Talk:Language committee

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Language committee (contact page about requests)

Please add any questions or feedback to the language committee here on this page.

Archives of this page

See also: Requests for new languages/Archives

2013 non-Wikipedia requests[edit]

I think verifying them can be easier than any ongoing verifications, and here are what I suggest:

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:35, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I was planning to try to address 2017 requests next, but will get at these soon. StevenJ81 (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, IMHO the Pipil Wikinews is a problem, because it's the only one Wikinews that is under Nahuatl languages umbrella. The solution is still waiting for that, which as a Collection of languages (see iso639-3:nah), Nahuatl does illegally have a Wikipedia that mixed a huge number of member languages. -- 09:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Good point, some months ago, this problem bumped a question: should we rename nahwiki to nciwiki or nhnwiki? and why? After that, the entire discussion dead, nothing happened on this panorama, really, nothing. Now the Wikidata issue bumped this problem again, because an IP user on that sent me an email that he wanna use nci, nch, ... instead of confusing nah, so we need a final target now, that nahwiki really need to be splitted finally, otherwise there're really no answer for all questions about Nahuatl. Note that I said three "really", so this is really a long-term problem now! --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:57, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
It really is. There is a LangCom member who said he would address this; let me bug him again. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:02, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

See latest updates above. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

More updates above. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Yet other updates above. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:42, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Last updates of non-Wiktionary projects before New Year's Day. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Manchu/Xibe language[edit]

In Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Manchu 2, it was said that, "Xibe and Daur are different languages. If you want to create projects in Xibe or Daur, please make separate requests.". However, I have recently encountered an extract from a document published by Tsumagari Toshiro, a linguistics professor who specialized in Tungusic languages, when he participated in a meeting about Manchu Studies at Korea University in year 2016, which mentioned that there are limited amount of information about spoken information on the Xibe language [as in text that transcribed how people in Xibe language say things directly] despite the relatively large amount of speakers it have, because the literary language used by Xibe speakers are de facto unchanged from the literary language of Manchu. However I cannot locate the source of the publication as I was reading it from an anonymous post on internet that quoted this extract by taking a photo of it.

Given this information, should the precaution be removed or re-worded so that contributors are also encouraged even if they are speaking the Xibe language, as long as what they wrote are standard Manchu?

C933103 (talk) 04:45, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@C933103: Makes sense. It would be worthwhile if you could find the source and add it to the the request page for reference. But I'll try to play around with the language on the page a bit. (Might take me a day or two to get to; I'm not sure.) StevenJ81 (talk) 14:15, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Anyway, Xibe does have its own ISO 639-3 code sjo; likely Daur dta. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Look, policy still dictates that languages that are "not different enough" (definition open for now, and let's not go there for the moment) do not necessarily each get a project. And in this particular case, Ethnologue on sjo says "Inherently intelligible of Manchu (mnc)". So if the written language is the same, even if the oral language is different, someone has to prove that there is a reason to create a future Xibe (or Daur) project anyway. As I said, I'll work on the wording, but I'm ok with this (conceptually) for now. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:17, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
OK. Reworded. Is everyone comfortable with that? StevenJ81 (talk) 17:26, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Request for Saraiki[edit]

As Wikipedia is thinking about creating projects in also in those language which have no ISO_3 code. In this sense if saraiki is given code sar. It would be easy to understand that it is saraiki language. So it is suggested that be created.Sraiki 15:32, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Saraiki already has code skr, and that is the code that will be used for Saraiki-language projects. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:55, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81 Thanks, Wikipedia be approved so that work be made faster.Sraiki 16:01, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

:::Why don't you use the word will in any place? -- 09:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@StevenJ81 Now we have improved Saraiki Wikipedia. Now stubs are less than 20%. so this wiki be approved.Sraiki 11:12, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
@Sraiki: I will look at the test late next week. (That's the soonest I can do it.) StevenJ81 (talk) 13:42, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
@Sraiki: I'm still checking on a couple of things, but I'm hoping to present Saraiki Wikipedia to LangCom by next week. Keep up the good work. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226 @StevenJ81, Saraiki language speaking people are in wait for Wikipedia in Saraiki.Sraiki 15:37, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
@Sraiki: This is now waiting on LangCom to find an expert who can verify that the test's language is Saraiki. (Don't take this personally. This is a requirement every time the first project in a new language is to be approved, and happened because of problems in the past.) Do you have the name of an academic or professional linguist—preferably one not strongly involved in your test project—whom LangCom could contact? StevenJ81 (talk) 15:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81 Dear, These are some professors in Saraiki.

