|Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2010, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.|
Requests for updates
Hello, I would like to request for updates of the unoficial analysis of wikinews Korean . The localisation of the MediaWiki messages and the messages of the extensions used by the Wikimedia Foundation projects has been Done.Thanks! --Gapo 05:18, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to request for updates of the unoficial analysis of Tatar Wikiquote . The localisation of the MediaWiki messages and the messages of the extensions used by the Wikimedia Foundation projects has been--Ильнар Шайдуллов 17:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to request for updates of Language committee/Status/wp/rue. The localisation of all MediaWiki messages has been completed. Please also have a look at the activity for previous few months. Thanks in anticipation. Gazeb 04:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Also main extensions used by Wikimedia Foundation wikis have been translated to Rusyn language Gazeb 18:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- The main MediaWiki message are enough for the first project (Wikipedia), but it is very good that you have translated all messages. You should now focus on content in the Incubator and perhaps finding extra contributors. Anyway, the Rusyn Wikipedia has been proposed for approval. SPQRobin (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- There is good activity, however that criterion is usually left unchecked, because continuous activity should remain until its approval. SPQRobin (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I've edited the status page. Sorry, I didn't know I shouldn't do it. I'm here to ask for update the request from the language committe. We are doing our best to complete the criteria. Thanks. CasteloBrancomsg 14:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Is this still working? Should I ask in another place? Where? Thanks. CasteloBrancomsg 02:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I was also wondering what the status of this request is. It's been open for seven months now. Jafeluv 21:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please, let us know about some possible dificulties in creating this project. Maybe the community can help you to face them. Do you need a reliable neutral source? I think we can provide this, from outside the project. I would recommed this and this. CasteloBrancomsg 00:24, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- There are still 418 untranslated messages in the "Extensions used by Wikimedia - Main" group. Translating them is a requirement to get the project approved. --Amir E. Aharoni 15:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Requests for approval Karachay-Balkar Wikipedia
Hello, dear friends! I want to request appoval for Karachay-Balkar Wikipedia. We have already translated all MediaWiki messages and I suppose that our community is rather active. Many others are waiting for Karachay-Balkar Wikipedia, because it is not comfortable to write articles in incubator. Also, I want to add, thet I had a conversation with the head of fund supporting the Karachay-Balkar language. He has become interested Karachay-Balkar Wikipedia. School teachers of the Karachay-Balkar language will be soon involved in work on our section, and also teachers and students of chairs of the Karachay-Balkar philology at the Kabardino-Balkarian and Karachay-Cherkessian state universities. --Iltever 11:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- It is necessary to support initiative of group of enthusiasts. Registration Wikipedia in itself is very powerful stimulus. Besides people should to have time work to summer vacations and holidays. --HalanTul 23:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- I support this project. It should be approved. Evertype 19:21, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry for waiting. We just need an approval from expert that Incubator project is written in Karachay-Balkar language. I hope that we'll conclude positively your request soon. --Millosh 05:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- The project has been approved. We are waiting now 7 days for Board's decision, which is a formality. After that, I'll fill the bug request for project opening. --Millosh 18:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Requests for approval Venezolean Wikipedia
Hi I am not sure if this is correct in this area of Wikipedia. How will e.g. venciclopedia.com be used as language code? Or is there no relationship to Wikipedia? --184.108.40.206 08:51, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
- No relation. Wikipedias are always created for languages not for countries. Spanish already exists. Venciclopedia is just a private site using the same freely downloadable software as Wikipedia. --::Slomox:: >< 11:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Requests for approval Wikinews Uyghur
Hello, dear friends! I want to request appoval for Wikinews Uyghur. I suppose that our community is . Many others are waiting for Wikinews Uyghur, because it is not comfortable to write articles in incubator. Thank you! --Aturantekin 16:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- Project is marked as eligible. Please refer to Language proposal policy for other requirements for project creation. --Millosh 13:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Requests for approval Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia
Hello, dear friends! I want to requests approval for Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Ottoman Turkish 2 because it have more than 1550 articles. Many people are waiting for opened Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia. Please approval Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia. I hope to you very much. Please.. I think Ottoman Turkish articles are more than Karachay-Balkar Wikipedia. Can you help me and the people at Turkey. Thank you. Please approval Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia. Then i look at reguests many people want this wikipedia must be open.--Digimon Adventure 10:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
The instructions say to add the request here.
