Talk:Language committee/2020

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

May I request Pa'o language

Pa'o are the large ethnic people,the 5th largest population in Myanmar, small number in Laos, Thailand.They have own language. But can't write and read in browser, wiki and other. So, I want to add our language. What should I do? Help me please Khun Yum Htun (talk) 04:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Where can I do?

Khun Yum Htun (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
@Khun Yum Htun: You can start a new Wikipedia test project for Pa'O language at Wikimedia Incubator. The manual can be found at here and language code (ISO 639-3) for Pa'O language is blk. Please feel free to contact me if you have any question or difficulties. NinjaStrikers «» 09:57, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Khakas Wikipedia. Хакасская википедия.

Hello, I want to ask about the Khakass Wikipedia. It already contains more than 1000 articles, and is well developed. I believe that it is time to transfer it from the incubator to public access, at its URL. Здравствуйте, я хочу спросить о хакасской википедии. Она уже содержит более 1000 статей, и хорошо развивается. Я считаю что пора перенести ее из инкубатора в открытый доступ, на собственный URL. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Дмитрий Аланов (talk) 2020-01-04 07:17 (UTC)

@Amire80: Can this be approved? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Nehiyaw Wikipedia

Shall we reopen it? The closed-it user isn't a member of langcom, and wrongly pointed the proposer as "LTA" without any evidences. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226: I'VE reopened it, I agree that that user has lack of evidences for LTA claim, though I have no time to discuss the real metter. -- 02:47, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
FYI proposer is locked as LTA. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:52, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Cantonese Wikiquote

Hi, I want to talk about the cantonese wikiquote. The Wq:Cantonese project was launched in the Incubator more than three years ago. There has been regular and significant activity for over last twelve months, also there is about several active contributors each month. Now it has more than 75 pages. So, I request that this Wikiquote be approved. Regards!--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) Wasami007 (talk) 01:35, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wiktionary Masry

Approval of Cantonese Wikiquote

Moved from my talk page --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:59, 28 January 2020 (UTC) Hi, I want to talk about the cantonese wikiquote. The Wq:Cantonese project was launched in the Incubator more than three years ago. There has been regular and significant activity for over last twelve months, also there is about several active contributors each month. Now it has more than 75 pages. So, I request that this Wikiquote be approved. Regards!Angus Leii (talk)-- 01:20, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Please start allowing ancient languages

In the page Language proposal policy it’s written: “Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted, because resources in such languages continue to be important to the world, even in the absence of native, living speakers of those languages. Where possible, such languages should be bundled with the modern equivalent Wikisource project (such as Old English with English), though that is not required.” There is already a Wikipedia in latin, and a Wikipedia in Old English, which are not very small. In my opinion, ancient languages should be allowed for all Wikipedia projects, however with stricter policies to make sure there is a large enough community to expand those wikis. Best regards, Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 14:45, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello? Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 17:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
According to Professional Latinists say the articles in Latin Wikipedia are very good. I don’t see a reason why there shouldn’t be Wikipedias in other ancient languages. Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 17:38, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
That's not what that link says.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
We've had this argument. A lot. There's a Wikipedia in Old English; let's look at one of the pages linked from its main page: Beowulf. Let's compare that to Vietnamese, which about as far out from Beowulf's cultural sphere as possible. Oh, you say that Vietnamese is a major language; let's try Welsh. Yes, Swahili and Lithuanian are roughly comparable, but we also picked an article that should have been a good example for Old English. The list of countries shows that several don't have articles, and most of their capitals don't. Let's grab the top one with an article, Egypt (Cairo, the world's 15th largest city, and a city older than Old English, doesn't have an article). Note that this is the article after I reverted vandalism that had been there for more than a year: "Ǣgypte is land in Middlum Ēaste, þe hæfþ þā ēa Nilum." plus a couple pictures and a linking template.
The Old English Wikipedia is not a real encyclopedia. There is no reason for anyone to ever look anything up in it. Except for stare decisis, there's absolutely no reason Wikimedia should have it around. For the Latin Wikipedia, I can at least imagine that someone might have a set of languages such that for a particular subject, the Latin Wikipedia is the best Wikipedia for them. Not so with the Old English Wikipedia. Latin could be defined as a living language; it is the language of a (marginal) nation, it is being taught to young children as one of their mother tongues, and works are actually written in the language even today. I don't know about Sanskrit or Classical Chinese, but no other ancient language has that, and I can't imagine any other ancient language actually ever being useful as an encyclopedia to anyone. Latin might be known by someone who's not familiar with one of the languages of the huge Wikipedias; scholars who know some more obscure tongue generally know English, French, German, Chinese, Arabic or Russian.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
So can you at least allow wikitionary in ancient languages? Because right now the language committee allows just wikisources in ancient languages. Thanks in advance, Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 15:27, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello? Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 12:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello? Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
@Dino Bronto Rex: Using multiple "Hello"s won't help your questions if you don't explain the benefits to answer your concerns, if you think such ancient languages are also having benefits to have projects other than Wikisources and Wikipedias, better to discuss at GRFC (not Meta:RFC, because your RFC would rather affect globally). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Regarding giving self-URL to Awadhi incubator

The Awadhi incubator is quite active and a total of 9045 edits and 4363 pages have been created on it so far. Please be pleased to give it the actual URL, which will speed up the development of its encyclopedia. Amire80 (talk) 07:10, 02 February 2020 (UTC)

Good time to consider approving Japanese Wikivoyage or not?

By checking the automated statistics, it looks like that this project has fair enough activities that like many projects we approved before. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:59, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

@User:Liuxinyu970226 Are you serious about this project activity?
  • Only two contributors have more than 100 contributions; 103 articles in total; 5 published in December 2019; only 1 new page in 2019; 0 active editor in 2019!!!
For simple comparison, the WP.Kotava Wikipedia project whose positive approval vote and the active, quality work being done by his community are ignored for months:
  • about 7,000 articles; 5 editors with more than 1,000 contributions; an average of 1,600 edits per month and an average of 700 new pages; an average of 10/12 editors active each month for more than a year... Axel xadolik (talk) 10:30, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
@Axel xadolik: The Kotava, as pointed in the above sections, is affected by langcom's indoor judging of constructed languages, why compare these two? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:50, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: See this statistical page about the activity of all Wikivoyage projects on Incubator. Axel xadolik (talk) 09:29, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
That's unuseful, a large scale test without eligible status can be rejected by any possible reasons, e.g. rural dialect of XXX, vetoed by WMF staffs privately, affected by sanctions to Iran, etc. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:32, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Certes, mais les statistiques objectives sont toujours un indicateur intéressant, davantage que bien des commentaires oiseux. Lorsque des critères sont publiquement affichés, indépendamment de raisons plus obscures d'appréciation, la moindre équité implique de les respecter. Axel xadolik (talk) 13:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Alors, c'est la raison pour vous, de comparer une demande éligible avec une autre demande, qui peut éventuellement être rejetée? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Comprenez-moi bien : des règles ont été établies et écrites, très détaillées sur l'acceptabilité de projets lancés dans l'Incubator, dans un but de transparence et de donner des repères objectifs aux communautés et contributeurs qui travaillent sur ces projets. Parmi ces règles opposables, il est notamment question de volume d'activité, de qualité linguistique et encyclopédique des contenus, de continuité dans les contributions et d'un nombre suffisant et attesté de contributeurs actifs. Cela me semble normal pour garantir la qualité et la crédibilité de Wikipedia et ses divers domaines.
Lorsque ces critères sont respectés (et les statistiques sont précisément là pour prouver la chose), alors il est normal et souhaitable que les projets soient validés en tant que projets autonomes. Mais il est également normal qu'une certaine file d'attente soit respectée, que les projets les plus avancés et les plus actifs ne soient pas systématiquement doublés par certains autres bien moins développés, sous le simple prétexte que untel ou untel s'en fait le héraut. Et cela d'autant plus que les membres du Langcom semblent malheureusement de moins en moins impliqués dans le suivi des projets. Axel xadolik (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
@Axel xadolik: Ihr Projekt muss also zuerst genehmigt werden, bevor Sie darüber nachdenken, andere Testprojekte zu genehmigen? So your project must be approved first before considering approving other test projects? Votre projet doit donc être approuvé avant d'envisager d'approuver d'autres projets de test? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:14, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
It's not specifically the project for I am the test administrator, but several other projects also. And at the very least, any project that is sufficiently advanced should be entitled to a serious discussion, within a reasonable timeframe. Axel xadolik (talk) 07:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
So your project can just be eligible right now? Per your comments? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Approval of Pu-Xian Min Wikipedia

@Jon Harald Søby, @James Heilman

Hi, I would like to ask about the approval of Pu-Xian Min Wikipedia. It is now already contains 2172 articles, and is well developed. I believe that it is time to transfer it from the incubator to public access. Appreciate if you could approve it. Thank you.--Henrytanck (talk) 14:43, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

@StevenJ81:^^ --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the recent activity is very low. Projects can only be approved if there are at least several (3+) regular contributors (more than 10 edits per month) over at least several months. --MF-W 02:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Bulgarian Wikinews

Are there any other objections to fully deleting Bulgarian Wikinews without transfer to another project, like Russian Wikinews? What about phab:T233322? The matter was previously discussed at a user talk page. George Ho (talk) 07:02, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Pinging MF-Warburg and Millosh. George Ho (talk) 02:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Ancient Greek Wikipedia eligible?

