAN!;) И я тебе не пастух!

--Kuban kazak 22:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

the first textbook about Latvian, "Manuductio ad linguam lettonicam facilis" was published in 1644 and "Grammatica Litvanica" in 53. And while it is not directly related to Siberian it is related to this disscussion page and clearly ilustrates the level of your competance and your tendency to write about things you know nothing about. And what you yourself write serves your and the sterotypical image of Russians you present is actually far more valuable and reaviling.
Wrong, wrong and right about not being related, but then think about the stereotypical image that Zolotoryov managed to present of himself, on one side a professional linguist, and on the other side a rude nationalist. However whilst I tried to adress Zolotoryov's flaws in his research and how unprofessional and uncredible it is, serios arguments are just replied with insults and PA. Original stupid nationalism. As for Latvia, then 1868 was when the first Latvian textbook was published in Russian. Yes Germans did develop the language 200 years prior, but only in the Russian empire did it get off the drawing board and started gaining mass usage. The rest of the stuff you comment about me all you like, but I am not the only one here, and I believe in what I have to say. At least, unlike Zolotoryov I can defend myself against criticisment, although I do urge that you reformat this and move it to the talk page. However that is purely your choice. If you want to discuss me or my user page on en:wiki you are welcome to go there. As for the remaining OT. Please there is enough of it in there already. Its funny actually, how Zolotoryov avoided direct challenges to debate and used nationalistic russophobic nonsense to cover up as did nearely half of the people who opposed the closure. As do you for that matter. --Kuban kazak 23:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Translation of one Siberian articleEdit

Apparently, Yaroslav Zolotaryov believes it's NPOV

Mithgol is a self-proclaimed fuckup in LiveJournal, and webmaster too. He banned many thousands of people because he didn't want to listen their comments about his stupidities, and this way he became famous. Also, Mithgol loves letter Ё, which is absent in the Siberian language, and letter ѣ, absent in the Russian language.

MaxSem 13:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

And this is only first edition, we have already made better article, long ago. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

There's a very long article about Mithgol in ru-wiki too, and it is proposed for deletion there. You are welcome to propose its deletion in sib-wiki, and i shall probably support it.
It's very easy to attack bad articles in a two-months old wiki. There are great encyclopedic articles in sib-wiki, considering its age, even though many of them are still stub-quality. Take a look at the full list of articles there, ignore the years, go to the last line and take a look for yourself. Edit and propose deletions as much as you wish. By the way, the years are being filled up with information too.
Some examples of good articles (or at least stubs):

