Talk:Language committee

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Talk:Language subcommittee)
Jump to: navigation, search
Language committee (contact page about requests)

Please add any questions or feedback to the language committee here on this page.

  • Please add new topics to the bottom of this page.
  • Please only add a request for update if there is something to update; and mention it.

Archives of this page

2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014

See also: Requests for new languages/Archives

Wikivoyage َArabic[edit]

Would you please approve the Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Arabic

Also we have some active users see and have up 80 users Support this project --Florence (talk) 17:57, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
What do we need to get the final approval for this project--Emara (talk) 13:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I think the Arabic Wikivoyage should be created because it has a large number of vistors.--عثمان خان شاہ (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


The Latest activities report section could use an update. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 18:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia 4[edit]

Hello. Could you please vote/approve this language or variant whether it should have an own edition of Wikipedia. There are native Turks who understands and use Ottoman Turkish.--Uishaki (talk) 03:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I could bring about a Langcom decision, but I don't see why the result would be something else than for request no. 2 and 3. --MF-W 04:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Awadhi Wikipedia[edit]

Hello.I would like to request Langcom to approve Awadhi Language for creating a Wikipedia.The activity on Awadhi Test Wiki is flourishing which can be seen from the analysis and here.I would be very grateful if you verify this language.I hope to listen soon from Langcom about updates on Awadhi Wikipedia--Anuraag Pandey (talk) 13:07, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Requests for new languages inconsistencies[edit]

Perhaps I'm not understanding certain aspects of this process, but I've found the following inconsistencies in the Requests for new languages page (the "summary" page) and its subpages. (Apologies for the huge post.)

Note that if any subpage appears in multiple categories mentioned above (but not on the summary page), it will only appear in one of the above lists (usually the earliest one).

Having now gone through every subpage I could find, I should point out that I've already fixed some minor errors I found here and there, but for the stuff listed above I either didn't know what to do about them or I figured they'd be better dealt with by an admin. - dcljr (talk) 08:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Wow, these are quite a lot. I will start with some comments:
Those in no. 1-4 and 9 have the status that is indicated on the request page. The "summary page" should be updated according to them (Exception is the 1st one listed for no. 9: It was in reality rejected, but the template parameter on the request page was vandalized/changed by an IP -- now reverted).
Those in no. 8 do exist; if it's desired, the links to the subdomains can easily be added (though they are also in the request template, as for all requests). --MF-W 20:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
And Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin 5, no summary, broken template, and per the 4 former discussions it can be 5th rejected (Forgive my all-caps oppose comment). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:21, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
TL;DR, Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Zazaki has two header templates, a "verification" one and a "submitted" one. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:20, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Some non-standard/rude titles are fixed by me... --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:59, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: You said, "Those in no. 1-4 and 9 have the status that is indicated on the request page." Unfortunately, that does not appear to be true in every case: When I started to go through syncing the summary page with the subpages, I found that the 2nd and 3rd subpages in my list (under #1 above), Wikinews Basque and Wikinews Sicilian, were given the status "verification" by an admin ([2], [3]) and were changed to "submitted" status years later by an IP editor ([4] [5]). Looks to me like the subpages (request pages) are wrong in those 2 cases, and thus will likely be wrong in other cases, as well. (BTW, three other similar edits by that IP editor at the same time did not involve a change in subpage status, but should probably be checked by an admin, anyway.) I have started to sync the information on the summary page with the subpages that appear to be correct, crossing out the entries in the above lists as I go. When I come across a subpage that appears to be incorrect (as with the Basque and Sicilian Wikinews requests), I will mark them with "??" and not change anything (yet). Someone else can change the subpages if they feel it is appropriate, but I'm going to stick with fixing the summary page in "obvious" cases for now. - dcljr (talk) 19:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I see, I didn't think about the possibility that the request pages could also have been changed wrongly, when actually no decision to change a request's status was made. In most cases, if a "submitted->verified" or "open->eligible" change wasn't made by a Langcom member, it is wrong. I checked the edits of the IP you mentioned and corrected them; that was in fact a past abuser. Thanks for your cleaning up in this area. --MF-W 00:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Request Luri, Konkani and Awadhi be verified for eligibility[edit]

I really think the following three languages (Northern Luri, Goan Konkani and Awadhi) should be reviewed for eligibility. These projects have each remained under discussion for quite some time now, and during that time they have become quite active, developing a fairly decent amount of articles and community N. Luri, Goan Konkani and Awadhi. each of these languages has a large community of speakers Northern Luri numbers 1.7 million speakers, Goan Konkani numbers 3.6 million and Awadhi numbers 3.0 million. I feel these projects should all be given a thorough review for eligibility and not be left perpetually in limbo, speakers of these languages might feel more willing to contribute even more than they already have if they have the security of knowing that there project stands a chance to one day be published. Abrahamic Faiths (talk) 23:04, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Urdu Wikivoyage[edit]

I think the Urdu Wikivoyage at Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Urdu should be reviewed for eligibility..--عثمان خان شاہ (talk) 20:54, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Northern Pashto Wikipedia[edit]

Hi, Need your help. The exist Pashto edition of Wikipedia is in Southern Pashto Which is mostly spoken in Central and Southern Afghanistan, this dialect is called Central or Western dialect of Pashto. But unfortunately the Pakistani Pashtuns (who are more in population than Afghan Pashtun) do not understand the Afghani Pashto Dialect, The central Afghanistani Pashto is completely different from Pashto Spoken In Pakistan (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa).So I want to request for Northern Pashto,Is it possible to create Wikipedia edition for Northern Pashto ? As Wikimedia already created two Arabic editions of Wikipedia one in Egyptian Arabic and second in Standard Arabic.--UsmanKhanShah (talk) 21:24, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Neapolitan Wikisource[edit]

Hi, in 2011 we opened a request for a Neapolitan Wikisource and I think that this project has grown enough to be approved.

We are a small community, but we are trying to keep a good activity every month to make this project run good. The Neapolitan language count more than 11 million speakers around the world, has a rich and long literary story and Wikisource would be a good opportunity to share this beautiful heritage.

It would be very appreciated if you could reply quickly to this request.

Thank you for reading and have a nice day.

--Chelin (talk) 17:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Moldovan Wikipedia consensus[edit]

there appears to be a consensus that Moldovan Wikipedia should be deleted that has approx. 81% supporting deletion of the Moldovan Wikipedia at Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Moldovan Wikipedia 2. 21:31, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not on the Language Committee, but I'd like to point out that closure discussions are not votes, so the 81% figure doesn't mean as much as you might think. There may indeed be a consensus, but it's not because one side got more votes. - dcljr (talk) 02:57, 5 February 2015 (UTC)