Talk:Language committee

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

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

Archives of this page

See also: Requests for new languages/Archives

Update on technical issues and other things interfering with getting the process moving again[edit]

I want to give everyone an update on

  • The technical issues (phab:T212881)
  • The two approved projects still pending creation.
  • The four tentatively approved projects still pending language verification.
  • Getting everything else going again.

Technical issues and projects pending creation[edit]

Getting this moving again was identified as a high-priority issue at Wikimania. Its priority at phabricator has been upgraded to high and it is being looked at by the Core Platform Team. I'm hoping this gets the logjam broken and that we can start moving these things along again.

  • The creation of Western Armenian Wikipedia earlier this summer was always going to have a large manual component, because the content was (mostly) being taken from Armenian Wikipedia, not Incubator, Multilingual Wikisource or Beta Wikipedia. So it was always a bit of an anomaly.
  • The recent creation of Neapolitan Wikisource was partly an exercise in seeing quite how broken the existing process was. (Answer: "Very.") Unfortunately, it did not portend the other two projects' imminent creation.
  • If we can get the language verification done on the four tentatively approved projects (next section), then I will try to get at least Hindi Wikisource (approved back in March) created manually. But, quite frankly, if I have to choose between pushing through a project manually and getting the whole process fixed, I'd rather time be spent on getting the whole process fixed.

Projects awaiting language verification[edit]

There is a LangCom member working directly on those now. I believe he has set himself a deadline of 30 September. If it goes much later than that, I will push again.

Other projects feeling they are close to ready[edit]

I am soon going to go back to projects that have been "close to ready" for a while. I am going to give a mild, early preference to projects that are not the first project in a language, so that I can avoid the "language verification" issue. But that is a short list likely be addressed quickly, and then I will move on to projects that are the first project in a language.

I think the main potential issue here is going to be that many test projects went dormant because of all the delays, both technical delays and approval delays. So here is how we will handle these:

  • Projects that have maintained approvable activity levels (3+ months with 3 registered editors making at least 10 edits each per month), or pretty nearly so (OK, they just missed once or twice during the summer), will be moved straight along.
  • Projects that had approvable activity up until a point earlier this year can restore their approvable activity status with a single month of approval-level activity. (I will try to let you know who you are.) That activity level then still needs to continue. But what I mean is that I am not going to wait until you have three more months under your belt to judge the readiness of everything else.
  • Remember that other things required for approval (content, interface translation, etc.) haven't gone away.

Thank you for your patience. I am happy to take process questions here. But please let me work through the list of "nearly ready" I already have, and don't start pushing your projects at me quite yet. I'm already going to have a lot to do, and I have a day job. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:30, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank for your update. For our Mon Wikipedia project, if there are any problem to get contact with linguistics, let me know it. Htawmonzel 12:48, 5 September 2019
Thanks for the update, Steven. Muhraz (talk) 05:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Norwegian, and Norwegian Nynorsk: Please revert Wikipedia name change of "Norwegian Bokmål" to "Norwegian"[edit]

"Norwegian" refers to two written languages: Bokmål and Nynorsk. The two languages are by law considered equal, as outlined in the 1980 Lov om målbruk i offentleg teneste (Source: Store Norske Leksikon [1]). Neither Nynorsk nor Bokmål are thus, on the national level, considered a more "correct" form of Norwegian (there are historical and practical arguments in favour of both). Municipalities, on the other hand, can select an official form (or remain neutral), as outlined in this map.[2]

The Bokmål form is favoured by speakers in Eastern Norway including the capital, Oslo, whereas Nynorsk has its stronghold in the more affluent Western Norway. Please refer to the Norwegian language conflict,[3] which in turn has a historical parallel in the Faroese language conflict[4].