--Amir E. Aharoni 14:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Вот интересно, а с чего Вы решили заниматься этим делом? Kazak 07:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
А мне неинтересно вам про это рассказывать. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Ну что ж, характерно. Kazak 15:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I think that Kazak asked me why have i decided to occupy myself with "Siberian language" affairs, so i shall reply:
I study linguistics, and i did a course about the linguistics of Baltic and Slavic languages. I learned about Northern Russian dialects as a part of my research about Lithuanian grammar about two years ago, long before i encountered Zolotaryov's "Siberian" project. When i discovered Zolotaryov's work, i immediately saw the same things that i already knew about Northern Russian. That way i knew that the "Siberian language" is not just a joke, and i immediately became curious about it.
Zolotaryov may not be the best linguist in the world, but nobody else is doing it, and if he doesn't do it, than these dialects may just die. --Amir E. Aharoni 22:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Don't you think it would be better to catalogue those dialects separately to preserve them, instead of "standardizing" them i a way that most of each individual dialect is left out? If it becomes mainstream (I shudder to think), this "Siberian" will lead to the destruction of all the myriad dialects still out there, as it would simple "paste" over them. Kazak 15:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
This is a good question. Of course they should be catalogued separately as thoroughly as possible. But doing only that will preserve them in books that few people will ever read. On the other hand, creating a literary standard gives them a chance of being preserved as a true spoken language. In this case i think that some compromises are inevitable - "United we stand, divided we fall". Every planned language is a compromise, and it is always artificial. I already admitted several times, that Zolotaryov's standardization work could probably be better, but i agree with the general idea.
If someone comes up with a viable proposals for Wikipedias in Pomor and Balachka, i shall probably support them :)
In case you didn't notice, the Siberian Wikipedia is already very viable and dozens of new encyclopedic articles are being created every day. --Amir E. Aharoni 05:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Even though I voted here long ago, I have just read this particular section, and, Amir, I respect your point of view and appreciate your courteous attitude, but I disagree with your arguments for the "Siberian" language legitimacy. The Russian language already exists, and I will dare to say it does unite all the dialects that are being discussed here. Most dialect words and constructions that constitute the core of Zolotaryov's language (and which's use is simply heavily overused in the latter) are incorporated in today's Russian, and are casually used in it. It's true that the spelling and some grammar structures are not a part of the modern mainstream written Russian, but they truly are a part of the spoken Russian; a part of the Russian sleng, if you wish. Being a native speaker of the Russian language only, I have no problem understanding any texts in Zolotaryov's Wikipedia, although at some point I should probably verify my understanding with the dictionary that exists somewhere. So, considering Zolotaryov's language a means of preservation of all these dialects is, in a way, a reinvention of the wheel.
It's also true that many of 'dialectisms' may be disappearing in the modern Russian, but nevertheless this doesn't mean the dialects are fairly represented in the Zolotaryov's language. I agree with Kazak that Zolotaryov's langauge is in fact a perversion of these dialects (Kazak, can your words above be interpreted this way?). It's a very artificial mixture of everything with a fair amount of Zolotaryov's own inventions. --BeautifulFlying 20:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Totally archaic and false approach. Spaniards also can understand a Portuguese text, using sometimes a dictionary. Is Portuguese a Spanish dialect? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Don't misinterpret me. None of the references you ever provided, including the 19th century research on the subject, would refer to the dialects in the Northern Russia or Siberia as separate languages. By following your logic, we would be now opening Wikipedias in every dialect and every slang in English. Many of these stand much farther from one another and from the standard English than the dialects in Siberia from the standard Russian. --BeautifulFlying 02:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Examples of constructed wordsEdit