See: 1. 2. Sraiki

@Sraiki: Thank you. I will forward to LangCom. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81:, The Saraiki ethnic community of Saraikistan area and all over the world is thankful to you and whole Wikipedia team for helping us to promote our language and culture through knowledge. Saraikis are expecting the approval of Saraiki wikipedia and its own website of wikipedia. Your kindness in this regard will be remebered forever. So we are waiting for good news from you. Thanks. Engr.ismailbhutta (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81:, @Liuxinyu970226 @StevenJ81, @Engr.ismailbhutta:, If Wikipedia is approved, the work will became fast, Approval is very close. Sraiki 04:36, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81:, @Liuxinyu970226 @StevenJ81, @Engr.ismailbhutta:, It is requested that language committee should take the notice of so delay in this matter. It is hoped that lang comm will try their best for this creation as soon as possible. Sraiki 15:37, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Mongolian language written in Mongolian script[edit]

Actually is it supposed to be represented by the ISO-639 language code cmg: Classical Mongolian? C933103 (talk) 12:24, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

There seems to be a difference between modern Mongolian written with the script and the extinct en:Classical Mongolian language. --MF-W 15:10, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
The thing is Encyclopedia Britannica list Classical Mongolian as an alternative name for Literary Mongolian, and then Harvard University also wrote on introduction to their Mongolian program in a way of "Classical (literary) Mongolian". There's also book that describe "Classical Mongolian" as the literary language of Mongolian. Is the "Classical Mongolian" being described by the code "cmg" being the same thing as what the Encyclopedia Britannica is describing, or is it some other thing that is not being well documented? What exactly is the "Classical Mongolian" being described? C933103 (talk) 06:12, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
We follow ISO 639-3. According to that, Classical Mongolian is an extinct language. So I guess this follows the definition of "some scholars [who] restrict that term [=Classical Mongolian] [...] to the latest period of its history (17th-20th centuries)" (quote from the Britannica snippet that is visible at your link). --MF-W 19:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
However, an language is consider "extinct" when there are no speakers anymore. Since Literary Mongolian is a language specifically for writing, there should not be any speakers of the language and thus the language should be extincted as it is supposed to even if there are still active use of the language in writing. I think it is similar to Literary Chinese or use of Latin after middle age era. Anyway, I think it would be the best if someone can ask ISO 639-3's RA what that Classical Mongolian actually isC933103 (talk) 21:33, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
I don't really understand the issue. There is no request to create a Classical Mongolian Wikipedia at the moment, so we don't need to know what it is. --MF-W 10:01, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: There are request to create a Wikipedia for Mongolian written in Mongolian script, and then also a request to create a monolingual value for Mongolian text in Mongolian script, however both of them are not proceeding at least partially because of the language code problem. If Classical Mongolian with its language code being cmg was actually the intended code for Mongolian language written in Mongolian script, then those requests can be proceed accordingly. C933103 (talk) 14:00, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
@C933103 and MF-Warburg:
  1. Indeed, the status on SIL can sometimes be confusing, too. This is just the problem that Ancient Greek meets.
  2. For "and then also a request to create a monolingual value for Mongolian text in Mongolian script", it looks like that you're asking phab:T137810, that said, @GerardM: will not allow introducing any new codes with dash, if they're begin with macrolanguage code, and I was also actually asked SIL that if changing Mongolian from macrolanguage back to an individual language is possible or not, the Melinda from SIL respond me two emails that No, there are really variets of Mongolian that make benefit to define "Mongolian" as macrolanguage", so I cried to ask you, C933103, can you please accept the Azerbaijani mode? To allow using mvf on Wikidata, and just by local definding that "mn-mong=mvf" on modules? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:23, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
The Azerbaijani comparison isn't really appropriate, see my user talk page reply for further detail. C933103 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Another example to what I mentioned: xwo, "Written Oirat", is listed as "extinct" despite information indicate that Oirat people are still writing in such script. That indicate language would still be marked as extinct despite they are written language and in active written use. Therefore the ISO labelling for languages extinct status is meaningless for language that are only written but not spoken. C933103 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

