Requests for comment/Language restriction on Navajo Wikipedia

Statement of the problem

An administrator of Navajo Wikipedia, Seb az86556, deleted my comment on a talk page because it was written in English.

My deleted comment was asking the origin or literal meaning of the title, Ásáí dinéʼiʼ bikéyah (Arab world), because the word, Ásáí (Arab), is not present in any dictionaries and the reference of the word is not found except Wikimedia projects. Thus, asking the literal meaning of a coined word is quite natural and relevant to the article improvement. After his deletion of talk page with stating it is not written in Navajo language, I tried to talk to him, but he insisted every non-Navajo comments in talk pages should be deleted. It cannot be solved within the Navajo Wikipedia because there are few contributors there, so I brought this issue to here.

There are few, if not none, monolingual Navajo speakers who can also properly write Navajo. Monolingual Navajo speakers usually haven't had chance to learn how to write and read Navajo language. If somebody can read and write Navajo sentences, s/he can also understand English in reality. Even two current active administrators are more fluent in English rather than Navajo.

Futhermore, even we neglect the current situation as I wrote above, deleting other people's comments solely because it is written in other languages should not be allowed in any Wikipedias. Thus, I hope we are able to reach two decisions.

1. To restore my deleted post on the talk page.
2. To let Seb az86556 know that he should not delete any comments or block any people on the ground that they write comments in other languages as far as they did it in good faith.

--정안영민 (talk) 04:35, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Statement of problem

The statement somewhat misrepresents the actual issue by going into details that are irrelevant here.

The question as I see it is whether wikipedias should be forced to accept talk page-comments in various languages, and if so which and how. I have asked JeongAhn to take the issue here in order to determine what a common cross-project policy should be and how it should be enforced.

The discussion should focus on developing a cross-project policy, enforced by meta's stewards which includes

1. A list of languages which must be accepted by all wikipedias on all talk pages
2. A list of punishments and sanctions for non-compliance, and
3. A list of stewards who will enforce this policy across all projects without prejudice

An unambiguous policy will result in equal treatment across languages, which is (one would assume) in the best interest of all concerned.

Thanks.

Seb az86556 (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment by Abd

Links and facts

• The sysop deleted the article Talk page.[1] The content of that page was provided below.
• This was discussed on the sysop user talk.[2]
• The filer here asked "Do you delete any talk page if it is written in other languages?"
• The sysop responded: "They are always deleted when not in Navajo. Besides, questions such as yours are out of place and not welcome here. Go to wiktionary."
• The filer responded: "basic spirit of Wikipeida is cooperation and other languages should be allowed if it is related to the improvement of the article. If you think all other languages should be deleted in talk pages, I will bring this issue to Meta. Selecting the title or name of the article is not irrelevant to the article."
• The sysop responded: "Or you could bring the issue to English wikipedia where they block people for not using English. I will be interested in that discussion, so ask them "Should every wikipedia be forced to accept talkpage-posts in any language, anywhere, and be expected to provide an answer in that language?"
• Site maintenance discussion on nv.wiki is at least sometimes in English.[3][4].

Assessment

• The sysop is not clear but does appear to be asserting a deletion policy. It is difficult for a non-Navajo speaker to research this because there is no Google translate for Navajo.
• The sysop appears to believe that en.wikipedia blocks people for not using English, and frames this issue in terms of "forcing" wikis to accept and respond to talk-page posts in "any language." This was not the issue raised. The sysop is diverting attention from the likely strong reason for deletion, the content of the question, and appears to be hostile.
• We cannot read the question itself because it was deleted. Any nv.wiki sysop or a global sysop could bring the text of the question here. It appears to relate to a possible neologism. Language issues can be political issues.
  • Text of the question:
  • == Literal meaning of Ásáí ==
  • I have never seen this word before. What is the literal meaning of Ásáí? Is there any reference for this translation? --JeongAhn (talk) 08:03, 17 Ghąąjįʼ 2014 (UTC)