I wonder where Mr. Zolotaryov got the words like Роботны веды or Межугимга? Do they really say so 'in Siberian villages'?--Shakura 22:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't you wonder how Siberian villagers could use the Internet (Межугимга)? Are you able to understand or let me explain next?--Ottorahn 01:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
hahaha, I wonder where Russians got the words like Экономика and Сентиментальность. Did they really say so in Russian villages in 18 century?)))))) --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 01:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
To create any sort of literary language, dialects will be standardized and foreign words imported. Such work, however, is always done or sanctioned by some some official body. Your group of wannabe nationalists has nothing official to it, and has no legitimacy - here, in Siberia, or anywhere else. Kazak 03:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
If, by "official body" you mean "government", then it will probably not be recognized by the Russian government anytime soon.
People don't need "legitimacy" to speak or write any language they want. Governments that tell people that they are not allowed to speak their language are called "fascist" - see en:Language politics in Spain under Franco.
The current Italian government also doesn't recognize local Italian languages, but it doesn't mean that they don't exist. --Amir E. Aharoni 07:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Do you think people receive legitimacy from:
  • me?
  • you?
  • Mr. Zolotaryov?
And I know which answer you've already gave. The third one. A very strange position. --Yms 15:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
We don't talk about legitimacy, do we? Who cares about it? Wikipedia is free project.--Ottorahn 18:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
We do talk about legitimacy, and we do care. Kazak 03:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia doesn't seem to be correct place for this.--Ottorahn 11:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
When Vuk Stefanović Karadžić effectively created what is today known as literary Serbian language, what official body sanctioned it? -- int19h 16:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Did he search in old books for words and expressions that no longer existed to create a new language? Did he look in other Slavic languages for words and expressions to make up the gaps? And all that, of course to construct a con-lang as different from Turkish as possible? By the way, anybody any idea where Lomonosov came from, and what dialect he must have spoken as a child? --Paul Pieniezny 12:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Lomonosov came from the great Northern Russian city of Arkhangelsk. I don't know what language did he speak in his childhood. It might have been a Pomor dialect, but for some reasons he decided to base the grammar that he wrote on Church Slavonic and the dialect of Moscow. Using Occam's razor principle i can try and guess that he thought that it would be more practical, because Church Slavonic was highly respected and well-documented and there were simply more people speaking the dialect of Moscow than those that spoke Pomor. It doesn't mean that Pomor is "worse" in any regard.
Actually, i read somewhere that Lomonosov's main reason for writing his grammar was that he found Russian at its then-current state outdated and impractical for scientific writing. Horrors! --Amir E. Aharoni 17:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
You may be surprised to know that Ukrainian nationalists claim that in the 12th century the language spoken in Kiev already differed a lot from the language spoken in Novgorod. The story that Lomonosov invented the Russian language does not hold water. And many Church Slavonic words entered the langauge as a result of Ukrainian bishops and priests coming to Moscow after the union. Most langauges at one time are confronted with the fact they do not have the words for the modern concepts used in other parts of the world. For many languages in Western Europe that choice was made when the bible was translated in that language - that also led to a fixation of the grammar rules. Lomonosov thought that Church Slavonic formations were preferable to Latin loan words.
By the way, this is just the thing which Lomonosov did - he looked in other Slavic languages for words and expressions to make up the gaps, especcially in Old Church Slavonic. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, of course for some time Lomonosov's Russian was a conlang, but any dialect map of Russian (especially if compared to dialect maps of Dutch and West-Vloams) proves that the Russian language today (and indeed, it is not only the langauge of Lomonsov now anymore) is as homogeneous as the English langauge in Northern America. Which is not surprising as the two were spread in the same way. Your language "exists" since 2005. There can be no native speakers by defenition. And because you fill your encyclopedia with obscenities and racial insults, there will not be any for a long time, because no responsible parents will let their children read these pages. As for the gaps, now that is a joke, when whole articles are entered which are visibly in Belarusian or Ukrainian. Your problem is not with words like "bankruptcy", "helicopter" or "re-industrialization", but with far simpler words. --Paul Pieniezny 23:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
hahaha, what map do you mean, maybe this one - [139]??? Russian dialects are very different, but now they are not often spoken, because your friends from Moscow prohibited them. So we have really dozen millions of native speakers - even if a Northen or Siberian Russian speaks Lomonosov's invented standard, this is not his native language. His native language is Siberian, standardized Northen Slavic language, and not conlang. I do not see any obscenities and racial insults in sibwiki, but I see insults and lie in your speech, so I wonder how many money do you receive from Moscow for organisation of all this company? There are no Belarusian or Ukrainian words in sibwiki, but some words are common for all Eastern Slavs, though they were replaced by Old Church Slavonic words in this Lomonosov's conlang, which was promoted by the criminal Muscovite empire for better exploitation and persecution of nations and of working people of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Siberia. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 17:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

People receive legitimacy from no-one to speak any language. People can only choose to accept a standard. Zolotaryov proposes a written standard for Northern Russian dialects. I haven't heard of anyone else who tried that (correct me if i'm wrong). If the people who speak those dialects choose to accept his proposal, that will be all the legitimacy that is needed for it to exist.