How can I add it if it says VIEW SOURCE and you cant edit the page?
- The request page is semi-protected, so that only registered users can make requests. This also excludes newly registered users for the first 4 days. This time is over for you by now and you should be able to add a request. --::Slomox:: >< 20:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, Slomox, PLEASE VOTE SUPPORT OF CRNA GORA.
I'd like to create a Wikipedia in Prekmurian. Prekmurian language is a autonomous dialect of Slovene. Its situation is smiliar to that of the Kajkavian-, Shtokavian-, Burgenland- and Chakavian-Croatian language. Prekmurian has a standard literary language and literature (ca. 250-300 books and newspapers). Gallery of Prekmurian works. Recently a dictionary of the old Prekmurian literary language was published (Vilko Novak: Slovar stare knjižne prekmurščine). Prekmurian was the language of the education between the 16th century and 1919, and the language of the liturgy until 1945 (see also en:Slovene March (Kingdom of Hungary), Zame prekmurščina ni narečje, temveč jezik/The prekmurian it me not dialect, but language and Prlekija – Prekmurje in Youtube). The last Prekmurian book was published in 1944, the last Prekmurian mass was held in 1945. In the USA the newspaper American Windish Voice/Amerikánszki Szlovencov Glasz was published until the 1950s. Prekmurian is a spoken language in the Prekmurje and Hungary even today. Recently few foreign linguists and scholars were interested in Prekmurian language. American linguist Marc L. Greenberg wrote six tractate of the Prekmurian. Today a few writers in the Prekmurje write books, verses and articles in Prekmurian (Feri Lainšček, Milan Vincetič, Milan Zrinski) and films are made in Prekmurian. In Hungary the newspaper Porabje is in Prekmurian (in the Raba March dialect). Though the old standard Prekmurian language is archaic, a renewed Prekmurian literary language exists through the works (Novine, Molitvena kniga 1914, Molite bratje!, Düševni list, etc.). With the help of these, the Prekmurian standard survived. If there was a Prekmurian wikipedia, its users could write articles in dialects, the standard language is only necessary for the names of lands, states, etc., because their names were pushed out of use by Slovene variants in spoken Prekmurian. Comment on the Sobotainfo Prekmurian online portal, are written in Prekmurian the comments. Several Prekmurians support the formation of the Prekmurian wikipedia and the idea was talked about in Slovenian Wikimedija Slovenija, but there was no user to create it. One problem is that Prekmurian does not have an ISO 639-3 code yet; actually some specialists label it as a regional language (pokrajinski jezik). What should I do? Doncsecztalk 12:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- The steps that need to be done are listed on Meta:Language proposal policy. The two most important steps are: You have to request a ISO 639 code. You can find instructions and a request form under . The second step is to create a test project at the Incubator project. Information about that can be found at incubator:Help:Manual. --::Slomox:: >< 20:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Request for update Laz Wikipedia
can you please update it? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_committee/Status/wp/lzz , i translated 500 messages, mobile messsages and babel. --Dacxiri 12:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- The most used messages are at 99,57% Thanks, GerardM 07:19, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Hill Mari Wikipedia
Hello. There is only one blank square among the criteria for final approval in the page Language_committee/Status/wp/mrj - I mean "to develop an active test project". If you look at the statistics in the catanalysis script page, you can see a significant anonymous activity in the project. I asked them to register, and one user registered (incubator:User:KMK). Other anonymous users are still ignoring the registration, but they continue to edit. Note one of very active contributors - 220.127.116.11. Hill Mari wiki have all 500 most-used MediaWiki messages translated. There are 286 articles in incubator. What do you think, maybe it is time for a final approval? --амдф 14:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Requests for approval Lower Silesian Wikipedia
I want to request the approval of Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Lower_Silesian. I think Lower Silesian Wikipedia already passes all criteria for final approval. Thank you. --18.104.22.168 19:32, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
MediaWiki core has done.－HW 09:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Please approval Wikinews, wikiquote and wikisource Malay
Hi, can you please approval wikinews, wikiquote and wikisource Malay. That's is my language. We are from Malaysia, South Thai, South Philippines, Brunei, Singapore, Indonesia, Timor Timor and West Papua New Guinea are waited to approved that's about Malay wikisource, wikiquote and wikinews. Please. Only that's are my languages. I spoke in Malay.--Md. Farhan 06:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Requests for approval Banjar Wikipedia
Hi, can you approval Banjar Wikipedia. We are waited for longer time. Please . You're my friends. Please approve Banjar Wikipedia in this time.--Md. Farhan 10:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- A requirement is the localisation of the most often used messages.. at this moment 17% has been localised. Thanks, GerardM 14:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Currently 93.38% Thanks, GerardM 07:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Solomon Pijin created??