the above was inserted by nv.wiki sysop, User:Stephen G. Brown 22:30, 20 October 2014. Thanks, --Abd (talk) 00:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• English appears to be the language of nv.wiki site maintenance and is generally the international technical language for WMF wikis.
• The sysop responds in terms of a demand for a policy requiring all sites to behave in a certain way, that nobody is proposing, that is exaggerated from what would have been simple here, allowing the question, no response required. I have asked questions on talk pages in English on many wikis, they have never been rev-del'd, which is the effect here. I see very few article talk pages on this wiki. It's tedious to research.
• If there is a site policy that requires all article discussion to be in Navajo, the comment could still be blanked with a reference, in Navajo, to history. In that way, any Navajo reader could reply to the question, perhaps on the user talk page. It is clear that English discussion on user talk pages is allowed! Deleting the article talk page prevents ordinary users from seeing the question, including seeing it in Recent Changes or their watchlists. Such a site policy, if it exists, should be announced in, at least, the international wiki language, English.
• Such a site policy might conflict with WMF policy, either express or implied. The motive may be the usage of the nv wikipedia to encourage literacy among Navajo speakers by forcing the use of Navajo, and only allowing those with adequate familiarity in Navajo to participate in guiding page content. That strategy, while possibly laudable in intent, could conflict with WMF neutrality policy.
• Such conflicts exist. They are not generally addressed by "forcing" local wikis to do anything. Neutrality policy is not generally enforced by "punishing" offenders.
• What the filer here is seeking is unlikely as some steward action. Nor are non-Navajo speakers likely to intervene in nv.wiki. What the respondent sysop is seeking is also unlikely as an outcome of this RfC. This RfC may generate advice, and it is possible that a more general issue will be raised, possibly through RfC. This title will not attract the necessary participation.
• I suggest negotiating a cooperative solution. I'm concerned about the apparent hostility. nv.wiki is low-participation. By far, most activity appears to be that of the sysop.
• If that site policy exists, or if the sysop is enforcing this as his own opinion, this could suppress participation even by Navajo users who are more fluent in English. Even the sysops on this site communicate in English, as the filer points out. I would urge the sysop to reconsider his position.
• What happens on en.Wikipedia as the actions of individual sysops is not necessarily consistent or site policy. As to policy on that wiki, "page not in English" is not a speedy deletion criterion, even for articles, see [5]. I have never observed "not in English" as a reason for deleting talk pages. Wikipedia is vast, so it may have happened. More likely, that comments were placed disruptively could have been a reason. Comments considered not useful are sometimes blanked, and in best practice, these are accompanied by a note referring to history, for transparency.
• Nothing in what I have said requires any nv.wiki user to respond to the question. The question might be unwelcome if seen as a challenge to the right of nv.wiki to use words either as neologisms or without any attestation in formal sources. I affirm that nv.wiki has the right to do that. That is, the language of the wiki is determined by the language community. Sourcing can be in other languages, it is not required that it be in the wiki language (though obviously verifiability in the wiki language is preferred). In order to discuss topics, words for the topics are needed. As long as those words are defined, they could be complete neologisms, unsourced. If the filer here wants to propose a different title, the filer should be free to do so. Is there a better term to use for "Arab world"?
• Normal WMF site policy is that if a page is speedy deleted, on the opinion of a sysop, or possibly someone templated a page and a sysop agreed, the page will be restored on request, and then the deletion may be discussed. Hence I'd strongly suggest that the sysop simply undelete that page and if it is believed that it should be deleted, start a discussion in an appropriate place. --Abd (talk) 12:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Can you please notify the administrator in question, as well as the local community? --Rschen7754 06:07, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I let them know. [6],[7] --정안영민 (talk) 08:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

• My own preference, as a Navajo Wikipedia admin, is that both Navajo and English should be considered appropriate languages on discussion pages of the Navajo Wikipedia. The reason I say this is because many Navajo, though fluent speakers of the language, cannot read it or write it (Navajo language use has been rigorously suppressed in schools for a long time). As a result, Navajos tend to use English for written communication. Of course we would like to encourage the use of Navajo there and discourage the use of English, but I think that practical matters make "Navajo only" an impossibility. Anyone who reads a comment or question in English or badly written Navajo is free to ignore it.
• I should mention that we have experienced a lot of nuisance questions from outside the Navajo community about language issues such as spelling, grammar, usage, and vocabulary, because of the complexity of the Navajo language and because language resources are few and expensive. Some people do not mind such questions if we know the answers, but others find these language-related questions inappropriate for an encyclopedia.
• I do not like the idea that Navajo discussion pages there may become almost all English, but I do not see how it can reasonably be avoided. Stephen G. Brown (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Is there any nv.wiki policy or guideline on this? Has the matter been discussed? --Abd (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• Stewards are not going to enforce a policy regarding languages and whatnot. That sort of thing is left to local admins, and starting a RFC / global policy on that sort of thing would most likely not pass.
• We summarily remove off-topic comments on talk pages all the time on en.wikipedia, but I am concerned about the use of the delete tool to do this, as the community cannot review the content of those comments.
• Otherwise, my views largely mirror Stephen G. Brown's. --Rschen7754 02:58, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

• I still claim every language should be allowed in talk pages of any wikipedia if the writer's intention is in good faith and his choice of different language is due to his lack of ability. Every other editor is free to ignore the comments written in different languages if s/he did not feel like to answer them. But the comment should not be deleted as far as it is relevant to the article. The reason for the existence of talk page should be more placed on making better dictionary by cooperation rather than on encouraging literacy among Navajo speakers.
• However, all of us seem to agree on the idea that at least English should be allowed in talk pages of nv-wp except Seb az86556. Could you reconsider your policy on this issue, Seb az86556? --정안영민 (talk) 18:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

• I asked it again on the talk page, and then realized my mistake and deleted it. I hope my action can be forgiven. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:12, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
• I also asked about the etymology on Wiktionary, although it could be put to RFV if someone wants to find a source using it. Hopefully this solution satisfies all parties, including User:JeongAhn and User:Seb az86556. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, PiRSquared17. But it does not solve the real problem. Language restriction on nv-wp is suppressing participation of others including me as Abd pointed out. The etymology of Ásáí is just a single example caused by the strict language restriction which is the real problem. --정안영민 (talk) 23:12, 24 October 2014 (UTC)