Talk:Language committee

Language committee (contact page about requests)

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 31 days.

Archives of this page

---

2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015
2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025

---

See also: Requests for new languages/Archives

Notifications from Langcom about proposed approvals

Nawat Wikipedia

The language committee intends to approve Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Nawat. If you have any objections to that based on the Language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next 7 days. Meanwhile, the community is asked to check (and if necessary, complete) the wiki settings as indicated on the request page. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations to the Nawat Wikipedia community. I'm very excited about the launch. One thing, could we get more transparency about the "intend to approve" part? How many members of the LangCom were involved? What way did they vote? A qualitative description of the activity that they saw, so they believe the activity level as described in the LPP is satisfied? I am supportive of the launch and the approval, but in general I believe we need more transparency about these decisions. Similar requests also came from other community members. Thanks for consideration. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:40, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker: If you aren't already, you are free to subscribe to the public language committee mailing list at mail:langcom. The archives are also available in that link; the Nawat thread is one of the most recent ones at the time of writing. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 02:01, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Discussions

Interslavic Wikipedia, third request

Dear Language committee. Since 2015 I have been subscribed to the Langcom mailing list, occasionally even sharing some unsollicited but hopefully useful expertise. My impression from the discussions has always been that the minimum requirement for approval is three active contributors over a period three months. At this point, Wp/isv has 12 full months with at least five active contributors each month. Our wiki currently has 1050 articles (not counting redirects), 67 of which have more than 10K bytes, as well as 821 categories, 316 templates and 68 modules. All the necessary localisation work has been done, too. Therefore, I reiterate my request to approve the Interslavic Wikipedia.

Earlier this year, in January, one of our users requested approval on this very page, arguing that "the Interslavic Wikipedia has been active for the last 5 months". To be precise, the number of non-anonymous users with more than 10 edits during these five months had been 6, 10, 12, 12 and 10, successively. These numbers alone should have been more than enough, especially considering how several other projects with much less activity have been approved in the meantime. Nevertheless, the request was ignored and archived after two months.

Five weeks ago, I posted a similar request. Again, no answer, even though similar requests with regard to other projects did receive a response from Langcom member @Sotiale. And this is the point where I really don't understand anymore what's going on. If you think there is something wrong with our wiki, then at least tell us what should be done to make it right. Already in January Langcom member @Jon Harald Søby wrote that "in theory the project is ready for approval. However, for artificial languages the approval is not as "automatic" as for natural languages; see m:Language_proposal_policy#fictional – there is some room for interpretation in the language committee, so we will have to take it (Interslavic) up for discussion. I think it will be fine, but I can't promise for sure."[1] However, to date no such discussion seems to have taken place. Besides, I can't see why the label "constructed language" should make any difference at this point, since the project was already marked as eligible in October last year, also considering that Wikipedias in two constructed languages with only a handful of users (Lingua Franca Nova and Kotava) were approved in recent years.

Please understand that your persistent silence on the matter is causing people to become disheartened and even cynical. Some contributors already seem to have given up on the project. Even I don't know anymore how to explain this situation to our people. So please, Langcom, at least give us some perspective! Regards, IJzeren Jan (talk) 16:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello there!

I'm one of the contributors to the Interslavic wiki. I just wanted to share a few thoughts on the constructiveness and artificiality of the Interslavic language.

As one of its speakers, I often feel the urge to correct people or join the conversation when someone refers to Interslavic as an artificial language. The reason is quite simple: Interslavic is different from any other artificial language. While it certainly has the qualities of a constructed auxiliary language, it possesses a very distinctive trait that sets it apart from all other auxlangs. Interslavic can be understood even by people who have never studied it or heard of it before. It is easily comprehensible to monolingual speakers of any Slavic language without any prior learning!

I strongly suggest taking this point into consideration, as it does make a significant difference. GlěbDyndar (talk) 00:14, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I understand your frustration. As other members have already mentioned, LPP is very strict when it comes to non-natural languages. While countless non-natural languages can be created at any time, it's important to consider how much they can contribute to the dissemination of knowledge. This isn't to say your language doesn't meet this requirement, but rather that we must approach the discussion with caution. We need to start a discussion, but I've been busy with business trips recently, so I can't act quickly as a volunteer. I hope another member will initiate this discussion and actively lead the discussion. If not, I'll try to initiate it within this month. --Sotiale (talk) 03:11, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, @Sotiale, I appreciate that, and for the record, I totally agree with the policy regarding constructed languages. It's just that I was under the impression that the feasibility of the language was already dealt with at the moment when it was marked as eligible, and that the second phase is more about demonstrating whether the project is viable.