Hi there! The list of closed requests indicates that a Solomon Pijin Wikipedia was created on June 25th. However the link doesn't work. Moreover, it seems strange to me that a language with 9 articles in the Incubator and apparently only one contributing editors get approval by the committee, while other, more advanced projects aren't approved in years. Can anyone clarify the background of this? Thanks. --Saberon 14:15, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- A person without a user page was overly enthusiastic. He has been reverted, the language is only eligible at this stage. Thanks, GerardM 17:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Request to be fixed. --Nemo 18:30, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Please update status wikipedia Banjar. Thanks.--J Subhi 06:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
All messages are translated. Can a committee member please give us an update, or any info about when we can have our permanent place? Thanks. --Xoser 02:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, we translated all wiki messages as of 02 October 2009 (9 months ago). And we kept translating hundreds of new messages after that. However, we still don't have our permanent place. What is the reason? Why we still cannot move forward? Can you please provide any explanation? --Xoser 21:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Still having troubles adding a request.
In my opinion, the lock serves no purpose. I already created 2 requests but can't put them because the page is locked. A previous answer said that a user must wait 4 days after registration, but I think it is completely locked out. And I have been active on here for more than 4 days.--Kanzler31 20:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
EDIT: Never mind. I can edit the page now.--Kanzler31 00:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Dear members of the language committee!
Having noticed the large quantity of pending requests as well as the fact that virtually no new languages are ever approved (one, i. e. Karachay-Balkar, in all of 2010!), I would like to ask you, especially on behalf of all people whose languages are not yet represented at Wikipedia, to more actively support and promote multilingualism. The current prohibitive approach which makes starting Wikipedias in new languages all but impossible severely discriminates against speakers of "smaller" languages, it ignores Wikimedia's mission statement "to empower and engage people around the world" and turns a " free encyclopedia" into a closed club to those who don't happen to know the existing wiki-languages. Furthermore, the fact that the current high level of red tape and committee bureaucracy involved in the process yields so miserably few results (in terms of new languages we can provide our users with) proves great inefficiency, unproductiveness and is a waste of time and other resources.
The fact that the current "requests for new languages" process brings forth so disappointingly little when it comes to fostering multilingualism clearly calls for some modifications in order to accomplish more satisfying results in the future. Of course, it is mainly up to the responsible committee to see which improvements can be made to assure better results. However, by merely looking at the facts, I think it is obvious that changes for the better have to be made along the following lines:
1. Members of the committee should support and advise users who seriously wish to create additional value by adding a new language proactively throughout the whole process of starting a new wiki.
2. All unessential requirements and unnecessary red tape must be cut out of the process!
3. The language committee as a whole should change its attitude toward requesters from being an authority that sanctions applications to acting as a team of "enablers" playing a positive role in making multilingualism happen!
I am sure that by embracing this new can-do attitude (the one that made Wikipedia great!) that will produce tangible results and real value - instead of a thousand times "no" - your committee work will became a lot more rewarding, too. Looking forward to hearing from you and to seeing changes for the better! --Saberon 14:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
- FYI at the time when the language policy was defined, it was in reaction to a general opinion that no new languages deserved a new Wikipedia. This was because so many of these were effective failures. As a consequence it may seem that the requirements are restrictive but in actual fact they are designed to ensure that a project has a good chance of success. One little factoid, we have had a situation where a language could not be recognised by the people who speak the language. It is for this reason not red tape but essential that we verify. Thanks, GerardM 15:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
What's obvious is that - here I agree with you - in the past some wikis were created rather prematurely. That's one thing that should be avoided and it can be avoided easily by having a committee that oversees such matters. What I find unfair, though, is that these days there are so many obstacles (and the fact of one single new language being admitted in all of 2010 speaks for itself) that it is practically impossible for people who don't happen to know the existing wikis languages to start a new edition in their own idiom. I know little about the Language Committee's other tasks and I am sure you're doing a good job there. But when it comes to enabling progress for the good of those countless millions of people all over the world not yet benefitting from Wikipedia and other free knowledge - because it's not available in their language - frankly, the current results are disappointing. And anybody really committed to making Wikimedia's projects available to as many people as possible (and that's one of our aims, isn't it?) ought to see that.
