Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Drents

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Drents Wikipedia[edit]

submitted verification final decision
This proposal has been rejected.
This decision was taken by the language committee in accordance with the Language proposal policy based on the discussion on this page.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

Test project content appears not to actually be Drents. Please continue to improve or create Drents article on the nds-nl: wiki. Shanel 07:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal summary
  • Language details: Drents (drèènts, dränþs, drt ISO 639-3)
  • Editing community: Fääogpüs
    List your user name if you're interested in editing the wiki. Add "N" next to your
    name if you are a native speaker of this language.
  • Relevant pages: development wiki project
  • External links:
Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.

Arguments in favour[edit]

I think that one drents wikipedia one good idea is. Therefore support I the manufacture of one wikipedia in the Drents.

  1. Es hat ein Test Project mit all zwei Seite. Deutschlehrer 13:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments against[edit]

According to Ethnologue, Drents is part of nds-nl. We do not want two projects doing the same thing. GerardM 09:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It differs much from eachother. This is bad Drents.
Whereon is this judgement based?
Even if it was true, that's a reason for improving existing content, instead of creating a new project. --::Slomox:: >< 19:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The criteria for approval say ensure the requested language is sufficiently unique that it could not exist on a more general wiki. This basically makes it impossible to get approved, cause Drents coexists on the nds-nl project since the very start with no problems. --::Slomox:: >< 20:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are severe problems with this request for a separate Drèents Wikipedia, if it is serious in the first place. There is a long history of discussion about how to treat the multitudinous Low Saxon dialects, and most people seem now to be reasonably happy with the situation of a Wikipedia for the variants spoken in Germany (which are heaviliy influenced by High German) and one for the variants spoken in the Netherlands (ditto with regard to Standard Dutch). Especially the Dutch Low Saxon Wikipedia has quite a small user community as it is: to break it up into distinct Wikipedias for each group of dialects would at this point be ludicrous.
Secondly, the applicant doesn't defend their position or come up with the beef. I'm not seeing a great alternative in the incubator. There is a blanket condemnation of the Drèents articles, which are being written either by native speakers (a few) or people who grew up in the Drèents language area, were raised with Drèents mostly passively, and have improved their command of the language through private study (such as myself). It is especially this latter kind of commitment, seen on both Low Saxon Wikipedias, which is getting these projects anywhere in the first place. I suggest that the applicant clarify their proposal, or else that it be closed due to a complete lack of merit. I.e., wasting people's time. Ni'jluuseger 20:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the proposer seems to like the Thorn-rune and uses it in the language name (dränþs) and in the headline of the test project (but not in the text on the test project, seems to be copied from elsewhere). I have never seen this letter in any Low Saxon writing. I actually don't even get the headline in the project: Þi frie boke þäs wiesi. What does it mean? The free book ?þäs? modify (from wijzigen perhaps)? Perhaps the proposal isn't about Drents but about some kind of other language? Old Drents or something like that...
There is one article in the test project: incubator:Wp/drt/Ørsäng. It has a far resemblance with Low Saxon, but there are words in it, which I can't work out. For example it uses "göig" for town/village. I can't find the word göig on the internet in any Low Saxon/Drents/Dutch writing, only in Alemannic. In Drents it should be dörp or at least darp or dorp or maybe kern. That's definitly no ordinary Drents.
@Fääogpüs: Please specify what sort of Drents this proposal is about. --::Slomox:: >< 21:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I write in the Eursinge dialect.
I had always thought, on the authority of Drèents literary historian Henk Nijkeuter and others, that the earliest Drèents texts were from the nineteenth century. The felicitous proposer of a Drèents Wikipedia, however, seems to have unearthed half-runic Drèents from an age when Charlemagne had not yet subjugated the Saxons. I can't wait till they'll share their invaluable sources with us. That, or till they actually start writing articles - on nds-nl - in good Eursings. Ni'jluuseger 06:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a nds-nl:-wiki which needs more editors, further it's not Drenths, it's nowhere near it. It looks like somekind of Lalo Bosa variant. As Lalo Bosa is not a language with a code, and does not have more than 5000 words, REJECT. --OosWesThoesBes 16:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Oppose It is only a dialect, there is already one for Dutch why do we need one for a dialect? The difference is nothing big at all. It would not last very long. (Red4tribe 04:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Strongly oppose - this Wikipedia doesn't even look like Drents (or Germanic for that matter), see and see for yourself. Besides on the nds-nl-wikipedia we have quite a few of Drents articles. Servien 13:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General discussion[edit]