I haven't been a fan of the project, but it's still not been rejected or marked as eligible. With the exception of one month, the period between 2016-03 and 2016-10 met that requirements for activity, so it seems possible and even likely that given the green light, they could achieve the activity requirements. That was three years ago; I think it fair for them to either have it marked as eligible, subject to whatever activity requirements, or rejected, wherein it could be kept in the Incubator or copied to several webhosts; I'd probably support creating an ancient Wiki if it was a matter of moving an active wiki in house. In any case, I think it's time for Langcom to make up their mind here.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I am, I have to admit, confused. Language_proposal_policy/2019-04_proposed_revision made no change about the rule that "in ancient languages, only Wikisources are accepted". However, on 26 February 2019, StevenJ81 wrote to Langcom " I will rework this to remove anything relating to historical languages for now. (I'll let the Committee know when the new draft is ready.) After March 1 (to put everything on the same archive page) I am going to make a one-off proposal to mark Ancient Greek Wikipedia as 'eligible'. After that, I'll make a proposal on historical languages more broadly." It seems like so far he has not gotten around to do so. I will investigate this further. Maybe it makes sense to put forward this one-off proposal now. --MF-W 23:54, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Konkani Wiktionary

StevenJ81, the community has been meeting the activity targets on the Konkani Wiktionary test for over a year now, and we are also working on the localisation. I request you to please propose to the Language Committee to consider our project for approval. Thanks and best regards, The Discoverer (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikibooks Telugu

I think, this can be rejected, because that project already exists. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Nehiyaw Wikipedia 2

It is same as Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Nehiyaw Wikipedia. LTA has made this proposal. All related accounts are locked. Please take note of this and handle this request. Thank you. --Sotiale (talk) 12:37, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Independent of the possibility of speedy deletion, in this page history, you can see that everyone except you are locked. --Sotiale (talk) 13:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
@Sotiale: May I know who is the master, if they are globally locked / local meta block, I think it's safe to G3 those. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Conversed with Sotiale on IRC, shall leave to langcom to handle. Hope for a speedy close to this nonsense proposal. Thanks.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:53, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Comment Comment@Camouflaged Mirage and Sotiale: Note that there are several RFL pages that are created by socks/IPs in the recent 2 years iirc. So what should we do? AbuseFilters? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: I guess the best is just to handle it case by case. If they are created by banned user / blocked users socks and there are no significant contributors than the banned / blocked users, G3 can be used to delete. However, we need the clear master of the socks. For accounts that can be simple, for IP we need to excise more care. Abuse Filters aren't that efficient in this aspect. Regards,--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Konkani Wiktionary

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Konkani Wiktionary. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 01:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

StevenJ81's current absence

Does anybody know what happened to StevenJ81 (talk · contribs)? His last contribution at Meta is December of last year, i.e. three months ago, and the discussion is about his email being out of service (or something like that). Will there be (temporary) substitutes for non-voting clerks? George Ho (talk) 08:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I guess he was burned out by LangCom business? — regards, Revi 13:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
I hope he's alright. I had been worried about him too. The Discoverer (talk) 12:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Formatting of Moroccan Arabic

Hello language Committee,

I am one of the administrators of the Wikipedia in Moroccan Arabic, currently still in the incubator, but that we prepare to launch soon. We are currently facing a problem, which is that someone (very long time ago - we don't know who) registered the Moroccan Arabic as a language written with Latin Alphabet, and called "Magribi". This is not reflected in reality as Moroccan Arabic is written in Arabic letters as you can see in the incubator. This problem touches all the ary (Moroccan Arabic) projects and not only Wikipedia in the incubator, but it is the one most suffering because we are facing a lot of trouble everyday with all edits due to the complications of LTR (left to right) while it should be all RTL (right to left) for us. Can you please help us solve this by:

  1. Change the formatting of Moroccan Arabic (Ary) from LTR to RLT?
  2. Change Moroccan Arabic language name in all Wikimedia projects from "Magribi" to "الدارجة", which is the name everyone uses?

If is not you who can do this, then please guide us to who does it so that we contact them? As this was a hanging issue for more than a year for us, and is a blocker for us to work on the Wiktionary. Thank you in advance for the help. I am tagging for reference the active editors of Moroccan Arabic Wikipedia: Sadiqui, Reda Benkhadra, Rachid Ourkia, Tifratin, Abdeaitali.

Best regards,

Anass Sedrati (talk) 19:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

@Amire80, Aaharoni-WMF, Sthottingal (WMF), Nikerabbit, and Nlaxstrom-WMF: FYI. Requests were submitted on Phabricator and GitHub, but they remained without answers. Thanks in advance ! --Reda benkhadra (talk) 20:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


What are updates about Saraiki Wikipedia and Saraiki Wiktionary.Sraiki (talk) 15:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

@Amire80:, @Antony D. Green:, @Maor X:, @GerardM:, @Jon Harald Søby:, @Klbroome:, @Yupik:, @MF-Warburg:, @Evertype:, @Millosh:, @SPQRobin:, @Satdeep Gill:, @StevenJ81:, @Doc James: Hello, lang Com. Look into matter and approve Saraiki Wikipedia and Saraiki Wiktionary.Sraiki (talk) 06:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Request for Approval of Shan Wiktionary

The test project is active enough and has more than 7700 entries. The Shan community's first Wikipedia Project was approved and created on 2018. Please review their second Project for the final approval. Thanks. NinjaStrikers «» 14:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@Amire80:, @Antony D. Green:, @Maor X:, @GerardM:, @Jon Harald Søby:, @Klbroome:, @Yupik:, @MF-Warburg:, @Evertype:, @Millosh:, @SPQRobin:, @Satdeep Gill:, @StevenJ81:, @Doc James: - May I know any update for this, please. Thanks. NinjaStrikers «» 04:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
@Ninjastrikers: See the bottom of this page. :-) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 12:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
@Jon Harald Søby: Thank you! NinjaStrikers «» 16:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Request for approval of Awadhi Wikipedia

@Satdeep Gill @ Talk The Awadhi Wikipedia incubator has been very active for the past several months. It has 5071 pages and 10918 edits so far and is continuing. Therefore, it is a humble request to approve the Awadhi test Wikipedia and create the independent URL. So that it can develop faster. Thanks. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ajaywikia (talk) 2020-04-12 05:06 (UTC)

Hello. It has now been approved and the creation of the wiki was requested. - As I see, we neglected to post a "notification about proposed approval" here one week before doing it. I hope this will not lead to any problems, but if someone has objections, he or she can of course still tell us. --MF-W 17:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Shan Wiktionary

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Shan Wiktionary. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 12:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jon Harald Søby: 11 days past and seems nobody object it? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Also if I created entries with books of the Bible in Shan, I would ask that approvate this Wiktionary, but don't give to know which are these books of the Bible, because only see squares, and just see visible characters in Mozilla Firefox.
Leonardo José Raimundo (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Thanks for the reminder, I forgot to follow up on this. I have filed phab:T253029 now.
@Leonardo José Raimundo: I'm not sure what you mean… The issue with the boxes sounds like a font issue, so you could try to install a font that supports Shan on your computer, like Noto Sans Myanmar. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 15:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Siberian

Can someone deal with this proposal?--GZWDer (talk) 11:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for mentioning it here. --MF-W 13:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Create Achomi language

This is old language in Iran Achomia (talk) 07:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

You could start a project at incubator:Wp/lrl. --MF-W 11:55, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikisource Ligurian

Seems ready to go to me. Is there a reason why this hasn't graduated from s:mul: yet? —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

+1, there was 3 users for the last 3 months, including one very active user (see stats), I also think this Wikisource is ready. Cheers, VIGNERON * discut. 12:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. Below I will post the note of proposed approval. --MF-W 12:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 12:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for approval of Kotava Wikipedia

Amir E. Aharoni, Antony D. Green, Maor Malul, Gerard Meijssen, Jon Harald Søby, Karen Broome, Kimberli Mäkäräinen, MF-Warburg, Michael Everson, Milos Rancic, Robin Pepermans, Satdeep Gill, Steven White, James Heilman : I don't understand why this project is still not validated or approved. It counts almost 8000 articles, in a wide variety of fields (literature, painting, mammals, ornithology, Africa, etc.), and many very active contributors over the last two years, and a great deal of attention has been done to the presentation of the articles, links and sources.