The Wikipedia "" used to be called "Norwegian Bokmål", but has recently been renamed simply "Norwegian", even if it does not allow Nynorsk articles: it is a Bokmål Wikipedia. The Nynorsk Wikipedia,, is still called "Norwegian Nynorsk". This appears to me to be an attempt to claim Bokmål as a "natural" form of Norwegian, a view often held in Eastern Norway perhaps because this is the form East Norwegians are more often exposed to, and Nynorsk as a more "specific" form of Norwegian. As pointed out, this does not reflect the official definition of "Norwegian", nor the official standing of Bokmål and Nynorsk as equal. And, before someone mentions the term Standard Østnorsk, I can point out that this (1)is not an nationally approved standard, but merely mentioned by academics (and then as a regional, not a national phenomenon), (2)only refers to speech, and (3)is only spoken in Eastern Norway, as illustrated by the fact that the prime minister Erna Solberg[5] speaks Bokmål with the very different set of phonetics and intonation found in Bergen, (4)the alleged "standard" refers only to East Norwegian Bokmål speech, not to East Norwegian Nynorsk speech, which is also widespread in some places, for instance in large areas of Telemark.

The name change should on the basis of the above be reverted. Narssarssuaq (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Could you please specify where exactly you observed this name change? As someone who does not speak Norwegian, I have a hard time guessing where exactly you made the observation which you describe here. FWIW, nowiki claims for itself to be the Wikipedia of Bokmål and Riksmål ("Velkommen til Wikipedia, den frie encyklopedi som du kan forbedre. 518 233 artikler på bokmål og riksmål". Kind regards, --Vogone (talk) 20:30, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
More precisely, my complaint refers to the language which is specified in the leftmost tab on the desktop version of Wikipedia, where you can choose "Norsk" (lit., Norwegian) and "Norsk nynorsk" (lit., Norwegian Nynorsk). The former of the two used to read "Norsk bokmål" (Norwegian Bokmål) - which I demonstrated above to be correct - and it was changed about a year or two ago. As the function of changing languages to read different versions is popular among Norwegians, they use this menu extensively, and the error is thus quite visible. Narssarssuaq (talk) 19:48, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Does anyone know whether this was done through a local Phabricator task (@MF-Warburg and Liuxinyu970226?) or whether this is something we inherited from the Unicode Common Locale Data Repository? If it was done as a Phabricator, there should have been a local discussion first. But if it's CLDR, then that has to be addressed to CLDR, not locally. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
It's not CLDR's problem; it's Wikimedia's problem that they have a Bokmål Norwegian Wikipedia under the tag "no", which should be for Norwegian in general.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, but note that it's two different languages, and fitting both under one umbrella would not be popular. Narssarssuaq (talk) 17:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
I have no idea. So a change happened, but nobody knows when exactly and by whom? And it happened "a year or two ago" and Norwegians see it every day, but nobody cared enough so far to investigate? --MF-W 12:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Actually, it took me years to find this page. Narssarssuaq (talk) 17:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
@StevenJ81: The language code for nowiki is wrong, and has been wrong for many years. CLDR gives a correct mapping as “no” is “norsk” (“Norwegian”). The project should use “nb”. A complete fix is rather complex, and there are also some resistance against it at nowiki. — Jeblad 10:34, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Oppose Oppose This isn't a good way to do, as Bokmål ≠ the entire Norwegian, your revert idea will only make Babel boxes parameters wrong, @Narssarssuaq: the much more better way is to rename domain and wikidata site id. Anyway, their community always claim that "we do also have articles in Riksmål", but they eventually didn't provided anyone example of "articles in Riksmål". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
I was unable to follow your argument. Narssarssuaq (talk) 17:17, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
@Narssarssuaq: cf. Requests for comment/Rename no.wikipedia to nb.wikipedia. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:34, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Also, saying this site as "nowiki" will only make confusions between a commonly used magic word <nowiki></nowiki> and this. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:54, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
I am unable to follow this argument as well. There's nowiki, there's mywiki, there's yowiki, the only thing we can't have is wwwwiki... --MF-W 12:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
I don't think you quite understand. What I am suggesting is merely a change in the desktop menu on the left: that is called "Norsk Bokmål" like before, not "Norsk" as it is now. And when you're at it, you may want to change the two into "Norsk (bokmål)" and "Norsk (nynorsk)", which would arguably be the most precise nomenclature. Narssarssuaq (talk) 09:00, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@Narssarssuaq: That should be fixed in CLDR, not in WMF. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:14, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: mywiki would not make any confusions as anyone who knows this language always trust that my is ISO 639-1 Myanmar, likely yowiki would never have other meanings than Yoruba. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:18, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Lol. --MF-W 23:19, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Simply, both mywiki and yowiki will never make confusions for computing funs, but nowiki can. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Anyway, there are nowikibooks, nowikinews and incubator:Wy/no/Hovedside, if you reverted no to be "Norwegian Bokmål", then these projects will be confusion to new users as it may lead to "Bokmål only". Such a revert will also fit a data bomb on Wikidata as there are two "Bokmål" entries. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
