Requests for comment/Rename nah.wikipedia to nci.wikipedia

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Dialog-information on.svgThis is a subpage; for more information, see the Requests for comments page.


This is a request for comment on renaming the project site for Wikipedia in Classical Nahuatl. The site Nāhuatl (Nāhuatl) (this name is used in Special:Sitematrix) is considered to currently be named incorrectly, and it is suggested renaming the project to nciwiki, as nci is the ISO 639-3 code for Classical Nahuatl. Likewise the subdomain should be nci as this is the correct code, and the content language should be set to nci. The Interface code can remain as it currently is, as it is already set to nci.

Note that changing the site identifier nciwiki must most likely wait until phab:T83609 is resolved, although the prefix can be changed before that task is closed.

There is a new attempt to vote over a rename of nahwiki, starting at 2nd February 2019. --218.68.229.42 01:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Background and related discussions[edit]

Background[edit]

The present project nahwiki is named according to a situation that existed many years ago, when nahwiki included many official written forms of Nahuatl, which are nci – Classical Nahuatl, nhn – Central Nahuatl, nch – Central Huasteca Nahuatl, ncx – Central Puebla Nahuatl, naz – Coatepec Nahuatl, nln – Durango Nahuatl, nhe – Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl, ngu – Guerrero Nahuatl, azz – Highland Puebla Nahuatl, nhq – Huaxcaleca Nahuatl, nhk – Isthmus-Cosoleacaque Nahuatl, nhx – Isthmus-Mecayapan Nahuatl, nhp – Isthmus-Pajapan Nahuatl, ncl – Michoacán Nahuatl, nhm – Morelos Nahuatl, nhy – Northern Oaxaca Nahuatl, ncj – Northern Puebla Nahuatl, nht – Ometepec Nahuatl, nlv – Orizaba Nahuatl, ppl – Pipil language, nhz – Santa María la Alta Nahuatl, npl – Southeastern Puebla Nahuatl, nhc – Tabasco Nahuatl, nhv – Temascaltepec Nahuatl, nhi – Tenango Nahuatl, nhg – Tetelcingo Nahuatl, nuz – Tlamacazapa Nahuatl, nhw – Western Huasteca Nahuatl, nsu – Sierra Negra Nahuatl, and xpo – Pochutec. The language code nah can be interpreted as a common code for w:Nahuatl language, or what is called the collection code. When Central Nahuatl, Huasteca Nahuatl, Guerrero Nahuatl, Northern Pueblea Nahuatl, incubator:Michoacan Nahuatl, Orizaba Nahuatl, and Pipil split off to become a project written solely in these modern Nahuatl languages, nahwiki continued to use the collection code instead of switching to the individual code nci, which is the correct code for Classical Nahuatl.

There were two main arguments for this. Partly a "peace offer" from these modern Nahuatl languages that nahwiki could continue to use nah as language code, and partly (and more importantly) that Nahuatl language by some is considered to also consist of the unofficial, conservative forms of many so-called other forms of Classical and modern Nahuatls, which are, respectively, w:Pipil language and w:Huasteca Nahuatl. The differences to these modern Nahuatl language forms may be confusing to some, but while Pipil was quite seldom in use at that time Huasteca Nahuatl was more common.

One of the main driving forces behind use of Pipil was, and partly is, the newspaper w:Aztecs. This newspaper used Pipil as its language, but then in 2006 it created its own version of Pipil and called the new language version "Modern Nahuatl". This started a slide among users of Pipil from the previously conservative version to a more moderate version. At the other side ordinary Classical Nahuatl started a slide towards this Modern Nahuatl. In the latest version of ordinary Classical Nahuatl from 2012 the differences between Classical Nahuatl and Pipil has become almost insignificant.

For all practical purposes there are no difference between Classical Nahuatl and Pipil, and even for Nahuatls the difference is next to impossible to spot. Most of the time when someone complains about changes to an article on nahwiki that is said to be Huasteca Nahuatl it is simply an article written by some mixture of old Classical Nahuatl and local common dialects. This is hefty reputed by people from the Huasteca Nahuatl movement.