This project is already much more active than other already accepted languages such as Friulan, Maltese, Ladino, Ligurian, Corsican, Sardinian or Lingua Franca Nova.

The project largely meets all the criteria required in the recommendations.

When will this approval take place? Thank you for your answers. ClaudiaVisentini (talk) 13:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

@ClaudiaVisentini: Doubtful, as that language request doesn't judged as eligible, for an on hold proposal, it's likely to wait for up to 5 years. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
Liuxinyu970226, several remarks:
  • 1) Why would the Kotava be less eligible than the Lingua Franca Nova or the Novial?
  • 2) Where are the reasons for this 5-year purgatory?
  • 3) Why does no member of this committee, which has the right of life and death over a language and the work of dozens of contributors, answer? ClaudiaVisentini (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
@ClaudiaVisentini: Well, the first question is confusing because as of now, nobody says that your language is "less eligible" than others, langcom members are privately (i.e. they discuss the entire Kotava-related issues on their own private mailing list) discussing the eligibility. The second question maybe also. For the third, asking Commons might be better. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:16, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: If I well understand what you're saying, I conclude that:
  • This committee actually operates as a secret committee, and that its "real" discussions are private and therefore no one can really know how decisions are made. A good example of transparency!
  • The famous criteria put forward on the face of the world are just here to give the impression of objective processes. As in political matters, finally.
  • The members of this committee have too much to do to answer to ordinary contributors and explain their decisions or non-decisions.
Sad conclusions. ClaudiaVisentini (talk) 16:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
@ClaudiaVisentini: Because they only privately discuss stuffs when they have benefits to do so, to which your issues are meeting their criterias, this is the reason why I don't have interests in joining them, since I rather like to have no sensitive things. In many times, questions other than yours are publicly answered, though. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:31, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Acum tire bata neda aun levgorar, me konedison va geltrafa flidera pu kotrafa doda ? Vol lité da batcoba tir rapalackafa gu dalaf nelkoteem ke Wikimedia. Tokdume ? (So this committee actually makes its decisions privately, in secret, without exposing the actual discussions to the whole community? I don't think that's very much in accordance with the main principles of Wikimedia. Why is that?) Biscuit 26507 (talk) 08:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
    @Biscuit 26507: Well, I'm not saying that "the langcom discuss the eligibility privately", I'm just saying that your matter should be discussed privately, okay? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Me, me gildá dume prilara me tid sanegafa, dume bat zolonarsaf bewik kivad da va tirka co muxad. Voxen rin, larde maneke lanepeson pulvil, pune kas va bata yasegafa vexala ronovansal ? Kre lidecké da ewarurapa tir.
(No, I do not understand why the discussions are not public, why these overly important members are afraid to express a position publicly. And you, do you have access to this private list to speak with such certainty? I have more feeling of a great offhandedness.) Biscuit 26507 (talk) 12:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@AEA, ADG, MM, GM, JHS, KB, KM, MFW, ME, MR, RP, SG, SW, JH : Tokdume meka dulzera ke kon bewik ke bata neda tir ? Tokdume abdumimaks gan winafa ebeltafa neda zo levlanzar ? Toklize sanegafa atatcera is remawira ke dusiveem tigid ?
(Why is there no response from any member of this committee? Why is this project blacklisted by your dark committee? Where are the public debate and the transparency of the arguments?). Biscuit 26507 (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
@Biscuit 26507: Patience, please. It is not blacklisted, but it has taken a bit of time to discuss it. You'll hear from us soon. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 11:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
@Jon Harald Søby: Va keuca, va keuca... Batcoba tir axafa dusiva. Mali konak aksat ikz- bat abdumimaks gan lo 10 webesik tegison zo linter. Kas naleteson kec da 10000 teliz di tid ? Edeme, toka mijepesa flidera elokasa va abduaxa tid ? Malgildeteson oblakafenkupú isen kotar webesik milinde askid.
(Patience, patience... That's a bit of a narrow argument. This project has been actively pursued for months and months by more than 10 contributors. Are you waiting for 10,000 articles to validate it? If not, what are the so disputed discussions that are blocking the process? My ears and those of all the other contributors are widely open to hear you.) Biscuit 26507 (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
@Jon Harald Søby: Golde rin banvielu grupé va "tålmodighet" ravlem. Tokon "keuca tiskipisa dum miel arte Lentefa Evilma" co kalil?
(Thanks to you I now know this word "tålmodighet". How would you say, "patience as long as a night at the North Cape"?) Biscuit 26507 (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for Approval of Central Bikol Wiktionary

Hello! What are the requirements we still need to comply to get an approval for the Central Bikol Wiktionary. Thank you! Dang Brazal (Talk) 16:21, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, there should be several months of continuous activity (from 3+ users) on Incubator, as well as an active interface translation process on --MF-W 18:30, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Ligurian Wikisource

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Ligurian Wikisource. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 12:20, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Weak oppose. Insufficient activity, only two last months. Compare objectively with some projects far more advanced and more regular like wp.kotava which counts 10,000 articles and is waiting for two years. Biscuit 26507 (talk) 14:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC) -- edit : now a simple weak oppose... Biscuit 26507 (talk) 16:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
It's at least three. --MF-W 15:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
@Biscuit 26507: you can't compare a Wikisource project and a Wikipedia project, that's two totally different dynamics. On a Wikipedia, you write and rewrite (and therefore, you need to know the language) on a Wikisource you just copy one time published texts (and don't really need to know the language). On a Wikipedia, 10 people is a very small community and it can be hard to manage 10 000 articles ; meanwhile, on a Wikisource, 10 people is a very big community and you can still easily manage millions of books.
Plus, this Ligurian Wikisource incubation has one active user for 3 years and 3 active user for the last 3 months. I think it's ready.
Cheers, VIGNERON * discut. 17:07, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Also, the Kotava Wikipedia test doesn't eligible for now on, afaik its status is still stucked on on hold, and idk why their community also ask many projects to "not approve for now" just because they want to have their project approved. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:54, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
@Biscuit 26507: With all due respect, this response cannot be qualified as anything else but childish. Blocking other projects because your own project hasn't been approved yet is not quite the best way to gain sympathy for it. Also, you should understand that Kotava is a rather peculiar case, even compared to other constructed languages. Granted, the amount of output you guys have managed to generate is truly impressive, but it remains the work of a very tiny group of people, the target group being the very same tiny group of people. Besides, since content written in Kotava is totally incomprehensible to anyone who hasn't learned it, it will be hard to find a person who can vouch for this content without simultaneously being a stakeholder. And then there's the problem that there are hardly any secondary sources that even mention Kotava, let alone discuss it in some detail. In other words, there is a serious notability problem, and there is still no conclusive evidence that the whole thing isn't a hoax. All I am saying is: don't be surprised that the LangCom has been hesitant in approving your project. That said, I hope it will come into being soon, because it's obvious that a Kotava Wikipedia can be viable. Cheers, IJzeren Jan (talk) 23:29, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I think approval can make now, comparing two projects that incubated in different places isn't good to me. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for giving permission. --MF-W 13:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Moroccan Arabic Wikipedia

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Moroccan Arabic Wikipedia. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 15:04, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Kotava Wikipedia

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Kotava Wikipedia. This includes both verifying the language as eligible & giving final approval of the subdomain's creation. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 13:13, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 10:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Ladin Wikipedia

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Ladin Wikipedia. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 13:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Looks like no against comments at all for both (this and Kotava above)?! --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:15, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 10:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

اللغة العربية البحرانية

يوجد الكثير من الناس التي تتكلم اللهجة البحرانية في العراق و البحرين و السعودية و حتى الكويت

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by an unspecified user

So... ? --MF-W 13:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Per Google translate tool, it seems that this user want to restart Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Bahrani Arabic? As it tells me "There are many people who speak Bahrani dialect in Iraq, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and even Kuwait". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Japanese Wikivoyage

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Japanese Wikivoyage. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 11:11, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: Do you intended to import contents from Wikitravel dump?--GZWDer (talk) 00:43, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Not me, in this case. The community might do it on their own, see incubator:Incubator:Import_requests#Wy/ja. --MF-W 01:43, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T260320
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 01:54, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Request for approval of Igbo Wiktionary

Hello Language Committee members. Please review Requests for new languages/Wiktionary Igbo for approval. Having reviewed proposals and reports from the Igbo Wikimedians User Group as well as other individuals on a number of Rapid Grants related to the project, a great deal of work has been put into building the project over the last year. See these reports for more information:

Ongoing work on Igbo Wiktionary continues to be supported through Rapid Grants as well:

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 08:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

