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.
@StevenJ81: ancash quechua and huaylas quechua are varieties of quechua but ancash quechua is divided in :conchucos and huaylas, huaylas is one variety, and in conchucos are 5 varieties, and I know a lot of native speakers and a speaker of hauylas quechua don't understand conchucos quechua completely and in conchucos quechua uses other diacritics to write.--Michael junior obregon pozo (talk) 20:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: The question of how many different Quechua Wikipedias the LangCom might ultimately allow is a good one. For now, there is not a problem with such tests continuing in Incubator. No such test is anywhere near ready for approval at the present time. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Right now, we have an already existing project in Southern Quechua, quwiki. We have an eligible test on Incubator using language code quh (assigned by SIL to Chimborazo Highland Quichua), but actually being written using the currently developing standard for Ecuadorian Quechua (or Kichwa).
Ancash and Huaylas fit into neither of those categories, and it's probably quite reasonable to assume that at least one project that represents "central" varieties of Quechua can also be approved. The reason I asked you about the mutual intelligibility of Ancash and Huaylas is that Huaylas is considered a variety of Ancash. Where languages are mutually intelligible, ideally we have them use a single project, rather than multiple projects. So I do not know whether LangCom would really want there to be a Huaylas project independent of an Ancash project.
Where languages really form more of a dialect continuum, it is entirely possible to include multiple varieties within a single Wikimedia project. (See, for example, Alemannic Wikipedia, which includes Swiss German, Alsatian, Baden and Swabian varieties—and Swabian even has a separate language code.) My question was more aimed at determining how possible that might be with Huaylas and Ancash.
Summarizing, I do not think that anyone will ever try to incorporate Huaylas or Ancash into either Southern Quechua Wikipedia or Kichwa (Test) Wikipedia. I think there is a very real possibility that LangCom would want to see Huaylas and Ancash combined, if they get to the point of approval as independent projects. In any event, there is no test in Incubator in any variety of Quechuan that is close to ready for approval. So for now, I don't think anyone needs to worry about anything. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
I will add, Michael, that even if LangCom is willing to allow a separate project in Huaylas, LangCom will never give it final approval as long as it's as much of a one-man banddef. 2 as it is now. The most important thing you could do right now is to try to find others willing to contribute to your test project. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@StevenJ81: Now I'm try to find. new users thanks.