The proposal is rejected and the project will be kept open.
A Language Committee member provided the following comment::
"Inactivity in itself is no valid reason; additional problems are" and no additional problems were shown to exist during the discussion. --MF-W 21:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC) // marked as rejected on: 13:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I propose closure. For now, no native speakers to contribute recently. Buryatia has low number of internet users. Buryat Wikipedia may be a relative of Mongolian Wikipedia. The 225-article project is now growing slow. So, this project will be closed, unless more native speakers have to contribute. Kalmyk (talk) 05:30, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Per the policy, only LangCom members may close proposals. I have re-opened this proposal. SPQRobin (talk) 18:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Shameful. As a member of langcom, you are bound to follow all parts of the policy. This means to immediately reject a proposal that is contrary to the rules. Do so now. Seb az86556 (talk) 02:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Please read the section "Decision" carefully. See the RFC. SPQRobin (talk) 03:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Comment Kalmyk is blocked as the long-term vandal SGF. Trijnsteltalk 21:54, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Honestly, I would support the closure of this project...--U.Steele (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. I'm going to work over that project if no one else is. --Comp1089 (talk) 10:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
It's great, but this project is dead, just like the better part of Wikies in the languages of Russia. You will have to try much.--U.Steele (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Против / Oppose. Отсутствие активных участников - это само по себе недостаточно валидная причина для закрытия проекта. Указания требуют дополнительных проблем. Эта вики же никому не вредит, даже если она и не очень полезна в настоящем состоянии. Спешить некуда, и вполне возможно, что в дальнейшем найдутся участники. / Lack of active users is not by itself a sufficiently valid reason to close a project. The policy requires additional problems. Besides, the wiki isn't hurting anything, even if it's not very useful in its current state. There's no rush. It's entirely possible that contributors will be found in the future. Tempodivalse[talk] 20:47, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose per Tempodivalse. Лучше бы чеченскую Википедию прикрыли, право слово... Saint Johann (ru) 19:32, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
What do you don't like in ce-wiki?--U.Steele (talk) 06:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose "Buryatia has low number of internet users." It is absolutely false. According to senator from Buryatia in Federation Council of Russia Vitaliy Malkin, in 2000-2010 number of internet-users in Republic grown from 48 to 140 per 1000 residents. In Russia the proportion of Internet users is 37.9%, in Buryatia only 28.8%, but it is 280 thousand people and if we'll see to demographics, 30% of them must be Buryats (2010). But it is only Republic - Buryats are living in other places of the world and Russia. And I don't think that closure of Buryat Wikipedia would be a good decision. --Soul Train (talk) 22:29, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. Бурятский язык существует. Носителей языка достаточно много. Компьютеризация идет полным ходом. То есть, перспективы раздела довольно неплохие. А мы вместо того, чтобы помочь разделу развиваться (прежде всего информацией о вики-технологии, целях википедии и т.п.), хотим закрыть раздел. Buryat language exists. Native speakers quite a lot. Computerization is in full swing. Бюрократ википедии на языка саха --HalanTul (talk) 00:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
No one doubts in a existence and number of native speakers of Buryat language. But if no one interested in this and no one reads it, we can/should move this Wiki in incubator until we find some native speakers.--U.Steele (talk) 05:34, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
How moving a project back and forth helps its improvement, I can't see?.. Amikeco (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Reread my message carefully. It may helps XDD --U.Steele (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose. Realization of this proposal may create a very bad precedent: we should not automatize the project closure processes pleading such arguments as "the local Wiki grows slowly". Living in the polyethnic and polylingual Volga-Ural Region, I know very good what a difficult task is to get the local languages speakers involved in any work on the Internet in case of the work demands use of their native language, even if the language is developed, has a relatively old literal tradition, the official status, and even if the native speaker has good proficiency in his native language. This is because of: a) technical obstacles (lacking of fonts, keyboard layouts); b) digital divide (it is significant e.g. for regional and minority languages in Russia); c) strong dialectal diversity (in that case the official language norm, if exists, seems alien to the most part of speakers because of its artificial character, or because it is based on the only one of many local dialects); d) conflict between the innovative, post-industrial spirit of the work with the up-to-date Internet projects (especially with Wikipedia), and between traditional, conservative characteristics inherent in the sphere of usage of the regional and minority languages (last but not least!). For Buryat, all these thing are suitable. But does it mean that wiki projects on Buryat have no prospects? I think no. The growth rate of the project in minority languages depends, first of all, on the activists' efforts, not only on the sociolinguistic circumstances. We can hope, that such activists will appear: as it was noted above, the internetization and computerization processes in Buryatia go rather successfully; there are some people who try to eliminate the technical obstacles with Buryat fonts & keyboard layouts (on PC, iOS, Android); history of the development of the Wikimedia projects in minority languages similar to Buryat tells us that the other obstacles also may be avoided. --Denis Sacharnych (talk) 02:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Just wondering, isn't Cyrillic already well supported in terms of fonts and keyboard, especially in Russia? SPQRobin (talk) 08:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
