Talk:Language proposal policy

Archives of this page

---

2006|2007|2008

Please add new topics to the bottom of this page

Wikinews Urdu

I'm working on Wikinews Urdu edition but It does not appearing on Requests for new languages under "Open".--Chowdhury 11:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

That is because nobody bothered to enter the request. Thanks, GerardM 19:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Prekmurian WIkipedia

Hi. We try to make a new proposal, but our en:Prekmurian dialect has no ISO code yet. What is the procedure? We also think it could pass other conditions. --Janezdrilc 19:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

What if someone wants to create a wiki encyclopedia in a language that "someone created in school one day"?

Where should one go for that? 192.12.88.7 04:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Protest of rule banning simple-language Wikipedias

Why is English given special treatment with a "simple" wiki? Why not allow "simple" language wikis in languages other than English? Rickyrab 05:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

(The following items have been copied from the archive for 2008.)

Thanks for your reply. The difference here is that Esperanto has a valid ISO 639 language code, while the expression "simple", besides being invalid, is at least ambiguous (it also works in French and Spanish). Further comments? Lwyx 17:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Simple-language wikis are not eligible under the current policy, but that policy only applies to requests for new wikis. Existing wikis are not affected. —Pathoschild 18:20:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

(End copied items from 2008 archive)

Is there any real reason for banning simple language wikis, other than "We already do it"? That sounds suspiciously like "WP:ILIKEIT" (look it up in the English Wikipedia). Where does one go to suggest changes to current policy? Is the page for a new policy still active, or has it been archived? Rickyrab 05:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes; see Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia and Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English (2) Wikipedia. IMO, without a clear target audience and without a clear definition of what makes a language Simple, they're pointless forks.--Prosfilaes 17:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Link to the discussion that took place before the simple wiki proposals were banned

I would greatly appreciate it if someone could give me a link to where this discussion took place. So that I can see the arguements put forward for its acceptance and implementation. Thanks, --Île flottant 22:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Unfair policy

It is not fair to say "existing wikis are not affected by new policies" so there is a ancient gothic language with no native speakers a anglo-saxon-wiki with no native speakers and a latin wiki with barely native speakers and most of the editors are other language natives and only interested into classics. so the most important language for european culture, ancient greece, is ignored for years now. the incubator project is a beginning, but same right should affect all wikis, not only the new ones. every person who has only a slightest bit of knowledge about ancient history, knows that ancient greece is as important as latin, the influence on european culture and languages is incredible. I assume there are some people from the Modern Greek wiki who do not want to split it up, but it is necessary. it does not fit into the modern greek wiki as anglo-saxon texts do not fit into the english wiki. I am very sad about the lack in knowledge about the importance of ancient greece in all western cultures. --Clayman0 12:50, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Would you rather have it that projects like the Latin, the Esperanto Wikipedia are ended because of your sense of fairness ? Thanks, GerardM 11:51, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

The problem goes much farther: For instance, I have been banned from the Bavarian Wikipedia because of my Bavarian Book Language, a historizing project based on the Bavarian of approximatety 1500-1800, to be pronounced according to present dialects, i. e. regionally differently. What now? Moreover, the major problem is that the main antagonists are by no means responsive; they are anonymous, gone with the wind ... Hellsepp 22:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