At the moment the Incubator project is not really active, with only one contributor so far in June, who made 2 edits. Apart from that, also the MediaWiki localisation requirements are not fulfilled, the most-used messages are not yet complete and there is no current activity on translatewiki:Portal:ig. --MF-W 11:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Thanks for this feedback, this is helpful to understand what the next steps are and where we might be able recommend support. I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Turkish Wikinews

This wiki is closed by community consensus. This raises a problem what whether it can simply be reopened by a new community consensus, or LPP must be followed.--GZWDer (talk) 17:27, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

First of all, that seems very theoretical. Second, the question should be asked, IF NEED BE, to developers on Phabricator (though I suppose the answer is affirmative ad primum, negative ad secundum), as the wiki was closed by them without langcom being involved. No idea what's up with the "We’ve had a message saying it’s okay from LangCom" comment there. --MF-W 15:58, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: But then, how to close Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Turkish Wikinews? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I closed it. --MF-W 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Request to reassess the eligibility of Malay Wikinews

Hello there. I as one of the active contributors now for Malay Wikinews, requested to reassess our eligibility to have own wiki for it. Please consider our request again for this project Requests for new languages/Wikinews Malay. Thank you! SNN95 (talk) - Vice President of WMCUGM 13:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@SNN95: Pardon, but is this an approval request, or you think the eligible status is premature? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Pardon me. This is an approval request. Because this project already in "verified as eligible" status for so long but there is no final decision yet from the community before me. So here I am, requesting the approval for this project to get its own wiki page. SNN95 (talk) - Vice President of WMCUGM 23:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Thx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I see that in this month of June, there has been good activity on the test-project. Please keep it up for several months, then it can be considered for approval. --MF-W 14:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: Thank you! We will try our best to keep it up. SNN95 (talk) - Vice President of WMCUGM 01:25, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Request for Approval of Saraiki Wikipedia and Saraiki Wikitionary

@Amire80:, @Antony D. Green:, @Maor X:, @GerardM:, @Jon Harald Søby:, @Klbroome:, @Yupik:, @MF-Warburg:, @Evertype:, @Millosh:, @SPQRobin:, @Satdeep Gill:, @StevenJ81:, @Doc James: Hello, lang Com. Look into matter and approve Saraiki Wikipedia and Saraiki Wiktionary. What are updates about Saraiki Wikipedia and Saraiki Wiktionary? Saraiki people are waiting for Wikipedia and Wiktionary in their language.Please give surprise to the community.Sraiki (talk) 07:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Closed section of Requests for new languages

I suggest we split it into two subsections, one for approved and one for rejected requests. That would make the section easier to edit and to peruse. Thoughts? --MF-W 16:51, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Agree, that would make sense. dwf² (runding) 18:14, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Support Support Current format is foggy. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Implemented it. --MF-W 12:39, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for approval of Walloon Wikisource

Do you consider this request premature? Since 2018 I have gathered information to see if the project is viable, and it is in my opinion. I think the project ready to continue on its own subdomain, even if there are few active users. I notify walloon users who are interested by this request and so that they give their opinion : @Lucyin, Srtxg, Èl-Gueuye-Noere, and Athelsatn: Greetings, Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 06:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean by "you gathered information to see if the project is viable"? I would be interested in the details of this information. --MF-W 14:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
To my mind, a such project is viable if there are enough texts to transcribe. If you only have ten authors who wrote a hundred texts into a regional language, I don't think it's necessary to deploy a new branch of Wikisource to transcribe these texts, the old Wikisource seems to be a good place to host them, or, in the case of Walloon language the French subdomain, considering that (almost) all Walloon speakers has French as native language nowadays. But here, we have a regional language with many hundred texts to transcribe, with some schools that teach Walloon (as the Walloon school of Namur), and some authors who still write in Walloon in magazines (Singuliers, El mouchon d’Aunias, Li Rantoele) or publish new books (Lucyin Mahin, Li batreye des cwate vints) in 2020. This means that we'll have work for more decades and this is what I mean by viable. I hope answered the question. Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 18:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, this Wikisource is ready. I've been monitoring this and it has been active since May 2018. Some months more active than the others, but it never fell inactive. Catanalysis is an underrepresentation due to incomplete categorization. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 05:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks OWTB! Are there maybe some other categories which I could look at in catanalysis as well to get a better impression of the activity? --MF-W 20:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello everybody,
I am writing to tell you that, such as @Reptilien.19831209BE1 precised earlier, I am in favour of an Independent Walloon Wikisource (whose name would be : Wikisourd). They are actually many works that need to be transcribed, this amount of work will permit us to be (certainly) a big independent Wikisource. Furthermore, in two months, the Walloon Wikisource has passed from 600 to 820 articles. That is to say that by the end of the year the Walloon Wikisource would surely have, at least 1,000 articles. However, some independent Wikisources in other languages have less articles than Walloon one. Moreover, the other Walloon Wikimedia projects are all the rage (i.e.: there are quite a lot of contributions for small projects).
All these are the major reasons that explain why the Wikimedia Foundation should create an independent Walloon Wikisource. If you want further explainations, please, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely yours,
--Èl-Gueuye-Noere (talk) 11:52, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
I am very interested in this project,and will add a lot of own texts as a Walloon language writer, but also many others I and different friends published in different magazines, like wa:Coutcouloudjoû, wa:Li Rantoele and wa:Singuliers, as well as on my Web-magazine.
--Lucyin (talk) 17:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@MF-W: It is mainly uncategorized subpages and talk pages (such as [1]). Checking again, it looks like categorization improved substantially recently, which is a good sign. (Any left-overs can easily be traced back via user contribs after the first export is deleted.) --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 13:55, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

According to what is currently visible through Catanalysis, it does not quite yet look ready to me, but could very well be so in one or two months [other langcom members don't disagree, at least, given that my mail with this content did not receive objections [2]). --MF-W 18:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
OK, so let's talk about that in 3 months (1st of november). Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 15:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok! --MF-W 18:37, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Achomi

I'm not sure what I should say here, the requester @Achomia: is trying to make their own code system, instead of follow ISO 639-3, see e.g. [3] (changed to ach, which means Acoli, hence I submitted another Acoli request), [4] (changed to iso639-3:chm, which is Mari in Russia, and as a macrolanguage code, already have two Wikipedias, an Eastern and a Western), [5] (changed to aco which even doesn't exist, and says "In order not to be limited to Lari dialect, I had to choose the name aco", and again), I've told him to not just do so, as new ISO code are requested following SIL's rules, not just changed here, but that user don't have any meanings to apology, and still make their own code distributing. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Well yeah. @Achomia, please stick to the correct ISO code... --MF-W 23:04, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Liuxinyu970226!Please do not interfere! ISO codes bsg, lrl and zum are all dialects of this language and can not be counted instead of the whole! The name of this language is Achomi, which is written in the Latin alphabet of the same language to Acomi (the same ch is pronounced in line c!); This code does not interfere with other codes, so in the beginning, the correct name and the correct code in Wikipedia have been selected;

@Achomia: Our policy requires all new projects to use valid ISO code, not make your own code, thx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
I know nothing about Iranian dialectology, and I'm not sure anyone here can do much better. The easiest way to do this is to take lrl, which w:en:ISO 639:lrl identifies as by far the largest of the dialects. There's other ways, but that's the easiest way.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:40, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Turkish Wikivoyage

There has been an open debate for a long time and I think it can now leave the Incubator. Requests_for_new_languages/Wikivoyage_Turkish I would be glad if you review it. --ToprakM 20:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

With only you making 4 edits today, 13 in June, and 3 edits by others for the whole period of April-July, there is unfortunately not enough activity for approval. --MF-W 23:45, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for new language (Talysh Language)

We want to make the Talysh wikipedia ! — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aryagolparvar (talk)

You mean, request approving this? Well, although I'm not a member of langcom, per [6] there are only two active contributors of it, @Patriot Kur and Meksikanets:, so I don't think it's a good time for now to request so. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi dear all! Dear, Liuxinyu970226. First of all, the reason for few users is the cyrillic alphabet. This is a big problem for our language. The Talysh people use the Latin alphabet, not the Cyrillic alphabet. Some use the Persian alphabet, but they understand Latin. I working on this problems in the "".--Patriot Kur (talk) 03:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Again, can Montenegrin be eligible?

