Here is one comment from a contributor:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Language_committee&curid=58944&diff=6409767&oldid=6363807
>>
I have read the discussion about the approval of Votic Wikipedia (I hope that's not secret data). Actually I'm even happy that Langcom found a good expert in the field of Uralic languages. Some notices about his/er response:

"ležib" instead of "on" in sentences like "the object is in...". I've fixed this ([2]). I'm not sure that real native speakers wouldn't understand the previous variant of wording (although, I agree, the variant with "ležib" ("lies") looks a bit strange).
Name of the main page. "Esicülci" literally means "the first [main] side". Word "cülci" means any side, not only body side. In any case, I renamed it from "Esicülci" to "Päälehto" (lit. "the main list", like in Vőro, Ingrian...). The new variant is entirely reasonable.
Absence of native speakers. Yes, we never had them, and I won't hide this fact. User Päivüd, as she(?) told in a request page, has Votic ancestors, but it's very doubtful that she is an actual native speaker. If this user really trying to learn and speak Votic in everyday life I'm sincerely happy for her. Be that as it may, she's inactive for more than year and didn't contribute much. The rest of our contributors are Russians (apart from FitzSaemParson, he's from Finland).
Some artificiality of "our" Votic, great number of calques, "very Russian" constructions of sentences etc.. I look at it with irony. We might find some real Votic grannies and suggest them to translate some words like e.g. "independence", "society", "service", "exact", and also some function words like "only", "but", "of course"... I would not be surprised, if they will use calques from Russian. (BTW I'm not sure they can use computer).

I think that members of Langcom are skeptical with respect to vot.wp, but (I know it sounds corny) we all wanted to take a chance and save the language. As for me, I think it turned out well. At least it's better than nothing.

Ask me if you have questions. --Tamara Ustinova (talk) 19:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

2013/10/21 Oliver Stegen <info@oliverstegen.net>

Michael,

I understand your suggestion to show “generosity in approval”. Still, when you write “keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die”, I wonder which language you are referring to. The speech variety of Votic which Ariste described in his 1948 grammar has died long ago. If some linguist enthusiasts are now “playing a game” with that grammar, they’re flogging a dead horse (and they’re certainly not helping to “keep Votic alive” given how twisted and far-removed from any real Votic their written Votic is. The only reason why I could possibly approve a Votic wikipedia as it stands now on incubator is if Votic mother tongue speakers (or their descendants) were involved, i.e. either the handful of Votic speakers still alive (but then, they’d be writing in a different dialect) or descendants of the extinct dialect. Do we know what connection to Votic those contributors to Votic on incubator have? They’re obviously not mother tongue speakers (even though some pose as such). Without some reassurance that there is a real Votic community, I wouldn’t feel happy to give approval.

Fwiw,

Oliver

From: Gerard Meijssen [mailto:gerard.meijssen@gmail.com]
Sent: 19 October 2013 20:17

To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia

Hoi,

Michael so what is it that you propose ?

Thanks,

Gerard

On 19 October 2013 19:07, Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com> wrote:

On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:50, Oliver Stegen <info@oliverstegen.net> wrote:

> It looks like there is a problem with “Votic”, cf. the reply which I received from the scholar who I was referred to via Helsinki University. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?

Keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom