Talk:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

This page has now been protected until a member of the Language Subcommittee can take a look at this. Naconkantari 16:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegro's Constitution

May I suggest that you use Montenegro's constitution as an official reference to determine Montenegro's official language ?
Otherwise, you are making just a big farse out of the so called "neutral point of view" ! --TeslianA (a valid en.wiki user)

According to the Constitution of Montenegro [1] [2], section one, paragraph 9:
"Jezik i pismo
U Crnoj Gori u sluzbenoj upotrebi je srpski jezik ijekavskog izgovora."
Which, when translated into English, means:
"Language and alphabet
In Montenegro, the official language is Serbian of ijekavian dialect"
As we all know, the Serbian language equally accepts the ekavian and ijekavian dialect, which makes it obsolete to create a new language. The constitution is clear: There is no Montenegrin language, and the official language is Serbian. --Paunović 03:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The bright minds behind this farse are just about to be made into poster children of what the Wikipedia and it's "neutral point of view" is definately not about. Destruction clearly seems not to be something that is contained to the fragile borders within Balkans. --TeslianA (a valid en.wiki user)

  • That is quite interesting while you reading SFRJ constitution :) New constitution about mether of language seas:
Član 15(Jezik i pismo)- U Crnoj Gori u službenoj upotrebi je crnogorski jezik. Constitution; en translation: In Montenegro official language is Montenegrin . --OutLook 10:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orthography

Will cg.wikipedia be using the proposed orthography? - FrancisTyers 16:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics

A quick breakdown of the demographics of this vote. Not perfect as it is not immediately possible to identify all parties, but should give some indication. - FrancisTyers 12:04, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  • Croatians: 8
  • Montenegrins: 9
  • Albanians: 4
  • Russian 3
  • Ukranian 2
  • Macedonians: 2
  • Serbians: 2
  • Moldovian 1
  • Yugoslavian 1
  • German 1
  • Spanish 1
  • Italians: 1
  • Usa: 1

Oppose

  • Serbians: 17
  • Germans: 2
  • Dutch: 2
  • Czech people: 1
  • Panama-ians: 1
  • Croatians: 1
  • Russians: 1

Neutral

  • Serbians: 4
  • Croatians: 1
  • English: 1
  • Spanish: 1

Montenegrin votes

All Montenegrin votes are from people who would like to have Montenegrin wikipedia and wish to use it. As the Montenegin is to be new language it is normal that users didn't write any articles. I am using Wikipedia for several years and I didn't put any article but I wish to in my language wikipedia. IT Association of Montenegro promoted this project and that is the reason why people voted in few days. In this process which is now several months on the way we had many supporter's from other organizations and individuals(TV, Newspaper, NGO,...).So this voters are not Meat Puppets, they are real people and it was proved. --Ego and his own 01:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ, and so does the Checkuser. Votes have been proven to be sockpuppets and NOT real people [3] --Paunović 03:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Puppet votes