There is clearly a double-standard and lack of consistency here, not to mention pettiness. The case for a Gothic wikipedia is evidently less defensible than that for an Ancient Greek wikipedia, given each's relative importance in the very culture that has given rise to wikipedia in the first place. And it is to be observed that this is true even if a Gothic wikipedia is a valuable one which must stay. The decision against the Ancient Greek wiki rests on an arbitrary rule applying to all new wiki projects, which is hardly fair, as has been noted above - however this fairness should be construed in a pointless hypothetical scenario. It is very petty to enforce a cut-off date beyond which no language, despite its justifiable importance relative to the others already existing, should be allowed to be created. I don't think Clayman was advocating the dissolution of those above-mentioned languages; but that if those languages should be allowed to stay, and indeed do add value to wikipedia generally, it is absurd to rule out one such important language as Ancient Greek on the grounds of administrative pedantry - an arbtirary time-rule - then cry out that these other languages should stay - god forbid they should suffer from the same beaucratic hubris - leaving a certain language - no less important and offering scope for many great things - to be tossed aside as of less importance and as being beneath the regard of wikipedia generally. And what a loss it is to a project which is clearly in debt to the achievements of this language. For Ancient Greek is without doubt a language of scholarship, and the people in power in this project, which clearly makes pretences at scholarship, apparently rub their nose at the language. I'm baffled at such pedantry and self-importance. Perhaps I should take up Anglo Saxon in order to satisfy my illogical desire for moribund appendages to wikipedia. And perhaps also I should found a new city with a handful of citizens speaking passable Ancient Greek so that the administrative pedants here can tick the box for 'living, and not historical, language'. Of course, I will be sure not to create the city after 2 o'clock so as not to upset any chronological fastidiousness. 124.170.11.226 07:55, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

the dialects

qoute:

"The language must be sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki. In most cases, this excludes regional dialects and different written forms of the same language."

i need to know how Egyptian arabic wikipedia had ceated if it is just an arabic dialect?! any Arab can understand the Egyptian dialet and any Egyptian can understand the standard arabic. the standard arabic wikipedia is a general wiki for all of Arabs, and there is no need for other wikipedias. if you need to create a wikipedia for every arabic dialect, then you should to create a more than 50 wikipedias --عباد مجاهد ديرانية 13:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC).

Egyptian Arabic is considered a separate language from Classical and Gulf Arabic by the Summer Institute of Linguistics who created the ISO 639-3 language list, and that opinion is shared by many linguists. In general, Wikimedia has deferred to ISO 639-3 on the existence of languages to reduce the amount of argument about the creation of projects in languages that are also described as a dialect of another language. Wikipedias are only created on request, so these Wikipedias won't be created unless there's someone interested in creating them.

For what it's worth, the ISO 639-3 list for Arabic lists 30 languages subsumed under the general name Arabic.--Prosfilaes 00:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

you are not Arab so you don`t know what is the diffrent between the standard arabic and the Egyptian dialect. first, in fact, the diffrent between the standard arabic and any arabic dialect is the same, but may you had accepted on the Egyptian one more than the others because its speakers are many (65 millions).

there is no any letters, Harakat, or even sounds (except the "g", which exist in many arabic dialects) in the Egyptian dialect that it is don`t exist in the standard arabic, and most of diffrences between them is minor. such as the word "jamal" (camel), which is in the Egyptian "gamal".

quote:

In general, Wikimedia has deferred to ISO 639-3 on the existence of languages to reduce the amount of argument about the creation of projects in languages that are also described as a dialect of another language.

you are not Arab, so you don`t know what`s the diffrent between Egyptian and Arabic. i am Arab and i don`t have to ask a linguistic to know what`s the diffrent between the arabic dialects, it is more simple than that. for example, you don`t have to ask a physicist to know that if you throw a pen it will fall again on the ground or will keep flying!

and i say again: "if you need to create a wikipedia for every arabic dialect, then you should to create a more than 50 wikipedias". the request is obvious: "The language must be sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki. In most cases, this excludes regional dialects and different written forms of the same language.". ask any Arab and he will tell you that the standard Arabic wikipedia could be a general wikipedia for all of Arabs, and there is no need for other than it --عباد مجاهد ديرانية 11:30, 5 June 2010 (UTC).

All of which has nothing to do with how the Egyptian Arabic wiki was created. You have one opinion, SIL has another, SIL is made up of professionals and their opinion underlies the system of language codes we use, so it was accepted.--Prosfilaes 04:44, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Simple German

I'm here on account of some people on the simple English saying that they would like a Simple German Wikipedia. IanP 03:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Contact me on my Simple English talk page under the same name. IanP 03:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

If there is no language code...