While we are talking here, the number of registered users and encyclopedic articles in sib-wiki is growing, so someone is choosing to accept Zolotaryov's proposal. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Totally agree with Amire80--Ottorahn 11:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Agree. Free human beings don't need no "legitimacy", or any merciful permition from the state or authority or anybody else to speak the language they want (or to develop a dialect into a litterary language). We don't live under totalitarian rule, so we don't care about those who are mentally unfree. --Cyclodol 20:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't deny that you personally can do whatever you want, but on Wikipedia there are certain criteria that need to be met for a language to be accepted. These also include a degree of legitimacy, of which your "language" has none. Go make your own site if you're eager to utilize your country's freedom of speech laws in the pursuit of making up unnecessary nonsense - don't waste Wikipedia's resources on it. Kazak 20:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
And what are the criteria? --Amir E. Aharoni 23:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
The only problem, Amir E. Aharoni, is that we here still see no proof that any of those who "choose to accept Zolotaryov's proposal" are actual native speakers of Northen Russian dialects. That's it. --Dmitry Gerasimov 13:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Some of them are, but some are not - this is not important. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, maybe some of them are. But again, the WikiMedia community still haven't seen any evidence for it. --Dmitry Gerasimov 20:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Just me, Cyclodol and OttoRahn. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Great. Quite propably, that makes another story. And may I ask where have the three of you been born and bred? --Dmitry Gerasimov 11:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I was born in Siberia, and two others in the Russian North. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Great. Where exactly? --Dmitry Gerasimov 11:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Dmitry Gerasimov is right: so far we haven't seen any reliable confirmation of Mr. Zolotaryov claims. Maybe that's just because "Siberian"'s creation is too recent, but, in that case, wouldn't it be better to wait for a serious review of his work and only then open a new Wikipedia ?
The other issue is whether a new Wikipedia would follow the main principle of NPOV, regardless of the "legitimacy" or "status" of the language employed. What I have seen in this page leads me to believe that this isn't the case with the people who run the ru-sib: project: the manner in which they conducted this discussion, their failure to engage in serious dialogue and address the questions and concerns of other participants, their habit of swiftly dismissing criticism as "intolerance" or "politically motivated", their constant resort to generalizations and simplifications (which are, of course, mere fallacies) and even insults, their usage of a militaristic vocabulary (enemies, aggressor, forces, attack, strike, etc- diff.)... not to mention the arguments expounded by most (not all) of the people supporting the project, all tell me that this project will be incompatible with the main principle of NPOV.
If Amir E. Aharoni and people like him were the "creators" of ru-sib: it would be different. He appears to be someone you can have a civilized and constructive discussion with. Someone willing to talk calmly about disagreements. But Amir isn't the soul of the project. - Best regards, Ev 15:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
The same lexics is used by closure supporters, especially when they are speaking russian) Remember, that we are not agressore, but they come with invented accusations and claims to closure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
You're right: some people supporting the closure behave in a similar manner. But that fact doesn't invalidate the argument. And even if their claims and concerns are invented, so far you haven't proved them wrong. - Regards, Ev 19:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I think, this invalidates - they do unprovoked agression against us. We do not do anything similiar against ruwiki, filled with russian nationalistic POVs. We have a lot of vandal attacks on the wiki every day. So maybe expressions of different members of the group are different, but the truth is one: we are fighting against despotism, against attempts to dictate us contents of articles or otherwise close us. I think we gave all the proffs about invention of those accusations --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Good joke about the double standards when the "closure" part speaks about "incivil conduct" of the "oppose" part: "Президент Грузии М. Саакашвили заявил, что ни за что не встанет на колени перед Владимиром Владимировичем Путиным. Российский МИД расценил это заявление как недружественное и откровенно хамское" ("Saakashvili said that he will not fall to Putin's knees. Russian goverment regars that this is very incivil conduct") --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
In fact, all the proof given so far is based on one and the same old argument: "This people vote for the closure of sib-wiki, because they are xenophobic Russian nationalists. And they are xenophobic Russian nationalist because they vote for the closure of sib-wiki". This is apparently a cyclic argument, ain't it? And up to now it seems to be your only argument. --Dmitry Gerasimov 20:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
that's not true, we have dozen arguments for oppose closure, why do you pay attention only to the one of them? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:44, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I mean, every time someone critisizes your arguments, points at logical fallacies, asks for reliable references, etc., you always start shouting about chauvinism and xenophobia, instead of providing a decent answer. Doesn't instill much credit to you. --Dmitry Gerasimov 21:05, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Please give any real examples of this. WE say about xenophobia only where it exists. This is just opposite part's conduct - cry about "incivilities" and "russophobia", and invent meanings of articles and even number of them. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 22:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Please, use the "Search" button of your web browser. On this very page, there are at least 18 instances of you using of the word "xenophobia" and its derivatives as the only objection to other people's arguments. --Dmitry Gerasimov 11:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Please give one real link and I will explain usag of this word. Actually we have very large argumentation when the opposite part only repeat lie or political accusations. It will be very bad if some wikipedia will be closed because of nationalistic accusations and fantastic inventions about it's content. National relations are complicated topic - if nationalistic flashmobes will be able to close wikipedias, what will be next? Serbian flashmob for close Bosnian wikipedia? Arab flashmob for close Hebrew wikipedia? Bulgarian flashmob for close Macedonian wikipedia? Just think about it. Siberian wikipedia should not be closed just for do not make precedent for the struggling nations. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
There is no struggling nation of Siberia. Get off your soap-box.--Paul Pieniezny 23:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
But there is Russian nation in wikipedia, and majority of it's members want to close the sibwiki. 80% of voters against us have came from ruwiki, so this is just ethnical voting. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Ev - thanks a lot for the compliment! I am not a true expert of N. Russian dialectology, but i try to have some positive influence on this project, which i find perfectly legitimate and curious.

