Jump to content

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Narom

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
submitted verification final decision

This proposal has been rejected.
While this request has technically been rejected, in reality this is a request that has been sitting open or on hold for a long time with little evidence of a community coming together to build a project. If a community comes together in the future and makes a new request, LangCom would consider that new request without prejudice.

A committee member provided the following comment:

  • 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.
  • The community needs to complete required MediaWiki interface translations in that language (about localization, translatewiki, check completion).
  • The community needs to discuss and complete the settings table below:
What Value Example / Explanation
Language code nrm (SILGlottolog) A valid ISO 639-1 or 639-3 language code, like "fr", "de", "nso", ...
Language name Narom Language name in English
Language name Bhasa Narom Language name in your language. This will appear in the language list on Special:Preferences, in the interwiki sidebar on other wikis, ...
Language Wikidata item Q3336135 - item has currently the following values: 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.
Directionality no indication Is the language written from left to right (LTR) or from right to left (RTL)?
Links Links to previous requests, or references to external websites or documents.

Project name Wikipedya "Wikipedia" in your language
Project namespace Wikipedya usually the same as the project name
Project talk namespace Wikipedya_sunting "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.
Optional settings
Project logo This needs to be an SVG image (instructions for logo creation).
Default project timezone Asia/Kuala_Lumpur "Continent/City", e.g. "Europe/Brussels" or "America/Mexico City" (see list of valid timezones)
Additional namespaces Potale and Potale_sunting (Portal and Portal talk) For example, a Wikisource would need "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk", "Author", "Author talk".
Additional settings Enable TimedMediaHandler extension, and reset fallback language to either English or Malay or Indonesian since we don't know French 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.



As just met staffs of Wikimedia Indonesia and Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia, we should have Our right to start a Wikipedia project in Narom language, however as I'm a little sorry, this doesn't seem normal because the de facto nrm: isn't a Narom Wikipedia but used for the Francophone-controlled Norman language, we tried to translate Our against message to French (well, most of SEA peoples don't have enough French knowledge) to them but still no reply (some of them are even made blacklist for us), thus we need sounds from langcom. Please tell me the way to complete Our dream, Selamat Datang! -- 03:22, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Initial Discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
This has gone way off topic. See summary below. Let's restart the discussion at Second Discussion below and stay on topic, which is actually a pretty narrow one. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waargh! This must likely to be a challenge of the entire Wikimedia Movements. I wonder if there are peoples willing to contribute it. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The people speaking Narom surely have the right to start a Wikipedia, but only if there is a native user base, enough activity, and significant contents. None of those are there, so this proposal looks like it's just out of protest. Therefore, I oppose this, unless a native speaker turns up. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 10:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ooswesthoesbes: This shouldn't be the reason that you oppose, we have a number of unmaintained tests, even the Middle English one.
To the best of my knowledge, the reasons why they still can't contribute are documented at incubator:Wp/nrm:

So there have to be a serial of problems that at least @Reedy, Krenair, JCrespo (WMF), and Chasemp:... face-to-face. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ and Liuxinyu970226: Do you want to start creating content now? If so, please contact me on my Incubator talk page, and I will set something up for you. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu: I do not oppose the creation of a test project (as that can easily be circumvented by simply using a different set of letters which aren't in use), I oppose the fact that there is no indication that native speakers are able/willing to contribute. The proposal written above looks like nationalistic inspired anti-French sentiments instead. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 11:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Let's all stop hanging each other, and say sorrys each other, okay?--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:02, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