Some say harshly that Pipil peoples and Classical Nahuatl has been moved towards Pipil, but it is still called Classical Nahuatl. Some say there are still eight important differences, some say about 40, whatever is correct the differences has become infinitesimal for languages in common use. Still note that there are a lot of articles on the net that describe the status as it existed in late 1990.

It is only as a content language Pipil is somewhat used, but the pages with Pipil is not marked in any way. It will probably not be possible to identify by automatic means which pages is truly Pipil, most of the terms that can be used as identificators will be just noise, and there will be no clear winner even for articles which are said to be written in a specific language form. It is simply not possible to identify any clear distinction between them after a few revisions.

The interface language at nahwiki is more or less pure Classical Nahuatl, and the language code in use are nci that is Classical Nahuatl. There are no interface language for Pipil. The project use nci as its default language.

In short, the reason why the nah language code is used on nahwiki is simply a continuation from the split between nahwiki and incubator wikis. There are no real reason why the code is nah and not the more proper nci. --218.68.229.42 01:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Future of the subdomain nah[edit]

1; There is no clear solution on where the nah.wikipedia subdomain should point, but one possibe solution is to eventually split the traffic evenly between nahwiki and incubator wikis. If an article exist on these wikis the choice among them can be randomized, but if the trend is skewed the losing wiki should be weighted up.

It can be argued that the choice between them should reflect the number of users of the various language forms, but that will open up for a discussion on how many are in fact using the different language forms. These language forms are official, and that makes it seem natural to do an equal division between them.

Another solution is to show the corresponding two pages from each Wikipedia (when they exist) side by side, allowing the reader to chose one version. --218.68.229.42 01:54, 2 February

2; The interface by nci (Classical Nahuatl) is Nahuatlahtolli, now it's incorrect as Nāhuatl; nahuatl means Nahua people.--Marrovi (talk) 16:55, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

3; The Classical Nahuatl is wrotten without macrons, a standard spelling by Classical Nahuatl is without macrons (UNAM). Only Alexis Wimmer wrote in 2003 with macrons in Dicttionaire du Nahuatl Classique, a website in French language.--Marrovi (talk) 16:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Arguments in favor[edit]

  • Mnn, I would rather Support Support it, because I don't know why they're using a code, which is defined clearly by SIL that that is a collection of languages. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support This Wikipedia, alone with their community, must stop and cease their foolish usage of Collection languages' code. --2409:8902:9300:5626:554:493B:611F:8433 23:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support If this won't break the contents, then why not? --117.136.54.137 22:56, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support Seems logical. --► Sincerely: A¥×aᚢ Zaÿïþzaþ€(hail sithis!) 14:30, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support The new code is more logical. Vulphere 03:32, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support Classical Nahuatl is a death language, this death language isn't problem with Modern Nahuatl languages spoken in my country.--Marrovi (talk) 19:28, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support Without changing URL, nothing can be better fixed, also as Liuxinyu970226 pointed below, the Code of Conduct concerns. --117.14.250.62 07:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support Nearly Nihil Obstat, those oppose users are introducing nonsense, and are clearly violating CoC, see example below: "... Seems like one of those smart-a*s-concern moves ..." That user used this pornographic word in their clauses, so there's nothing we can ask them to obey. --218.68.229.188 07:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support Having it at nah is misleading and drives away potential content contributors, and I’ve seen cases of people who routinely get confused by trying to add modern-language translations to it, only for those to get wasted. ―Born2bgratis (talk) 00:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Arguments against[edit]