So I asked SIL via email about information of what is the Classical Mongolian language in ISO 639-3. They pointed me to but the site seems to be having problem now. However as I understand the Multitree site would show users a list of resources on Lingulist. And thus there are about a dozen or so different form of materials about Classical Mongolian that are available on Lingulist. It also linked a few Linguists who are listed as related to Classical Mongolian. Some of those linked document specify Classical Mongolian = Written Mongolian, some of those doesn't mention it, some of those imply they're talking about written language with classical mongolian listed as subject language for their mail, but some of them seems to be using the code to talk about ancient speaking language and some even seems to be using the code to talk about vowels of the language being spoken in modern time in Chinese part of Mongolia. Not sure what it imply. Maybe someone can contact one of those listed linguist for detail? C933103 (talk) 07:11, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@GerardM: Will you have time to contact them? Because for random one of those 6 linguists, their email address are not publicly shown, and by clicking that blue button I got a captcha-like popup, but between texts and login button, I can only see "404 Not Found" --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: You can google the name and institution of those linguists listed on the site and you can usually find their email or social network accounts in the first few results. C933103 (talk) 18:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
@C933103: I've tried, but non of all those linguists published their email addresses in anywhere. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:08, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: How about emails listed at or or (page 2 left hand side) or or C933103 (talk) 00:13, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Then @C933103: I can confirm that the wickhamsmith is failed, because I've got an automated refusion message that "host[] said: 552 For explanation visit (in reply to RCPT TO command)", I'm trying other four. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:43, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
@C933103:I've transfered a copy of response email (from Benjamin) to you, please read it in your inbox. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:56, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, so it seems like it is inappropriate to use cmg: Classical Mongolian to represent Mongolian written in Traditional Mongolian Script. And then mvf is also an ill choice to represent anything. So, what now? C933103 (talk) 14:25, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Oh and by the way, from the mail it seems like you haven't briefed the professor with enough context when you send him the mail. I hope you have written an appropriate follow up reply to the professor afterward. C933103 (talk) 16:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

In this situation, what would be the most suitable code? C933103 (talk) 07:34, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

If you think no alternates are good to you, then you have to withdraw directly requesting Monolingual text codes, but just add mn values, with qualifier writing system (P282) Mongolian script (Q1055705). If you even can't agree this, then you have to drop your efforts. Just a reminder that langcom wasn't, isn't, and won't agree any ideas for mn-mong, because if there's a separated individual code available for i18n, then its "father" macrolanguage code will be PROHIBITED for any usages in anywhere of WMF. -- 07:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
It would probably help if you signed in, especially if you want to continue to speak as an authority on the subject. I don't know where you're getting "PROHIBITED" from; both and exist, so there is a precedent that mn-mong could be used for language tag for a Wikimedia project.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:33, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@Prosfilaes,, C933103, and StevenJ81: FWIW, in that Phabricator task GerardM said these sentences which to the best of my knowledge, they vetoed mn-mong:

... I don't know how old this quote is. Current policy is that macrolanguages require a 2/3 vote, not that they cannot be approved at all. Mind you, Gerard, nearly always will vote against a macrolanguage. But if two people vote against him, it can be allowed. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

And as per **two emails** I've got in the last year, SIL will never agree any "cancel" requests of macrolanguages, and Mongolian (mn) is also a macrolanguage even you don't think so. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
It was unclear what the problem was, though if it's accepted that Mongolian in the Cyrillic script and Mongolian in the Mongolian script need to reside on different wikis, given the current existence of mn, I find it unreasonable to reject mn-Mong.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Pause to restate the problem (25 November)[edit]

Could everyone please stop for a moment?