So what's the present situation here? Most recently info is that such askers can only be logged-in contributors, so are there more peoples from ESEAP area interested this? I would help a little, but only after I can see a sane test project. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:47, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Krenair: again here, because if this is eligible, it can be approved years later, but if one day this is even approved, I doube if the domain can be normally created as-is, and the Wikidata problem can also be bumped. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why I'm being pinged here? --Krenair (talkcontribs) 21:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Krenair: Because we need you to point that what will the Operators members do for this language if one day this request is approved, currently the nrmwiki database is combined with nrm.wikipedia.org, and as far as I know renaming a database does require create database newname, mysql db dump export from oldname, and import to newname, finally drop oldname, which they're incompatible with the MediaWiki software. So is there be possible that copy-paste the database to nrfwiki, and then clear up the nrmwiki is possible or not? -- 07:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What about just using nrmwiki for now? But just call it “Norman-Narom Wikipedia”? I don't understand that why @Verdy p: seized nrmwiki for their work. --
That's false. I have NEVER defended any "right" to use the "nrm" code for Norman, so I certainly NEVER "seized" the "nrmwiki". I was always opposed to it (I even warned Wiki admins when they just started to accept Norman under a false code), but the decision was taken long ago (not by me), before the languages comity and its policy required that ALL new languages should conform to BCP 47 rules for their naming.
Until now, it has still not been possible to migrate all existing Norman content to "nrf".
So Narom has been blocked since always from entering the place. This is an issue known since long (so many years now!), and all proposals to migrate current "nrm" content to "nrf" (since its adoption by ISO 639 and then its inclusion in BCP47) has stalled due to technical difficulties, that I'm not responsible for. Various proposals have been made to accelerate the migration. But all migration will take time now (the more we wait, the more it will be difficult, because there are now so many places in wiki projects where "nrm" is used where it should be now "nrf").
Also I do not advocate mixing Norman and Narom in the same wiki. All that can be done is to host for now Narom under a private extension code like "x-nrm" (not used by any language). Still if we do that, these new codes will pollute Wikidata. Wikidata is the first to fix because it is not used just for Wikimedia projects. The correct codes can already be used in Wiktionnary to tag the translations, even if it is also impossible to link to a Narom Wiktionnary (which is I think a first goal to reach to preserve that language, even before we even can build a Wikisource for its precious corpus of text, and only then Wikipedia, later Wikinews if there's a public to read it and maintain it). verdy_p (talk) 03:25, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And if you want my opinion: the "nrm" code has also blocked the correct development of Norman. There='s so many cases where exists the ambiguity of the language designated by "nrm" (theses cases have polluted many other databases, not just those of Wikimedia), that I think it will just be faster for everyone to stop using "nrm" for anything (Norman or Narom).
Norman has now its "nrf" code, let's use it now and forget "nrm" for this usage.
For Narom, it woould just be simpler to requests to ISO 639 to deprecate the code "nrm" (because it is already too much ambiguous), and to assign a new unambigous code for Narom. Then it will be to Wikimedia (and all other non-Wikimedia projects) to cleanup their nightmare by usinf "nrf" (now) or the new requested code for Narom (as soon as it is made available).
Using a temporary code for Narom in Wikimedia will just complicate things (e.g. for correct language fallbacks according to standard BCP47 rules, or to allow normal derivation of the code assigned privately to Narom) and will also cause new nightmares for non-Wikimedia projects and databases.
Deprecating a language code like "nrm" is not new in ISO 639, it has also occured in BCP47, even for wellknown languages (e.g. "jw" for Javanese replaced by "jv", "iw" for Hebrew" replaced by "he", "sh" deprecated and replaced by 3 distinct codes "sr", "hr" and "bs"... We can continue the list of old bugs of Wikimedia with language codes like "sr-ec" and "sr-el" instead of "sr-cyrl" and "sr-latn"). verdy_p (talk) 03:46, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Verdy p: Please, do not suggest deprecating nrm, that's not fair for Southeast Asian people. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:17, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not fair ???? I suggest asking to deprecate the code because it has been blocked and has now mixed uses, so it is already ambiguous and now almost definitely broken (because of the fault made by Wikimedia). But I do not suggest it not unconditionnally: I support the existence of a distinctive code for Narom, but it will be *simpler and faster* to just ask for a new code (too many years have past now since this bug of Wikimedia was signaled and never resolved, now we have a situation of complete havoc everywhere, not just in Wikimedia, making the "nrm" code almost definitely broken for any use). That'w why we should now restart with safer and cleaner bases. I'm extremely respectful about Narom users, whose situation can no longer continue: Wikimedia has not been able to solve the problem since many years, and is still unlikely to solve it for many years, so there's no solution, except by assigning them a "temporary" code (which will then cause problems and limit its development. Having a new code would solve the problem immediately for Narom users and on Wikimedia it will be immediately usable (then everyone will have to solve the legacy and take the time to cleanup ALL past broken uses of "nrm", this can continue to be done for years, it will still no longer block Narom). This is an extremely fair solution (the same that has been used successsfully for deprecated "jw", "iw" and "sh" codes). It's simple to do (at least we can try by Wikimedia asking to ISO, and recognize the Wikimedia's fault of this havoc where Wikimedia's broken use of "nrm" now dominates every use of the "nrm" code everywhre in the world and in all applications, not just Wikimedia).