Anyway, the dissemination of knowledge is, in fact, the main purpose of Interslavic. As my colleague @GlěbDyndar noted, any (if not most) Slavs are practically monolingual, and Interslavic can serve to give them access to information that is not available in their native language. Something to consider when the discussion is started! Best regards, IJzeren Jan (talk) 08:44, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer! I hope that the discussion about approval of Interslavic Wikipedia will start soon. Indoeuropejczyk (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

A discussion has begun and I will contact you if necessary. --Sotiale (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

@Sotiale, thank you, I appreciate it. Although to be honest, I haven't seen anything on the Langcom mailing list yet. Anyway, I'll be happy to answer any questions. IJzeren Jan (talk) 22:23, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

It's very good! I really hope that the discussion about approval will end successfully. ~2025-27224-46 (talk) 17:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

@Sotiale, now that five weeks have passed, may I enquire about the status of the discussion? Regards, IJzeren Jan (talk) 19:23, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

The discussion isn't going well, but there doesn't seem to be any negative feedback. I sent a reminder to the mailing list. --Sotiale (talk) 05:01, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I want to hear as soon as possible that everything is okay. ~2025-29104-46 (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, it's been two months, but there's still nothing new. Has the discussion not started yet? ~2025-31100-24 (talk) 05:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Still nothing :( ~2025-35755-71 (talk) 10:59, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

About Okinawan wikipedia

There are 2672 articles in Okinawan wikipedia, and User interfaces have translated to Okinawan. So would you like let Okinawan wikipedia graduate from incubator? さきじょーぐー (talk) 07:44, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Although it has recently begun, it still doesn't meet the criteria for community sustainability. I'm confident that with more active editors continuing to edit, it will gain approval. --Sotiale (talk) 12:30, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you.

There are 14 handreds of people in Okinawa prefecture.I think that if Wikipedia incubator have be known morely, Editors increase. Can it advertise Okinawan wikipedia by wikimedia fundation?

There are several media in Okinawa. さきじょーぐー (talk) 07:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Okuwa ngaka dentaku kotateni ~2025-29629-13 (talk) 17:36, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@さきじょーぐー and Sotiale If I checked the archive correctly, this project was having fake contributions matter, has that problem been resolved nowadays? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Approval Request for the Levantine Arabic Wikipedia

The project has had a decent amount of activity for the past 12 months. Although it fell a bit for the last 2 months, I believe it will recover soon. The project has an active Discord server and a volunteer Instagram account with ~450 followers, mostly from Turkey. Here are some additional points for the case for approval

• The most interested group of native speakers are in Turkey, but they are not familiar with the Arabic script. They use the latin script to communicate. We need the official launch to start working on the dual writing system and recruit more contributors.
• The language is the 33rd most commonly spoken natural language in the world. Wikipedia has already editions in more than 300 languages, it is definitely not unrealistic to assume that this one is legitimately a viable project.
• The Incubator project has sufficient number of good articles, it could even be one of the notable written works in this language, so it deserves to be officially launched and get the inter-language links: which would even bring more contributors.

Adding @HitomiAkane, @FunLater, @A455bcd9 if they want to add anything. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 10:08, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I wanted to post something similar today. @Liuxinyu970226 recently removed Levantine from the featured list. It's the 3rd largest project here by number of articles (see: Incubator:Incubator:Wikipedia projects). Unclear what the next steps are. A455bcd9 (talk) 12:30, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

