Langcom December 2017

langcom@lists.wikimedia.org

16 participants
39 discussions

Re: [Langcom] Ingush and Gorontalo Wikipedias
by Steven White 13 Dec '17

13 Dec '17

MF-W, I asked both projects for new names of experts again (relatively) recently, and sent them to Milos. I will forward that message to you separately, and if any of the experts are different, then by all means contact them. Separately (all), these projects have me thinking about the question of what to do about really long-standing Incubator projects that are otherwise ready for approval when we cannot reach experts, even after serious effort. The Ingush project has edits going all the way back to March 2007, and the Gorontalo project back to March 2009 (though most of the work on that was in the last two years). Someone might want to run a CU on them to make sure there's no repeat of the Khowar situation, of course. But assuming that there is no such problem, don't we need to assume good faith at some point and approve these projects? Steven Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

2 1

Ingush and Gorontalo Wikipedias
by Steven White 13 Dec '17

13 Dec '17

These are still awaiting language verification, and both projects have provided the names of language experts for the purpose of verification. Has anybody taken any action on these yet? Steven Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

2 1

Four Wikipedia project requests dating from 2009 or earlier
by Steven White 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

Here are four RFL requests for Wikipedia projects dating to 2009 or earlier: * Kichwa Wikipedia (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Kichwa): Interesting request. There is already a "Quechua" Wikipedia at qu.wikipedia.org<https://qu.wikipedia.org/><http://qu.wikipedia.org>. That's a macrolanguage code for all Quechua varieties, but that project itself is apparently written mainly in the Southern Quechua varieties spoken in southern Peru and Bolivia. The test project under discussion here uses qug, the language code for "Chimborazo Highland Quechua", but in fact represents a variety of Ecuadorean (Northern) varieties. (The Wp info pages on Incubator for 13 other codes redirect to this one.) According to the English Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quechuan_languages#Classification) mutual intelligibility between regions is not complete. I am not in a position to say whether the current quwiki can or should incorporate this content in the long run, but on the whole I'm inclined to recommend that this be marked "eligible" for now. * Southern Min Wikipedia written in Hanji (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Southe…): This one is related to my question earlier in the week, so I'm not going to discuss further here. * Mohawk Wikipedia (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Mohawk): Indigenous language of North America. No reason it shouldn't be eligible, and I marked it so. * Hazaragi Wikipedia (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Hazara…): Eastern Persian variety mutually intelligible with Dari. The request for a Dari Wikipedia, in turn, was rejected about five years ago because Dari was considered mutually intelligible with Standard Persian. And the 11-page test project on Incubator has been utterly inactive since 2014. So notwithstanding that Hazaragi has a language code, this request should probably be rejected in favor of encouraging participation at fawiki. Steven Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

8 22

Re: [Langcom] our interaction (WAS: Four Wikipedia project requests dating from 2009 or earlier)
by Steven White 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

To respond to Michael's message of about 9:45 pm last evening (UTC), only one project is being held up right now (over this discussion), namely LFN Wikipedia. Perhaps there should be further discussion on refining requirements around conlangs. But for a variety of reasons, I think we need to go ahead and release this project and get a phabricator task underway for it. Here is why I say so: * First and foremost at this point, no matter what else anyone might say about this, the formal discussion about the approval of this project was open for seven days, nobody objected, and I announced the project approved, pending language verification, fully according to this committee's rules. Then people affirmed language verification, and I announced the project completely approved, fully according to this committee's rules. Only then did objections begin to appear. And then at that, MF-Warburg acknowledged that he didn't really think it would be appropriate to reverse the approval, because the approval had been according to this committee's rules. Only Gerard asked to walk back the approval, notwithstanding the rules. I'm sorry, but the community worked hard to get the project ready, and I was extremely careful in moving the nomination through by the book, because I knew that conlangs have been controversial in the past. I really gave the committee every chance to respond (and object) in a timely fashion. But the broad community of people we serve as the Language Committee has a right to believe that we will act according to our own rules, and that we will not appear to be capricious or arbitrary about doing so. For that reason, regardless of whether or not the committee wants to modify the rules on conlangs going forward, I think we need to go ahead and release this project as approved. * Second, I can tell you that there is no other conlang project even close to approvable now by current standards, so there is time to discuss conlangs further before this question would come up again. Consider the following data (available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:StevenJ81/sandbox/Conlang): There are 21 conlangs with language codes. Of those, seven (7) already have full Wikipedias, and another five (5) are art languages (like Klingon, Quenya and Sindarin). That means that exactly nine (9) other conlangs can even possibly be discussed right now under the current standards. One is LFN. One is Kotava, which has about 100 pages in Incubator, but fewer than 100 speakers. Two others have one page each, and the other five have no content at all. So besides LFN, no other project can possibly come up for discussion in the near future under the current standards. On my data page, the only two other conlangs having no language code but at least 200 speakers (making them as large as Ido, third-largest conlang with a Wikipedia) are Toki Pona and Interslavic. Toki Pona does have an SIL application pending now, and if it is approved, we could potentiallly have to deal with that in the next year or so. But Interslavic does not have an application. Any change we may discuss may want to keep Toki Pona in mind. Steven PS: Two other projects are also waiting now for language verification: Wikipedias in Gorontalo and Ingush. I think Milos has been trying to get in touch with the language experts that have been identified in those cases. Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