  • Oppose Oppose I don't see a clear goal. I believe that the split of the nah wikipedia into many dialects, unless it has a bigger community, will affect the efforts to generate quality content. If the proposal is about renaming it to nci I hope it can preserve its content insetad of restarting it from zero. Regards. --Ricardo gs (talk) 19:03, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
    Well, no man want to clear nahwiki, even I don't want to, anyway, there's really violation we, even yourself, meet, that usages of any ISO 639-2 (or -5 if you'd love to say) collection of languages are violating code standards, and by keeping such codes, a developer is clearly violating MediaWiki Code of conduct, should I say more concern reasons of nahwiki here? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
    "?" -- Which part of the Code of Conduct? Seb az86556 (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Seb az86556: Its Unacceptable behavior section states clearly than God:
    1. ...
    2. Gratuitous or off-topic use of sexual language or imagery.
    3. ...
    --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:02, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
    And where has anyone here used sexual language or imagery? Seb az86556 (talk) 00:45, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Seb az86556: Should I copy-paste what 218.68.229.188 on the above section pointed? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
    Look, you posted this RfC while logged out, you used several IP addresses to stack the vote in its favor, and now youʼre using it to make wild and unfounded allegations about sexual harassment which in some jurisdictions is a very serious criminal accusation. None of this helps your case. Seb az86556 (talk) 12:34, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Seb az86556: By logged out and check, my IP address is 223.72.69.143, how do you think that 218.68.229.188 has connections with me? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
    Also, if the "smart-ass-concern" below can't simply identify that you did "sexual harassment", okay I will no longer trust those IP users, but please can you not simply judge those IP users "as me"? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Comment I don't see any chance that any of the other Nahuatls ever leave the incubator, so this should be a very low priority if done at all. Seems like one of those smart-ass-concern moves where people argue over some coding-frivolities instead of actually contributing. Seb az86556 (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Seb az86556: Please read LPP, where it states: "Codes for collections of languages are part of ISO 639–2, not ISO 639–3. These are no longer valid codes for new Wikimedia projects. A few existing projects continue to use such codes, though the plan is to move them all.". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:59, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion (1)[edit]

  • The whole situation is unclear and I'm not sure to understand, is this a request for renaming nah.wikipedia to nci.wikipedia (in this case, nah disappears) or a request for creating a new nci.wikipedia where the actual content of nah.wikipedia would be moved (in this case, nah still exists). Plus, could we have the links to the previous discussion/requests? (I remember seing some). And why isn't this on the LagCom? (this is where we usually deal with such things). Finally, it should be good to have a discussion/vote on nah.wikipedia itself to know where the local community stands. Cheers, VIGNERON * discut. 09:32, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
    @VIGNERON: Looks like the first, maybe such discussion can be just happened on Phabricator? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:01, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
    incubator:Category talk:Incubator:Nahuatl languages you may look it a lot. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:02, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

There is no single Nahuatl language, in fact there are several Nahuatl languages that speak in Mexico, that is what every linguist knows. I have invited speakers with mother tongues, but they are not interested in having a platform as wikipedia, I have been told several times.--Marrovi (talk) 19:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

The Classical Nahuatl language is a dead language, today many scholars of this language speak this dead language, really the Classical Nahuatl will not be useful for the mother speakers of modern Nahuatl languages, but it could be useful for researchers, academics or fans of the Mexican culture.--Marrovi (talk) 19:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Although the idea of this proposal is good, the proposal is flawed.

Migration plan There is no migration plan. There have been pages copied from nah.wikipedia (hereafter mentioned as nahwiki) to incubator and there is no indication that import is fully done. Also those copies like Steven mentioned on incubator are not the proper way to do that. The proper way needs to be discussed further. There are two ways of doing this. (1) that nahwiki admins export pages and let incubator admins import them. (2) The other way is to add nahwiki to the import list of incubator and let incubator admins do the imports. In both cases there needs to be some tags on pages, mentioning where each one should go, according to their language, so that users can help out. It should also be clear that the copies that where made on incubator should be cleaned up and done properly.

Lack of discussion I checked when the main pages of nahuatl languages where created on incubator and checked those dates with the village pump on the nahwiki. There was no discussion there at that time. There might have been discussion outside of the village pump, but it does not seem to have been mentioned there. Due to that fewer people have been aware of the discussion (if there was any discussion to begin with). Meta can´t really be expected to take decisions on the behalf of an wiki community.

Clear which users write in which language There is one upside here, Marrovi did list in the incubator discussion which users write in which language on nahwiki. This is really useful as when the time comes to create those wikis it will (obviously) be easier to create those wikis than it would be otherwise.--Snaevar (talk) 13:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Snaevar: If you're asking that the administrators of this wiki should also be invited: @Akapochtli, Filtro antiabusos, and Ricardo gs:. --117.15.55.114 05:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the invite and for making me aware about this issue.--Ricardo gs (talk) 18:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

In Wikipedia nah there aren't wrotten by native speakers of Nahuatl languages, those who existed, decided to leave the Wikipedia projects, now I only have the help with Tepoxteco, who supports me in making translations that are understood by native speakers.

The majority of articles in Huiquipedia are not understood by native speakers of Nahuatl languages, but I do not judge them, those who edit there are not native speakers, they are Spanish speakers as me, each with their own positions regarding the language and not in consensus with Native speakers like me have tried to do it.

One way to end the problem of understanding between those who edit articles in Huiquipedia, is to change the code to the classic Nahuatl, a dead language that does not necessarily have to be edited by native speakers. Thus, the editors and aysops who work there in Huiquipedia will be able to continue retaining their political position.

In case they decide that Huiquipedia is of excellent quality or habitual use for people who speak Nahuatl languages ​​as their mother language, the content should be edited only by native speakers or by non-native speakers guided by native speakers. The Huiquipedia hasn't edited for the Nahua peoples from Mexico and El Salvador, they do not edit here, and Wikipedia has not been a good platform that is attractive to the indigenous peoples of Latin America.--Marrovi (talk) 15:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Corrections in Wiktionary[edit]

It's not the same to say Nahuatl to Classical Nahuatl; has been corrected all the entries (words) in the wiktionaries of Spanish, English, German, French, Portuguese, Korean, Japanese, Russian, Hungarian, Romanian, Polish, Finnish, Croatian, Czech, Italian, Sicilian, others. Also was added other Nahuatl languages.

The nah code is used to encompass all Nahuatl languages and nci to especify only Classical Nahuatl, where the different historical orthographies about Classical Nahuatl are specified. Examples: (wikt:en:Category:Nahuan languages, wikt:es:Categoría:Idiomas de la familia nahua)

In the year 2018, the native speakers on all the variants of the Nahuatl languages in INALI to unify a common alphabet for Living Nahuatl languages spoken in Mexico, that is why the unified alphabet of said meeting has been used in the wiktionary nah.(a, ch, e , h, i, k, l, m, n, o, p, r, s, t, ts, u, w, kw, x and y); but in case you want to change the interface to nci, once again you must change all standardized Nahuatl text to the Classical Nahuatl alphabet.--Marrovi (talk) 17:28, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

No es lo mismo decir Náhuatl a Náhuatl clásico; se ha corregido todas las entradas en los wikcionarios de español, inglés, alemán, francés, portugués, coreano, japonés, ruso, húngaro, rumano, polaco, finlandés, croata, checo, italiano, siciliano, entre otros.

Se usa el códico nah, para englobar a todas las lenguas nahuas dentro de una macrolengua y nci para especificar solo al náhuatl clásico, donde se especifica las diferentes ortografías históricas del náhuatl clásico. Ejemplos: (wikt:en:Category:Nahuan languages, wikt:es:Categoría:Idiomas de la familia nahua)