So just consider the checklist at top of this page: we are locked at step 2 (get a code from ISO 639) and it's now impossible to progress on all other steps, without passing this step which can be much faster than everything else (and it can be much faster to complete, at least we could try it and get an answer from ISO 639, their response will be faster than Wikimedia's response to its very old and severe bug). verdy_p (talk) 10:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(German)Was für ein äußerlicher Müll-Kommentar hast du gesagt? ISOs Antwort wird niemals schneller als alles andere als WMF sein, sie können viele E-Mails zurücksetzen, die sie für höchstens zwei Jahre erhalten haben! Und dies ist eine gültige Sprache, die wir, die Narom-Leute aus Sarawak, Malaysia, sprechen und schreiben. Warum wollen Sie sie aufgeben? Neokolonialismus? Denken Sie daran, dass Sie, wie viele französische Kolonisten, bereits seit vielen Jahrzehnten unter Omniciden in Südostasien und im Südchinesischen Meer Verletzungen, Wutanfälle, Krankheiten, Krankheiten und AIDS erlitten. @Verdy p: Sie müssen sich sofort für Ihre Neocolonialism-Töne entschuldigen!!!
(English)What an outer junk comment you said? ISO's response will never quicker than anything even WMF, they can backlist a lot of e-mails they got for at most two years! And this is a valid language that we the Narom people from Sarawak, Malaysia speak and write, why you wanna abandon it? Neocolonialism? Remember that you, like a lot of French colonists, already made hurts, angrys, terribles, diseases, and AIDS, among omnicides in South East Asia and South China Sea for many decades, please do not introduce them again and again. @Verdy p: You must say sorry for your Neocolonialism tones immediately!!!
(Spanish)¿Qué es un comentario basura exterior que dijiste? ¡La respuesta de ISO nunca será más rápida que cualquier cosa, incluso WMF, ya que pueden hacer una lista de muchos de los correos electrónicos que recibieron durante un máximo de dos años! ¿Y este es un lenguaje válido que nosotros, las personas Narom de Sarawak, Malasia, hablamos y escribimos, ¿por qué quieren abandonarlo? ¿Neocolonialismo? Recuerda que, como muchos colonos franceses, ya hiciste heridas, enojos, terribles, enfermedades y SIDA entre los omnicidios en el sudeste asiático y el mar de China meridional durante muchas décadas, por favor no los presentes una y otra vez. @Verdy p: ¡¡¡Debes pedir perdón por tus tonos de neocolonialismo de inmediato!!!
(French)Quel commentaire indésirable extérieur avez-vous dit? La réponse d'ISO ne sera jamais plus rapide que n'importe quoi, même WMF, ils peuvent sauvegarder beaucoup d'e-mails qu'ils ont reçus pendant au plus deux ans! Et c’est une langue valable que nous, les Narom du Sarawak, en Malaisie, parlons et écrivons. Pourquoi voulez-vous l’abandonner? Néocolonialisme? N'oubliez pas que, comme beaucoup de colons français, vous avez déjà fait des blessures, des angrys, des terribles, des maladies et le sida parmi les omnicides pratiqués en Asie du Sud-Est et en mer de Chine méridionale pendant de nombreuses décennies. @Verdy p: Vous devez dire désolé pour vos tons de néocolonialisme immédiatement!!!
(Italian)Che commento spazzatura hai detto? La risposta dell'ISO non sarà mai più veloce di qualsiasi cosa, anche se WMF, è in grado di creare un sacco di e-mail che hanno ottenuto per almeno due anni! E questo è un linguaggio valido che noi del popolo Narom di Sarawak, Malesia parliamo e scriviamo, perché vuoi abbandonarlo? Neocolonialismo? Ricorda che tu, come molti coloni francesi, hai già fatto ferite, sofferenze, terapie, malattie e AIDS, tra gli omnicidi nel Sud-est asiatico e nel Mar Cinese Meridionale per molti decenni, per favore non presentarli più e più volte. @Verdy p: Devi scusarti per i tuoi toni neocolonialistici immediatamente!!!
(Japanese)あなたが言った外の迷惑コメントは何ですか?ISOのレスポンスは、WMFでも何よりも早くないでしょう。彼らは、2年以内にたくさんのEメールをバックリストに載せることができます!そして、これは、マレーシアのサラワク出身のナロム人が語し、書くことができる有効な言葉です。それをなぜ放棄したいのですか?ネオコロニアリズム向?長年的くのフランス植民地のように、あなたは何十年も前から、東南アジアと南シナ海のオニニドの中ですでに痛い、怒り、ひどい病気、そしてエイズを覚えていたことを忘れないでください。@Verdy p:あなたは、あなたのネオコロニアル調子をすぐにごめんなさいと言ってください必須!!!
(Korean)당신이 말한 바깥 쪽 정크 논평은 무엇입니까? ISO의 응답은 WMF조차도 결코 빠른 것이 아니며 최대 2 년 동안 많은 전자 메일을 다시 목록에 올릴 수 있습니다! 그리고 이것은 말레이시아 사라왁의 Narom 사람들이 말하고 쓰는 올바른 언어입니다. 왜 그걸 포기하고 싶습니까? 신식 민주주의? 많은 프랑스 식민지 개척자들처럼, 이미 수십 년 동안 동남아시아와 남중국해의 무형 문화 유산 가운데서 상처, 화난, 끔찍한 질병, 에이즈를 만들었다는 것을 기억하십시오. 여러 번 소개하지 마십시오. @Verdy p: 당신은 네 식민지주의 톤에 대해 즉시 미안하다고 말해야한다!!!
{ru}}Какой внешний комментарий вы сказали? Ответ ISO никогда не будет быстрее, чем что-либо, даже WMF, они могут перечислить много электронных писем, которые они получили в течение не более двух лет! И это правильный язык, который мы, люди народа Нарока из Саравака, Малайзия, говорим и пишем, почему вы хотите отказаться от него? Неоколониализм? Помните, что вы, как и многие французские колонисты, уже много раз причиняли боль, страдания, страхи, болезни и СПИД, среди омнидов в Юго-Восточной Азии и Южно-Китайском море в течение многих десятилетий, пожалуйста, не вводите их снова и снова. @Verdy p: Вы должны немедленно извините за ваши неоколониалистические тона!!!
(Simplified Chinese)你说的外面评论是什么?ISO的响应永远不会比WMF更快,他们可以重新列出他们最多两年的电子邮件!这是一种有效的语言,我们来自马来西亚沙捞越的Narom人会说和写,你为什么要放弃呢?新殖民主义?请记住,你和很多法国殖民者一样,已经在东南亚和南中国海的大都市中造成了伤害、痛苦、麻烦、疾病和艾滋病甚至种族灭绝几十年,请不要一次又一次地介绍它们。@Verdy p:你必须马上为你的新殖民主义音调说对不起!