I have no doubt in my mind that the rules were put in place with the best of intensions. But someone watching the proceedings from the outside can't help but wonder if you really care enough about the results they produce with regard to the people they affect. Why don't you take a few minutes and reconsider, with an open mind, if the current way is really the best we can do in terms of promoting multilingualism. I don't think so. Just a few thoughts that crossed my mind:
- The committee's page lists a number of praiseworthy aims. However - and this is a bit strange for a committee in charge of languages - there is no clear committment to promoting and enabling multilingualism!
- About 98% or so of all requests for new languages (talking about really new ones here, not additional projects for existing languages) fail or end up "in limbo" forever. Sure enough, some of the requests are rubbish, hoaxes or the like. But a great many people are seriously determined to starting something good. Sadly though, the current lengthy, complicated, bureaucratic way the committee responds to those legitimate wishes "kills" practically all of them sooner or later. The most likely conclusion here would be that it is not the requesters but the policy and the people in charge of the procedure that lead to such poor results. We could do a lot better than that, I'm sure.
- A lot of pages on Meta are available in different languages. All information regarding requests for new languages, however, is available solely in English. This raises the threshold even more, as English is not widely known in many of the regions with a lot of potential for new Wikipedia languages (think of China, Brazil, Africa or Russia, for example). Basic information about the procedure e. g. in French, Portuguese or Arab could help lower the bar for countless language communities that have passing proficiency in the official language/lingua franca of their region, but not in English.
- It is not clearly indicated which members of the committee know what languages. A committee in charge of language issues ought to be multilingual itself, of course. Why don't you inform potential requesters in some prominent place who they can turn to if they don't know English and want to start in wiki in their language? The current "English only" makes the whole procedure even more prohibitive to a great number of people.
- The current requirement of forcing users interested in starting a wiki in a new language to do plenty of software/interface translation work before they can even start is anti-productive and IMHO the cause behind the failure of many promising requests. Why not turn this requirement into a non-mandatory recommendation, help people doing the translation as good as possible at the time they choose (accepting a community's independent decisions!) and otherwise put first things (getting the encyclopedia started) first. I am ready to bet that if you guys would be less dogmatic about this unessential point, we'd all see better results!
Why not concentrate a little more on people and how to achieve something good for their benefit - and a little bit less on principles? Yours, --Saberon 18:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
- I definitely agree with you. The results show that there is something wrong with the process. Wikimedia's goals and the results do not match. I understand official's concerns about the failed projects. However, why the others have to be punished?
- I am the proposer of the Zazaki Wiktionary project and here is the project stats. We started the project in February 2009, and we met all of the requirements in October 2009, including translating over 5000 Wikimedia messages, some of them not even related to Wikitionary project. After painfully going through the process and waiting all these months, we did not get any response from the officials. We have been ignored. That is very disappointing. We have given thousands of hours. It is painful. --Xoser 21:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, too. And I can't understand the criteria. This proposal, the Zazaki Wiktionary has reached all the requisites for eligibility on October 2009. The test project has been active since 15 months ago. And still there is a proposal, recently approved, which didn't complete the criteria. The Wikinews Korean does not have the required activity on the test wiki. I'm proposer of the Esperanto Wikisource and Esperanto Wikinews, so let's see that:
- The status page says, about activity: "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.
- Well, I don't know what means "few", exactly, in this case, but I think 15 months it's too much, and surely more than a few. If we look the last 6 months, this is what we've got:
|Month/Proposal||Wikinews Korean||Wikinews Esperanto||Wikisource Esperanto||Wiktionary Zazaki|
All the proposals above are eligible and completed the localisation.