En el año 2018, se reunieron en el INALI, los hablantes nativos de todas las variantes de las lenguas nahuas habladas en México, para unificar un alfabeto común, por eso se ha empleado en el wikcionario nah, el alfabeto unificado de dicha convención (a, ch, e, h, i, k, l, m, n, o, p, r, s, t, ts, u, w, kw, x y y); pero en caso de que se desee cambiar la interfaz a nci, de nueva cuenta se debe cambiar todo el texto náhuatl estandarizado al alfabeto del náhuatl clásico.--Marrovi (talk) 17:28, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@Marrovi: So you believe that "Nahuatl Wiktionary" should also rename to nci.wiktionary.org? --60.26.9.239 06:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes of course, Classical Nahuatl is a death language, no necessary to have got Native speakers, in other Nahuatl languages is very necessary Native speakers.--Marrovi (talk) 14:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Last year, the native speakers now have got a new alphabet for all live languages in Mexico and El Salvador, the new alphabet is this; Kwawtli or kwawti. I love all alphabets in live Nahuatl languages, but if is necessary to change for Standard new alphabet is only in case with nah. For nci, is only an old alphabet as in Nahuatl Dictionary from UNAM [1] and John Sullivan's dictionary from Oregon University.--Marrovi (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

LangCom response and request for information[edit]

@Maor X: for information
This discussion has gotten very off track, personal and inappropriate. This question has been out there for a while, and both LangCom and developers know that something needs to happen. For the developers, there are some other things that they believe are higher priority. For LangCom, we have tried and tried and tried to get information to clarify the situation, and don't get information that is not totally overlaid with emotion and accusation. And we just can't work with that. And to be quite honest: if the people here think that this renaming (or whatever) needs to have a higher priority, you need to answer my questions, because otherwise it's just going to look like a more-or-less geeky coding issue to most people.

To begin, I have two questions that I need responses to: fact-base responses without a lot of emotion and accusation in them.

  1. Where does the OP get the idea expressed here that there has been some agreement to split these seven languages off and make them into a separate project? Or is the OP saying that people writing in each of these seven languages have split off and made seven separate projects? Because that's what the situation in Incubator looks like to me.
  2. What is the real content language of the current nahwiki? Is it all nci? Is some of it in any kind of modern language? (And if so, which one[s]?) I'm not looking for a hard statistical analysis at this point, more a general idea.

I do NOT ... repeat NOT ... want to see arguments (right now) for what should happen to the nah domain, or what standard orthography should be used (for anything), or who should be allowed to contribute to any of the projects (this means you, @Marrovi: don't!), or anything about Wiktionary at all. We'll get to those things later, I imagine. I need the answers to those two questions I asked. Without commentary. Just answers. Thank you. For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 17:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Regards Steven;

You like it or you don't like it, I know the languages ​​spoken in my country; I am in the few people who know about this Nahuatl here on Wikipedia because he has studied it for more than 15 years, in the end he has told him that science is above envy, anger, plots and lynchings. And that is what I have to tell you with your opinion about my country, since I have had the honor of participating and inviting me to its national and international congresses.

You cannot see the work of other people who also know the language, but they have been more confined in making a war than in joining the dots, they despise my work because they know that I am a connoisseur of the subject and that you are holding on. project because you don't want me to know the subject about Nahuas languages. Your hatred towards me is personal because it is no longer possible to prove I am a bad person and I am harmful, my work speaks for itself and people are not so dumb to realize that I am not what you make everyone believe, He has come to call me Devil (diablo) [3], but I have no grudge against you, I don't want to keep hate in my heart and poison myself. I am not a bad person as you think, I love you more in the languages ​​that you can feel for them about their diffusion, revitalization and knowledge.

I am so loyal, what is said in front of things, it is not my custom to act on anyone's back, because I do not have the right to close my way and deny freedom of expression just because I do not I sympathize, knowing that I am knowledgeable about this subject. Thank you.--Marrovi (talk) 07:46, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Saludos, @Marrovi:
First, I hold no hatred toward you at all. And I do not support people doing things like calling you "devil". I will go back to that page and redact that description; I'm sorry I missed it.
I think you were actually referring to me, when I said "The devil is in the details." That was not personal at all. That was using a well-established English idiom. See en:The devil is in the details and wikt:devil is in the details. But my apology for not being sensitive to that cross-culturally. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:51, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Second, my point here specifically addressed to you was strictly limited to your comment above, namely: In case they decide that Huiquipedia is of excellent quality or habitual use for people who speak Nahuatl languages ​​as their mother language, the content should be edited only by native speakers or by non-native speakers guided by native speakers. This is often a theme of yours, but it runs against the concept of "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" (emphasis added). Individual projects have the right to judge whether people contributing are writing in the correct language; we do not set central rules about that.
Finally, I beg you: Please do not write vast walls of discussion. People ignore them, they get frustrated with you, and your point gets lost. Stick to 1-2 sentence responses—for your own sake. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:41, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Answer 1