(Traditional Chinese)你說的外面評論是什麼?ISO的響應永遠不會比WMF更快,他們可以重新列出他們最多兩年的電子郵件!這是一種有效的語言,我們來自馬來西亞沙撈越的Narom人會說和寫,你為什麼要放棄呢?新殖民主義?請記住,你和很多法國殖民者一樣,已經在東南亞和南中國海的大都市中造成了傷害、痛苦、麻煩、疾病和艾滋病甚至種族滅絕幾十年,請不要一次又一次地介紹它們。@Verdy p:你必須馬上為你的新殖民主義音調說對不起!-- 01:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No more suppressions here please!!!-- 02:46, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And dear all trust users of Meta-Wiki, Verdy_p is the famous user who always make edit wars between him and IP users, please tech him en:WP:HUMAN and tell him not to do so anymore! thx. -- 03:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The only wrong man is you! You are the only one that should say sorry! -- 02:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also the BCP47 is also unstable! The Western Armenian already got ISO code hyw, But Your French friends still so-called it hy-arevmda. -- 02:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you insist ? I've NEVER said that I want to abandon this language, and in fact I strongly support its inclusion in Mediawiki. But it's a fact that there's a longstanding technical problem to get Wikimedia make the necessary changes (it's been requested including by me since years!). Why are you convinced that I do not support your cause, when in fact this is exactly the opposite and I strongly support your language (this does not mean that I support the need to use "nrm" for it, when all requests attempted since years to use it have failed ?
Stop using also such abusive and really insulting terms. I never insulted you or your community! If you continue I will report your attitude to admins to moderate you. Please keep your calm and respect!
It's absolutely not a question of politics like you argue (and there's no "colonialism" idea in my reply: affirming it repeatedly is an insult against me and Wikimedia admins and other legatimate Norman users that NEVER colonialized anything but used a right that was granted to them by Wikimedia to use the "nrm" long before Narom was encoded in ISO; you completely forget to look at the real history of this issue), bue a technical problem that blocks everything (and it's not my fault if that problem exists). Even ISO is at fault when it initially allocated the NEW "nrm" code for it in ISO 639-3 without seeing that it had already a use long before ISO 639-3! This allocation was not tested (ISO could have seen that it had already admitted the preexistence of a usage, like it did when he also kept "jw" for Javanese (as a legacy code), even if it was deprecated in favor of a new less ambiguous "jv" code. When "jw" was used, it encompassed lot of unrelated languages (including Narom!), because ISO 639-1 and 639-2 have always been a mess full of confusion (and this is still the case today).
Only BCP47 has provided a stable interoperable framework for processing languages (including by preserving backward compatibility, something that ISO 639 never checked!).
So the fault is shared between Wikimedia (constantly delaying the fix for years, when if the usage in Mediawiki was almost valid before ISO 639-3: We had no voice at all from Narom users at that time the "nrm" code was still not allocated by ISO 639 and could not be claimed for Narom), and ISO (for ignoring backward compatibility). But the technical fault is certainly not from me.
verdy_p (talk) 01:40, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are making edit wars against my own post and warnings since the first message you posted: I've already ordered you to stop personal attacks (that's what I deleted) and politically oriented concerns (completely out of topic for this request page that you continue polluting more and more with these insults). You've posted now 20 messages of insults (plus translations in a dozen of languages!) (visibly nothing can stop you), and made the edit war on this page. I've alerted admins for your obstination to not respect others. I've been personnally, directly and constantly insulted by you, and you have offensed as well the whole French/English/Norman community. You cannot hide the fact that I've asked an admin to moderate you strictly, this does not change things: you've initiated the war yourself. verdy_p (talk) 03:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First stop masking me (you've pseudo-masked above your own talk, but you have no right then to hide my reponses ! But as you insist in keeping your insults visible above, and don't wan't anyone else know that I've alerted you multiple times, this just confirms that you should be blocked from this discussion (and other discussions elsewhere on this wiki or in other Wikimedia sites). You've already lost all credibility in all your opinions and you're even discredited within the Narom community itself. And I instruct you to read again en:WP:MEAT in the link you posted: you are accusing me of using a "sockpuppet" but all signs demonstrate that I've never hidden my identity but you're the only one that would have puppetized your own identity. I risk nothing according to [[en:WP:MEAT], but you risk a lot! Now we all know that you used a "sockpuppet" and you perfectly know what it is and what it means (I never used that term, you've fooled yourself by revealing it). verdy_p (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK I won't use IP to make fake-canvassing any more, wish you to forgive me. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:52, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ooswesthoesbes: when the IP user(s) above talk about the language, they said they encountered this error when they're trying to translate messages, and they also used expressions like saying it's the language that "we the Narom people from Sarawak, Malaysia speak and write", thus it do appears like there are native speaker interest in developing the project (or at least they claimed so). C933103 (talk) 06:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, reading it back that seems to be the case. The way it was written wasn't all too clear (due to the quality of the English), so I revoke that statement. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 09:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]



