Discuss the creation of this language project on this page. Votes will be ignored when judging the proposal. Please provide arguments or reasons and be prepared to defend them (see the Language proposal policy).
Ensure the requested language is sufficiently unique that it could not exist on a more general wiki.
Ensure that there are a sufficient number of native editors of that language to merit an edition in that language.
The community needs to develop an active test project; it must remain active until approval (automated statistics, recent changes). It is generally considered active if the analysis lists at least three active, not-grayed-out editors listed in the sections for the previous few months.
"Wikipedia talk" (the discussion namespace of the project namespace)
Default is "no". Preferably, files should be uploaded to Commons.
If you want, you can enable local file uploading, either by any user ("yes") or by administrators only ("admin"). Notes: (1) This setting can be changed afterwards. The setting can only be "yes" or "admin" at approval if the test creates an Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) first. (2) Files on Commons can be used on all Wikis. (3) Uploading fair-use images is not allowed on Commons (more info). (4) Localisation to your language may be insufficient on Commons.
Classical Mongolian is the most distinctive Mongolian language. It is widely used in Mongolia, China and Russia. It is the officical language of Inner Mongolia and Mongolia goverment has announced that it will use Classical Mongolian as the only offical language in the near future — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jiderlesi (talk) 2021-04-04 05:44 (UTC)
@Jiderlesi: Per LPP#Ancient or historical languages: Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted, because resources in such languages continue to be important to the world, even in the absence of native, living speakers of those languages. Where possible, such languages should be bundled with the modern equivalent Wikisource project (such as Old English with English), though that is not required.
Comment Currently Ancient languages are not eligible for new wikis. There has been a request to change this policy. You can sign your support here. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 14:41, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Something like a comment from incubator:I:RFD#Wp/fax: I don't think any speaker of Classical Mongolian would ever join this project while these loads of gibberish crap stand there purporting to be their language. As it is now, more than start a fresh project, they will need to get rid of all that garbage prior to start doing anything there. Not to speak of the great disservice it is to the Classical Mongolian language for incubator to host such loads of gibberish purporting to be it. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:47, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that, the requester is requesting a wiki for "the officical language of Inner Mongolia" and claim it is a language that "Mongolia goverment has announced that it will use Classical Mongolian as the only offical language in the near future", which doesn't sound like an ancient/extinct language. C933103 (talk) 16:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What are the "some local users' feedbacks" you mentioned, and by who? The proposal clearly stated the language this project intended to represent is "the officical language of Inner Mongolia" so of course it will be the same as "the modern Inner Mongolian"? But as also states in the proposal, it is also a language that "Mongolia goverment [...] will use [...] as the only offical language", so using the language code mvf and describing the language as "modern Inner Mongolian" doesn't seems to make sense to me. A few years ago, I have also received a copy of email from you inquiring a Mongolian language expert, in which the inappropriatity of the code "mvf" and its ill definedness were also mentioned clearly in the text. C933103 (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The question here is, the two proposal obviously does not fulfill the requirement "Ensure the requested language is sufficiently unique that it could not exist on a more general wiki." since they're essentially the same language according to the description of the requester. But which of the two requested language here is "a more general wiki" over the other one? C933103 (talk) 12:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's why I suggest to reject this RFL as soon as possible, since we all don't have evidences that that "is sufficiently unique". Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:51, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support As Liuxinyu970226 mentioned, there is Test wiki of Peripheral Mongolian (mvf) now in the incubator. On the other hand, when I check on the website of SIL International, I saw there is a valid code "cmg" for Classical Mongolian. So it seems no problem for building two separated wiki projects under two different language codes. However, as the description shown on SIL International, the language type of Classical Mongolian is listed as historical. For this, you can try to apply for a ISO 639-3 Change Request to change the type from historical to living if you do have people still using the language now. About the ISO 639 request, you can find me on my talk page if you need help. ripunn 05:51, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ripunn: As someone said there: That is not true; you are entirely free to create unique texts, and even host them on sites like Wikia and GitHub today. WMF is not the only hosting solution in the world. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:23, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Thank you for the information. Wikia and GitHub might be another good choices. Only when it comes to Wiki projects here, as I know so far, users who speak a language which has a valid ISO code can try to create their own wiki project. And as I said, I know Classical Mongolian is listed as historical now on SIL website. But somehow, they have the right to apply for change request on their own language. ripunn 11:46, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, it's realllll(65535*l)ly a hudge problem if you are building two separated wikis, under two different language codes, for just one same language. Because, that said, "The language must be sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki. In most cases, this excludes regional dialects and different written forms of the same language." Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]