Dmitry Gerasimov - There aren't many native speakers of Gothic, Latin and Old Church Slavonic, yet they have their wikipedias. Lack of proof of existence native speakers who contribute is not a criterion for closure. The only criterion for closure that i found is inactivity, and the ru-sib wiki is very active for a project less than 3 months old. (There was also Toki Pona, which is an intentionally poor conlang, impractical for an encyclopedia.)

Zolotaryov says that he is a native speaker: ru-sib:User talk:YaroslavZolotaryov#Для приколу. Go on and prove that he lies... --Amir E. Aharoni 17:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to prove this. Yaroslav proved this himself by starting request for opening this wiki in section for non-natural languages. Edward Chernenko 20:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
We opened in both sections because the status of language is discutable, we recognize it. But we ourselves believe that the language is not more artificial, than the russian one. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
The problem is not that Siberian is a conlang without native speakers, the problem is not that it is OR and OWNed by Zolotaryov, the problem is not even that it is innate POV - the problem is that it is all three at the same time. --Paul Pieniezny 23:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
not OR, because we do not develop it in Wikipedia, but it was developed earlier, and not owned by me. because there are many other writers too. It was proven already, you simply repeat the same args already discussed. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 00:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Current vandalism in sib-wikiEdit

During 31 December- 1 January vandals from 50 IPs destroyed about 700 articles in Siberian Wikipedia. That was political, because they filled the destroyed articles with Russian nationalistic slogans. Now all claims about "sockpuppetry from Siberian side" are riduculous - from the Russian side there is real mass nationalistic vandalism. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