The reason is taken from the linguistic classification made by Ethnologue, each Nahuan language is assigned a code such as nci, nhn, nch, nch, azd, azn or nhv. The level of intellegibility is varied between one Nahua language and another Nahua language, Huasteca Nahuatl is not the same to Classical Nahuatl or Northem Puebla Nahuatl is not the same to Tabasco Nahuatl; no same syntax, no word correspondence or no standardized spelling, each Nahuatl language has its own peculiarities. Have got another classification of Nahuan languages by INALI in Mexico.

Answer 2

Classical Nahuatl has been assigned to be the best known Nahuatl language in the world, although it's a dead language, it is a language that remains in force within science, it is a comparative similar to Latin, Old Greek or Classical Chinese. Ethnologue has assigned the nci code identify to the Classical Nahuatl.

Currently the Wikipedia nah , is using the writing of Classical Nahuatl for the simple reason that there are many documents printed with the spelling of Classical Nahuatl, so the editions are made with that spelling; The writing of most texts is not a modern Nahuatl language, it has been an interpretation of Classical Nahuatl, so it is advised to change the code to NCI. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marrovi (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. But your "Answer 1" doesn't really answer me. I understand your answer (and have for years; you have educated me thoroughly on this). I was trying to understand if the original poster above (218.68.229.42) was suggesting a unified project for some or all of these languages. I know what you think of this; I was trying to understand whether that user was suggesting that there was an effort toward a unified project.
As to "Answer 2", thank you. My follow-up question to that is as follows:
  • Is each of the individual Nahua languages widely used in writing? Or is writing in Classical Nahuatl common in different communities, even while the spoken forms vary?
Please answer in brief. I don't need a whole explanation here. I just need an answer. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:00, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
The Huiquipedia Mainpage (nah) was written by Mestizo Mexicans who have a low domain in Classical Nahuatl (Akapochtli and Cuaitl are only the users who know the domain of Classic Nahuatl), Huiquipedia Mainpage has got many invented words. The communities where live Nahuan languages ​​are spoken don't use the writing of Classical Nahuatl, each living Nahuatl language uses its own alphabet, there are many reasons why native speakers do not accept the Classical Nahuatl writing, one reason is that Classical Nahuatl writing there is Spanish language phonetics, it's an archaic writing and has got a strong relationship with colonialism; living Nahuatl languages ​​have evolution and do not correspond identically to Classical Nahuatl syntax, for example; Old Castilian vs. modern Spanish, Argentine Spanish, Ladino, Mexican Spanish or Chavacano (Filipino Spanish).
Classical Nahuatl is only spoken by academics, researchers, archaeologists, students who are interested in the Aztec culture or the Spanish colonial period. Classical Nahuatl is a revitalized dead language for educational purposes for to try to understand the history. Speakers of the Nahuan living languages ​​do not understand Classical Nahuatl, many Nahua-speakers use their language orally and few Nahua-speakers write in any modern Nahuatl language.--Marrovi (talk) 05:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
To me all the new questions asked by StevenJ81 can simply answered by one sentence: If something is wrong, then every things about that are also wrong, no need to paint them as correct, just fix. --218.68.229.211 07:15, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Part of the reason for my questions is to understand how we should arrange the mechanics of this if we recode this project. (In particular, is there some content in languages other than Classical that we should move somewhere else?) So let's just let this play out. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:23, 27 August 2019 (UTC)