Although I don't speak this language, the recent discussions of Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin 5, which is on hold for 3 years, given me some brief informations that Montenegrin is enough independent from Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian, maybe also from Slovenian and Macedonian. Many of the participators on that page told us that how Montenegrin can't coexist on the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia (shwiki) (eligibility rule #3), and by checking [7], I really can't believe that this kind of activities even can't fullfill #4 rule. Eventually, the first and second rules are already checked for years. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226: How exactly have many of the participators on that page told us that how Montenegrin can't coexist on the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia (shwiki)? I looked at that page a little while ago, and it was mostly arguments about "is Montenegrin really a different language." I didn't really see any evidence suggesting that Montenegrin really couldn't coexist on shwiki, and, in fact, when I asked if there was any evidence that the existing communities have prevented Montenegrins from having "free, unbiased access to the sum of all human knowledge" on the current projects the response I got was simply "this expert should tell you whether Montenegrin is different or not," which simply took the discussion back to "is Montenegrin really that different" and not "is the existing Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia actively preventing users from using Montenegrin." On the latter point, I have not seen any specific evidence. DraconicDark (talk) 15:51, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
@Prz rulez, Space2006, Цареник Костович, Kolega2357, and Ego and his own:@НиколаБ, BokicaK, Lujki, Biblbroks, and MirkoS18:@GregorB, RMN120501, ApcehCraft, Freemanmne, and Rovoobob:@Vogone, Kubura, Bellatrix10, Doncsecz~enwiki, and Imjusttherediting: any comments of the above? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Montenegrin has its own grammar, specific letters, stylish differences. If there is separate English and Simple English, Nynorsk and Bokmal Norwegian, Belarussian and Belarussian (Taraškevica), why not separate Montenegrin? If the Montenegrins want to keep and develop uniqueness of their language, it is in their best interest to write the articles themselves and to avoid any massive botocopying and like sh.project did. Kubura (talk) 00:15, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Given that the Simple English wikipedia and one of the two Belarussian wikipedias would not be opened now and exist only because they were opened before the current rules, it's not wise to cite them for opening your Wikipedia.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:02, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

In the meantime, nothing has changed in favor of establishment of a Montenegrin Wikipedia. I have nothing new to add on this topic, so.... --ΝικόλαςΜπ (talk) 10:30, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Here's my 2c. The four standard languages that together constitute Serbo-Croatian (or BCMS, if you prefer) are all derived from the very same Štokavian dialect (Eastern Hercegovinian). Differences between them are minimal and mutual intelligibility is nearly 100%. Montenegrin is essentially Ijekavian Serbian with a few minor orthographical quirks similar to labour vs. labor in English. It's constantly the same few words (śutra, đevojka, nijesu etc.) that are being quoted to show the difference, but their number is limited and many articles won't contain any of them. For the rest, is of course possible to construct sentences that demonstrate how different Montenegrin is from Serbian, but the same can be done for American/British/Australian English as well ("That bloke parked his lorry on the left shoulder of the motorway").
When I was in Montenegro recently, it was pretty hard to find any traces of this separate Montenegrin orthography; all I found was a poster in a school. Even the websites of major state institutions don't seem to use it. My impression is that at present, this language/orthography as a separate entity is marginal even in Montenegro itself.
Another thing is the Montenegrin test wiki itself, which is almost exclusively about Montenegrin subjects; You'll hardly find articles about planets, mathematics, animals, American politics, psychology, linguistics, films, Pokémons and whathaveyou. In other words, it's a Montenegropedia rather than a typical Wikipedia. Now, I'm not saying that's a bad thing, quite the opposite, because the entire content of this test project could very easily be merged into either the Serbian or the Serbo-Croatian edition. I'm sure it should be possible to establish as a rule that articles about Montenegrin subjects should be preferably follow Montegrin standards, and, if desired, it's always possible to add a template saying "This article is written in Montenegrin" (several languages with multiple standards already do that, f.ex. Rhaetoromance, Norman, Sardinian, Limburgish).
At last, since the difference between various forms of Serbo-Croatian is of a political rather than a linguistic nature, the only remaining argument for a separate Montenegrin project seems to be POV differences. Apart from the fact that Wikipedia ought to be neutral, the number of articles where this POV difference could really matter is extremely limited. It's most unlikely that there will be nationality-based POV differences about other topics than former Yugoslavia. IJzeren Jan (talk) 09:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ookuninusi: was said to Steven that "Hi Steven. I returned to Wikimedia after a long break :D What happened to the request for the establishment of Wikipedia in the Montenegrin language? I see that almost nothing has happened on that issue. The number of new pages has dropped drastically in the last year, and there are almost no active editors. Best regards!" Ookuninusi, do you still interested in this topic? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
What is encyclopedia, or what is wikipedia, if not the matter of valid sources (literature) and people who want to use them to create content.
Wikipedia in English language predominantly forces sources in that language, combined with the fact that English became the leading language, ensures a great base of people who want to describe the world based on that sources. We could very easily determine that English Wikipedia is (more or less) culturally biased forcing English sources/literature above all other, forcing POV based on the exclusivity of those sources even if they present world-scale unencyclopedic POV. All other views will always be a minority POV on English Wikipedia, because of the leading language position, be that right or wrong, plus it is not just a value statement.
What is a language, seems like a question: what is normal, and in my view the Language Committee is not authorized to determine what is a language, they should simply determine whether major reference institution deem a language.
Montenegrin is a language by some major world institutions, sources published in that language exist.
While other wikipedias tend to do the same systematically biased predominant use of sources in the same language-specific context, many projects use wide variety of sources written in *foreign* languages, and also disapprove of the same language-specific context (almost exclusivity of the sources written in the language of the home-project). I believe that they could be less prone to language-specific POV, at least in the long run (hopefully; since, what do we know...), because most users do know at least one foreign language beside the leading world language. There are statistics about that fact published in recent years.
Other projects of the Central South Slavic diasystem have communities that tend to be more or less open to *outsiders*, but still the equation is the same: mono-linguistic sources which over saturate the projects. Still, the influx of English language sources continues to grow, because editors willingly translate content from English Wikipedia.
Communities do not magically appear, but are gathered up around a project of a certain appealing name. -- Несмир Кудилович (разговор) 09:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
@Nesmir Kudilovic: I'm afraid that the most current problem when judging the eligiblity can be queired by [8]: "Every time I asked the proponents of the Montenegrin Wikipedia for reliable sources for the differences, they couldn't provide them.", "I haven't yet seen a convincing argument that this wouldn't work for the actual readers.", "It's a normative document, so it's also a valid source for confirming the existence of a different spelling standard, but it's not a valid justification for creating a whole new project.", "That's precisely why we should stop creating *more* precedents for political forks.", "I'm still open to other reliable source that would prove this language's uniqueness or the inappropriateness of the current Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias for Montenegrin people." I'm afraid that unless if those problems are all resolved, the request may likely to be on hold for at least a decade. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:35, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 05:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for Approval of Southern Kurdish Wikipedia

Native speakers of Southern Kurdish have the competency and willingness to contribute to this project in the long-term. Hence the Southern Kurdish language deserves to be given the opportunity and priviledge to have its own language edition of Wikipedia along with the existing Kurdish language family such as Kurdish, Zazaki, Kirmanjki and so on. There are 3,000,000 speakers

southern kurdish is different from kurdi (ku) and Surani Kurdish (ckb). so it's better to has separate wiki project for Kermashan,Ilam,Khanaghin,Jalola,Zarbatie,Kefri AND Lakistan(in Iran and Iraq)[Sunday - 2020 19 July]

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 05:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

What to do with Bosnian Wikinews?

Must I (re-)propose hard closure of Bosnian Wikinews or just simply ask for a banner saying that the project is inactive? The recent activity was discussed at Bosnian Wikipedia. George Ho (talk) 09:34, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

If the wiki is inactive, anyone can put such a banner there, I suppose. --MF-W 10:00, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Can you do that? Can the banner be written in English and/or Bosnian? George Ho (talk) 11:08, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
What about soft closure it? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Banner is also part of "soft closure". Shall the banner be in just English, just in case? George Ho (talk) 23:42, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@George Ho: Why English? [9] isn't true? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Seriously? Google Translate? :< George Ho (talk) 03:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Wtf indeed. --MF-W 12:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
I could not find a compatible license that would allow us to use Bosnian language. I found notice saying that content copyright belongs to "Oxford University Press USA". I can't be sure whether Google's terms would allow us to use its translations, even when our original English content is ours to begin with. George Ho (talk) 00:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I can probably put the banner there, if someone tells me what exactly it should be, yes. Surely English-only for the start is ok, if absolutely no translator can be found (which is unlikely I guess). --MF-W 12:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Probably something similar to either Swedish Wikinews or Norwegian one (temporary English version). George Ho (talk) 00:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Or ask @AnToni, DzWiki, Edinwiki, KWiki, and Mhare: @Palapa, Semso98, and Srđan: for translation helps (per bs:Posebno:ListaKorisnika/sysop, list of bswiki administrators, exclude bots and AbuseFilter-like)? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Here is the translation of the Norwegian Wikinews (English version):
Wikivijesti na bosanskom jeziku nisu aktivno uređivane u posljednje vrijeme. Pogledajte [[:bs:Wikipedia:Čaršija/Jezici#(In)activity_of_Bosnian_Wikinews|stranicu za razgovor na Wikipediji na bosanskom jeziku]] za više informacija (na engleskom).