This has gotten way off topic. So I feel I need to put a stop to this, summarize a few points, and get us to refocus on the topic we should be discussing here.

  1. There is no neo-colonial (or any other) conspiracy against Narom here. Langcode nrm was used within Wikipedia for Norman before the ISO 639–3 standard even existed. The main page of Norman Wikipedia dates to April 2006. ISO 639–3 standard was published in February 2007. nrm is not a code within ISO 639–2, so it's not a code that pre-dated the Norman Wikipedia. To make a long story short, it's one of a few unfortunate conflicts we have that still date to the relatively early days of the Wikimedia movement.
  2. There seem to be great technical difficulties in untangling conflicts like this. Frankly, I do not understand why. But there have been phabricator items open on these things for a while. I suggest that if people have a specific complaint about the lack of progress on this front, they contact the system developers. But remember that many of them are volunteers, too, and there may be some very good reasons why this has not been their highest priority technical problem.
  3. Issues about code changes are not under Wikimedia's jurisdiction. If you want the language code nrm deprecated, you need to discuss that with SIL International, which is the standards organization that manages ISO 639–3. Don't discuss that issue here.
  4. Discuss Wikidata-related issues on Wikidata, not here. On Wikidata, Norman has different codes for the ISO 639-3 code (nrf) and the Wikimedia language code (nrm). Presumably, they have a way to address situations where those codes are different.
  5. Discuss translatewiki.net-related items on translatewiki.net, not here. While Portal:Nrf and Portal:Nrm both exist there, MediaWiki translations to Norman are coded to nrm. That undoubtedly needs to be fixed. That said, in the short run, there is no reason that a temporary code couldn't be used there as well as on Incubator to support a Narom Wikipedia test project.
  6. As far as behavior of certain registered and IP users here goes, just stop acting like children:
    • We don't need multilingual translations of things on this page. This discussion is being conducted in English. If people think it needs to be conducted in another language, say so. But don't start throwing out unnecessary blocks of translation that just lengthen the page to no useful purpose.
    • That said, everyone needs to treat everyone else respectfully here. I am going to start to be aggressive about reverting uncivil behavior.