This person is not acting from the "Russian side", whatever that means, but rather on his own initiative. I find him as tasteless as you do. Kazak 07:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Don't say nonsense, Yaroslav. This is Зукагой (Zukagoy), well-known vandal who vandalized ruwiki many times, last time 28 December, And compare your block log with block log on ruwiki for 28 December:
  1. 08:25, 28 December 2006 Torin (Talk | contribs) blocked "АХУЕК ТО КАКОГО ЦВЕТА (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (провокационный ник и вандализм)
  2. 08:23, 28 December 2006 Torin (Talk | contribs) unblocked АХУЕК ТО КАКОГО ЦВЕТА (contribs) (для переблокировки, такие должны блокироваться бессрочно)
  3. 08:22, 28 December 2006 Torin (Talk | contribs) blocked "White penis - you should not using didlo (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (провокационный ник)
  4. 08:21, 28 December 2006 Torin (Talk | contribs) unblocked White penis - you should not using didlo (contribs) (для переблокировки, такие должны блокироваться бессрочно)
  5. 04:07, 28 December 2006 OckhamTheFox (Talk | contribs) blocked "Пенис снежного цвета :) (о как!) (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (username)
  6. 04:02, 28 December 2006 OckhamTheFox (Talk | contribs) blocked "Херочек цвета кагого? (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (username)
  7. 04:02, 28 December 2006 Alma Pater (Talk | contribs) blocked "White penis - you should not using didlo (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 year (заборный вандал)
  8. 04:01, 28 December 2006 OckhamTheFox (Talk | contribs) unblocked Херочек цвета кагого? (contribs) (для переблокировки)
  9. 03:52, 28 December 2006 OckhamTheFox (Talk | contribs) blocked "Херочек цвета кагого? (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 day (vandalism)
  10. 03:41, 28 December 2006 Neon (Talk | contribs) blocked "ХУЕЧЕК БЕЛЕНЬКИЙ (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite
  11. 03:31, 28 December 2006 Alma Pater (Talk | contribs) blocked "АХУЕК ТО КАКОГО ЦВЕТА (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 year (вандал заборный)
  12. 03:16, 28 December 2006 Neon (Talk | contribs) blocked "Белый, а дальше Вы знаете... (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (Зукагой)
  13. 03:15, 28 December 2006 Neon (Talk | contribs) blocked "И опять х.... (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (Зукагой)
  14. 02:50, 28 December 2006 Solon (Talk | contribs) blocked "Х.Б опять с нами (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (вандализм)
  15. 02:41, 28 December 2006 Solon (Talk | contribs) blocked "Б.Х. СНОВА С НАМИ (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (вандализм)
  16. 02:08, 28 December 2006 Volkov (Talk | contribs) blocked "И снлва БЕЛЫЙ ХУЙ (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (username)
  17. 02:08, 28 December 2006 Volkov (Talk | contribs) blocked "И снова БЕЛЫЙ ХУЙ (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (username)
  18. 02:04, 28 December 2006 Volkov (Talk | contribs) blocked "ХУЙ белый снова (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (username)
  19. 02:00, 28 December 2006 Volkov (Talk | contribs) blocked "Новый белый ХУЙ (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (username)
  20. 22:43, 27 December 2006 Dmitry Gerasimov (Talk | contribs) blocked "Белый ХУЙ (contribs)" with an expiry time of infinite (вандализм, провокационный ник)

As you can see, that's just the same behaviour: right after each block it changes IP and takes another name. The common strategy against such a vandalism is to find a ateward to check IP ranges of vandal and block them at once. You haven't done it just because you wanted to say about "political moscal vandals"? So you received appropriate result. Edward Chernenko 17:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

But in sibwiki he just are using words like "we, moscals, will delete all of this", nicks like :A Stupid Democrat Zolotaryov" etc., so he is good representative of all the closurers I think:-)) I did not know about that stewards can help in this case - all the same, he uses very many IPs without any range - maybe many Russians were involved in this? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
According to this is action of several ru-wiki users, so please do not lie. Yes, not of the whole ruwiki (actually we have even several supporters here), but of radical nationalist group, which dominates here. As to Zukagoy, he was unbanned just 28 December in ruwiki, when he is well-known vandal, as you yourself recognize. Why was he unbanned? Maybe it was a treaty between him and ruwiki admins that he will leave ruwiki alone, and begin vandalize in sibwiki? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
That is not how things work on Wikipedia, in case you were unaware. Kazak 07:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
But it is true that you personally helped us in this night, so I should thank you personally for the help, this is true. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)