*Ovaj projekt ostaje otvoren za urednike zainteresirane za njegovo oživljavanje.
*Za pristup ostatku sadržaja Wikivijesti krenite '''[[Početna strana|ovdje]]''' s početne stranice.
*Molimo da ovu početnu stranicu ostavite u trenutnom stanju dok ne bude ažurirana dovoljna količina sadržaja za vraćanje aktivne početne stranice.

Odgovor na daljnja pitanja možete dobiti na Meti od korisnika [[:m:Korisnik:| ]], službenika [[:m:Language Committee|Jezičkog odbora]].

Oni koji žele pisati o trenutnim događajima također mogu doprinijeti [[:w:|Wikipediji na bosanskom jeziku]] pod uvjetom da je tema relevantna za enciklopediju.

-- Semso98 (talk) 09:56, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Semso98. Bosnian Wikinews's main page is full-protected, so I won't be able to convert the page into the banner page indicating inactivity. Must I make a request at SRM then? George Ho (talk) 00:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
At the very least, I created this as such: n:bs:Početna strana/soft. George Ho (talk) 00:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I corrected Semso98's translation. You can use this version now. -- KWiki (talk) 19:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

User:George Ho: as far as I can see, this was done successfully? Thank you for handling it! -MF-W 23:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome, and yes, the request to change page was successful. :) George Ho (talk) 04:57, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 05:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Approval of Manchu Wikipedia

Hi! The manchu wikipedia has been quite active since May, so I think it is the time to consider the approval of Manchu Wikipedia. --Limfurg 07:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

"Valid" months in the sense of having 3 or more contributors are July and the ongoing August, so please keep up the good work. Also, the most-used MediaWiki messages still are not translated completely. --MF-W 21:02, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Approval of Laz Wikipedia

Laz Wikipedia is requested over 10 years, the project is marked as verified as eligible and Laz Institute in Istanbul is highly interested on Laz Wikipedia. Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Laz 2 --Cemyildiz (talk) 00:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

There's no activity in the test wiki. Recent changes comes up with exactly zero changes in the last 20 days. If the Laz Institute is highly interested in it, they can surely fix that.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposal to elaborate on requisite for eligibility #4 (classical languages, revisited)

Some time ago, I made a suggestion to change the fourth requirement for language proposals, which can be seen here: Talk:Language_committee/2017#Proposal_to_alter_requisite_for_eligibility_#4 I'm glad to see that some fine-tuning has been done, and I think the current version of Language_proposal_policy#Requisites is better; particularly the change in wording which permits fluent L2 speakers in addition to L1 (I also think allowing BCP 47 codes is a good idea).

However, there's still a point of ambiguity: what is the policy on classical languages for Wikipedia? the Latin wiki is quite successful, as is the Classical Chinese wiki. However, I've seen proposals for other classical/historical languages end up languishing in incubator, or even being rejected, and that in spite of viability, communal support, distinct orthography, and well-developed literature. Currently, there is a special condition for conlangs, namely a 'reasonable degree of recognition' comprised of various factors. I propose that another special condition be added for classical/historical languages; this condition might include a pool of speakers, communal support, literature, established orthography, distinctiveness, and current usage. I think this would be very productive, finally allowing long-delayed projects to come to fruition, and would help sort out requests. Of course, I wouldn't want just any historical language approved, just as not every conlang is eligible. But creating a classical standard, in addition to the conlang standard, would be a significant improvement.

Thanks for your consideration. Xcalibur (talk) 11:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

tl;dr: the above is a proposal to add a condition allowing for Wikipedias in classical/historical languages in addition to conlangs. Xcalibur (talk) 16:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Your standards of "quite successful" are very different from mine; I'd classify the Classical Chinese Wikipedia as one of the Wikipedias that for literally no one is the best Wikipedia to turn to on literally any subject. Without the justification of supporting native languages, it seems the vast majority of classical language Wikis are of no value to Wikimedia.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
the Classical Chinese Wikipedia has an active community, a decent amount of content, and lots of depth for its size. it fills a niche, and it's successful. the same can be said of the Sanskrit Wikipedia, another ancient language with a living community which has proven itself viable. the Latin Wikipedia, although it wouldn't be approved now, is comparable to Norwegian and Tamil in stats. Granted, Gothic and Old English are unnecessary; not every historical language should be approved. but the examples I've given are proof of concept -- classical languages are viable for Wikipedia, and this should be properly accommodated. Xcalibur (talk) 00:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
It fills what niche? My standard is, does it provide a encyclopedia that anyone would actually look up something in. This is different from native languages, where there's value in providing an encyclopedia in the language, even if in practice users will use a different Wikipedia. I don't see any evidence that Classical Chinese ever provides a better source than the Mandarin Chinese Wikipedia. (I doubt there's many who could use the Classical Chinese Wikipedia who can't read Mandarin, but the Korean and Japanese Wikipedias aren't slouches either.) And Sanskrit, Latin, Ancient Greek and Classical Chinese are pretty much the complete list of classical languages that might have value.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
I could see where someone might prefer a classical language, especially when there are communities keeping them alive, and they're highly relevant to scholarly pursuits. I'm glad you agree with me on Ancient Greek, it's stuck in the incubator and has been delayed for years, in spite of a high degree of support. to that list, I would also add Classical Japanese. there may be a few more viable options out there as well. Xcalibur (talk) 06:01, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
They're not highly relevant to scholarly pursuits; nobody publishes in ancient languages any more. I don't agree necessarily that Ancient Greek Wikipedia should become a thing, but I do think it should get a clear yes or no.
Classical Japanese violates one of my major rules about classical languages, in that they must be multicultural. Classical Japanese doesn't bring anyone to the table who can't already contribute to the Japanese wikis. There is no one language that speakers of any of the languages I mentioned above all know, though I'm not sure about how many non-Mandarin readers know Classical Chinese. The biggest argument for the Latin Wikipedia IMO is that it still brings together a broad spectrum of speakers with no common languages.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:37, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
nobody publishes in ancient languages any more hehe. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:35, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
A wiki is not publication; publication involves some sense of permanence. And by the context of "scholarly pursuits", I was clearly talking about academic publication.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:54, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
I'd say Wikipedia is a publisher, albeit one that functions differently from typical brick-and-mortar publishers.
they are in fact relevant, with lots of people studying them, a significant literature, and active use to this day; this is especially true of Ancient Greek. international appeal is an issue, but a relatively minor one in my view. Classical Chinese was once a scholarly lingua franca throughout the Far East (similar to Latin in the West) until the early 20th century, and is still influential for that reason. Likewise, Classical Japanese had official sanction until the early 20th century, and is still used in some contexts. all languages mentioned have a very significant literature. while bungo may seem a bit narrow, I wouldn't underestimate the ability of people worldwide to study and contribute in a notable classical language. for the Japanese in particular, bungo may help fill a niche and attract new contributors who prefer it to the modern standard. overall I see plenty of potential here. Xcalibur (talk) 07:11, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
The ability to "attract new contributors who prefer it to the modern standard" is much stronger for Simple Spanish or Conservative English than Classical Japanese. This type of splitting of contributors to projects that don't actually represent distinct native languages of speakers, or even conlangs or ancient languages that can form a interlanguage between two speakers otherwise ignorant of any common language, is something Wikimedia has discouraged.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Simple Spanish sounds like a viable idea, especially since it's so common worldwide (in many ways second to English). I don't know what you mean by Conservative English, if you mean Appalachian English, that's too close of a dialect to work (as opposed to Scots, which is a viable WP despite being a close relative). the Old English WP was grandfathered in, and even that has an active community. If other classical languages had been approved years ago, they would be well along by now, and it's not too late. it wouldn't necessarily be a split, since it may pull in contributors who otherwise would not be involved. Also, you shouldn't underestimate the enthusiasm of people worldwide for learning and writing in classical languages. I still see Bungo as viable, and Ancient Greek even more so. Thus, my suggestion stands. Xcalibur (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
It has been made quite clear that no new Simple Wikipedias are going to be opened. By Conservative English, I mean Conservapedia. Why does "too close of a dialect" matter? Unless you're talking about language community, and I don't regard Classical Japanese as having a different language community from Japanese. --Prosfilaes (talk) 01:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
that's fine, I'm not arguing for more Simple Wikipedias, although Simple English WP is undeniably successful. the problem with Conservapedia is that it's structured around a partisan perspective, which is beyond the scope of a general-purpose encyclopedia. Without getting into the larger debate over language vs dialect (an army & navy being relevant here), there should be enough of a difference so that mutual intelligibility is limited or partial at best (as is the case between ancient languages and their modern descendants). Language communities are one factor for consideration among others. For classical languages in particular, there is often a broader appeal, and the potential to pull in new contributors who would otherwise not be involved. Xcalibur (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

to reiterate, tl;dr: the above is a proposal to add a condition allowing for Wikipedias in classical/historical languages in addition to conlangs. I've made my case, but ultimately it's up to the Committee. hopefully they will take my words into consideration. Xcalibur (talk) 09:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Small wiki audit