Given the above, the subsequent discussion must have a very limited focus. Let me stipulate a few parameters here:

  • In principle, Narom is certainly an eligible language to have Wikimedia projects. And any project other than Wikipedia can even be conducted in Incubator under the language code nrm. The question here is strictly what to do about a Wikipedia project.
  • In the short run, in the absence of a resolution of the technical difficulties associated with making nrm available to this project, we will have to use a temporary code. Most of the range of q-- codes are available "for local use", so we will use one of those.
  • Because doing that—and because then using that code as a basis to start collecting interface translations at translatewiki.net—is a non-standard, somewhat complex process, I am looking to make sure there is a community of people interested in creating this project. Let me emphasize: we are not looking for people who say that "in principle, we think there should be a Narom Wikipedia". We are looking for people who actually intend to create content for a Narom Wikipedia test.
    • The reason I have requested that registered users be involved is that we need to be able to have a sense that such interest is real, not fleeting or disruptive. Ideally, I would have registered users who are associated with Wikimedia Indonesia and/or Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia, and can speak for them, to affirm this interest.
  • If I get a sense that there is really a community that wants to start creating content, I will be very happy to assign a code—and to ask translatewiki.net to do so, as well. (@Amire80: for information.) So far, it really only looked to me as if people were arguing for the sake of principle, not because they really want to create content.