I need someone to define clearly what the problem even is here. Are we talking about a potential project eligibility? Are we just talking about identifying text strings in Wikidata? Those aren't the same thing, and might be handled differently?

  • Note: people don't need to keep quoting @GerardM. And note that not everyone on the Committee always agrees with his interpretation of the rules. In particular,
    • when the "constituent languages" of the "macrolanguage" are highly mutually intelligible, and/or
    • when the "constituent languages", even if not mutually intelligible in speech, are basically the same in writing
then LangCom should and will permit the macrolanguage.

It seems to me, then, that if we're talking data strings in Wikidata, then one or more of the following will, absolutely be permissible:

  • If the reference is only from Classical/Literary Mongolian, then code it that way
  • If the reference is modern, then either one of the language codes of constituent languages within mn, or else mn-Mong itself, has to be eligible. The real question here would then be, "are the data strings we're talking about correct in multiple types of Mongolian? If so, either code it multiple times in the corresponding Wikidata entries, or show me that from a written point of view, it's really a single language. And do that here, not phabricator.

If we're talking about a project approval, the appropriate place to discuss is on the RFL page. In that case, LangCom's first preference would be either (a) a project in the individual variety of Mongolian, and/or (b) a script converter on the current mnwiki. But if neither of those is possible, and the community clearly demonstrates on Incubator that all varieties in Mongolian script are welcome, we can work with that—provided it is consistent with modern usage of this script. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

We do not accept macro languages except as an artifact of days gone bye. (Thank your deity). Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@GerardM: You are the only member of the Committee who feels that strongly about it. And current policy says "2/3" (see voting page), not "we do not accept". StevenJ81 (talk) 15:54, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
We also have a history of seeking consensus. Your notion is not argued but a power ploy. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
If you say so. Yeah, I'm really gunning for power here. What nonsense. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Total consensus based systems only work when people are willing to concede. Otherwise it's just tyranny by the people who are only interested in getting their way. The cases where a two-thirds majority can't win a consensus should be rare and be very stressful to the system.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:13, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
  1. It is about both of them, the wikidata text value identifier and also the creation of Mongolian in Classical Mongolian script Wikipedia.
    @C933103: Please, as I'm crying with tears to ask you to, do not suggest site creation using a code with dash, that can result speedy veto from server operations e.g. @Reedy (WMF):. -- 08:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
    I am not making such recommendation in this message, although it doesn't really make sense to speedy veto site creation with dash when it have already be done in the past.C933103 (talk) 09:14, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  2. After contacting Mongolian linguistic professors, it have been shown that "Classical Mongolian" as in the iso language code cmg is not supposed to represent the written language that use Classical Mongolian script, so it would be incorrect to use the language code "cmg" here for this purpose.
  3. You can check the description on the Written Mongolian here: [1]
  1. Then what do you think would be an appropriate language code for Mongolian text written in Mongolian script? Given that mvf is inappropriate as already clarified by Doctor Benjamin Brosig in his email to User:Liuxinyu970226.
C933103 (talk) 16:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@C933103: To the best of my knowledge, the decision of langcom is kindly like the Permanent five of UNSC, where I'm 99.999% sure that your proposals can be vetoed just by one oppose vote. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:29, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
That is no longer technically true, though most of the time it is still true in practice. However, that applies to a formal LangCom discussion forum; just because a LangCom member has expressed concerns here does not mean this discussion should be stopped. It does mean, though, that proponents need to know their chances are slim. StevenJ81 (talk) 09:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81 and GerardM: That rule (I mean, the "2/3 agreetion") requires "within langcom-l mailing list" mail vote, and do you both send such emails to start a refreshed new vote? If not, then it's still true that mn-mong is one-oppose-vetoed by GerardM. -- 08:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
I didn't mention anything about that in this particular section. C933103 (talk) 23:46, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm afraid no one can accept any creation of new WMF sites (if by site creation you mean domains) now, just if the language code has dash. The likely case is Korean in Hanja, which C933103 was proposed ko-hani but, not only langcom members but also Korean Wikipedia communities e.g. @-revi: oppose it. -- 03:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Again, you speak as if on high, but as an anonymous editor, I don't see why anyone should accept your assertion that "no one can accept". If there are language communities divided by script that can not be held on one Wikipedia, we would have no option but to include a script tag or some other (standard or non standard) disambiguator. Korean in Hanja doesn't strike me as a likely case at all, given that both Koreas write Korean in Hangul, and I don't think there's any other major groups of Korean speakers.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:57, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
And @Prosfilaes: How did your comments be effectively here? Nearly all of your this comment are addressing no problem at all, which looks just like a "three sentences" bushwa to me, if a vote can also be happened for Korean Hanja, then it should be bumped within langcom-l, if not, just non-admin close it, thx. -- 08:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm having trouble understanding your sentences. Korean in Hanja fails the test of being a real problem.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
@Prosfilaes: "Not a real problem", hehe. -- 02:34, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
@GerardM: So can you suggest a language code for use for purposes listed above? C933103 (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
AFAICS that is at least not mn-mong, just because that's vetoed by GerardM, you must select a proper alternative code, C933103. -- 08:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
At issue is the use of standards. My oposition is based on my understanding of standards. I reject the notion that we are free to just select something because it is convenient. When there is a need for something where the standards are problematic, there is ampple room to go different and indicate this in the code used. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 09:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Can we please close this section by this way?![edit]

