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 language committee needs to verify the language is eligible to be approved.
Check that the project does not already exist (see list).
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.
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.
Before you start yelling that such a proposal has already been refused I'd like to tell that this time it will be the good one. Why ? Because Ottoman Turkish is not a dead language. It is as dead as Latin, which would be foolish to consider a dead language knowing how many speakers it has. Ottoman Turkish is an incrediblely rich language with a corpus embracing 15th century classical poems as well as modern scientific and political treaties. Then you might think that creating such a Wikipedia would just be Turkish in arabo-persian script but no. Wikiepedia purpose, wikipedia's tenets always have been the ease of the access to the knowledge, the freedom and gratuitousness of knowledge and by accepting to create a wikipedia in Ottoman Turkish you're realising the wet dream of some Turkish nationalists nor history nerds but allowing a maximum of people to access to this language and its content, a maximum of people to reach knowledge and this is the very meaning, the very reason to be of Wikipedia, so creating wikipedias in Ottoman Turkish and other literary languages of our wolrd history must be considered by Wikipedia. I hope you read me until the end and that you will agree with me for the sack of the humanity. Waiting your favourable reply, may you accept the expression of my dearest regards. --L'Effendi (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have ideas why LPP terms 3rd and 4th can't be the oppose reasons? The language must be sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki. In most cases, this excludes regional dialects and different written forms of the same language, and The language of the proposal has a sufficient number of fluent users to form a viable contributor community and an audience for the content. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While I totally agree that an Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia would not necessarily be the plaything of nationalists or religious ultra-conservatives, and would be as desirable or undesirable as any other Wikipedia in a classic language, I don't think your proposal is helpful. However valid your arguments may be, you say nothing that hasn't been said before - in reference to either Ottoman Turkish or any other ancient language. The discussion will start all over again and the outcome will likely be the same. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion)20:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to say some things as someone who will contribute if it is opened. Many Ottoman works have survived to the present day and Ottoman works are still very common in literature. Although they are often novelized, it is quite easy to show examples in the academic field. There are people actively speaking the language in Northern Iraq, Southeast Turkey, Istanbul and some Balkan cities. Although it is very similar to Turkish, there are some differences, such as the Arabic languages. I don't want to give you a headache with too much technical information. I can say that the language has the manpower to make a potential contribution, albeit limited. It's been 5 years since the last application, and in that time, strange as it may sound, the number of people learning Ottoman Turkish has increased. I would like to give an example from the country I live in. Turkey is made up of 81 provinces and in all 81 of them there is a state course where anyone who wants to learn Ottoman Turkish can do so. In addition, it is considered compulsory in academia, especially among historians and literary scholars. Mustafa MVC (talk) 15:24, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be a useful Wikipedia like Old English. There are people learning Ottoman Turkish in the successor states of the Ottoman Empire, mainly in Turkey. In some villages in Turkey, there are people who continue to speak and write in Ottoman. That's why I think it should be opened. In addition, it would be nice to have a romanization option like in Kurdish Wikipedia to increase interaction. Âfâkî💬13:48, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
also even modern turkish language wikipedia isnt even in good shape(not in bad shape too). so; improve your own, widely in use, modern language wikipedia instead make this discussion. ----modern_primatඞඞඞTALK23:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Many Turkish people has knowledge in Ottoman Turkish and they can edit. An example there are also Esperanto or Latin Wikipedia's and actually this languages has not native speakers. Zolgoyo (talk) 07:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226 Better is when the Language committee makes a discussion about the great languages (like Ancient Greek, Ottoman Turkish etc.) to give a chance. Where this languages has a great meaning in history. Zolgoyo (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. This language is not extinct. Its still studied and learned by Ottoman history scholars, and having a Wikipedia version with this written form of Turkish will certainly shed light on it for the Turkish people and Scholars in Particular, and help preserve it for new generations. Add to that, we still have lots of public domain sources that were written in Ottoman Turkish, and using this Wikipedia we can help preserve them as well. I just tend to prefer its title to be «عثمانليجه». Best--باسم (talk) 11:19, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. Its good to keep a historic language alive, making a Wikipedia for it is very good for preserving it and making it gain new learners. I myself would contribute in such a Wiki. Xaneqînî (talk) 18:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. This language is not extinct. Its still studied and learned by Ottoman history scholars, and having a Wikipedia version with this written form of Turkish will certainly shed light on it for the Turkish people and Scholars in Particular, and help preserve it for new generations. Add to that, we still have lots of public domain sources that were written in Ottoman Turkish, and using this Wikipedia we can help preserve them as well. I just tend to prefer its title to be «عثمانليجه». Best--باسم (talk) 11:19, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Strong oppose.--Fenikals (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