I don't suppose the MediaWiki (or Wikimedia) infrastructure would allow us to change that only on Wikipedia pages, but not on other project pages ... StevenJ81 (talk) 15:13, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, "no" doesn't exist as a locale in CLDR at this point, so it must be handled locally somehow. Was there a change in our "names" table? StevenJ81 (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
The code “no” (“Norwegian”) is a macrocode covering both “nb” (“Bokmål”) and “nn” (“Nynorsk”). There are two other language variants, “Høgnorsk” and “Riksmål”, where the former has a language code while the later has not. — Jeblad 10:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Excerpts from IANA subtag registry 
Type: language
Subtag: nb
Description: Norwegian Bokmål
Added: 2005-10-16
Suppress-Script: Latn
Macrolanguage: no%%
Type: language
Subtag: nn
Description: Norwegian Nynorsk
Added: 2005-10-16
Suppress-Script: Latn
Macrolanguage: no
Type: language
Subtag: no
Description: Norwegian
Added: 2005-10-16
Suppress-Script: Latn
Scope: macrolanguage
Agree, what you point out needs to be avoided. In some projects, "Norwegian" has come to refer to Bokmål+Nynorsk combined, and changing this would probably be unfortunate. For instance, I can see that the Wikibooks site has reached some form of compromise, with the front page written in both Norwegian languages, i.e. Bokmål and Nynorsk, and with articles in both languages being welcome. Due to the limited number of Wikibooks available, this seems like a good way to increase the available content and make search and discover easier for Norwegians. Wikipedia, on the other hand, has from the very start been strictly divided into two parts with no general "Norwegian" umbrella above it, which also has worked out fine. I see no reason to change the overarching structure of either. My point was merely one of incorrect nomenclature in the language tab on Wikipedia. Narssarssuaq (talk) 09:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Narssarssuaq: No, it's not "a good way to increase" either, because you're still proposing to show duplicated "Norwegian Bokmål" entries in Wikidata (unless, if you can technicall tell me that how your "revert" suggestion on Wikipedia won't technically affect Wikidata). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:12, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm not proposing anything technical, because I don't know how Wikimedia works. I am only pointing out a recommended change to the user interface. You guys need to work this out. Narssarssuaq (talk) 10:20, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Note that I'm planning to start a business travel in North Korea next week, which means that I may not possible to access this page, so don't ping me anymore in this section, please. Please instead ask @Jeblad: for more about this section. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:15, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
(I don't know how Wikimedia works, but I'll give a few observations from a user's perspective:) Of course, one more drastic possibility is to move the Bokmål Wikipedia to, say, or something (although that's already taken), and retain as a sort of meta-Wikipedia above "nn" and "bm". It has from the start been a slight practical problem that users have to check both Wikipedia sites to see whether there's an article in "Norwegian" on a particular topic. I'd like to stress, however, that one should not make userfriendliness any worse than it is, and one should also be mindful of the fact that nuisance may arise whenever the two languages have to be mixed together in one site. From an aesthetic point of view it would look a bit like mixing Scots and English in one site, which would look a bit annoying because it will be visible that the overall form is a bit forced/artificial, whereas a search engine that covers both might be understood as more useful. Narssarssuaq (talk) 10:21, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
It isn't two languages, it is two written variants of the same language. The language code in question is “no”, “nb”, and “nn”, and they are quite well-defined. The old RFC for renaming nowiki as nbwiki can be found at Requests for comment/Rename no.wikipedia to nb.wikipedia. I also made a temporary solution for making an override of the language entry in the sidebar, but it was not possible to achieve consensus. — Jeblad 10:55, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I should probably reiterate the fact that nnwiki (that is Nynorsk) has two subvariants where Høgnorsk is unofficial, and that nowiki (the present Bokmål version) has several subvariants. Bokmål have two main variants, radical and standard, and also an unofficial variant Riksmål. In between we have Moderate Bokmål, which is a form commonly used in the newspapers. It is not easy to identify any of the articles as clearly written in one specific subvariant. You can even write Nynorsk and nearly call it Radikalt Bokmål. — Jeblad 11:04, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Høgnorsk (Nynorsk) and Riksmål (Bokmål) are accepted for use on Wikipedia, and conform to more archaic written conventions of the two variations. As for radikalt bokmål, it is within the confines of current Bokmål ortography and vocabulary. Narssarssuaq (talk) 10:11, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