For all these languages extended Cyrillic should be used with characters absent in Russian. --Mitrius (talk) 16:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose, Buryat and Mongol are two different languages. As an intermediate solution, I can offer daily guidance (same way I am active in several other minor Wikipedias) to ensure there is no vandalism during the periods native speakers are not active.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Support closure. Project currently inactive/orphaned. Leaving project orphaned may lead to vandalism and junk articles and discourage future possible Buryat users from contributing to the project. Закрыть. Проект явно заброшен. Если в будущем и появятся пишущие на бурятском, что тоже еще под вопросом, пока в разделе никто не активен, он может наполниться мусором, а это только отпугнет возможных авторов. --DonaldDuck (talk) 06:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose per Tempodivalse and Denis Sacharnych. Она никому не мешает --W008 (talk) 06:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Pages in Mongolian created by one spamer two days ago don't interfere too *irony*. Nobody wants to delete it.--U.Steele (talk) 07:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Против (oppose). Развивается медленно? Если закрыть - вообще никак не будет развиваться. --Scorpion-811 (talk) 08:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Развиваться и в инкубаторе можно.--U.Steele (talk) 11:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Ну, возможно и в инкубаторе будет развиваться, согласен ... но по-моему участники будут вносить вклад более охотно в проект, который имеет независимость и собственный раздел. Если мы хотим действительно поддержать бурятскую Википедию, логичнее не закрывать проект, а наоборот привлекать туда пишущих и помогать бороться с вандализмом. С уважением ~ Tempodivalse[talk] 15:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. The current low number of articles and users is not a sufficient reason to close the Buryat edition. If it was, we would have to close dozens of other editions with the same situation. By closing the Buryat Wikipedia we would handicap its development even more. I'm not an expert on Mongolic languages but the proximity of languages is not a reason, either. Out of the other editions, there are plenty of such examples that we can't ignore. Moreover, this question was already examined when the Buryat edition was created. --Voevoda (talk) 08:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose per Tempodivalse. "Lack of active users is not by itself a sufficiently valid reason to close a project", furthermore I prefer to give her another chance, hoping that some new native speakers will join the project. --Reder (talk) 08:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose per Denis Sacharnych. --Kaganer (talk) 12:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Против/Oppose Неактивность и проблема "язык-диалект" -- два негативных примера из правил закрытия. / Inactivity and language/dialect problem are two typical antipatterns in the rules. Ignatus (talk) 15:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. This project does have a chance: there is a pretty high number of native speakers, Buryat Republic is progressing in the terms of Internet access. It is also false that there is no scientific works in Buryat: for example, there is a Russian-Buryat mathematical dictionary. Thus I think that this project must have a chance, as this is a project in more or less widely spoken language — NickK (talk) 18:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Против / Oppose / Əleyhinə per Tempodivalse and Denis Sacharnych and Soul Train. --►Safir yüzüklü Ceklimesaj 10:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. There is a Buryat electronic textbook. Thus I think that this project must have a chance, as this is a project in more or less widely spoken language per above, and the project will be a minority project of the proposed Wikimedia Mongolia. You may contact Chinneeb, MongolWiki, Aapyyl, or Zorigt about Buryat Wikipedia. --Warcraft (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - Per policy, inactivity/small size are not sufficient reasons for closure of Wikipedias. --Node ue (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose per Denis Sacharnych. --Mitrius (talk) 16:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose. In any case Buryats should have the possibility to build their version of WP, though maube it will be slow. Closeness of Buryat and Mongol languages should not be exaggerated - the languages are different. --Al Silonov (talk) 17:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose per Denis Sacharnych. Buryat is a living language. Buryat people should have chance to use WP to preserve their language and culture in the digital age. I think that since more and more Buryat people age getting access to internet, Buryat WP will eventaully take off. Just compare it to some other wikis in the languages of Russia. The Bashikr WP was asleep for years, but it have become really active now. V. Volkov / В. Волков (kneiphof) (talk) 12:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose. I am a native speaker of Buryad. I spoke only Buryad until I was 4.
It was me who created an initial structure of Buryad Wikipedia (user:Tsebeen). At the time I wanted to become an administrator, but didn't know how. Now I would like to become an administrator and I will really appreciate if you can support me. I am one of the authors of the Electronic Textbook of Buryad (buryadxelen.com). Besides I have developed and maintain keyboard drivers for Buryad (currently available for Windows and iOS, the MacOS version beta tested for the moment).