Over 20 votes from users that created accounts within an hour voted "Support" within an hour. I have removed these votes, since they are obviously sock puppets. --Paunović 21:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paunovicu this votes are not puppets, next time when you have some doubts first ask. Sysadmin will check this don't worry. --Ego and his own 22:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Proven to be sockpuppets, checkuser has proved it. --Paunović 22:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What you are talking about? This are real people from Montenegro who support this initiative. --Ego and his own 23:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, and they all made accounts within an hour, and all voted within an hour. Do you think that the checkusers on Meta are idiots? Good thing I reported this on time. --Paunović 23:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AFAICT, these accounts have different IPs. There are in the same range, but that's not surprising if they come from Montenegro. Yann 23:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well then how do you explain the fact that they have all been made in an hour, and have voted in an hour? Besides, they are probably proxies, or meatpuppets (their first edits were votes on this article). Isn't that strange to you? --Paunović 23:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there are the same people. They could be people who know each other IRL and organise themselves to vote support, but that's another matter. Yann 00:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Paunović, you should be a shame of your salfe. It's fourth time that you deleting a regular votes. If you have a private problems, keep it at home. On record: All today's votes are Montenegrins --OutLook 00:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Outlook I deleted your post. Today we had obstruction on test server and this. I will put explanation on this tomorrow when i get some good sleep. --Ego and his own 00:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can't delete posts. --Paunović 00:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Paunovicu we need to go over again? This are not meatpuppet votes. --Ego and his own 01:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Read : Wikipedians (and others) should remember however that the use of such terms may be perceived as highly offensive to the people involved. By definition the first contribution of a new user will be to a particular area, and they may start by expressing a view on what should happen on a particular before they subsequently add material of their own. Only if there is very strong evidence should such a term be used in relation to an account created by real person. Note also that "JDoe is a meatpuppet" can only mean "the account called JDoe is a meatpuppet" and to avoid offence the longer form is preferable --Ego and his own 03:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Even if they're not puppets (and I'm sure they are), users can't use their first edit to vote. Their votes are invalid. --Paunović 04:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
where is that rule? I have proof that this what you are doing is motivated by your political motifs --Ego and his own 04:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the voting requirements, and stop opstructing this project. Thank you. --Paunović 20:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well it is obvious that voting system on wikimedia is weak. How could one on this green planet earth prove that my vote was "Puppet vote"? Please return it back. And here is a quick reference for ADMIN's: IP's form Montenegro 85.94.96.0/19 (ICG) , 195.66.160.0/19 (ICG) , 213.149.96.0/19 (ICG) , 195.250.118.0/26 (Montsky), 195.250.119.0/25 (Infomont). --Bozocv 12:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe some people used proxy from our main ISP ICG(t-com) proxy.cg.yu with IP address: 195.66.160.3 --bozocv 13:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody's playing with this page

What used to be comments on the "support" side have been switched into "votes". I HAVE NEVER VOTED "FOR" THIS PROPOSAL. Actually this was done so ridiculously badly that comments alongside the "votes" don't correspond to people who left them; e.g. my first comment is now listed as "CrnaGora" 's support vote. PEOPLE WHO ENGAGE IN THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR SHOULD BE BANNED INDEFINITELY. --Dzordzm 22:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree. --Paunović 22:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Ego and his own is double counted. --ZorinSin 22:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have crossed his vote. Users can't vote twice. --Paunović 22:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All the Red-linked meta users on the votes currently have no past. A good deal are single purpose accounts. Some aren't even accounts (Neron BG is not an account). I'd like permission from someone to remove them.
And oddly enough, two neutral votes are SPAs as well. Logical2u 22:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is Meta, not en.wiki. Single-purpose accounts are not forbidden. There are editors here that only work on translation or other single actions. If you have concerns about the validity of the vote, please request a checkuser. Naconkantari 22:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I keep forgetting that meta is not the primary wiki... friggity. I just wish there was some uniformity, I dunno. I should probably undue some of my strike outs, too. Logical2u 22:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Check this out:
"If you need any information about (the) strain, which are our organization (“ITAM”) making in this project, please be my guest and simply ask. If my expectations are righteous, and you are really do all this things (which, in these circumstances, are making a lot of damage to image and ethic rating of our organization) with noble conception, we are open for all kind of cooperation. [4]
Since when do people organize outside Wikipedia to vote and start a project? OutLook left this message on my talk page, and this basically proves that this whole thing was organized, and that the single-purpose accounts are meat-puppets. Anyone care to express their thoughts about this? --Paunović 23:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Paunović, it's enough! You are converting the facts and interpret them under your contrivers needing. Since you are already banned from wikipedia, because of your vandal behavior and don’t wont to stop your indecent acting, I am forced to end all communication with you. --OutLook 00:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You better find the perperator and ban because now looks what happened to the summary, the whole support votes is all but gone! Rakuten06 23:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The votes were crossed out by an admin, do you have anything against that? --Paunović 23:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I crossed them out, and I'm not an admin. If there is a problem, please undo my changes. I'm stressed. Logical2u 23:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we can't undo anything now.. the page is "protected" --Paunović 23:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, I just reverted vandalism to the page from an IP... I may add it to the checkuser page. We are just not supposed to be dealing with the SPA. Logical2u 23:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@Dzordzam: You've supported the proposal, see this diff. Maybe it has happened by mistake, you can change your vote until the voting is closed. —Pill δ 16:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You just show that Dzordzam had been aginst proposal. --212.200.201.46 16:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC) Here is who stole Dzordzam vote. Look [dzordzm vote] and here is how Ego and own added 5 votes from neutral ground or comment to support votes [Ego produced 5 support votes out of comments and neutral ground][reply]

