Talk:Language proposal policy/New policy

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Maybe we should add something explicitly what is already de facto policy:

  • When there are multiple orthographies or standards that are commonly used, they can either work together on one project, or request different projects in which case they need a valid IETF language tag. For example, "be" and "be-tarask".
  • When there are multiple writing systems that are commonly used, a conversion script should be made. If that is technically impossible, they can request a different project for a specific script. See also Wikipedias in multiple writing systems.

SPQRobin (talk) 10:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that you should start discussion about that at langcom-l. I agree with that, but I think that one of our friends could have strong opinion against ;) --Millosh 11:18, 4 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Email sent. SPQRobin (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What language code for simple language wikis?[edit]

What language code should be used by simple language wikis? Right now Simple English Wikipedia uses 'en' and Simple English Wiktionary uses 'simple'. This needs to be spelled out so that we don't get more inconsistency. Kaldari 20:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What do you suggest? --Millosh
I don't know what Kaldari suggests, but I just suggest not having simple projects. That should solve this issue easily. ;-) Cbrown1023 talk 22:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is very likely that the only candidate with good chances would have to have a couple of tries until it gets its own project. So, if no ideas before, we'll think then. --Millosh 11:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Already thought about it, best would be no language code at all but a new project name "wikisimple":

  • - simple:en:
  • - simple:de:
  • etc.

Regards axpdeHello! 12:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd go for etc, since that is the current code structure (code + tag, think of "be-tarask"). would be in theory but that would not be moved. Btw, "wikisimple" excludes projects other than Wikipedia. SPQRobin (talk) 18:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd agree, if we were to have simple languages projects, except exchange "simple" for an equivalent in the language in question, e.g. (Swedish) "". /Julle 18:37, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, and a couple of reasons as to why, maybe. First, I don't see the point in creating a simple language project and then inject more foreign words in the URL than necessary. Second, if we want the projects to feel that their language matters as much as English, I think we should try to avoid blatantly English parts in the URL. "Wiki" and "Wikipedia" can at least in many languages that use a Latin script be construed as loan words, rather than English. "Simple" can't. /Julle 18:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That makes sense, I agree that "simple" would need to be translated. SPQRobin (talk) 21:27, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I like the idea of "code-simple", and it works as long as there is a latin transcript of the local word "simple", e.g. "". But with non latin chars we'll end into severe problems as not all systems will work with non-latin server names! a×pdeHello! 07:07, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's a problem for later, when we actually face the problem. It could even be that by then 99% of systems support it. In the worst case, we could use "xyz-simple" for those. SPQRobin (talk) 19:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]