The guidelines for eligibility declare that "If there is no valid ISO-639 code, you must obtain one.", but, how do we obtain one? This info was never given. Wōdenhelm 01:22, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Give up. Wikimedia never concern minority rights. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 02:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I laughed because it's true, I cried because it's true. But, how would I obtain one? Wōdenhelm 21:16, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

First, please check whether you are "expert" enough to do it. If you still do not have a “linguist”-title, please send some money to Jimmy Wales to obtain one. Then turn to step two. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 15:54, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Right. It's the only multilingual website on the web to support languages like Navaho and Cherokee and Venda, but they say no to your usage of their webservers (which you have no right to), and suddenly they don't concern themselves with supporting minority languages.--Prosfilaes 20:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The ISO 639-3 change submission page. Be prepared to justify your request within the framework of ISO 639-3; it is nigh inconcievable that any Earthly language doesn't fit inside an existing language family tag, and it's quite likely it's already considered part of an existing language tag. If you name the language here, it's possible someone could tell you what the existing tags are and give you an estimate of how likely SIL is to accept your changes.--Prosfilaes 20:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Specifically I'm needing to have Appalachian English recognized with an ISO code so that I can propose a Wikipedia be opened in this unique dialect, as well as proving an Appalachian version of the Ubuntu Linux interface (to form a language team, they require an ISO code as well). It has a different grammar from Standard English, much custom vocabulary, as well as pronunciations which cannot be reflected in Standard spelling (thar, doln, enyhal, etc). I figure the differences are probably about on par with those of Scots. Wōdenhelm 13:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, I've seen where Low Saxon has the language code nds-nl on here. How feasible do you feel it would be, to try to propose Appalachian English using (for example) en-app, without a separate ISO code? (assuming Appalachian would be included under the en code, and the -nl suffix after nds was Wikimedia's creation) Wōdenhelm 10:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe that they're opening any more Wikis without ISO 639-3 codes, so no en-app. Try filling out the ISO 639-3 change request and see what type of response you get.--Prosfilaes 07:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

No joke: Create your own Bible, and you will have your own language code! Hellsepp 22:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Dead languages bundled with the modern equivalent?

I think the text quoted below is very absurd (the bold text is especially absurd part I think):

"Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted, because there are no living native communities to use other resources. Where possible, such languages should be bundled with the modern equivalent (such as Old English with English), though that is not required."

Why are dead languages bundled with the modern equivalents allowed? Wikis in dead languages bundled without the modern equivalents can be run if there are experts enough; and wikis in dead languages bundled with the modern equivalents cannot be run if there aren't experts enough. I think the current policy was created to give privilege to some dead languages that are loved by modern "majorities". For example, Old English and Latin are favored by people from powerful countries. This is some kind of politics!

I think both "DLs bundled with the MEs" and "DLs bundled without the MEs" should be equally allowed or not in the future. --Yes0song 16:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Huh? How does it give privilege to some dead languages?--Prosfilaes 06:51, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Wrong question

The real problem is that eventually we will have to financially stimulate loads of projects, than to fear that the variants of XY might become to many. Is it not strange that stone-dead artificial languages (not Esperanto, e. g., a really vibrant project, supported also by me) pretend to have 50.000 articles - i. e. from the automaton -, whereas really existing and vivid supra-regional languages, e. g. in Africa, have a hard time with struggling with everyday sorrows? Hellsepp 23:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Translation in french

Hi,

I just translate the Language proposal policy in french (Language proposal policy/fr). Fell free to read and correct it.

Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 14:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup ! SPQRobin (talk) 17:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

De rien, j’en avais besoin pour les wikisourciers.

You’re welcome, I need it for the wikisourcers.

Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 20:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Localized versions of the template {{lc-navigation}}

I think it should be possible to use localized versions of the template {{lc-navigation}} (as example, {{lc-navigation/ru}}). Please add code for lc-navigation subpages using in the source. --Kaganer 21:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Any reply? --Kaganer (talk) 21:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Not many people really watch this talk page, it could've been better to talk to someone directly :-) Anyway, I think you should be able to add it yourself.. I did so now so you can change "en" to "ru" in the translation interface. SPQRobin (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks ;) --Kaganer (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)