Paunović's behaivor

That is not make sense any more. Stop deleting support votes! — The preceding unsigned comment was added by OutLook (talk)

I'm not deleting support votes, what the hell are you talking about? Have you checked the history? I removed Ego and his own's second vote, and thats all. The puppet votes will be removed in a few days by the admins of Meta, don't worry :) --Paunović 01:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, Checkuser deleted those votes faster than I thought he would. Good job! :) --Paunović 05:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The votes of users that Naconkantari deleted are individual users and are not sockpuppets. The reason why some of them may have voted within an hour is that Ego and his own opened a topic on Cafe Del Montenegro forums with instructions on how to vote, and so the people that support the Montenegrin wiki have registered and voted for support. Here are some of the useres that Naconkantari wrongfully deleted (their votes to be precise): Maveric, XeraX, Blackout, BOLOGMO, MajoneZ, MedoJE, Hercules, Kambodza, Zagarcanin, Zvoncica, Superman CG, E-one, Bozocv, NoLimit, Cavlovic.--Nikollaki 12:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nikolaki you just give as proof that Ego and his own was using meatpupets. To call people over forums to vote is forbidden. Ego behaviour is forbidden. And such people are not for wikipedia. --212.200.201.46 15:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that is isn't forbidden to inform other prospective people about a new project. —Pill δ 16:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is forbidden to call people to vote yes over forums. Meatsockets. --212.200.201.46 16:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia should be made

It seems that there are enough of Montenegrins who want to have their own Wikipedia: http://wikii.itam.ws/index.php/Glavna_stranica --Millosh 11:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finally some sence out of serbian admins...--Nikollaki 12:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support, Milosh. I have to apologize for “main page” look, but it’s result of constant vandal attacks. --OutLook 12:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you didn't see support vote number 10. If there are Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and even Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias, it is reasonable to have Montenegrin, too. --Millosh 13:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem was that I can't know are you real Wikipedians or not if you don't say so and if you don't give some proofs. It is very reasonable so suppose that Wikipedian who knows other languages and doesn't have it's own Wikipedia -- should work on other Wikipedias. At least on English Wikipedia. I can't go all over the Internet in trying to realize that you are real people. AND, five contributors are reasonable minimum. --Millosh 13:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we should talk about your language issues, but this will be when you make your test Wikipedia on incubator.wikimedia.org (after the decision here). --Millosh 13:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Milosh, few times was annotated existence of experimental wikipedia.--OutLook 13:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Experimental Wikipedia" means that you started project on http://incubator.wikimedia.org/. I was there and there were no Montenegrin project. Also, I don't want to read a bulk of trolling and I read only the part where I am trying to find 5 people who claim that Montenegrin is their native language. However, nor you nor Ego still didn't list convinced me that you are not CrnaGora or Momisan or Dzemper. However, I may see that your project is alive and intend to be NPOV and because of that I think that you should have your own Wikipedia. --Millosh 14:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice Millosh, why don't you suggest a Vojvodina Wikipedia now, since you're happy to support Wikipedias in languages that haven't been standardized or internationally recognized. Who made you the judge on whether a dialect is a language or not? --Paunović 15:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please assume good faith. @Millosh: CmaGora (at least that user name) was a troll on the test Wiki who was blocked by Ego. Greetings, —Pill δ 16:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What test wiki? This ([5]) or I missed something? Also, may you (Pill) confirm some identities? (i.e. Ego, OutLook, etc.) --Millosh 16:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Montenegrin&oldid=476223"