I think Ingush Wikipedia can be approved, from the activity viewpoint. The
translation of the most-used messages is complete (<
http://tools.wmflabs.org/robin/?tool=codelookup&code=inh>) and there has
been a quite high activity since almost ten months now <
Now we would of course need verificiation of the content. Searching the
archives, I found a mail from Amir from 10 November 2011. Back then, a
linguist had said the language in the test-wiki was not quite what would be
expected from literary Ingush. However, the current editors are all
different from the ones that were active five years ago.
Amir, could you check with that linguist or someone else from the Ingush
State University again about the quality of the content?
Best regards, MF-W
One issue: voting.
== Voting ==
This is also proposal, so read it and comment if you don't agree or
you want any addition.
1) No voting
1.1) According to the Closing projects policy , particular member
of the committee analyzes discussion and, if decides that the project
should be closed, sends the request to WMF Board.
1.2) Clear-cut situations for making a language eligible for Wikimedia
projects: the language has a valid ISO 639-3 code, there are no
significant issues in relation to the language itself, the population
of speakers is significant, request made by a native speaker. In this
case, any committee member can mark language / project eligible.
1.3) Approval without obvious formal requirements. No project will be
approved without them.
2) Simple majority (of those who expressed opinion)
2.1) Eligibility of a language with a valid ISO 639-3 code, but
without significant population of native speakers. (Note: this covers
ancient, constructed, reviving and languages with small number of
2.2) Eligibility of a language without a valid ISO 639-3 code, but
valid BCP 47 code. (Note: this covers Ecuadorian Quechua.)
2.3) Eligibility of a language with significant collision between
prescriptive and descriptive information. (Note: this covers
2.4) Project approval if not 1.3.
3) 2/3 majority (of those who expressed opinion)
3.1) Any change of the rules, including the committee's role in
possible changes of the Language proposal policy  and Closing
projects policy .
4) Consensus (of those who expressed opinion)
4.1) A new member of the Language committee should not be opposed by
any of the current committee member.
Gerard and I were talking today about this issue. Here is the proposal
to be added into the LPP if accepted. Gerard's parts are related to
the traditional LangCom requirements, my parts are about the
organizations. Feel free to fix my English, add whatever you think
it's important for the amendment itself etc. (Asaf, Carlos, you are
encouraged to give your input in relation to the organizational part.)
Note that this proposal assumes that both Wikimedia and non-Wikimedia
organizations would be able to propose a project for fast approval.
* * *
Fast approval assumes that the Language committee would approve
previously eligible first Wikimedia project in particular language
under certain conditions without necessity for the project to pass the
process inside of Incubator (which usually lasts at least six months,
but likely a couple of years).
The main condition for fast approval is officially expressed support
by particular organization, which would guarantee that the project
would be viable for the next two years.
Organization has to have the following attributes:
* Officially incorporated organization inside of the country where
significant population of speakers of the target language live.
* Annual and strategic plan.
* Track record of successfully finished projects.
* Commitment to transparent work.
To do that, organization has to do the following:
* Translate 500 most common MediaWiki messages in the target language
to immediately show its commitment. (NOTE: I think that few hours of
translation job is reasonable immediate requirement; we could discuss
* Present to the Language committee the proposal for the project. That
could be a program of editathons in particular area, targeting
speakers of one or more languages without any Wikimedia project.
* Give formal guarantee that the Wikimedia-related work with
particular linguistic group will last at least two years.
I received a few requests to check the status of Western Balochi incubator
The code bgn is legit, the translation of most-used messages is complete,
and the activity in the incubator is reasonable. A lot of pages are
written; many are just one or two lines long, but I don't think that I mind.
Do we want to verify that it's the right language?
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
Dear members of the Language Committee,
As you know, the Wikimedia Foundation staff, a designated strategy team and
a Community Process Steering Committee have designed a process to gather
input from all voices in the Wikimedia movement to define the strategic
direction of our movement over the next 15 years. The process until
Wikimania is divided into three discussion cycles, and cycle 1 will run
from 10 March to 10 April.
I am currently reaching out to all organized groups (e.g. affiliates,
committees) and encourage them to participate. As LangCom is one of these
organized groups, I would like to ask you to participate in these
There are different options for your group to participate: You can discuss
in person, onwiki or on other online platforms, as well as virtually via
telephone or video conferences. We have created a toolkit that will support
you with designing and hosting these conversations.
We are asking for at least one person from each organized group to
volunteer to be the Discussion Coordinator. This person will receive and
invitation to a Discussion Coordinator training and is responsible for:
* Inviting people to the discussion
* Hosting the discussion
* Summarizing the discussion
Please use the following links:
* Sign-up to be a Discussion Coordinator: https://docs.google.com/a/
* Use the discussion toolkit for organizing your group's conversations:
* Find out more about the movement strategy process:
This is the time many of us have been waiting for for years. I would love
to see each and every one of you make your voice heard and take the chance
to shape the future of our movement together. I am very much looking
forward to making this happen with all of you! Stay tuned for updates on
the process that we will publish next week, and please reach out to me with
any question you might have in the meantime.
PS - Note that all summaries submitted by 20 March will be used in the
strategy track during WMCON in Berlin 28 March - 2 April. If your group
meets after WMCON but by 10 April, your summary will still be synthesized
before Cycle 2 begins (late April).
PPS - I have joined the team as Track Lead on 1 March, which is made
possible through an agreement between Wikimedia Deutschland and the
Wikimedia Foundation. In the sense of a strategic partnership, our two
organizations have agreed that I will invest most of my time until the end
of the year towards this new role.
Wikimedia Movement Strategy Lead
Track A: Organized Groups
As André hasn't applied for the membership, I worded the proposal a
little bit differently.
The main point behind my proposal is that it's very hard to find that
kind of areal linguist.
It would be good if Michael would tell us a bit more about him.
here is the summary of ISO 639-3 annual changes:
Retirements (= the following codes no longer exist)
* 5 simple retirements
** prb / Lua'
** puk / Pu Ko
** rie / Rien
** rsi / Rennellese Sign Language
** snh / Shinabo
* 3 merged retirements
** jeg / Jeng -> oyb /Oy
** skk / Sok -> oyb / Oy
** krm / Krim -> bmf / Bom-Kim
* 1 split language
** kgd / Kataang -> ncq / Northern Katang + sct / Southern Katang
Additions (= the following codes have been added)
* 8 newly created languages not previously associated with another language
in the code set
** gie / Gaɓogbo
** ibh / Bih
** lth / Thur
** npx / Noipx
** nql / Ngendelengo
** szs / Solomon Islands Sign Language
** ukk / Muak Sa-aak
** xdo / Kwandu
* 2 newly created languages created by splitting the previously existing
** ncq / Northern Katang (ex kgd / Kataang)
** sct / Southern Katang (ex kgd / Kataang)
* 8 name updates, either change to a name form or addition of a name form
** blv: Bolo -> Kibala
** bmf: Bom -> Bom-Kim
** cug: Chung -> Chungmboko
** klw: Lindu -> Tado
** krr: Kru'ng 2 -> Krung
** lgn: Opuuo -> T'apo
** ngt: Ngeq -> Kriang
** ovd: Övdalian -> Elfdalian
* 2 denotation updates of a language into which another variety or two was
** oyb (+jeg, +skk)
** bmf (+krm)