@A455bcd9 Well, because in the last two months, only 2 users (TheJoyfulTentmaker and HitomiAkane) are active, will the activity be re-populated up? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:35, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't criticize your decision. It's just unclear when/how long the project has to stay active for before a decision is made and this might discourage contributors. A455bcd9 (talk) 13:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I acknowledge that the drop in the activity in the last 2 months is not ideal, but also please look longer term. The contributors to the Levantine Wiki are experienced Wikimedians with multiple project involvements. And not all activity is visible in the Incubator logs, Discord, Instagram, merge requests to ISO to merge apc and ajp, which was primarily motivated for setting up the Levantine Wiki. Also, the Language Committee used judgement in the past, e.g. raising the bar for artificial languages. Here we are discussing a language that is a natural language and within the top 35 in the world, and we have already a meaningful collection of content. Overall, the most important aspects from Wikimedia mission's perspective are "is this a different language" and "can the project survive?", and the answer to both is a clear yes, as far as I see it. Multi-script is essential so people from Turkey and the Lebanese diaspora can join the project, and that either would require a separate incubator wiki (which will be wasteful in terms of the effort needed to set that up) or simply approve and launch and we can start working on the multi-script system, similar to the one used in the Kurdish Wikipedia (Latin, Arabic). TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 06:57, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker And how do you consider those users who said oppose? Aren't they answer to both questions you asked as really no instead of yes? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:21, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226 Those users who said oppose (Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Levantine Arabic) are the exact same ones using the exact same arguments as those who opposed Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Moroccan and Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Egyptian Arabic. And yet those were created. So of course the answer to the first question is yes. "can the project survive?" is a different question, but again: what is the criterion? A455bcd9 (talk) 11:38, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

As a sidenote, Levantine Arabic is the largest language (in terms of both total speakers and native speakers) without its own Wikipedia edition. I wonder what the second one is but it might have just a few million speakers. A455bcd9 (talk) 11:48, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

So at the end: how long does a project need to stay active for to be considered for approval? A455bcd9 (talk) 04:53, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

@Sotiale @Amire80 @Vito Genovese just wanted to make sure you saw this. Please note not just the past 12 months, but consider the past 3+ years of activity by 3 native speakers and 2 learners of this language. (The current test wiki admin admin @HitomiAkane has a much longer history with this incubator Wiki, and he has a long gap because he incorrectly thought the project was canceled.) The interface translations, numerous phabricator tickets, off-wiki activities (discord, Instagram, Reddit, ISO). More importantly, we still can reach only a fraction of potential readers and contributors without Latin-script support. An inquiry I made on this page about that was left unanswered and archived; but full Latin-script Levantine Wikimedia interface and dual writing system are essential, and we can start working on it after launch. I don't see any benefit in delaying launch at this point. It will only increase the risk of losing more volunteers who could lose motivation, something definitely against the goals and the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation with respect to one of the world's top 35 languages. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 08:13, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

There is an important point that everyone is missing: we are all volunteers in Wikimedia projects, yet we are held accountable according to our periods of activity as if we were employees! and even more, the project evaluation is based on activity, not content!!!. Moreover, how will other contributors know about the project if it always faces criticism and is not allowed public visibility??

Well, to be brief, opposition to other language projects than Arabic usually comes from users on the Arabic Wikipedia who believe that the goal of these new projects is to eliminate Arabic, which is purely insane. First: No one in the Arab world speaks Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) in daily life; rather, they speak other languages such as Levantine, Egyptian, and Maghrebi Moroccan, etc.., which only resemble Arabic in some terms. Second: No one aims to eliminate any language (and I do not want to discuss the other racist reasons here). As for my long period of interruption, it was due to frustration with the strange phrases in the rejection discussions, which I did not understand. Therefore, during that period, I developed the Egyptian Wikipedia project as far as possible, and currently, I am only committed to administrative work there. I am now focusing most of my administrative and developmental efforts and experiences on the Levantine Wikipedia project. This does not negate that I am still frustrated with the discussions despite all the efforts made by all colleagues, but whether the project is approved or not, I will continue to develop it according to my time, my ability, and my health condition. HitomiAkane (talk) 14:42, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker, @HitomiAkane: As you may know, the most important requisite for final approval of a project is that there is a sufficient community of contributors. The work you have put in to this project is great and inspiring, but ultimately what is lacking is a sizeable community. When I look at the activity stats, I see very many edits from HitomiAkane (and kudos for that!), but the number of edits from other users is relatively small, as is the number of other contributors as well.

