Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Khmer Wiktionary

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The result of the following proposal for closing a WMF project is to KEEP the project. Please, do not modify this page.

The following discussion is closed: Still no activity -- project to be closed per consensus (bug 19368). SPQRobin (inc!) 20:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

- I have reopened this discussion, there is no consensus here and even users seem to be contributing in the RC locally. --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 09:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

This one is not active, see http://km.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%9E%96%E1%9E%B7%E1%9E%9F%E1%9F%81%E1%9E%9F:%E1%9E%94%E1%9F%86%E1%9E%9B%E1%9E%B6%E1%9E%9F%E1%9F%8B%E1%9E%94%E1%9F%92%E1%9E%8A%E1%9E%BC%E1%9E%9A%E1%9E%90%E1%9F%92%E1%9E%98%E1%9E%B8%E1%9F%97&hideminor=1&days=500&limit=500&uselang=en -- recent changes going back as far as possible, with hideminor to hide bots (only bots marked their edits as minor). Activity on:
  • 30 June: today one user edited it after he commented about the closure of this wiki on my talk page
  • 25 June: a user doing some edits
  • 30 May: a user doing creating two pages
Imho, it's some activity but not real activity if you look at the whole period. SPQRobin (inc!) 14:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I propose to close this discussion in seven days from now, on May 11VasilievVV 20:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

SPQRobin: What do you mean by "consensus"? Could you please elaborate? In this page there are more people against the closure than supporting it. What are the other factors not showing here? Regards. --83.42.147.250 09:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
If you want, you can ask your friends to oppose/support so you are in the majority. It's about arguments, so see my comment above about activity. SPQRobin (inc!) 14:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Let's see if I properly understand it: you are closing on your own account something which has 3 (old) votes supporting closure and 5 (more recent) against and, besides, you still call that consensus? About activity... well I just can say that your ideas about it are something totally opposed to what I think is basic in a Wikimedia wiki. Anyway. Maybe it was not active. It is now. That should be enough. --81.38.38.128 17:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The only acitivity at the Khmer wiktionary is the index.php spambot. The Khmer wikipedia is just slowly starting to get a life, the community is way to small to support more than one project. Ahoerstemeier 11:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems to be locked now (sometime in the last week or so) with no notice here or there? (I'm not sure exactly how the lock/access rights work, but that seems to be the case; pages are only editable by Stewards.) Note on the bug "JeLuF 2010-03-21 11:37:54 UTC " saying that the wikis had been closed ("Done."). That "bug" should not have been left open. Probably should be unlocked again. Robert Ullmann 18:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I've re-opened the bug to sort this out ;-) Robert Ullmann 18:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
JeLuF has re-opened the km.wikt, closed the bug again. So that is resolved. It may be time to end this request though, the comments supporting closure are from 2007. Robert Ullmann 13:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
seems to be "closed" again; re-opened bug (;-) yet again! Can't edit ATM. Robert Ullmann 22:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC) resolved Robert Ullmann 11:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Support closure[edit]