1 0

Re: [Langcom] Please respond on tickets in https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/374052
by Steven White 11 Dec '17

11 Dec '17

This topic has to do with adding new language codes for Wikidata. Could someone who understands this stuff please have a look and OK it? Steven Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

2 1

Re: Re: our interaction (WAS: Four Wikipedia project requests dating from 2009 or earlier)
by Steven White 11 Dec '17

11 Dec '17

The new voting rules were implemented as of MF-Warburg's email post of 21:03:56 UTC, 18 July 2017. (https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/langcom/2017-July/001557.html) Steven Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

2 1

Steven to get access to the private list archive
by Milos Rancic 11 Dec '17

11 Dec '17

I propose Steven to get access to the private list archive. I've seen that he is making some comments which don't include the information existing there. (AFAIK, we've been talking about Quechua languages before making this list public.) And it makes sense that he, as the clerk, should have access to all relevant information.

2 1

Re: [Langcom] Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia
by Steven White 10 Dec '17

10 Dec '17

I cannot agree to stopping the clock. By all means let this be motivation to clarify policy and procedures for conlangs going forward. (I have some thoughts on that to share later.) But one of the reasons I took on the role of clerk is because so many requests (opening and closing) have been in stasis for months and years, sometimes notwithstanding policy. And I'm really trying to keep things moving consistent with the current rules. So since this project passed according to the current rules, we need to accept that in this case and create the wiki. Steven Sent from my iPad

3 2

Please respond on tickets in https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/374052
by Gordana Dori 10 Dec '17

10 Dec '17

Hi, per tasks I created patch: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/374052 To it can be deployed, you have to respond on tasks. Can you do it, please? Patch waiting for deploy much. Zoran.

1 0

Re: [Langcom] Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia
by Steven White 10 Dec '17

10 Dec '17

Based on Milos's message of 22:51 UTC Friday, along with a comment from Prof. Boeree at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_committee#Lingua_Franca_Nova_…, I am marking this project as approved, and will open a phabricator task to do same. Steven Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook> ________________________________ From: Langcom <langcom-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org <langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 7:00 AM To: langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Langcom Digest, Vol 51, Issue 8 Send Langcom mailing list submissions to langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wik… or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org You can reach the person managing the list at langcom-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Langcom digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia (Michael Everson) 2. Re: Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia (Milos Rancic) 3. Re: Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia (Gerard Meijssen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 22:47:10 +0000 From: Michael Everson <everson(a)evertype.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia Message-ID: <A1C11C08-0F5E-41B1-9306-FF6D4171080F(a)evertype.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I’m working with both Boeree and with Simon Davies on a new dictionary of LFN. I published Simon’s translation of Alice in 2012. https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazo… I’m not a fluent speaker, but I can tell you that the language on these pages is genuinely LFN. Do you need more? > On 8 Dec 2017, at 18:34, Steven White <Koala19890(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > This has been out a week with no objections, so I am marking this as "approving" (pending language check). > > I guess the logical person to contact on this is the creator of the language, C. George Boeree, Professor Emeritus at Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania. (I am told he contributed a small amount to the project, but was not a major contributor.) He has a web page at https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwebspace.s…, and his email address is cgboer(a)ship.edu. Please let me know who is going to handle this. > > Steven > > Sent from Outlook > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wik… ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 23:51:40 +0100 From: Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia Message-ID: <CAJuBPbo18394N78WvUeqcRhqvp9JnoypSsP+8b0oWzdkbzrn8A(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Michael Everson <everson(a)evertype.com> wrote: > I’m working with both Boeree and with Simon Davies on a new dictionary of LFN. I published Simon’s translation of Alice in 2012. https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazo… > > I’m not a fluent speaker, but I can tell you that the language on these pages is genuinely LFN. Do you need more? Yes, I think this should be enough as the expert verification. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 06:54:38 +0100 From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia Message-ID: <CAO53wxXi2RNNm0gsNhJE_ChiRyqdhEKc3cj97SsWg6OHuTrR-Q(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hoi, We had Klingon at one time.. Do you really consider revisiting that ? Thanks, GerardM On 8 December 2017 at 23:22, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:58 PM, MF-Warburg <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com> > wrote: > > Can we, by the way, define more detailed criteria for which artificial > > languages should be eligible? > > Agreed. If we count native speakers, Klingon is, AFAIK, immediately > after Esperanto. > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wik… >

3 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

Langcom December 2017