I am not trying to detract from your efforts in any way (like I said, they are inspiring), but we need more contributors who contribute over time if we are to approve this project. So I would advise you to focus some of your efforts on trying to recruit more contributors to the test wiki. Does that make sense? Jon Harald Søby (talk) 17:16, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Question to @Jon Harald Søby and the language committee. I raised this question several times but was not able to get a response, unfortunately, so I'll try this way to make my point. (The following question is in English, but written in Arabic letters. You can use any LLM to convert it to Latin Alphabet. Again, this text is English, not Arabic, just it is written in Arabic letters. ):

ذِسْ إِزْ هاو لِڤانْتِينْ سْبِيكَرْزْ إِنْ تُورْكِي سِي ذَ لِڤانْتِينْ آرَبِكْ إِنْكْيُوبِيتَرْ وِيكِپِيدْيَا. إِتْ إِزْ رِتَنْ إِنْ أَ لانْگْوِجْ ذَتْ ذِي أَنْدِرْسْتانْدْ ڤِرِي وِيلْ، بَتْ إِتْ إِزْ رِتَنْ إِنْ أَ رَايْتِنْگْ سِسْتَمْ ذَتْ ذِي دُونْتْ نُو هاو تُ رِيدْ. هاو دُو وِي إِكْسْپِكْتْ ذِمْ تُ سْتارْتْ كُنْتْرِبْيُوتِنْگْ؟

CC: @User:MIskander-WMF, @User:SDeckelmann-WMF, @User:PBradley-WMF

Also we are having this situation about our recruiting efforts, unfortunately. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:36, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

In summary, we have a chicken-and-egg problem here: without launch, we are not able to work on the dual-writing-system support, and do not get the benefit of cross-language-wiki links, which would bring more visibility to the project and allow us to find more contributors. I tagged the WMF executives because I feel this is a situation that the foundation needs to help more, especially if it really cares about indigenous languages. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker: there are more than enough Levantine speakers using the Arabic script to kickstart the incubator project. Also, those speakers who do not know the Arabic script can either learn it or use a keyboard that converts Latin to Arabic or any kind of software. A455bcd9 (talk) 05:34, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@A455bcd9 Thanks for giving me the chance to clarify my point: yes, there are enough Levantine speakers who knows the Arabic script, but my clear observation is that (as someone who has very actively tried to recruit contributors over the past 2 years for this project) they are more likely to be against this project since they probably went to school in an Arabic-speaking country and their education system taught them that writing in Levantine is inappropriate and shameful. On the other hand, the Levantine speakers who use the Latin script, particularly the ones in Turkey and the Lebanese diaspora, tend to be more supportive of the project, since Levantine is the only kind Arabic they happen to know. And regardless, I believe the Wikimedia philosophy is about giving the chance to everyone to use Wikipedia in their mother tongue with the writing system that they are most comfortable with, so the speakers who do not use the Arabic script deserve the same chance to be involved in the early phases of the project, as much as the ones who do. And I believe we have 5 Wikimedians (myself, you, @HitomiAkane, @FunLater, @Sentbuddy02) who contributed over a large span of time meaningfully. Not all of the activity is visible in the logs, but I find it very unfair to us to ignore these contributions. These span from recruiting, managing the social media account, you writing a very detailed proposal to ISO to merge apc and ajp, @FunLater translating the interface on TranslateWiki, @Sentbuddy02 writing multiple articles about Syrian cities... I know some projects were approved just 3 contributors and 12 months of activity. We have a span of covering more than 3 years. There are gaps but we were persistent, so I find it hard to understand the rationale to delay the launch further, especially without offering any solution for speakers using the Latin script. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 06:10, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker chicken-and-egg, is exactly my point here, all wikimedians know for a fact that cross-language-wiki links are the most efficient way to let Wiki-Users know about the available language projects, at the end, it is so frustrating to reach a point where you see the efforts of a year of contributing are gone with the wind! HitomiAkane (talk) 06:34, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker: I agree with you that Latin would be amazing but even if we get the Wikipedia created it will take time so I believe some of these people can already be onboarded on the incubator. Even one contribution is good!

@Jon Harald Søby: what is the typical / approximate level of activity that is required in terms of number of editors + duration? A455bcd9 (talk) 09:44, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

I'll just answer about language conversion for the moment. It is not a problem to add a language converter (they're actually script converters, but we call the language converters in MediaWiki) while the project is still in the Incubator. You can see the Serbo-Croatian Wikivoyage in the Incubator for an example: incubator:Wy/sh/Glavna stranica. On desktop, click the tab that says "Latinica" next to the talk page tab to change (note: due to language conversion not working in Parsoid yet, and Parsoid being enabled by default on the Incubator, you will also have to click "Switch to legacy parser" in the tools menu currently; I just filed a bug to fix that).