The "Second Discussion" below is therefore limited to the following question: Who are the users (and preferably Wikimedia affiliates) who actually intend to create content? Please identify yourselves. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Second Discussion


Is there any technical difficulty that would prevent the creation of a nrm incubator given that the other language that's currently using the nrm code does not have an incubator project? C933103 (talk) 08:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@C933103: "...and the database name nrmwiki is reserved for that wiki..." --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:49, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When the database name is reserved, the Incubator extension expressly prohibits creating or editing pages with that prefix. The only two things you can do with such pages is (i) leave them alone or (ii) delete them. (And if you delete them, you can't then restore them.)
However, starting a project with a temporary code on Incubator is a very flexible solution. Understanding that we are a very long way away at this point from the possibility of an independent Narom Wikipedia, either of the following would be very easy to do:
  • If Norman(d) Wikipedia is ever moved to nrf.wikipedia, such that nrm.wikipedia becomes available again, it will be very easy to move a test project from Wp/q-- to Wp/nrm.
  • If that never happens, and Narom Wikipedia becomes approvable otherwise, the test at Wp/q-- can be put to any possible subdomain you want (like, for example, narom.wikipedia.org).
So don't worry about that part. Just find people who are competent at writing in Narom to create content. That's the real question here. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it seems like the original statement in the proposal was talking about interface translation. Will it also be easy to assign a q-code for them to do interface translation and then move it around? How would it interact with http accept language header that users might have specified? C933103 (talk) 02:40, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If the problem is just "where to create the test wiki"? Yes I already found the answer.
If the problem is just requesting i18n for this language, let's follow that gerrit patch.
But now there's still the most hard-to-define question that: If one day this can be approved, what will happen during "Create Narom Wikipedia" task(s)? Currently the workflow of wiki-creating tasks are afaik:
  1. Add xxx.(project name).org to DNS and Apache (if not added)
  2. Add XXX language support to MediaWiki software (if not added, and if that has enough twn activities)
  3. Prepare and check storage layer for xxxwiki
  4. Localize core/Gadget/Scribunto/ProofreadPage namespaces to XXX
  5. Localize core special page names to XXX
  6. Add xxxwiki to WikimediaMessages/RESTBase/Pywikibot/wikistats
  7. Run populateSitesTable.php on xxxwiki so Wikidata and Parsoid supports are added
Non of steps above can avoid a sane-builded database, you must always make sure you're creating it with a "no doubt" name, because, as @JCrespo (WMF): said in phab:T83609#1310355 and phab:T21986#1287684, the renaming method do require exporting-and-importing of dumps, reload on all our clusters (codfw, eqiad, eqsin, esams, ulsfo). Then you have to re-populate the names in e.g. CentralAuth, server puppets, dblists; and as *all the user permissions lost, you have to re-assign the sysops, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, ... etc. one-per-one on-wiki)*, and someone who first re-visit that wiki must have to patrol nearly all existed diffs as soon as possible, as they will reset as having red exclamation marks !
To me, is there really having benefits to rename nrmwiki? In fact they don't have any known sysops, and I've looked their Special:recentchanges, they don't have other activities other than global renames and central notices, so how does such a quiet wiki also need to do the "be-x-old to be-tarask"-like rename, just to give a place for another language that the nrm code originally assigned for? To me why can't we do semi-rename instead: First create a nrfwiki as-is, and lock it, then export-and-import dumps of nrmwiki to nrfwiki, and then clear all contents of nrmwiki? By this way we don't need a temporary code on Incubator ever. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:33, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226: That is not the subject of this discussion. I asked you to stop discussing the technical points. The purpose of this discussion is only "Is it eligible?", and that depends on only are there people who would create content. The question of where it lives and how we do it is not the subject for this discussion. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@StevenJ81: Without checking translatewiki.net myself, given discussions being done by now, users have already started translating wiki interface into Narom. So people have already started making contribution to the wiki software that's contributory to establishment of wiki projects in that language. However, that is prevented and reverted by other editors on the site because of this language code problem, and thus editors have been prevented from making contribution necessary to establish wiki project in their own language version. C933103 (talk) 07:53, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of rollbacks, and rules for continued discussion