- I have absolutely nothing against the Wikinews Korean project, I think it will be successfull (as the Korean Wikipedia, Wiktionary and Wikiquote already are), and I feel the same about all those projects above. What I cannot understand, yet, is why is so difficult to aprove the proposals that already reached the criteria, or those that are almost reaching them. Why is so important to complete the localisation now and not later? Why there is a requisite to be active, in a pattern of 3 editors/month in the last few (?) months, if we can see that if you want to approve a project, those things are not so necessary? All we know it's much more easier to reach a community in a proper project (and not in a test). Yes, it's very disappointing. I support less requirements, and a reasonable period for the evaluation of the proposals. If nothing really relevant is said against the proposal until the end of this period, so there's a consensus for the approval, and the project must be requested at bugzilla. It could reduce the work for the committe, that can stay focused in non-obvious requests, and in support the proposals. CasteloBrancomsg 00:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
In my view it all boils down to the fact the committee as a whole doesn't care enough:
- You don't seem to care if the rules you set up produce such disastrous results. If you cared you'd realize the rules (which might look great in theory) don't do any good in real life and adjust them - like every learning organization should do! Why do you refuse to learn?
- You don't seem to care about all those fellow Wikipedians behind the requests. If you did you'd respond to the justified complaints of our Zazaki friends (and other similar cases) in an adequate manner. You guys redirected the RFNL talk page to the language committee's talk and now you only at will respond every now and then to users' concerns. This is impolite, immature and non-wiki-like. What's the matter with you?
- You don't seem to care if community members sit down for a couple of hours and take care in coming up with some workable suggestions to improve the current situation. I posted a few concrete ideas fairly easy to imply on July 25th. There's twelve of you, right? Still, there hasn't been a single response to my ideas by any of the committee members. Sorry, but over here we'd call that arrogant.
- You don't seem to care if countless millions of people around the world are excluded from Wikimedia's resources of free knowledge by the way you respond (or don't respond) to legitimate, well-prepared, promising requests for new language subdomains. If you did care, you'd deal with the people making those requests in a much more welcoming, helpful and success-oriented manner. And not thwart them with unnecessary, exorbitant 5000-message translation requirements and the like. They are your fellow users, not some lowly solicitants!! When will our language committee start doing its job in a positive, friendly, wiki-style manner??
--Saberon 12:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- LangCom is in the process of getting fresh blood which would improve those parts of the process. As all of those parts can be automatized, I think that we'll have much more prompt approval process during the August or September. --Millosh 12:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Saberon requested my reply here. I'm too new in the LangCom to make big statements, but i'll say a couple of things...
- On Promoting multilingualism:
- I am not sure that promoting multilingualism is the LangCom's job. I dearly love multilingualism, but LangCom's job is first and foremost to ensure that new language projects are viable (Millosh, please correct me if i'm wrong) and once that is clear, to ensure that technology doesn't hinder the development of these projects. Actually promoting multilingualism by helping projects in underprivileged languages to grow is a task that requires resources which are way beyond the LangCom's capabilities; we hardly have time to write articles in our own languages, let alone write them for others. We do try our best to create working environments for others who show their determination to write.
- The Wikimedia Foundation is taking the issue of helping small language projects quite seriously lately. Jimmy Wales' keynote speech on the last Wikimania was just about this. Also, follow that latest discussions about translation of foundation-l. These are just some of the examples.
- On starting Wikipedias in new languages being "all but impossible":
- Nothing could be further from the truth. Starting a Wikipedia in a new language is not just possible, but also quite easy for people who have a little patience to learn a couple of technical quirks (more on that later). It's technically possible to just go to the incubator and start writing pages under Wp/abc (where abc is the code of your language). If you write pages that will appear to be bogus, they will probably be deleted; if you write pages that will appear to be good, LangCom members will be glad to see it and will help you. (Currently i'm helping as much as i can to the incubators in languages ady, kbd and esu.)
- So it really boils down not to red tape, and not to the "impossibility" of starting new Wikipedia. The most important part of starting a new Wikipedia is not setting up the abc.wikipedia.org domain, but writing articles. Whether you write them in the incubator or in the full-fledged domain is secondary.
- An issue in which i, personally, would be very glad to see some change, is the current structure of the Incubator. The need to create every page with a language prefix is particularly off-putting. Some users don't let that bother them; for example, Bogups (Богупс) is doing a fantastic job writing articles for the Kabardian Wikipedia (kbd) and i am quite sure that it will be approved soon (lately i studied that language a little). But for some less technical users it is an unnecessary technical hurdle. We at the LangCom should think how to make it easier and we'll be glad to hear ideas about that.
