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).
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.
Support : Kotava exists since 1978. Its community is small, not proselytizing but nevertheless active. This project is already progressing well in the incubator and I am sure it will remain active and of good quality if it will be officially open.
Amongst the constructed languages, except Esperanto, Kotava is certainly the one with the strongest literary development, with many translations and original texts.
Among other fields that will be strong on the encyclopedia, there is Africa (look for example the "portal" about Tanzania), prehistory, history more generally, the Russian world widely, the geography and some other themes. On the other hand, for the moment at least, the scientific fields (medicine, mathematics, chemistry, etc.) are weak points.
Languages die every day, unfortunately. Others, very rare, are born and need space and benevolence to grow and to blossom. Wikipedia must fit into this free way of life. Thank you. --Axel xadolik (talk) 07:23, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm going to put this on hold for a time. There is a fairly high bar to have a conlang marked as eligible. So I'd like to give this test community a little time to solidify before I start discussing this request with LangCom. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:59, 25 January 2019 (UTC)