Note, however, that it is impossible to losslessly convert between the Arabic and Latin script, since the Latin script is bicameral (has uppercase and lowercase letters), while Arabic is unicameral (doens't have that distinction), so the script converter would not be able to know which letters should be capital or not. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, @Jon Harald Søby, we definitely need it. Near lossless conversion is possible thanks to the developments in LLMs and happy to jam with the community about this. To get started, we can even use a Latin script convention with no upper cases. How can we get started? Also we need the to start translating the MediaWiki interface to apc-latn, but it is not available on TranslateWiki. Please guide us. I think being able use the right script is not something "nice to have"; it is a "must have" if we are serious about this language. Asking someone to be an unpaid, volunteer contributor to something that they themselves won't be able to read does not make much sense, am I wrong? TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 19:38, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@Selena Deckelmann If we are serious about radical inclusivity I believe the foundation needs to be more active here. Volunteer support, especially when it comes to software, may not be sufficient when it comes to world languages and writing systems. This is the 33rd most spoken language in the world and we still don't have a Wikipedia and don't have proper writing system support that all speakers of it can use. It is 2025. There are books getting published every year with Levantine written in Latin, but the MediaWiki interface does not include it. This contradicts that we are proudly announcing frequently that we support 350 languages. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 15:33, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker Hello. As you are already aware, decisions about the eligibility of languages, and approval of  projects in those languages are made by the Language Committee. They have responded in this discussion already. I can see there has also been past community feedback on the proposal, and a recent U4C case you submitted. Separate from the governance issues related to language projects, general internationalization (i18n) and localization (l10n) matters on the Wikimedia platform are handled as per standards to ensure that content in those languages can be written, read, and stored efficiently wherever they appear. In terms of the matter of the script used in the Levantine Arabic testwiki in the incubator, we trust the process that the Language Committee follows in collaboration with the requesting community members based on details provided, and can offer technical support where needed. If there is an eventual decision about using the language converter on the testwiki, I see that @Jon Harald Søby has already provided the details of the existing issues that can lead to a suboptimal experience for the scripts in question in this particular case. I hope this is helpful. Thank you. Runa Bhattacharjee (WMF) (talk) 15:13, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

@Runab WMF Hi Runa, thank you again for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate it. I want to clarify that my message to WMF leadership was not because I did not understand the current procedures. My intention was to ask whether the existing procedures should be updated, especially when we look at the Foundation’s larger goals and public messages.

I also want to gently point out that dialectal Arabic projects have received zero funding so far, while all available resources have gone to MSA projects. This creates an imbalance that affects communities who are trying to make information written and discussed in their living languages.

Over time, it has also become clear that there is a very influential group of Wikimedians who oppose dialectal Arabic for ideological reasons. I do not think anyone has bad intentions, but the result is that some communities feel discouraged, even though their languages and efforts are culturally important and fully legitimate.

My hope is that we can take another look at whether the current system is unintentionally supporting this imbalance, and whether there is room for a more inclusive and community-friendly approach in the future.

Thank you again for your engagement. It really means a lot. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 17:39, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Also, regarding the "community feedback" page linked above, many of the oppose votes are simply "oppose" with no explanation, and most of the remaining oppose comments are not based on the Language Proposal Policy in any meaningful way. I would like to assume that the Language Committee disregards such arguments, but it is hard to deny that they may have influenced the current decision. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 04:13, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

Regarding activity, I am certain there are enough people interested in contributing. We just have to find them. And I apologize for my lack of activity. Writing articles that I know very few people will read is demotivating. I am, however, still very interested in the project's success and would love to work on standardizing the spelling and improving the manual of style. I want this project to grow.

Regarding the used script, the Arabic script is well-understood in Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria. A script changer would be cool, but an algorithm doing this, with no way to manually change its output, would not be ideal. FunLater (talk) 15:22, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much FunLater, these are very valuable points. FunLater is a very active member of our community, a native Levantine Arabic speaker, who recruited myself to the project through a Reddit post, who set-up the community's Discord server, who translated the Levantine interface on TranslateWiki, and who contributed to numerous articles on the Levantine Incubator Wiki. So our community has at least 2 native speakers and 2 learners who are still very passionate about this project, and the Incubator is well ahead in any typical Incubator in terms of the number of articles. Not only articles, we even have all the guidelines and policies written/translated from more established projects. So I believe we have a robust community who are still active and who have contributed over a large span of time. I kindly ask the Language Committee to reconsider their decision, keeping in mind the broader goals and the mission of the Wikimedia Movement. (Note: Whether the approval happens or not, I still believe the Latin script support is essential, and I acknowledge that there is a lot of work waiting for the community to bring it to a fully functional state, with the help of the WMF.) TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:48, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Request for Approval and Suggestions for Sasak Wikipedia and Wiktionary (Wp/sas and Wt/sas)

Hi hi!

