Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Northwest African Arabic

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Northwest African Arabic Wikipedia[edit]

main page Request for a new language edition: Wikipedia Northwest African Arabic

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.

A committee member provided the following comment:

At this point, the Algerian Arabic Wikipedia test project (see incubator:Wp/arq and Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Jazayri) is the lead project for creating a Maghrebi Wikipedia. Please contribute to that project instead.
You can also contribute to existing tests in Moroccan and/or Tunisian Arabic.
For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 16:01, 2 April 2018 (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.
  • 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  (SILGlottolog) A valid ISO 639-1 or 639-3 language code, like "fr", "de", "nso", ...
Language name Maghrebi Arabic Language name in English
Language name Darija 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 Q1194795 - 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 "Wikipedia" in your language
Project namespace usually the same as the project name
Project talk namespace "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 Continent/City "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.


This request has been proposed after discussion between Language committee and WMF Board members in response to the requests for Wikipedia Algero-moroccan arabic, Wikipedia Algerian, Wikipedia Tunisian and Wikipedia Moroccan. Note that just the first one (Algero-Moroccan Arabic) has been rejected, Tunisian is on hold, while Algerian and Moroccan has got eligible status. --Millosh 23:10, 18 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The request should be used to determine are there enough native speakers support to create one set of projects for Northwest African Arabic varieties. --Millosh 23:10, 18 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Native speakers comments would be counted, mostly. --Millosh 18:21, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Arguments in favor[edit]

  1. Favor. -- 02:25, 20 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IPs vote in Wikimedia ? --Helmoony 17:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  1. Favor. This type of Arabic is very different from Arabic spoken in the middle east. It is similar to the difference between Scots and English. Snood1205 23:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  1. Favor. This is not a dialect, this is a separate language.

I'd say it's closer to Dutch and English instead of Scots and English. Many people who speak this language don't know enough standard Arabic or French in order to use Wikipedia.

Just because it's catagorised as Arabic, doesn't mean it's a dialect. Arabic is not one language, it is tens of separate languages each having dialects. Selim_P 24:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arguments against[edit]

  1. No - Do we seriously need to create wikis in Dialects? We don't write wikis in slang... --Speedy Gonzalez 03:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  1. This is, of course, an invalid argument against. If you consider colloquial varieties of Arabic to be slang, then yes, we do write Wikis in colloquial varieties of Arabic. We already have one in Masri (Egyptian Arabic). The purpose of this request is not to decide whether or not we should have Wikipedias in regional or local varieties of Arabic (if there is enough speakers willing to contribute, of course), but rather to decide how to divide it: should we have one for Darija/Maghrebi and one for Amiyya/Mashreeki, or should we have one for each country (Algerian, Tunisian, Moroccan, Lebanese, Iraqi, Syrian, Kuwaiti, Bahraini, Hejazi, Najdi, etc)? This particular request is about Darija (=Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya.) --Node ue 20:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. oppose --U.Steele 20:03, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Oppose - The Arabic Wikipedia is in need of more effort, breaking it up into smaller projects will just make it harder to make a complete Arabic resource.--Aa2-2004 14:20, 11 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    This is, of course, an invalid argument against. We already have one in Masri (Egyptian Arabic). The purpose of this request is not to decide whether or not we should have Wikipedias in regional or local varieties of Arabic (if there is enough speakers willing to contribute, of course), but rather to decide how to divide it: should we have one for Darija/Maghrebi and one for Amiyya/Mashreeki, or should we have one for each country (Algerian, Tunisian, Moroccan, Lebanese, Iraqi, Syrian, Kuwaiti, Bahraini, Hejazi, Najdi, etc)? This particular request is about Darija (=Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya.) --Node ue 20:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. oppose. No community ready for it. No resources written in that 'language'. In what language will the wiki be written ? Are you going to invent a new language ? What alphabet ? What rules ? Wikimedia is not a place to invent new rules and new languages. Give me 5 websites or books written in that 'language' ! Or you kbnow what give me just one website. --Helmoony 17:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Our Bigger country is divided into 22 puppet states. Does this mean we need to have a separate Wikipedia for each? Absolutely NOT. Besides these emotional reasons, I doubt the existence of such "a Northwest African" dialect, let alone language, as the Arabic dialect in Libya is different from the one in Algeria or Morocco, so which one will be adopted? Furthermore, I doubt the presence of substantial support for such a wiki. There is no intellectual production in these spoken dialects? I would not even know how to write in this dialect, although I am a native Arabic speaker and fully understand the dialect. Having said this, this project will find no contributions and will fail if ever started. We don't need additional dead projects. عمرو بن كلثوم 01:39, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Symbol oppose vote.svg OPPOSE The above will be sufficient enough my friends. InTheRevolution2 23:43, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Symbol oppose vote.svg OPPOSE There's no such thing as "Northwest African Arabic". There's three or four different dialects, that are different from arabic, the only logical solution is to make individual wikipedias for these languages (morrocan, algerian, tunisian and lybian) but not one unified northwest arabic. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk)
  8. Oppose - This seems analogous to setting up separate wikipedias for American English, Canadian English, Indian English, Sri Lankan English, Singaporean English, Hong Kong English, South African English, Zambian English, Australian English, New Zealand English, etc. The effect would only be to make Wikipedia less useful. M Carling (talk) 11:04, 18 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. No ISO code - The ISO code determines whether there is a Wikipedia. The Algerian, Moroccan, Tunisian, and Libyan dialects have their own ISO codes and now are in the incubator. A pan-Darjia would only work if a standard Darjia is developed and gets its own ISO code. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1. Any Arabic Slang Language is not a formal human language, it is slang ! having a Wikipedia in a slang Arabic, will lead for many problems, the main leading one : more Arab-speaking wikipedians will be starting more wikipedias in other slang dialects, therefore we shall have someday in the future more than 30 Wikipedia's in Slang dialects ! each Arab speaker would want to start a Wikipedia of his own dialect ! and we should keep in mind, that not only regional states have their own dialects, the cities within those countries and states have more specific slang's and dialects, and this will make the true value of Wikipedia drop down when it will be filled with slang's ! 2. how valid is a Slang Dialect : lets not forget it is a dialect : meaning there is total biding code to how to spell and write or read ! a dialect differs from a man to another ! for example in slang English : the word The : is turned into da and de ! as also it is a slang : a slang doesnt have a biding grammar or what so ever ! it is just what goes with the mouth ! a slang is saying what you feel your mouth can easily say ! this is how a slang develops ! and another thing is that in slang we might have sounds that do not exist in the formal language : for example in many slang arabic's we have the sound /g/ and there is no specific way to express this sound ! sometimes they use the Farsi letters sometimes else, here are four letters that all represent /g/ in slang arabic's :چ ڠ گ ڇ, and there are many more !

