Grin

Thanks for the notice on my talk page, I would not have otherwise noticed your question. I've mostly tried to answer your questions there. On the matter of self-appointed policy makers, I guess that being willing to do the work can often give the appearance of authority. Often I try to articulate a certain vision of an issue that desparately needs to be addressed, but there is a lack of response until there is a crisis. Just because something needs to be done and decisions need to be taken I proceed, in the absence of further guidance, according to my own vision. It's somewhat like a silence-is-consent approach. Others then follow my approach as though it were a rule, which it never was. It may not be until several months later that people start to question the "rule" that never was. Eclecticology 18:50, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I know and cheer that. I accept you as a leader, as a prophet, as a god, or whatever you please because I do not have the time to lead people everywhere. ;-) However I am very aware that if I start to follow my own ideas they going to became habits, then people going to follow me, then they start to question me why did I do this and that, and I am not going to have any explanation, because I do not have the time to plan, and I do not have the time to interview every sourceberg fathers and mothers about his/her intentions.

What I need is some vague "we intended this at the beginning" document I can debate or accept. I would like to see a "do's and dont's" page, which could grow to be a guideline in the future. You, as god, have the responsibility to summon such a page and give it some structure and starting thoughts. (If you choose to accept the Agency will deny any connection to you or to your men.)

Jokes apart, you're more familiar with this project, or know those who consider themselves familiar with it. Do or ask them to do that guidelines page, as me, like someone who wants to use the sourceberg mainly instead of policing it, would like to have that guidelines. I'm still a bit confused about the purpose of sourceberg, and the difference between it and wikibooks. --grin 21:20, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

You make me blush.

Keeping the blood flow busy makes life longer.

Will you be building a statue in the centre of Budapest?

You mean whether I want pidgeons to shit on your face? Not yet. :-)

I don't think that any "we-intended-to-do-this" document ever existed. There was some talk on Meta and the mailing lists. Then when someone was upset enough at seeing the Pushto language (ps) link being taken over it just happened. All I'm dooing is trying to establish a kind of intellectual coherence.

Someone (most probably you and Angel A) should write an Our Great Purpose document, open for others' different memories, opinions and constructive criticism. Without a clear definition the project it cannot live long and prosper.

The difference between Wikibooks and Wikisource is fairly clear in my mind. Wikisource is mostly for already published material that is primarily in the public domain. It is original source material, but it is not the original writing of the Wiki contributors. Wikibooks is original material compiled by the contributors, but it is a more in depth treatment of a subject that would be suitable for Wikipedia. For both projects entries so far can be in any language.

Sounds good, ought to be included in the document mentioned above.

Please read my comments about language co-ordination at Talk:Main Page. That represents my attempt at top level article co-ordination, and documents how I have organized the left box in the English main page. If you feel my idea is good, I would appreciate if you apply the left-box as a template that you can apply for the Hungarian main page. Eclecticology 10:13, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I want to give time for the possible constructive critizism and creative ideas. If nobody complains or hide your dead body then remind me next week and I'll see what I can do translating it into ours. --grin 08:28, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

figyelmeztetes a linkmegorzesre

Helló!

Látom, kiraktál egy feliratot a magyar főoldalra, hogy a szövegeket linkeljük be erre a listára: Magyar tartalmak listája. Szerintem viszont sokkal jobb lenne erre a célra aegy kategóriát használni lista helyett, például a Category:Magyar vonatkozású szövegek kategóriát.

Ez azért egyszerűbb, mert így nem kell egy külön oldalt szerkeszteni, csak be kell írni a kategóriát a szöveg alá, és szebben is jelenik meg. Ez persze azzal járna, hogy az összes lapot a meglévő listáról be kell tenni a kategóriába, de szerintem hosszú távon akkor is jobban járnánk vele.

Köszi, B jonas 17:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)