OK. We understand the problem here. We're not going to directly revert for the moment: (1) We're still trying to find out how and when this was accomplished in the first place, so we're not even quite sure how to revert it if we wanted to. (2) It may or may not be appropriate to revert it in Wikipedia. It probably is not appropriate in other projects, and as far as what the impact would be anywhere on a page but the navigation pane, we're not even sure. So let's stop arguing the merits for the moment. If anyone knows when this happened and how, that would be useful information. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

The original change is [6] and it corrected the macrocode so it follows CLDR, BCP-47, ISO 639-1, etc. As the definition is common for several sites and projects it will have an rippeling effect to revert the change. Most projects use correct language code, and the only one (?) that abuse the no-code to mean “Norwegian Bokmål” is nowiki. There are several possible fixes for the link in the sidebar, without changing the language code, and I have implemented one as an extension (mw:Extension:LangCodeOverride). It was not much interested in the solution, so I put the solution in cold store. — Jeblad 18:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

LangCom formally recommends the closure and deletion of the Bulgarian Wikinews project[edit]

The Language Committee has formally recommended to the WMF Board of Directors that the Bulgarian Wikinews project be closed and effectively deleted. The formal recommendation can be seen at this link. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:09, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Please close that site as soon as possible, those users who want this project keep open are only think that site as a playground of copyvio. They don't know what's wiki, they are not suitable for wiki. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:05, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
The Board has seven days to respond. I asked the Board liaison at 17:15 UTC on 9 September to notify the Board. He responded to me at 23:56 UTC on 9 September that he had done so. So it seems to me that at 00:00 UTC on 17 September I can ask the Board liaison if there were any comments, and when I get a response on that I can proceed. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Waiting is bad enough, but not knowing how long for is mental torture.[edit]

Mon WP had been active since 12/17/2018 and waiting for to be approved and open as independent WP month after months. How long we can maintain our patience without knowing nothing! Htawmonzel 12:58, 18 September 2019.

@Htawmonzel and Amire80: As far as I know, Htawmonzel, Amir is trying to get language verification on Mon. His target deadline is end of September. Understand, too, that even if he succeeds and we approve the project, there are still technical issues around creating new wikis. So your patience is appreciated. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I'm very sorry about this. I already started something, and I'll try to make it faster. I appreciate your patience. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@StevenJ81 and Amire80: what's statue of Mon WP from the LangCom? Htawmonzel 08:10, 02 October 2019.

