Portal talk:Klingon
I have listed your resources in the School of Language and Literature resource catalog--please post any further resources there! Thanks! Oh, and to put in my two cents--I think that if people want to take the time to put together Klingon language resources on Wikiversity, then they should go right ahead--but I think it's pretty silly to have a Klingon language Wikipedia. Maybe instead of trying to set up courses you should set up a "just-for-fun" language stream? --Trinity507 03:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I am very doubtful about this topic. I would like to remind that the Klingon-language Wikipedia has been closed by a decision of Jimbo Wales and the associated wiktionary is going to close very soon. So please don't open yet another project about Klingon language here, as it will probably be deleted too. Thanks. guillom 13:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think we need to delineate between learning the language of Klingon, and having a project in Klingon. I wouldn't support a Klingon Wikiversity (unless i could see a real need for it), but I've no problem with people learning Klingon on the English (or other) Wikiversity. Cormaggio talk 15:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Does teaching/learning Klingon provide a greater educational benefit than learning French or Chinese? Does having resources on Klingon further or detract from Wikiversity's mission and vision? --Remi 11:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Klingon is a minor language which cannot compete with French or Chinese. Perhaps a comparison with sign language or computer languages would be better? I tend to agree with Cormaggio that learning projects on languages of this kind are fine. On the other hand, the languages of Wikiversities should be restricted to languages which cater for populations of people who speak that language as a native language. --McCormack 12:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- I understand that as one of the founders of the wiki concept Jimbo is very influential, but does that give him a right of censorship? Do you also propose deleting all other fictional content? What about the Tolkien languages? Or Harry Potter pages on Wikipedia? Jonathan Webley 15:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Jimbo does very occasionally delete things that he thinks are contrary to the general goals of the Wikimedia Foundation - though he prefers to leave it to communities to decide for themselves. I honestly can't see a problem with having a Klingon learning group on Wikiversity - bearing in mind that it would be for non-encyclopedic, non-dictionary content. Cormaggio talk 16:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that Klingon is copyrighted by Paramount Pictures afaik. guillom 15:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Jimbo does very occasionally delete things that he thinks are contrary to the general goals of the Wikimedia Foundation - though he prefers to leave it to communities to decide for themselves. I honestly can't see a problem with having a Klingon learning group on Wikiversity - bearing in mind that it would be for non-encyclopedic, non-dictionary content. Cormaggio talk 16:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't believe it is possible to copyright a language. If the language is protected by copyright, that means all the invented words are protected by copyright - Klingon, Vulcan, et al. So are you saying that no wikimedia page can use these words? Jonathan Webley 06:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- There's a non-profit devoted to learning Klingon and it hasn't been sued yet by Paramount. Technically, Paramount appear only to own copyright over the official dictionary - and I don't think they'll be pushing it too much unless there's mega-bucks in it. I still can't see a major problem with this learning group/material. Cormaggio talk 10:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)