1. @StevenJ81: Do you, or @Amire80, Maor X, GerardM, Jon Harald Søby, and MF-Warburg:@Millosh and Satdeep Gill: do you all have anytime to start an official within-member [VOTE] in langcom-l mailing list regarding this? As that IP user pointed, the "2/3 agreetion requires a vote held within langcom member, and within mailing list", if not, then it's very likely that the normal "one-oppose veto" has applied. I will continue filling other steps after your responds. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

What you propose is against the voting policy. Topics should be discussed first, and only afterwards there will maybe be a vote. So far, this topic has not been discussed by langcom at all. --MF-W 13:38, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
No need to, the C933103 is also having their wrong behaviors e.g. forking CC BY-SA 3.0 contents to Wikinews which is CC BY 2.5. -- 05:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Can somebody tell me why a script converter on the current Mongolian Wikipedia is not a viable solution? StevenJ81 (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hindi Wikisource[edit]

Hi, What does need to be done to create the subdomain for the Hindi Wikisource, i.e. m:Requests for new languages/Wikisource Hindi? Regards, Yann (talk) 05:31, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

:There are still 159 untranslated messages in MediaWiki. Also, the following untranslated messages need to be translated because these extensions are used for Wikisource: Cite, Collection, Confirm Edit, Gadgets, Ogg Handler, Proofread Page, Vector, Licenses, Wikimedia messages. John Vandenberg 06:04, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

@Yann: Last 8 years the Hindi community not fulfill this minimum task. Jayantanth (talk) 18:58, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
And it is quite impressive that Requests for new languages/Wikiversity Hindi and Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Hindi approved so quickly, but this request have been hang by 10 year span, requested in 2008.Jayantanth (talk) 19:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
It does not appear that the project has been active enough. We need to see at least three registered users having ten or more edits each for at least three consecutive months. StevenJ81 (talk) 01:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
OK, I have forwarded this to several people who speak Hindi. We had a workshop in Bangalore last month, and several people have expressed interest to work on this. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
I saw increased activity on this test project in November. You must continue this level of activity for December and January, and then we can talk about project approval. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:27, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikisource language name.[edit]

So, there is that Literary Chinese Wikisource request.

I am personally in favor of creation of a Literary Chinese wikisource with reasons listed on the request page, despite there are some realistic concern about cost of migration and future cost of maintenance which might make such an action unfavorable.