- Finally, on giving up on writing articles for an Incubator project because it takes too long to get it approved:
- I am very sorry to hear that it happens. It shouldn't. If the language is eligible and if the writers know what they are doing, they can keep writing in the incubator and sooner or later a full-fledged domain will be created. The aforementioned Bogups from the kbd Wikipedia doesn't let that discourage him; he just writes more and more articles. That's the way to go. --Amir E. Aharoni 22:59, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Millosh, Amir:
Many thanks for your replies. Good to hear that the problems I - and many other users - are perceiving are not unnoticed by the committee. What I was trying to point out is that there might be a huge gap between how you as committee members very familiar with the issue think of the procedure (logical, transparent, feasible ...) and how those affected experience it (like maybe "confusing", "frustating", "too demanding"). Wikimedia's vision statement reads:
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.
This implies giving people a realistic opportunity to add content in languages not covered so far. According to certain rules, of course, but with an effort that's somewhat compatible with the wiki principle (boldness in getting things started, ease of access, step-by-step improvements rather 100% perfection from the start). You need to take into account what's realistically doable by average internet users (the ones that make a Wikipedia great), not only what's desirable from a technical viewpoint. The requirement to translate many hundreds or even thousands of software messages before going "on air" seems to be a major turn-off for potential new wikis.
The Incubator test wikis are a good thing, of course. But once again, we must take the perspective of potential new language contributors, too: sometimes they make great efforts in creating a lot of good content and still don't get a "real Wikipedia", their request is unapproved for years for some minor technical detail and they feel that their language is valued less than e. g. Volapük by Wikimedia and they become frustated, discouraged and eventually give up. I fully agree with you that writing articles, not having a domain, is essential. I'm afraid, though, that the majority of users has a different view here: a Wikipedia is "the real deal", something everybody knows, Incubator is considered "internal stuff", something for the experts. It's mostly about perception I guess. Maybe this could be changed by presenting the Incubator test wikis in a different manner to the "general public". [idea: why not put links to, say, five or seven test wikis on the wikipedia.org homepage (likewise for the sister projects). Not all test wikis, of course, just a selection, either random or hand-picked, exemplary ones. Thus a much wider audience will become aware of the existence of test wikis and realize that they can edit them like any other Wikipedia. The test wikis (all, not only the ones featured) would thus probably attract more editors and develop faster. Plus WP would advertise the fact that it is developing not only article-wise, but also language-wise in a very prominent place.] Just look at the tale-telling fact that the latest approved (now here's some good news at last!) request, the one for North Frisian, got choked off twice (!) by the langcom (for some reason that might be perfectly logical to you, but plain demoralizing to the applicants). Now the people from North Frisia have braved the forces of nature for centuries like few others and that's why they persevered and even tried for a third time ;-) . But many others will surely give up before that and we'll lose them and the value they could add.
When users complained in the past about how forbidding the RFNL procedure is, the uniform reply by committee was always something like: "The policy is perfect. The problem is just that the users making requests don't try hard enough.". My view, however, is that if so few new languages ever get approved it's not the users' fault. It's because of the policy and how it's applied that Wikimedia loses so many promising efforts. Hence the requirements and the application procedure should be adapted to what real people in real life can and will realistically do. It's that concept of accessibility that has turned Wikipedia into such a great success. --Saberon 10:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Even though we met all the requirements since October 2009, our project is not approved. Almost 10 months has passed, and it seems that this project will never be approved. So far we have not received a word from officials. I stop translating any new messages. For the last year, we translated over 5,000 messages, and not even a stone moved. --Xoser 20:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Requests for approval Kabardian-Circassian Wikipedia
Hello! I am one of the most active participants in the Kabardian-Circassian section Incubator. Recently been transferred the 500 most used system messages MediaWiki, remains a good activity, the number of articles, slowly but surely growing. Is this enough for final approval of a separate project? If not, you need to complete? Master Shadow 05:39, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for notifying us. You are doing a very good job. We'll take a further look at it and notify you of further developments. --Amir E. Aharoni 12:35, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
I juste open Requests for new languages/Wikisource Breton but I don’t know the precise method. Could someone check if I have done everything right ?