  • Support closing. No recent activity nidicates noone is interested... I can't see any useful content or at least my browser does not show it... --Tone 07:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment Comment That's a font issue, you need to have a special Khmer font. But I don't speak Khmer, I can only see that it uses the correct characters, so it seems to be legitimate contents, but only very few. Ahoerstemeier 11:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Support closure: tiny amount of Khmer content—barely 10 pages (wiktionary:km:Special:Allpages) and little useful activity recently other than protection and spam cleanup (wiktionary:km:Special:Recentchanges). There was one editor last year adding some content; I left a message on his en.wikipedia talk page at en:User talk:Pisethkem#Proposed closure of Khmer Wiktionary informing him of this discussion. If someone will make a commitment to this project diluting efforts on our tiny Khmer Wikipedia, I'm happy to reconsider my "support closure" position. --A. B. (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
    I don't know where you learned math, but I count about 60 pages. -- Prince Kassad 05:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
    Well, I don't claim to be a math whiz but I do have 10 fingers and I used all 10 plus a couple of toes to count up the number of pages with what I presume to be Khmer titles. In fact if I go back 200 days (10 fingers times 10 toes times 2 feet), I find no Khmer changes, just a lot of thankless work by Ahoerstemeier (20 edits, 30+ deletions and blocks) and by Drini (20+ deletions and blocks) to keep this project clean of trash.
    Having said that, on closer examination, the English and French-titled pages are useful content: Khmer-English or Khmer-French translation pages, most of them added last year by an anonymous IP that I believe to be wikt:km:User:Pisethkem‎ (based on his edits to Pisethkem‎'s user page). I suppose I do need more fingers and toes.
    I have left a message for w:km:User:Chhorran, km.wikipedia's one active editor, making him/her aware of this discussion. I also posted a similar message at km.wikipedia's embassy.
    In the meantime, I stand by my recommendation to close this project and transfer its contents to the incubator until some editor commits to work on this project. --A. B. (talk) 12:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Oppose closure[edit]

  1. Oppose - it has sufficient content. -- Prince Kassad 11:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
    Comment Comment To my understanding the most important about Wikimedia projects is that it needs a community - and there is noone active at this wiki for many months. The existing content won't be deleted, once there is a community it can build upon those few entries already existing. Ahoerstemeier 11:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose per Prince Kassad. Let them more time. Slade 22:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    I will try the best my contributions to edit for both khmer wikibooks(វិគីសៀវភៅសិក្សាខ្មែរ) and khmer wikitionary (វិគីនុក្រមខ្មែរ) 04:27 (UTC) 6 November 2007 Chhor Ran
  3. Oppose The project is up and running. --Piolinfax (@es.wikt) 03:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
    Comment Comment
    > To my understanding the most important about Wikimedia projects is that it needs a community
    Not to my undertanding, though. One single person can do many and excellent things in a project by themselves. In Wiktionaries there is a relevant fistful of such cases. A community is most desirable but not mandatory.
    > The existing content won't be deleted
    Well, maybe, but it may be as well hidden (i.e. become magically inexistant and useless) or (a better option but not the best) taken to the Incubator, were it will be kept cosy and warm but quite likely in a comfortable, self-induced comma (the fact of its being in the Incubator being the main factor for this... it's psychological, you know) and out of reach of a good number of potential users not so involved with or used to Meta or the Incubator itself. --Piolinfax (@es.wikt) 03:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Looks like this project has sufficient content. Localisation of Khmer has improved very significantly in the past months. 81% with a fully localised read-only UI. Risk with small communities and multiple projects is always there, though. I wouldn't be surprised if this project got into trouble again in a year or so. Siebrand 16:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Time, friends, give it time. --Jeffmcneill 23:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
  6. Oppose Looking at the recent changes, there's a trickle of activity lately. It's not much, but it's there. A Stop at Willoughby 19:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  7. Oppose There is very little activity, but no (serious) problems with vandals. Given that the km.wp is growing, we should just give this time. Robert Ullmann 18:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  1. Comment Comment Although there is content, I think there's a bigger but easier to fix issue. Is the writing in articles actually legible? Content articles use writing like this: ទោះបី​ជា​មាន​មតិ​យ៉ាងណា​ក៏​ដោយ​ការ​ប្រើ​ស្រោម​អនាម័យ​គឺ​ជា​វិធី. --Pineapple fez 01:56, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
    It is just fine if you have a reasonable font installed. Robert Ullmann 18:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
    Good :D --Pineapple fez 06:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
  2. Comment Comment It is getting a new word every few weeks, most recently from Alifshinobi. Probably ok to move this back to the incubator if the editors rae willing, but given the reasonable state of localization it's also fine as it is. SJ+ 23:54, 11 April 2010 (UTC)