Hello. The page small wiki audit may be of interest to LangCom. PiRSquared17 (talk) 08:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Small wiki audit/Malagasy Wiktionary

Please take a look at this page, where I have detailed the massive problems with the Malagasy Wiktionary. This problem is not exactly under the committes's purview, but it should be of great interest to anyone who actually cares about the quality of some of our biggest, and yet most overlooked, projects. I am looking for community input on this, so we can move forward and clean up the mess. Metaknowledge (talk) 02:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Approval of Tachelhit Wikipedia

Tachelhit Wikipedia is requested over 13 years, the project is marked as verified as eligible and it has been quite active lately, so I think it is the time to consider the approval of Tachelhit Wikipedia. Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Tachelhit -- Ayour2002 (talk) 12:30, 02 October 2020 (UTC)

The test-project is currently in its third consecutive month of two regularly editing users (>10 edits), while usually it should be at least three. Also, the most-used messages are not yet complete which are also a requirement. --MF-W 05:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the answer, the most-used messages wil be fixed as soon as possible -- Ayour2002 (talk) 21:42, 06 October 2020 (UTC)

Announcement of Betawikiversity statistics change

Hello. BetaWV provides monthly statistics of incubating wikis. I plan to exclude statistics for languages that have not contributed at all in the last 3 years starting this month(+the proposal has been submitted but has not contributed in). They can be added to the stats again if they are contributed, but at least not in the next month's stats.

First of all, language codes that are primarily excluded from statistics are as follows:

I am manually generating all 50+ statistics, so there may be more language codes added later. Please review the above inactivity proposal at the Language Committee.

Regards, --Sotiale (talk) 11:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sotiale: The Marathi one is submitted: Requests for new languages/Wikiversity Marathi. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Thanks for updating. fixed. --Sotiale (talk) 12:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Looked up those which already submitted, gl, li, yue: inactive for 7 months; glk, ht: inactive for 3 years; mr: inactive for 4 years; skr, sq: "Could not perform query:" bug. So I don't see how and why they should be approved. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I see no problem with BetaWV changing its statistics page. --MF-W 22:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I second to you, just changing statistics page is always feel free, and by everyone. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Aztec

I want Wikipedia to be translated into Aztec, because this is one of the few native languages ​​in America that survives to this day, and I think Wikipedia in Aztec would be a good way to keep it alive and preserve. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by HeitorHD325 (talk)

See nah:. --MF-W 22:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 17:25, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Esperanto Wikivoyage

Is it possible to check again the status of incubating Esperanto Wikivoyage for approval? Started in 2013, compared with other projects that have been approved, I cannot understand what is missing.

An example of recently approved wikivoyage project is: Japanese Wikivoyage (by Catanalysis: 971 pages - 128 editors - 6600 edits). According to Incubator Main Page, Turkish Wikivoyage is close to approval (by Catanalysis: 342 pages - 77 editors - 1649 edits). --- By comparison, Esperanto Wikivoyage has 2549 pages - 94 editors - 26255 edits.

Of course, the number of speakers is very different. It is reasonable to expect that Japanese Wikivoyage will grow faster than many other projects with a small number of speakers (including other already approved Wikivoyage projects). But the usual policy of Wikimedia seems to me, that also languages with smaller numbers of speakers should get their chance (and in fact several wiki-projects already exist in Esperanto).

Another difference is the peak activity in a single month. Other projects had a few months with very strong activity (500-1000 kbytes per month), whereas the activity of Esperanto wikivojage is more stable over the years, with smaller peaks (up to 200 kbytes in a single month), but also smaller gaps (i.e. months without activity). --- Or is there some other issue that I did not see? --Rdelre (talk) 09:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC) (I am not an administrator, only a contributor for Esperanto incubating Wikivoyage)

Thanks for mentioning this project here. I see that in this month, there has been a drop in the number of active users. But if it gets back to the level of the preceding months, there should be no problem with approving eo.wy. (By the way, the list of wikis on the Incubator main page is completely unofficial and does not mean that a wiki might be approved soon. Wy/tr only reached the "more than 3 contributors per month" requirement for the first time in this October.) --MF-W 23:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
I have now proposed to Langcom to approve Esperanto Wikivoyage. --MF-W 17:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 00:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for approval of Walloon Wikisource

As mentioned in the previous request, I reopen this one to reassess the eligibility. Greetings Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 07:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

To whom it may concern,
I support this request. As Reptilien wrote earlier, we already had requested the approval of the Walloon-speaking Wikisource. The Walloon Wikisource project is growing fast. Furthermore, the amount of contributions per month also keeps growing. Moreover, an independent Walloon-speaking Wikisource would enable us to maintain the Walloon language alive. As you may know, Walloon is regarded as an endangered language, and Wikimedia's networks remain an excellent means in order to keep threatened languages alive.
Sincerely yours,
--Èl-Gueuye-Noere (talk) 18:45, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I have brought up the topic in Langcom. In the meantime, could you finish the localisation of the ProofreadPage extension? It's a requirement for new Wikisources. --MF-W 01:50, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Done Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 10:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 00:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Whether to delete Bulgarian Wikinews

The task to delete Bulgarian Wikinews is currently "stalled" (phab:T233322). Shall the task be reopened (and probably eliminate "redirect" from title), or what else to do with the task? George Ho (talk) 20:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there a necessity to delete the wiki? I'm unsure. --MF-W 09:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
What about the articles copied from third-party sources, sensational articles whose "facts" are questionable, and all that? The whole Bulgarian community have favored deleting the whole project without saving any content there or transferring content to another project. Why the reluctance? George Ho (talk) 16:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I'm wondering if it isn't enough to simply delete all the pages. That's probably less work for the technical side. --MF-W 17:37, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Then why do you want the closed project to remain as-is for now? What are you hoping for the project's fate? --George Ho (talk) 03:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Well, not as-is, but with the deletion of the pages. --MF-W 22:06, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Approval for Madurese Wikipedia

Madurese Wikipedia is a growing community with quite stable contributors over last few months. As administrator, I'd like to inform to the committee that the translations to Madurese has been completed. It seems like we have met the criteria for approval, could you review the proposal? We would love to hear further news. --Boesenbergia (talk) 07:24, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comment. We are discussing it now. --MF-W 22:43, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 03:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Nias Wikipedia and Wiktionary

Hello. Please notice our proposal on Nias Wikipedia and Wiktionary approval. Thank you. Banio (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

@Banio ba Hinako: The second request isn't eligible yet, though it's very likely to be eligible per the Wikipedia one, are you sure that the second one should also consider approving? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:49, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Fyi, both are considering: [10]. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:18, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Liuxinyu970226. I had subscribed to the mailing list. Why isn't Wiktionary eligible? What criteria haven't met yet? Banio (talk) 02:59, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Maybe langcom members have no times to do so? At least I see no reason why it can't be eligible. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I have marked it as eligible now, which is really just a formality in this case. --MF-W 01:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
PS @Banio ba Hinako: I think the rest important thing before a final approval is the interface translations? All things within Wikimedia are seem done, the rest thing is happened on which is beyond Wikimedia's control. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:16, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello @Liuxinyu970226:, there is only one untranslated message on translatewiki since I wrote this request. Until now, we still can't translate it. When I try to publish the translation, it always say "Publishing the translation failed: You do not have permission to edit this page because it contains raw HTML which can be modified to affect all visitors."
I'm asking for help on translatewiki support now. banio (talk) 04:08, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Most used messages done translated. banio (talk) 12:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello! The activity is very good, please keep up the great work. The projects will soon be ready for approval, we (Langcom) only need to verify the content. We are already on it, but if you could recommend a linguist who would be able to confirm to us that the projects are indeed written in correct Nias, you can also e-mail me about that. --MF-W 03:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Did you receive my message MF-W? banio (talk) 10:40, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, all went well! --MF-W 15:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 16:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Saraiki Wikipedia and Wiktionary

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Saraiki Wikipedia and Wiktionary. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 22:41, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

See now: phabricator:T268410 for the Wikipedia. For Wiktionary, some info about the settings is still required. --MF-W 17:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 16:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Request for Approval of BCL Wiktionary

Good day. Please check if our local Wiktionary is already eligible. You may check our status here. Kunokuno (talk) 13:53, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I think you are ready for approval and have proposed it to the language committee. --MF-W 03:11, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 16:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Approval of Taroko Wikipedia