One of the alternative solution I can think of is to turn Chinese Wikisource into a multilanguage wiki so that it can be more convenience to users that want to seek, read or contribute Literary Chinese documents without knowing modern Chinese

However that might not be enough to attract users from other non-Chinese speaking region. For instance, currently the Chinese Wikisource is known as "Chinese Wikisource". But, while Literary Chinese is also seen as part of Chinese in other related countries, according to my understanding they are commonly being included as part of Japanese/Korean language education, and as such with a system similar to the current system, regular user might not be able to correlate Chinese wikisource to be a place where they can get their desired Literary Chinese document.

One of the method that might be able to help with the problem is to change the Chinese Wikisource language name in those other mentioned languages so that it is explicitly pointed out that "Han text" or "literary language text" - literal translation to variants of LZH name in different languages - are also included in Chinese Wikisource by changing the translation for "Chinese" as a language name for wikisource project.

However such change should only applies to wikisource and shouldn't influence other wiki project because it does not applies to other wiki projects.

Is this something technically achievable? C933103 (talk) 07:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

It may be tricky to do this, because language names seem to be drawn from the Unicode Common Locale Data Repository, and need to be changed there to make a difference here. I don't necessarily know if they can be overridden locally using a MediaWiki namespace page; you'd have to ask a developer about that.
I'm inclined to think the following two actions (done together) might mostly do the job:
  • Notice on the main pages (and village pump-equivalents) of the appropriate WS projects that lzh content is to be found in ...
  • Make sure people know that you can always choose your interface language, even on a wiki that is not nominally multilingual, using Special:Preferences.
Where it gets harder here is on document headers/descriptors and on discussion pages. And I have to admit that I'm leaning toward explicitly asking the sysops on Chinese Wikisource how amenable they would be to either (a) making the wiki multilingual, (b) at least activating the "Translate" extension so that certain pages could have translations in multiple languages or (c) at least allowing parallel document descriptions on pages having more to do with Vietnam, Korea, Japan, etc. than China. If that community is agreeable, then I think the best approach is likely to be to let all the content stay there, and to try to focus everyone's work there. If not, then we may need to allow duplication. (And to be perfectly candid: it is always allowable for things to live on multilingual Wikisource, and in the short run that would be the solution supporting duplication anyway.) StevenJ81 (talk) 14:54, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Here's what French Wiktionary considered about this: We can install Translate extension, use Special:Pagetranslation to configure all the necessary pages to zh, so that all such pages can be translated from zh. But a reminder: We won't break the CLDR, so in general the language name is impossible to be changed just by your heart. -- 07:33, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Why would it be related to French Wiktionary? C933103 (talk) 12:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
@C933103: My understand of this comment is, per phab:T138972, the Translate extension is also nowadays available on French Wiktionary, so as you said locally at zhwikisource: "倒是可以考虑把中文维基文库非内容部分多语言化。", that IP user suggests to also install Translate extension to Chinese Wikisource, so that policies, help pages, templates, (maybe) modules and (maybe) MediaWiki messages that don't exist on twn can be translated (to lzh iirc) locally. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

When to approve Western Armenian Wikipedia?[edit]

It's already approval ongoing for over 3 months! -- 02:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

It's awaiting language verification. Can a registered user who has been contributing either at hywiki or on the Incubator please provide contact information on language experts (substantially) independent of the work here? StevenJ81 (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
I have reviewed all the translations and everything is ok.--Azniv Stepanian (talk) 18:21, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Would you mind confirming from your WMAM account? In the meanwhile, over the weekend, I'll try to get a final OK from LangCom. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I confirm what I said above.--Azniv Stepanian (WMAM) (talk) 12:41, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wiktionary Manchu[edit]

