Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South Africa/Bush Telegraph

Items for inclusion

What will the process be for deciding what items are to be included be and who will decide? Kind Regards, Elf-friend 14:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, although some articles need to be place quickly, for example Dewet's RFA. --Jcw69 15:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, its not all that urgent anymore ;) dewet|✉ 15:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

If this isn't strictly Wikipedia-related (I have no idea what the scope is), I'd like to mention that our good friend die pienk olifant has received his S.A. citizenship this morning! dewet|✉ 09:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That is great news (I think), I support adding it as he is one of us. --Jcw69 10:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

How to distribute and how often?

Maybe we should look at how the military history project is doing it ... Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Outreach/Newsletter May 2006, they offer options to receive just the nonification on your talk page, the full newsletter, or nothing at all. Maybe we could adapt this system?

We will probably also have to create different subpages for the different editions then?

The other question is how often to distribute it. I feel that once a month is too little, there may be time-sensitive issues. How does once a week sound (with maybe special editions once in a while)?

Regards, Elf-friend 12:21, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I rather like the way Esperanza and the Signpost spams my talk page; therefore I'd be all for creating Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa/Bush Telegraph/Edition 1 and subst'ing it onto talk pages. I mean, its not as if (at least for the immediate future) we'll be having so much content that people will feel we're overwhelming them. If we diversify it too much, maybe we're just creating more trouble than its worth? 2c. dewet|✉ 12:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

As long as people can opt out: i would much rather see new issues on my watch list, than my talk page. --Piet Delport 14:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you keep such a good watch on your watchlist to never miss anything? :) Maybe I'm just too pragmatic, but talk pages can be infinitely abused — you archive or delete stuff that you don't want/need anymore, and we certainly don't have any storage problems. dewet|✉ 14:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Definitely; i try to keep my watchlist small enough that it never becomes overwhelming or uninteresting. I also prefer to keep my talk page more or less append-only (with periodic archiving), like with article talk pages. Of course, it's none of my business if other people prefer to have their newsletter "delivered" to them. :) --Piet Delport 14:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

This is what I was afraid of. I do not want to open my talk page one day and find that it's grown to double its original size with a whole bunch of announcements I would probably not be interested in. I cringe whenever I see someone's talk page full of Esperanza spam. How about we simply create a new sub-page for the latest edition then give members a short notice with a link? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I have just created the first sub-pages. I have made an initial assumption of one new issue per week and we'll just take it from there ...

Well, I think that is why it is important to have delivery options, some would like it delivered to their talk pages, some would just like to be notified of a new edition and some would just like it on their watchlist. I'm going to create the three sub-groupings on the page, please put your names under the preferred heading.

Do we have any volunteer(s) to handle the actual delivery of the newsletters (whatever option)?

Kind Regards, Elf-friend 08:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I know things like WP:AWB can do this, but it requires Windows ;) If I had the time, I'd figure out how to do this using the python wikirobot.

Also, I've transcluded the current issue into the page itself (for easier reading); I propose that the current issue starts at "/Current issue", and then gets moved to an "/Issue xx" archive when a new "current" issue is created. This allows for a static link to be made for editing the current issue. If that's OK, an admin needs to delete the current (blank) Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa/Bush Telegraph/Issue 2 so that the current issue can be archived there in a week's time. dewet|✉ 08:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Great, fine, and thanks! I've deleted the subpage. By the way, it would be nice if somebody could design a cool logo! Kind Regards, Elf-friend 09:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Notice of an issue

This is meant as a forum to allow us to deal with issues affecting South African articles (among other things), right? Then y'all might like to have a look at Qamata and my comment on its talk page. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 11:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I need someone to do a little task

Could y'all have a look at Talk:Drakensberg? Don't ask why I can't do it myself... Thank you. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Stop stalking me you loonie!!

Um, people... Who put me down as "undecided" (and why)? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 18:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Feeling a bit stressed...

Hello, me again. I'm sure that by now most of you know that I usually access Wikiped from my cell phone, right? So imagine how frustrated I feel about an edit made to Sesotho language by User:Dwo about a day ago and the answer he recently left on my talk page. Yes, this is a rather important issue, which could have far reaching consequences. I'm not looking for an edit war, but I was perturbed by him saying that he had "strong feelings" about this (why?) and was planning more changes. Comments? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 20:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant 12 hours ago. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 20:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry you're feeling stressed :) 'Zulu' is by far the more common term in English for the language, and is the Wikipedia standard for now. Languages though are alive, and 'isiZulu' is in the process of being 'stolen' by English, and as you point out is already quite widely accepted in South African English. Wikipedia though should use the more standard 'Zulu'. Greenman 23:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

And "isiXhosa" and "Sesotho"...? This is what I meant about far reaching consequences. I think one of the main reasons why Wikiped more often uses "Sesotho" than "Sotho" is because of my very consistent use of the word (English certainly uses "Sotho" "more often"). Even Oprah thinks she's "a Zulu" - English does not use these terms often and consistently enough to accurately say that "Zulu" is the standard (this is like the statistical fallacy where you try to get results from too small a sample). Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 23:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Same applies there. isiXhosa as a word doesn't exist in most English dictionaries (see dictionary.com as one example), though that may change over time. Greenman 18:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Dictionary.com!? I think the entry would be under "Kaffir" (try it - I'm serious). According to them Basotho is another name for Sesotho and Basuto are a war-like tribe of cannibals. I've never eaten anyone - I promise. If you had tried a sane dictionary, like the Oxford Dictionary of South African English you would find that "isiXhosa" is a real English word (and note the entry directly below it, and the 3rd, 4th, and 5th entries up). Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 21:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)