On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Rick Harrison <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:20:53 -0700, Dirk Elzinga <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >Why does it matter so much that constructed languages make it to
> Wikipedia?
> >In all of this discussion (and previous ones), no one has ever
> articulated
> >clear and compelling reasons for including constructed languages on
> >Wikipedia. What are these reasons?
> I think auxiliary language enthusiasts seek a Wikipedia presence for their
> projects in
> hopes of attracting users. I know of a couple of auxlangs that sought/are
> seeking ISO
> 639-3 codes because having one is viewed as proof of notability by some
> Wikipedia
> editors, and is a pre-requisite (I think) for getting a Wikipedia _in_ the
> auxlang.

I've been thinking about this for a while. If it is true that auxiliary
language proponents are trying to use Wikipedia for advertisement, then
doesn't that cast a shadow on the whole constructed language enterprise? On
the other hand, how else can they get the word out effectively? Like it or
not, Wikipedia seems to be the source of first (and sometimes only) resort
for information on a whole host of topics, and if someone can get a mention
on Wikipedia, that's bound to result in a few more hits to their website.
But all of that has been said before.

Are there other reasons why we should care about being represented/mentioned
on Wikipedia?

> No doubt it was the same desire for attention/participants that prompted
> one person to
> use a bot to generate 100,000 article stubs in the Volapuek Wikipedia.
> This raised the
> Volapuek Wikipedia's position in the list of Wikipedias sorted by number
> of articles,
> attracting a lot of attention, not all of it favorable. (One response was
> a proposal to
> delete the entire Volapuek Wikipedia.)
> Presumably some artlangers would want their favorite projects to be listed
> for similar
> reasons: a feeling that one's art is recognized as significant and valid,
> or the possibility of
> attracting participants to collaborative projects.

Personally, I'm not interested in advertising my projects beyond this list
and a few friends who aren't here. I'm pointedly *not* interested in
gathering disciples, so I really could not care less if Tepa/Miapimoquitch
shows up on Wikipedia (though I was surprised and pleased to find Tepa
getting a nice mention in Sally's recent book--everyone likes having their
ego stroked). I also do not agree with the premise that language
construction is an "art." I do not engage in language construction as an
artistic endeavor. For me it really is like building a model train (a cliche
by now, but appropriate here). It involves some skill and a fair amount of
aesthetic judgment, and so is something that may better be called "craft."

But of course I can only speak for myself, and I do not deny that others
feel an artistic impulse in language construction.

Miapimoquitch: Tcf Pt*p+++12,4(c)v(v/c) W* Mf+++h+++t*a2c*g*n4 Sf++++argh