Help me approval Fataluku Wikipedia
I´am a native speaker and i realy want our language Fataluku that was spoken by more 30000 people in District Lospalos, Timor Leste to have its own wikipedia and i know this language is a amazing gift from our ancestors. I hope you guys can help us to aprove this language to be Fataluku Wikipedia. The Fataluku is a language of the great family of origin papua, for that reason when they speak this language has some similarity with other language like Makasae and Makalero in Timor-Leste. Majority people of District Lautem communicates with that language and at this time there is also Bible written in language Fataluku similar with the liturgy of Mass and other songs. The rituals of our culture everything is also spoken in Fataluku. Ivan Zeruwsky 02:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
- I see that you are doing a good job in the Incubator project.
- To move forward with approving this project, you need to translate the MediaWiki interface into your language using the website http://www.translatewiki.net . Unfortunately your language is still not supported there, but i added a request to support it: http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Thread:Support/Adding_Fataluku_(ddg) . In the meantime, open an account at that website.
- Before the project in your language is completely approved, you must localize the most used MediaWiki messages; see Language committee/Handbook (requesters).
- Please let me know if i can help any more. --Amir E. Aharoni 12:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Please approve Wikisource Venetian
Hi folks. 2 years have passed since the request, and I think the Venetian Wikisource project is finally ready for having its own subdomain. Let me tell you about the current situation:
- 2400+ pages in Main namespace
- 2100+ pages in Page namespace, with 46 Index pages
- users that are actively collaborating are:
As you can see from the raw numbers, this project is already more successful than many existing Wikisources! ;-)
Thanks for your kind attention, Candalua 16:43, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- According to the translatewiki.net statistics, 99.67 of MediaWiki messages are translated and 93.73% of MediaWiki extensions used by Wikimedia are translated. Complete translation of all the messages is a requirement for starting a new project.
- Since you have only a few dozens of messages to translate, it shouldn't take you a lot of time. Once you're done, this project will move forward. --Amir E. Aharoni 12:05, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Localization is now complete. Are we ready for the approval? Candalua 12:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Approve the Wiktionary Ligure, please!!
The request for the Wiktionary Ligure was made on nov-6-2008 and the Wiktionary Ligure is now considered eligible, please approve the Wiktionary for our language!
- According to the translatewiki.net statistics, 27.19% of MediaWiki messages are translated and only 0.09% of MediaWiki extensions used by Wikimedia are translated. Complete translation of all the messages is a requirement for starting a new project in a language in which another project already exists. --Amir E. Aharoni 12:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Now there are 214 request for approval in this page. Is there something we can do to help the Language comittee about that? Have you ever consider to make this analysis in a "wiki" way? I could list the eligible requests and their localisation/activity, if you find it useful. The community itself can keep it up-to-date. To check the eligibility could also be quickly done by the community (in most of cases). The committee could be concerned only on the last step: the approval process. And in rare cases, to help with the other two. Well, it's just an idea, I'm not waiting for a response, and I don't even think I would have one =). Just think about it. CasteloBrancomsg 05:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
- As an example, I've done an alternative analysis here. There are 55 request eligible since 2006/07. Only seven of them have at least 90% of the required localidation. And only one of them has activity in the last three months. The Comitte should then look to this request. This is the oldest eligible request that meets all the requirements about localisation and activity. And the project just have four messages to translate. CasteloBrancomsg 13:06, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
- We are working on improving our process so it will be more automatic and eligible projects will be approved faster and won't be forgotten.
- In the meantime it's OK to nudge us when you think that your project should be approved and we forgot about you. --Amir E. Aharoni 18:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Approval of pfl
- It is in the process of approval. We are currently looking for an expert who can verify the content of the test wiki in Pälzisch. If you or someone else of the community knows an expert or professor, you can give us contact information (either here or through Special:Emailuser/SPQRobin). SPQRobin (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
- hmmm, i will try to find someone. thanks for the information. Elvis 12:47, 28 October 2010 (UTC) (fixed signing)
- i do not think it would be sufficient if i get some administrators of the german wikipedia to vow for me when i say it looks good to me and i should know since i came from that place? (just a dumb idea i fear) Elvis 20:02, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it should be verified by an external source, not someone from the German Wikipedia. SPQRobin (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
I want to request a new wiki mr.wikinews.org. What can I do for that? Czeror 07:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)