This language has been verified as eligible. The language is eligible for a project, which means that the subdomain can be created once there is an active community and a localized interface, as described in the language proposal policy. You can discuss the creation of this language project on this page.
Once the criteria are met, the language committee can proceed with the approval and will verify the test project content with a reliable neutral source, such as a professor or expert.
If you think the criteria are met, but the project is still waiting for approval, feel free to notify the committee and ask them to consider its approval.
A committee member provided the following comment:
Since this language meets the conditions of LPP, it is marked as eligible according to langcom's discussion. This is separate from the creation of Wikipedia in this language. --Sotiale (talk) 13:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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.
Item about the language at Wikidata. It would normally include the Wikimedia language code, name of the language, etc. Please complete at Wikidata if needed.
"Wikipedia talk" (the discussion namespace of the project namespace)
Enable uploads
no
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.
"Continent/City", e.g. "Europe/Brussels" or "America/Mexico City" (see list of valid timezones)
Additional namespaces
For example, a Wikisource would need "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk", "Author", "Author talk".
Additional settings
Anything else that should be set
submit Phabricator task. It will include everything automatically, except additional namespaces/settings. After creating the task, add a link to the comment.
The Levantine language has become the easiest and most powerful Arabic derived language. It is taught as well in some of some universities around the world such as the university of Cambridge and it is spoken by more than 20 million individual around the globe. Therefore it ought to be recognized as one of Wikipedia's languages. --PersonneSyrienne (talk) 23:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose What a absurd coincidences! Migration season to the absurd. -- صالح (talk) 19:51, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose As long as there is an Arabic encyclopedia, there is no benefit from this project. --عبد الله (talk) 06:20, 7 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose-- All Arab countries speak Arabic and understand it why you wants to differentiates between the Arab peoples.--Bander7799 (talk) 09:01, 7 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose All speakers of Levantine understand and speak Arabic as an official language. So I'm definitely against these projects.--Faisal talk 15:47, 7 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support The fact that there is a Wikipedia in Modern Standard Arabic doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a Wikipedia in any other contemporary variant of Arabic. --Cryptex (talk) 00:19, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you think splitting Arab League's peace rules are good for you, do your best. On my interview, our keyboards are not designed for your purposes. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support There's an ISO code and a strong community of speakers all around the world, it should have its own Wikipedia like any other language. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Although there's an ISO code, the actual Arabic speakers' communities around the real world doesn't really want to have separated dialects of Arabic to have Wikipedias. Am I wrong here? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And if the German speaking community had objected to the opening of nds projects? I don't know where else speakers of a language got to veto another language with an ISO code on the grounds it is a dialect.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just see Michel Bakni said below. You're totally wrong. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"I'm totally wrong" is not a response to either of the two sentences.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose I am a resident of the Levant, and I think that launching a new version of Wikipedia for the Levant is a bad thing! And something that will not have any benefit, especially since the dialects of the Levant are closer to the classical language!
I see that any attempt to create an additional version of the Arabic language is a very negative thing. --Osps7 (talk) 12:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support All of the arguments against this, if even any are made instead of just declaring opposition, appear to be rooted in Pan-Arabism. They are predicated on the idea that Arabic is "one language" and any attempt to create Wikipedias based on regional languages (which they dismiss as "dialects") are spun as "dividing the Arab world." These same arguments are made whenever any proposal for a Wikipedia in an Arabic language besides Modern Standard Arabic is made. But we are not here to cater to nationalist pseudolinguistics. A speaker of Algerian Arabic will struggle to understand a speaker of Levantine Arabic without knowing Modern Standard Arabic. Arabic is not a single language but a macrolanguage, with dozens of distinct languages forming a continuum stretching from the coast of West Africa to the mountains of Central Asia. --Sailor Ceres (talk) 18:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is rude post-colonial propaganda. Arabic is the formal language in Algeria: newspaper, education, and TVs are all in Arabic. So how can you find an Algerian not familiar with Arabic? Not to mention that, historically, Algeria has been an Arabic-speaking state/nation, for the last 15 centuries, and that it is a member of the Arab league today.--Michel Bakni (talk) 21:25, 11 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is the same argument used against Cornish, Sami, any number of Romance or Germanic languages that aren't standard French or Dutch or Italian or German, yet are in those countries. The fact that is part of the Arab league doesn't mean anything; all of Italy is part of Italy, but we still have Occitan, Venetian, Piedmontese, Lombard, Sicilian, Neapolitan and more, all closely related Romance languages of Italy. Imperial ambitions do not justify the suppression of local variations of the standard language that are themselves languages.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These small languages have Wikipedias, only because there are enough reason to match the LPP§3, how do Arabic dialects match it? In your opinion we should deprecate the PCP because every coded languages are different, even Tagalog (tl) and Filipino (fil) and hence nobody should request closure? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
SIL says Latin split into 44 different languages, and Arabic into 30. You're telling me that Latin split into 44 different languages, and Arabic 2 (Arabic and Maltese). One of those arguments is more persuasive than the other.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, not true. Occitane is older than modern French and Italian. Arabic variants are dialects and not separate languages, they do not have their own vocabularies or grammar, instead, it is differences in pronunciation or using of the words. The difference between Levantian Arabic and Egyptian Arabic is like the difference between British English and American English.--Michel Bakni (talk) 10:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All Romance languages date back to the Roman empire; people in France have been speaking their own Latin dialects for 2000 years, just like in Italy. w:Levantine Arabic seems to dismiss your claim about vocabularies; "In the vocabulary of five-year-old native Palestinians: 40% of the words are not present in MSA" is cited.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Any language must have rules. Who talks once about such rules? Where are this language grammar? Any Linguistic? Any book? While nobody in the region (Levant) knows himself more than "talks Arabic" except some minorities such as Kurd, Armen.. To that point, how come a Syrian man, Arabic, Kurdish, Arminian or Assyrian daily communicates with someone Egyptian or Algerian in their mutual job? This is only by means of Arabic, the Syrian Arabic dialect, which is understood by the inhabitants all over the MENA. Furthermore, obviously most of the opponents are from the Levant, which means the most relevant to what so called "Levantine language". (Damascus-Syria) أسامةالفاروسي (talk) 10:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose, This dialect has no rules, and it uses the rules of the Arabic language, the only difference is that the dialect changes the pronunciation of some words! أحمد الغرباوي (talk) 13:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Just another dialect of Arabic.Fluxqi (talk) 11:19, 2 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose The day we see British, American, Australian, and Canadian English Wikipedias, or Parisien and Quebecois French Wikipedias, is a day we would start thinking about having Shami, Masri, Djezi, Iraqi, ...Wikipedias. Ahmed M Farrag (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