I would like to request for approval for both Sasak Wikipedia and Wiktionary projects. These are new Wikipedia and Wiktionary project to Sasak language that we are currently develop. Both of them are already verified as eligible (Wp/sas and Wt/sas), and the translation for the most important messages have already been done.

Since we are still very early on our community, I would like to also ask for suggestions on how we can improve the community engagement, edits, and how to improve both of these project in general. Thank you very much!—NikolasKHF (talk) 10:36, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Request for Approval for Betawi Wikiquote and eligiblity for Betawi Wikisource

I would like to request for approval for Betawi Wikiquote and request for eligiblity for Betawi Wikisource projects. Our team was successfully working for 7 months for developing Betawi Wikiquote. Our team also was successfully working for 4 months for developing Betawi Wikisource. We are hopefully to develop Betawi language since Betawi has to be conservated and developed. Thank you.Pitchrigi (talk) 08:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, may I have an information about these please? Thank you for kindly attention. Pitchrigi (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

Request for Approval for Cebuano Wikisource, Hiligaynon Wikisource, Kapampangan Wikisource and Waray Wikisource

On behalf of the Wikisource Loves Manuscripts Philippines, I would like to request for approval for Cebuano Wikisource, Hiligaynon Wikisource, Kapampangan Wikisource and Waray Wikisource projects. Our team has been consistently working on the said projects for more than 12 months for developing the local editions. --Filipinayzd (talk) 07:44, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

@Filipinayzd The RFL for second is still not got its eligibility verified, still need to include this one? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:22, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226 How does the language get verified? Thanks. Here are the links that support that Hiligaynon is an existing language: 1 2 3. --Filipinayzd (talk) 05:40, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Approval request for the Wikipedia Luba‑Kasaï

Hello to all members of the Language Committee, @Amire80 and Sotiale:

I am writing to you on behalf of the Incubator Wikipedia Luba-Kasaï project community to request the official approval of our Tshiluba Wikipedia so that it may become an autonomous wiki (with its own subdomain) under lua.wikipedia.org.

We believe that all the required criteria according to the Language Proposal Policy have now been met. Please see the page Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Luba‑Kasaï, the project is quite active since August 2024.

We are also ready to propose or put you in contact with a linguistic expert (professor, native speaker) to verify the quality of the existing content if necessary.

We remain at your disposal for any additional information or clarification you may need.

Thank you in advance for your time and for your support of linguistic diversity on Wikimedia. @Shayi ngolu and Chrisdanielkazadi:

Kind regards, CapitainAfrika (talk)

Approval request for the Urdu Wikisource

Hi committee members, i'm requesting again for the approval review of Urdu Wikisource project after the archive of previous request. the project is quite active since Mar 2025. Thank you. KuldeepBurjBhalaike ^(Talk) 08:53, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Request for review of language authenticity on Wp/ngi test project

Dear LangCom,

I would like to request an administrative review of the Wikimedia Incubator test project Wp/ngi (intended for the Ngizim language). I am concerned that the language currently being used in this project differs significantly from the actual language spoken and written by native speakers. The content appears to be heavily influenced by external languages and structures, and in some cases does not reflect recognized grammar, vocabulary, or orthography used by the language community.

To the best of my understanding, the project is primarily being developed by non-native speakers, and there does not appear to be sufficient involvement or validation from native speakers or recognized linguistic sources. This raises concerns about misrepresentation of the language, potential long-term harm to the language if inaccurate forms are normalized and possible non-compliance with the Wikimedia Language Committee’s requirements regarding language authenticity and community use.

I kindly request that this project be reviewed, and if necessary, referred to the Language Committee for further evaluation, cleanup, page protection, or other appropriate action.

Thank you for your time and consideration. DE-INVINCIBLE  talk  07:37, 6 December 2025 (UTC)