I would like to point out that the recent activity of Wikipedia Taroko (incubator:Wp/trv) is really good, it has already translated over 1611 articles. Overview, there are 1991 pages (including categories, templates, talk pages, and redirects). It's been active for a long time. The quality and quantity of articles are also comming to a certain level. Furthermore, MediaWiki(most important messages) is over 91% translated. Is there any possible that Taroko can be verified as approved?Mecytan (talk) 03:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Support Support, [11] tells me that there are already more than 10 contributors that are contributing new contents in the past half years. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for mentioning this here. The activity on Incubator looks very good. Please finish the most-used MediaWiki messages translation. --MF-W 00:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg:Thanks for your advice.The most-used MediaWiki messages translation is 100% translated. We would like to know how can we push it to the next step?Mecytan (talk) 04:17, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
User:Mecytan: what's now missing is only the verification of the content. We (Langcom) are already on it. There should be an update within the next two weeks. --MF-W 02:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg:Thanks!Hope there will be good news.Mecytan (talk) 09:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Esperanto Wikivoyage, Walloon Wikisource and Madurese Wikipedia

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Esperanto Wikivoyage, Walloon Wikisource and Madurese Wikipedia. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 23:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Filed as T269426 for Esperanto, phabricator:T269431 for Walloon, phabricator:T269437 for Madurese. --MF-W 12:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Bikol and Zazaki Wiktionary

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Bikol Wiktionary and Zazaki Wiktionary. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. --MF-W 04:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Filed as phabricator:T270274 and phabricator:T270275. --MF-W 13:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 17:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Closure proposal of Polish Wikinews still on hold

The closure proposal of Polish Wikinews is still "on hold" since August 2019. Shall it be reopened or closed? George Ho (talk) 05:28, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@George Ho: Suggest reject, there are oppose comments from WMPL members. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Why did you ping me rather than any LangCom member? I am not part of the LangCom. BTW, let's await their decision then. George Ho (talk) 04:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: as suggested by above, should this PCP be rejected? Or continue to gain consensus to close n:pl:? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:28, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
This wiki does not look inactive. I will have a look at the closure proposal. --MF-W 22:43, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 17:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Approval of Coptic Wikipedia

It has already 1000+ articles and a lot of active editors. Can you please approve it? ⲟⲩⲣⲙ̄ⲛ̄ⲕⲏⲙⲉ (talk) 15:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

There have only been 3 edits in this month. --MF-W 16:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes but we are still in the beginning of the month it but other than that it has all the requirements. ⲟⲩⲣⲙ̄ⲛ̄ⲕⲏⲙⲉ (talk) 01:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
One third of the month is over. 3x3=9. Besides, the most-used messages are not complete yet. --MF-W 14:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 17:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Nias Wikipedia and Wiktionary

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Nias and Requests for new languages/Wiktionary Nias. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. Meanwhile, the communities of these projects are asked to check (and if necessary, complete) the wiki settings as indicated on the request pages. --MF-W 15:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 17:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Eligible since 2007

On Requests for new languages there is hundred of language request for various projects still in status "eligible", waiting since 2007 for "on hold" or "approved" status. When will be changed the status for those languages? --2001:B07:6442:8903:6C4B:B275:DA25:58D7 09:28, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Projects can be approved when they meet the (mainly activity-related) requirements. --MF-W 13:42, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 17:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Tashlhit Wikipedia (Wp/shi)

Hi I'm one of the test-administrators of the Tashlhit Wikipedia project wp/shi. If my request is possible, i would like that you make me aware on the situation of the approbation process of this project.

Best regards

Lhoussine AIT TAYFST (talk) 12:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I think it could be approved; I have asked the rest of the members of Langcom for their opinion. --MF-W 23:01, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Please see [12] --MF-W 21:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Turkish Wikivoyage

Hi! Langcom intends to approve Turkish Wikivoyage. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please tell us here on this page in the next seven days. Meanwhile, the communities of is asked to check (and if necessary, complete) the wiki settings as indicated on the request page. --MF-W 21:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

There is now phabricator:T271260. --MF-W 21:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Bashkir Wikisource

Hello, dear Committee! Bashkir Wikisource is ready to start. ProofreadPage translated. There are more than enough texts (over 2300). The community has been active and willing for a long time. And many Wikipedians didn't even know about this Wikisource oldwikisource:Category:Башҡортса. Please write your solution. Thanks! --Arxivist (talk) 11:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Looking at [13], no edits are shown for this month of December and only some sporadic activity in the months before that. Are there pages outside of the category which skew this view? --MF-W 04:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, @MF-Warburg:. 1. It's often makes mistakes. Catanalysis often does not reflect the reality of the community. Many projects are in the "incubator" stage due to the reluctance of the community to constantly edit the "incubator". Visual activity on the date of creation and after. I think that the Bashkir language is fully consistent and fulfilled all the norms. This section contains more than 2000 sources. What is the problem? 2. No, I did not find such pages.--Arxivist (talk) 17:09, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Hallo, @MF-Warburg:. Do you have any news?--Arxivist (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the low activity doesn't fulfill the requirements of the language proposal policy. --MF-W 18:03, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Sorry, but this is nonsense. The project has grown long ago and will have more activity than other projects. Is it really a project in Anglo-Saxon where there is one text, and it can exist, but not Bashkir? Few people look into the multi-section silt incubator. Please, let's take it adequately.--Arxivist (talk) 12:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, everyone. I want to support User:Arxivist. It is time to open Bashkir Wikisourse as they have many texts and they have strong wikicommunity which can join the project. But joining the incubator is not interesting even for me. I think that Arxivist can help to Bashkir community with the project as he is very experienced user. And in this question we should support every language, because if there are projects for less than 100 texts and there are no normal project for more than 2000 texts I think it is discrimination. --Visem (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Привет. Support Support. Выход башкирской Викитеки из инкубатора будет стимулом для активности волонтеров в проекте. --Рөстәм Нурыев (talk) 15:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

There needs to be an active community behind the project before it can get an own wiki. While for Wikisource wikis this is usually handled less strictly than for other projects, because of the lower "active maintenance" that needs to be done for finished transcriptions of works, there are still some things that need to be done, especially when a new wiki is set up. None of you are active on on this project, except Visem, who made 2 edits 3 days ago. Also, what's up with the "Incubator is difficult to use" argument? It's true, but Multilingual Wikisource is not Incubator and much easier to use, fortunately. And Anglo-Saxon Wikisource is a closed project. --MF-W 23:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

So can Georgian Wikisource be the next one to request approval?

Fyi, this topic was again bumped by @ჯეო: on a non-Wikimedia platform, and within the main request page, but with the fatal errors in [14], I'm not sure how they are ready for an official kawikisource. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:21, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226: Open it and you will see how ready we are--ჯეოCommonsski (talk) 06:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Are all pages in oldwikisource:Category:Georgian? --MF-W 03:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Yes, these are Georgian texts. ProofreadPage is fully translated. Having over 2000 texts and a community is a good argument. --Arxivist (talk) 13:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I quickly checked all the sources and I can confirm that they are all Georgian sources, which are mostly medieval sources, as well as sources from the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th centuries. These are mainly orders of kings and letters, as well as books and poems by Georgian writers. Also, I finished all the work on the translation of MediaWiki and I think we are ready to support the new project. Thanks, --Mehman 97 13:53, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Ah, sorry. What I meant was: Are all Georgian pages in the Category:Georgian or are they even more pages outside of it? --MF-W 04:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, @MF-Warburg:. I have not found such pages. The Georgian community has long and diligently been collecting them into this category. The time has come! :) --Arxivist (talk) 17:11, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Hallo, @MF-Warburg:. Do you have any news?--Arxivist (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
@Arxivist: There are much categories:, but at all, all of this categories become part of Category: Georgian, for this moment Category: Georgian has 181 categories and this categories also has categories. Every page is in this category--ჯეოCommonsski (talk) 15:37, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
This project has more articles than 27 opened wikisource projects--ჯეოCommonsski (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Project is full ready for open--ჯეო (talk) 19:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but even with Catanalysis broken, I still don't see much activity e.g. here. --MF-W 18:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Sorry, but this is nonsense. The project has grown long ago and will have more activity than other projects. Is it really a project in Anglo-Saxon where there is one text, and it can exist, but not Georgian? Few people look into the multi-section silt incubator. Please, let's take it adequately.--Arxivist (talk) 12:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: Trust me page of this project are very popular in Georgia because people are really interested in this project, after opening of project it will be more easy for beginer users to start edit. Users like me, who have some experience will start editing after opening of this project, because after opening the will have big motivation--ჯეო (talk) 08:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Trust me if this project will be opened, it will have much active users, begginers will be really interested in this projected and we will try to popularize this project, if this project will be opened, it will become one of the best wikisource with quality, and now nobody has motivation to start editing, because this project is in incubator for years--ჯეო (talk) 08:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)