I Hope you all don't forget Guianan Creole Wikipedia too...! PouLagwiyann (talk) 04:22, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

One of draft recommendations[edit]

I'm inviting the LangCom for its input on one of draft recommendations: Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Sprint/Roles & Responsibilities/2&3 (decentralization and self-management). George Ho (talk) 13:10, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

But why? Please elaborate. --MF-W 20:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I discussed how decentralization would (or would not?) affect the LangCom and its roles, especially in opening or closing language projects. The recommendation proposes giving roles and responsibilities to smaller, less centralized groups. George Ho (talk) 06:27, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Balinese Wikipedia[edit]

Cf. Notification about proposed approvals

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

For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 15:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Note for everyone else: We're really starting to work on the backlog, but the technical issues aren't totally resolved, either. Please continue to be patient. Thank you. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
And how about Sakizaya Wikipedia and Minangkabau Wiktionary? Shouldn't you also notify both approvals? -- 23:45, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Language: Badini Kurdish[edit]

hello, I want to add a missing language and it is a very important language because many users know and understand this language well, and I want to add this language —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ahmadkurdi44 (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2019‎ (UTC)

The Kurdish Wikipedia exists. According to Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Kurmanji, the Kurdish Wikipedia is actually in Kurmanji, which w:Kurmanji lists as the parent tongue of Southeastern Kurmanji or Badînî. I don't know about Kurdish languages personally, but depending on the actual state of the Kurdish Wikipedia, you might get the Wikipedia Kurmanji decision reversed and that Wikipedia created, but I find it highly unlikely a Badînî specific Wikipedia will be opened, and certainly not without a ISO 639-3 code. Right now, take a look at the Kurdish Wikipedia and tell us if that will work, and if not, why.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Mon WP[edit]

Dear Langcom, @StevenJ81 and Amire80:

How long we have to wait for language verification of Mon WP? Why we don’t have the right to know what makes the process terminated when we are a part of the project and had spent a lot of our time for it more then one year. I asked the two persons who I gave to LangCom for verification. They said that they were not contacted by LangCom. Is it because they are the native specking of Mon and the LangCom does not accept them? Let we know what we can do? I hope not our time and work for this project do not bring to nothing. Htawmonzel 18:05, 08 October 2019.

@Htawmonzel: Hi! Could you please email me their contact details, and I will ask them. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 21:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jon Harald Søby: Dear Jon Haarald Søby, I'm really appreciated it. This is my email to LangCom from 27 Apr 2019, 09:32

Dear Language Committee

The Committee need two Mon linguistic experts who can verify the Mon language.

Thus, I send hereby the two Mon experts.

Ven. Kelāsa (M.A. in Buddhism, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka) is a Mon linguistic expert. He is an instructor in a Mon Pariyatti Academy in Mudon Town, Mon State, Burma (Myanmar). He received award the title Sāsana Dhaja Dhammācariya from the Burmese National Government. He is a member of central committee of Rāmañña Dhammācariya. Rāmañña Dhammācariya is one of the largest Mon Pariyatti Educational Institute and the second largest Pariyatti Educational Institute in Burma after the Government Pariyatti Educational Department. [Pariyatti means in Pāli Study] This is Ven. Kelāsa's email,

Nai Sunthorn Sripanngern is a Mon writer and Mon linguistic academic, living in Bangkok, Thailand. He wrote many books in Mon and Thai including Mon - Thai Dictionary. He was a key member on making curriculum of Mon language teaching for Mon children in Thai primary school in Thailand. Nai Sunthorn’s email is

If there are any problem to get contact with them or other thing that we have to do, don't be hesitate to let we know.

The best Regards,

På forhånd tak, Htawmonzel (talk) 22:03, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Simple English News[edit]

This is filed as a new Wikimedia Foundation Sister Project proposal, but it should be a new language of a existing project. How should this be handled?--GZWDer (talk) 15:50, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@GZWDer: We could just move it to Requests for new languages/Wikinews Simple English 3, but it's not gonna go any differently than 1 or 2. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 21:38, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Sakizaya Wikipedia[edit]

Cf. Notification about proposed approvals

The language committee intends to approve Sakizaya Wikipedia. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please say so on this page in the next seven days. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 06:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Notification about proposed approval of Minangkabau Wiktionary[edit]

Cf. Notification about proposed approvals

The language committee intends to approve Minangkabau Wiktionary. If you have objections to that based on the language proposal policy, please say so on this page in the next seven days. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 07:24, 21 October 2019 (UTC)