Talk:Simple English: Difference between revisions
(seems reasonable) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Seems reasonable. The English articles will make up the backbone of information to which all other language versions will be compared to so it is a sound policy to try to use language that can be understood bo as many people as possible [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] | Seems reasonable. The English articles will make up the backbone of information to which all other language versions will be compared to so it is a sound policy to try to use language that can be understood bo as many people as possible [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] | ||
:Right, so if you have an issue with the definition of [[time horizon]] here, as you raised in [[talk:time horizon]], you must take it to [http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/time_horizon] - where a lot more people can and should argue with you over it - and only when you are satisfied that *that* definition is correct, should you fix the much shorter one here. This is a bit of a pain but it drastically reduces the risk of our relying on any unchecked or nonstandard definition of terms that will matter a ''lot'' when we are doing this in 40 languages.... | |||
Revision as of 17:18, 9 October 2003
Seems reasonable. The English articles will make up the backbone of information to which all other language versions will be compared to so it is a sound policy to try to use language that can be understood bo as many people as possible Juxo
- Right, so if you have an issue with the definition of time horizon here, as you raised in talk:time horizon, you must take it to [1] - where a lot more people can and should argue with you over it - and only when you are satisfied that *that* definition is correct, should you fix the much shorter one here. This is a bit of a pain but it drastically reduces the risk of our relying on any unchecked or nonstandard definition of terms that will matter a lot when we are doing this in 40 languages....