Another newly created request, verify it? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, I'll get there in due time. But consider the following points:
  • Except (maybe) in the very most obvious of cases, giving everyone a few days to comment is no bad thing, even if these are not true votes (or even !votes).
  • I never mark eligible until I check and see if someone is actually working on the test. It means I just don't say "yes"/"no"; it takes at least a little bit of time and effort. I don't want these sitting and lingering, but I just cannot always make these my #1 priority at all times. I'm a volunteer, too.
  • Related: I strongly do not wish to set up expectations anywhere that people can demand instantaneous service on RFL requests. At the most benign, that expectation puts more pressure on volunteers like me. At the most malignant, people can create relatively unserious requests and send us running to no good cause.
It is for these reasons—the last, especially—that I have explictly asked you NOT to ping me every time a new request is filed. Understand that there are pretty much no circumstances where a new request will appear and I won't notice it within a week. And I am very troubled that you do not seem to be willing to respect the work I do by accommodating that request. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm not pinging you here. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:58, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
When you put this kind of request on this page, you are effectively pinging me here. If I (or another LangCon member) don't get to a request in, say, a month, then go ahead and tell us to get off our butts and act. But please don't do it any sooner than that. StevenJ81 (talk) 12:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Western Armenian Wikipedia[edit]

Dear Language committee, please solve the issue of the separation of Western Armenian Wikipedia. I send an email to committee mailing list. Thanks! --WikiTatik (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@WikiTatik: The (probably) good news: [2]. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:51, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much!--WikiTatik (talk) 12:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

։;Dear Liuxinyu970226, I checked there is no (talk) 13:13, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@WikiTatik: Not yet. Probably will be approved in the next few days. Then it will take some time to get content moved from hy.wikipedia and from Incubator into the newly approved project. But progress is being made. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

The table of closed requests should not be collapsed.[edit]

This really should go on Talk:Requests for new languages, but that redirects here. The table of closed requests should not be collapsed. It is important to see and be able to search for all projects in a language without having to go down and separately open up the closed request table.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree, and have changed it back. (I left it as a collapsible table, but with its default position expanded.) StevenJ81 (talk) 11:53, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
But the opened table also results Mobile users like me to have to waste too much traffic fares to load, @Prosfilaes: have you ever considered mobile users? -- 23:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
It shouldn't matter. You're still downloading the table, open or closed.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
If someone creates a css class that will show the table on computers but not download it at all on mobile devices, I'd certainly be willing to add that in. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Guianan Creole Wikipedia[edit]

Cf. Notification about proposed approvals

The LangCom intends to approve Guianan Creole Wikipedia. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please say so on this page in the next seven days.

For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 14:18, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Request for approval of Mon Wikipedia[edit]

The test project of Mon Wikipedia is being active since August 2018, especially the users, Htawmonzel, Aue Nai, and Ninjastrikers. There are also some other active consturbutors from September. We would like to request for final approval for a subdomain for Mon Wikipedia.

The best regards, Htawmonzel

I'll look into it shortly (probably at the beginning of next week). StevenJ81 (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
@Htawmonzel, Aue Nai, and Ninjastrikers: Looks good. I will submit to LangCom later today (my time). As is true for all projects that are the first to be approved in a language, this will need language verification from an academic or professional linguist, preferably one without strong ties to your test project. Please try to have one in mind in case I ask you for one. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:55, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Mon Wikipedia[edit]

Cf. Notification about proposed approvals

The LangCom intends to approve Mon Wikipedia. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please say so on this page before December 31. (I'm leaving this open longer than usual because of the upcoming holidays, as many people's ordinary on-line routines are likely to be disrupted over the next couple of weeks.) StevenJ81 (talk) 23:13, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Wiktionary Minangkabau[edit]

Hello. The Minangkabau Wiktionary recently saw a significant increase in its activities. We now have a regular pool of active contributors and recently-acquired dictionaries and other needed resources for a new project. Therefore, we would like the Committee to consider it for the next step into final approval. Thank you. Muhraz (talk) 10:07, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Activity only really started in December. It would be good to wait at least a little bit more. There should usually be at least 3 months of consecutive activity. Please also work to complete the interface translation (at least the most-used messages). --MF-W 16:47, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Hindi Wikisource[edit]

Cf. Notification about proposed approvals

The LangCom intends to approve Hindi Wikisource. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please say so on this page in the next seven days. StevenJ81 (talk) 23:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)