I have also contributed to Buryad translation if different projects at translatewiki.net (user:Bjargal), last year I was busy developing the Electronic Textbook of Buryad v.2. It will be published soon on DVD.
And last but not least the user Kalmyk is blocked for being suspected a sockpuppet of another user. Is it a usual Wikipedia practice to discuss deletion of whole projects initiated by unknown person (or who wants to remain unknown)?
I feel very grateful for those of you who supported Buryad Wikipedia. Thank you so much for your efforts. I also do understand those who supported deletion: you want to keep the project you love so much free of unsuccessful stories.
I hope that the current situation in Buryad Republic will some time turn downside up in economic and all other aspects including linguistic one. I hope this time won't make us wait too long. Me and many of my fellow colleagues are doing our best to make it true. But 40 years without national school, under implicit imperial pressure, when the TV, publishing and education in your mother tongue is abandoned, is quite long period for people to start forgetting about who you are, and what you should do in this world. The Wikipedia is one of windows to outer world, not many people realize it here in our region, but I am pretty sure the number will increase.
Thank you for reading this. Best regards for this and many days in future, Jargal (talk) 01:17, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose: Lower activity is no reason to close a project; especially with the language having half a million native speakers. Give it a chance, there is no harm if it stays afoot (and hopefully grows). --chinneeb-talk 05:57, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. Why should we close the alive Wiki? Yes, the activity is small but we should understand that it's quite nornal in modern Buryad Republic with its low computerization. Also I should agree with Jargal: "40 years without national school, under implicit imperial pressure, when the TV, publishing and education in your mother tongue is abandoned, is quite long period for people to start forgetting about who you are". We mustn't forbid Buryad people to remember their language and roots by Wikipedia. --LexArt (talk) 08:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose: Per above. The only native speaker and active Buryat Wikipedia contributor is Korol Bumi, who he is still active on ruwiki. --Omega 3 (talk) 11:05, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't think that Korol Bumi has native speaker abilities in Buryad. Jargal (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Oppose: we should wait ; this small project will take its flight. And the reason of the deletion exposed here is not rather valid.--Morphypnos (talk) 07:35, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Strong oppose. Я против закрытия. Пройдет какое-то время и все равно придется создать такой раздел. Пусть уж лучше будет, тем более он никому не мешешает. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yappo (talk) 07:17 UTC 14. Apr. 2012
I think it is appropriate to make a clarification here: The Buryat Wikipedia will not be deleted. That is not what is proposed. It is merely proposed to prevent further editing on bxr.wikipedia.org and to move the content (and editing) to Incubator. Looking at the discussion, I can already say (as a Langcom member) that it's very unlikely that the proposal will be approved. At the same time, we would very much appreciate it if everyone who speaks Buryat here would consider contributing to its Wikipedia --MF-W 10:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Strongly oppose Buryat is a living language with native speakers who have all the right to access to knowledge. These native speakers include kids and other junior speakers. So its in the best interest of these people, we shall give it a chance. Another thing: Nowadays, Buryat and Mongolian written language and speakers are not mutually intelligible: The difference may be far greater than those of Scot and English. I am a Mongolian speaker. If I knew how to contribute to the Buryat Wikipedia, I honestly would contribute. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dagvadorj (talk)
Do you mean you don't know Buryat well enough to contribute, or are there perhaps any other specific problems stopping you from contributing? SPQRobin (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
The comments below this line were made after the proposal was rejected.
Oppose. Buryat and Mongolian are traditionally regarded as the same language, but due to historical factors (namely, the Russian government) they have been differentiated into two separate standards (three if you count the Inner Mongolian Chahar-based standard). In addition to originally-existing dialect differences, the two standards have diverged because of the Russian decision to use different spelling standards for the two and due to stronger Russian influence on Buryad. Despite differences, someone who can speak Buryad may be able to understand Mongolian, and vice versa. But this is a whole different ballgame from the ability to write. Dagvadorj's stated inability to contribute to Buryad Wikipedia is a very real issue. Inner Mongolians similarly have great difficulty writing the Cyrillic script of Mongolia, even though the standard languages are very similar. The Buryad Wikipedia is in poor shape, it is true, but Mongolian Wikipedia isn't terribly good, either. The solution is not to close Buryad Wikipedia down, but to try and find people who are willing to devote the time and effort to build it up. As a first step, contributors should be encouraged to translate articles from Russian or Mongolian. The current weakness in content is a vicious cycle. Because there is no content, few people find it worthwhile to visit. Because few Buryad speakers visit, there is no development of content. There is a desperate need to kickstart the Wikipedia with content that Buryad speakers find useful, and thus encourage the development of a Buryad Wikipedia community. 18.104.22.168 01:11, 5 May 2012 (UTC)