User:Dcljr/Requests for new languages inconsistencies

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Copied from Talk:Language committee/2015#Requests for new languages inconsistencies, so I can continue to work on this (maybe).

Requests for new languages inconsistencies[edit]

Perhaps I'm not understanding certain aspects of this process, but I've found the following inconsistencies in the Requests for new languages page (the "summary" page) and its subpages. (Apologies for the huge post.)

Note that if any subpage appears in multiple categories mentioned above (but not on the summary page), it will only appear in one of the above lists (usually the earliest one).

Having now gone through every subpage I could find, I should point out that I've already fixed some minor errors I found here and there, but for the stuff listed above I either didn't know what to do about them or I figured they'd be better dealt with by an admin. - dcljr (talk) 08:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Wow, these are quite a lot. I will start with some comments:
Those in no. 1-4 and 9 have the status that is indicated on the request page. The "summary page" should be updated according to them (Exception is the 1st one listed for no. 9: It was in reality rejected, but the template parameter on the request page was vandalized/changed by an IP -- now reverted).
Those in no. 8 do exist; if it's desired, the links to the subdomains can easily be added (though they are also in the request template, as for all requests). --MF-W 20:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
And Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Montenegrin 5, no summary, broken template, and per the 4 former discussions it can be 5th rejected (Forgive my all-caps oppose comment). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:21, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
TL;DR, Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Zazaki has two header templates, a "verification" one and a "submitted" one. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:20, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Some non-standard/rude titles are fixed by me... --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:59, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: You said, "Those in no. 1-4 and 9 have the status that is indicated on the request page." Unfortunately, that does not appear to be true in every case: When I started to go through syncing the summary page with the subpages, I found that the 2nd and 3rd subpages in my list (under #1 above), Wikinews Basque and Wikinews Sicilian, were given the status "verification" by an admin ([2], [3]) and were changed to "submitted" status years later by an IP editor ([4] [5]). Looks to me like the subpages (request pages) are wrong in those 2 cases, and thus will likely be wrong in other cases, as well. (BTW, three other similar edits by that IP editor at the same time did not involve a change in subpage status, but should probably be checked by an admin, anyway.) I have started to sync the information on the summary page with the subpages that appear to be correct, crossing out the entries in the above lists as I go. When I come across a subpage that appears to be incorrect (as with the Basque and Sicilian Wikinews requests), I will mark them with "??" and not change anything (yet). Someone else can change the subpages if they feel it is appropriate, but I'm going to stick with fixing the summary page in "obvious" cases for now. - dcljr (talk) 19:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I see, I didn't think about the possibility that the request pages could also have been changed wrongly, when actually no decision to change a request's status was made. In most cases, if a "submitted->verified" or "open->eligible" change wasn't made by a Langcom member, it is wrong. I checked the edits of the IP you mentioned and corrected them; that was in fact a past abuser. Thanks for your cleaning up in this area. --MF-W 00:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)