3. today we have a Wikipedia in a slang non-grammatical nor organized language, so why cant we have a Wikipedia in lolcat language, it already translated the bible : teh lolcat spek iz organizd !

4. if you accept to have a wikipedia in a slang language of a regional state, this means you now need to have a Wikipedia to each state in the US at least, having Wikipedia Masri, is a huge deal of turning Wikipedia into politically divided than nations and cultures contributing together, DO NOT TURN WIKIPEDIA INTO A POLITICAL DIVISION !

5. in All Arab & Algerian Universities, (and rest of the world), a scientific report - scientific page, in a slang dialect, even their own slang, is not acceptable and that report/page will never be regarded as true or even scientific unless in a formal Language like Formal Arabic Language !

6. having Wikipedia in this slang language or any other will lower the validity and the standards of Wikipedia : how would something valid/true/scientific and reliable as Wikipedia have a SLANG language, there is not scientific family in the world that would recognize a slang as a valid way to express science and studying !

7.when we have this Wikipedia & many others, that is already leading to more Wikipedias in other Arabic SLANG Dialects, the Arab-speaking Developers and editors will be divided in more than 30 Wikipedia in stead of all of them developing the one true formal language Arabic Wikipedia, thus they are destroying and corrupting in stead of uniting and building wikipedia, and expanding Wikipedia Arabic

8. treating Slang Arabic as equal for other formal Languages is a discrimination against the other slang-speakers of the world, thus for example we must also have Slang Arabic English, it is as the same level as Egyptian Arabic Slang, or Algerian or Bahrani Arabic



and so I've presented my statement, with Logic and reasoning ! please respect and don not vandalize ! as I stress on you understanding #1 & #2 !

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asm17hawkeye (talk)

  1. Oppose. I strongly support creating Wikipedias written in different Arabic varieties. However, it seems that this is a GROUP OF LANGUAGES which includes Algerian Arabic, Moroccan Arabic, Libyan Arabic, etc. We already have test-wikis in the above three SEPARATE LANGUAGES. Thus, it is meaningless to create a Wikipedia consisting of various languages, which violates the Language proposal policy.Professorjohnas (talk) 05:23, 25 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Other discussion[edit]

I'll raise the same issue that I do for all Arabic colloquial proposals -- is there any kind of accepted or established orthography other than ad-hoc attempts to write dialect words using unmodified classical Arabic script? Because such ad-hoc attempts to write dialect with unmodified classical Arabic script are rarely very successful -- and would seem to be especially useless for many Moroccan Arabic vernaculars, which (from things I've seen in the linguistic literature from time to time) have a phonology extremely divergent from Classical Arabic... AnonMoos 07:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you suggesting that Wikipedians have to create a new scipt ? Is it our role ? Who are we to substitute the reality by imagining a new language with a special script ? --Helmoony 08:52, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm saying that unless there are some kind of established or accepted orthographic conventions for writing Northwest African Arabic dialects specifically, then this project is likely to be of rather limited usefulness -- because trying to write Arabic vernacular dialects in an ad-hoc improvised way using classical Arabic orthographic conventions (and probably everybody doing it slightly differently) is a losing game which almost always gives poor results (and seems guaranteed to give extremely poor results for many Moroccan dialects). AnonMoos (talk) 11:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]