I just reverted all of 114.*'s comments because they are irrelevant to the current scope of the discussion. (Apologies to User:Prosfilaes, whose response to that was entirely appropriate, but is now also gone. I'll note that I already said the same thing at the end of the original discussion.) Now, then:

  • This discussion is now semi-protected. The IP contributors have made their desires clear, but we're not doing that now, and they are not answering the current question(s).
  • I don't think anyone is writing Narom translations at translatewiki, as all the nrm translations there are in Norman(d).
  • The only question on the table is this: Is there anyone here who is fluent in Narom and wants to create content? Can we please have a yes-or-no answer to that question? StevenJ81 (talk) 04:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, the answer of this question isn't simply yes or no, because lack of key informations about many minor-communities South East Asian languages in the pan-APEC area. As listed on English Wikipedia article, there are lists of terms, written materials and audio recordings available on the ScholarSpace academy of University of Hawaii, it's sadly to say, however, that non of the authors' links are working well, clicking any of them can show "No Entries in Index" warning message, so there's no way to contact any listed persons by email in nearly all ways (unless in the very unlikely case if just one of them has ORCID record), you can even not find them via Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Instagram, ... due to the high stricted usage policy of UoH, thus to "contact" them, you or any interests have have and have to visit UoH by plane and car. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Due to verification hard, I would say, that to answer this "only" question, a Malaysian PhD that has enough knowledge in their languages must therefore join this discussion, but the semi-protection seems IMO to be a roadblock of them. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226: An IP user can make a comment on the talk page. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have made one more direct request to Wikimedia Indonesia and Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia to see if anyone knows of people actually interested in working on this project. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment


I am going to reject this request without prejudice.

  • LangCom's policy is to close new project requests as "rejected–stale" when a request is made on Meta, but no meaningful test project is created on Incubator, Beta Wikiversity or Multilingual Wikisource within a year. In a sense, that's all I'm doing here. I have been trying to find people truly interested in creating content for this project for six months, but have found no takers.

If I'm being harder on this [prospective] language community than we normally would be on a language community of 4,000 speakers, it's only because we have to make some special provisions to make this work, and will have to provide more oversight than usual to take care of the test. At that, I think there are only two ways in which I am being stricter than usual:

  • Requiring a registered user to make the request to start the test
  • Closing this as "rejected–stale" after six months instead of twelve

And I am doing so strictly because of the extra work (and variance with normal policy) that this test would require.

At the end of the day, I've seen no evidence that there is serious interest in creating content for this project. I've heard people complaining about prejudice (unfairly). I've heard people complaining about French and Normand speakers (unfairly). But without exception, people supporting this proposal have done so because it's right, not because they are proficient Narom speakers/​writers wanting to create content. And what I'm not willing to do is to create extra work for myself and for translatewiki.net over an interest in this project that is only theoretical.

Going forward
  • If a registered user approaches me directly and says that s/he wants to start creating content in Narom, then I will create a space in Incubator for her/him, and @Amire80 will do the same at translatewiki.
    Link to my talk page on MetaLink to my talk page on Incubator
  • Ultimately, Narom is (in theory) eligible for projects. That said, a renewed request for a Wikipedia in Narom will be speedy-deleted as an invalid request unless, and until, someone has actually started creating a test project in Incubator.

For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 15:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Further comments