Langcom May 2017

langcom@lists.wikimedia.org

17 participants
28 discussions

Wikisource Tajik
by Antony Green 28 May '17

28 May '17

I'm marking Tajik Wikisource [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Tajik] eligible as well; it seems uncontroversial to me. -- Dr. Antony Green Rudolf-Seiffert-Str. 31 WE 1703 10369 Berlin, Germany E-Mail: toniogreen(a)web.de Mobile: +49-176-82295920

3 2

Sheshi Pang
by Antony Green 27 May '17

27 May '17

A request has been made for Wikipedia in Sheshi Pang [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Sheshi…], a Sino-Tibetan language of Nepal. However, ISO calls the language Sheshi Kham [http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=kip]; the Wikipedia article groups it together with three other languages as the Kham language [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kham_language]. Ethnologue estimates 20,000 native speakers. Is there any reason not to mark this eligible? Should we use the requester's name Sheshi Pang or ISO's name Sheshi Kham? Regards, Antony -- Dr. Antony Green Rudolf-Seiffert-Str. 31 WE 1703 10369 Berlin, Germany E-Mail: toniogreen(a)web.de Mobile: +49-176-82295920

2 3

Notes from the Berlin meeting
by Milos Rancic 19 May '17

19 May '17

Sorry for delay. As I said, I am the sole responsible person for this delay, as I had numerous tasks to do in the meantime and this is not something to be done without being fully concentrated. == Organizational issues == === Yearly meetings in Berlin === Yearly meetings in Berlin. We've concluded that we want to have yearly meetings during the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin. It is the most convenient place, as almost all of us are Europeans and significant number of LangCom members live in Germany. === New member === We have the new member, but that's been already known. === New list admins === Saatdeep and MF-Warburg are new list admins. Old list admins are still list admins. === Internal procedures === We should define the following internal procedures: * Who should define the rules how we are making decisions, per our communication with Board. * There was a question of how to call the vote and what does formal voting mean. It should be flexible, it shouldn't be necessary that everybody votes about everything, but we should definitely define it. * We should define the rules how to remove the LangCom members. Maybe we should adopt the stewards' confirmation procedure. === Who, what, do === * MF-Warburg has created the spreadsheet [1]. All LangCom members should have access there. It's useful to know who is able to do what. (Said so, I haven't filled the info, which I should do ASAP.) * We should create our own Timeline, to be able to follow what should be done next. (It's likely MF-Warburg and I will do that.) == Languages Foundation == * We were discussing creation of the ''active'' organization, based on the Language committee members. We started talking about that on Wikimania in London 2014, we are talking about that from time to time, but at this point of time everybody either expressed active support for the idea or didn't have anything against it. I will take the next step in the form of creating a separate thread, with suggestions how to continue that. Basically, the idea is to create the organization comparable to Wiki Education Foundation [2]. * During the discussion about Wikipedias in new languages, it's been suggested that it would be good to have a wiki farm external from WMF, which would be used for small communities to write there their own knowledge, without having to follow strict Wikipedian and Wikimedian rules (NPOV, strict copyright and similar). == Language committee and WMF === === Liaison === We need a WMF liaison, who would take care about our needs in relation to the WMF. We've agreed with Kathrine that it would be better that it would be a WMF employee rather than a Board member, as we need operational support. She mentioned Jack (not sure about his surname), who talked with us a little bit. Although we haven't discussed that, I think the default option is just to "promote" Asaf from a "community observer" to the WMF liaison. === "In the name of WMF" === In relation to the ISO 639-3 code for Mapudungun (see below), I've asked Christophe, Board chair, if we could find the way that Language committee fill the form in the name of Wikimedia Foundation. The answer is "yes" if we communicate particular issue with the Board. It is important to know that there is such an option for the future issues and not just related with ISO 639-3. == Linguistic issues == === Mapudungun === Mapudungun has the code which Mapuche people treat as derogatory. My position is that we should help them and make pressure over JAC to make the change. To be honest, I am prepared to push this into much higher level than Wikimedia is, as they were able to change the codes for a language because one ethnicity is inherently racist and didn't want to be connected with the other ethnicity by ISO 639-6 code name, while JAC are not capable to address colonial and racist past of their own societies. Said so, Michael was quite nervous about that and he will definitely vote against that when I put this on vote here. == Technical issues == This is "the rest" what I have. Some of the issues have been already covered. If others have something else to add, let them do that. === Look & feel of Incubator === It was raised by, I think, Oliver (and Michael?) that Incubator looks horrible for an average user :) I mean, it looks perfectly fine for an average Wikipedian, but quite confusing to anyone who doesn't know the internal dynamics of MediaWiki pages :D The conclusion was that it would be good to contact WMF and ask for QA help in relation to how to make Incubator pages more convenient to new users. (I have a note "incubator and programming", but I think it's about QA help. Anyone remembers something different?) === Phabricator task into the project === Amir should convert the tracking task on Phabricator into a project. Our mailing list should be subscribed to relevant tasks/tickets/projects, making all of us informed about the state of particular request. === Transliteration and translation === Kathrine, Amir and I communicated about the transliteration and translation engines. There is a low level email communication about that. If anyone is interested in that issue, let him or her contact Amir and/or me. In short, if transliteration engine would be made properly, it could be used for machine translation, as well. [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1km84QEg4MIbeWekZ4qZVibQ37pX3sd4p8qH… [2] https://wikiedu.org/

8 39

Point of Clarification (Mapuche tests)
by Steven White 19 May '17

19 May '17

I just want to clarify the following: On Mapuche Wikipedia (Wp/arn), there have been six or seven users who have had a noticeable amount of activity over the last twelve months. At that, none had as many as 100 edits on the test over the last twelve month period. On Mapuche Wiktionary (Wt/arn), excluding a couple of administrative edits by me, there were -0- edits on the project at all between December 2011 (that’s correct) and January 2017. Then two users appeared and were active during that month. They have since disappeared. Steven Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:langcom-request@lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 7:08 pm To: langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:langcom@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Langcom Digest, Vol 44, Issue 29 Send Langcom mailing list submissions to langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom 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: Notes from the Berlin meeting (Milos Rancic) 2. Re: Notes from the Berlin meeting (Milos Rancic) 3. Re: Notes from the Berlin meeting (Karen Broome) 4. Re: Voting changes (MF-Warburg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 00:33:30 +0200 From: Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting Message-ID: <CAJuBPbpfguygByjvYe=YzEUi3RdwKrBWn58oi_nuwrzVkOJGKw(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Maor Malul <maor_x(a)zoho.com> wrote: > For Wayuunaiki speakers, GUC comes from Guajiro, also a derogatory term > imposed by the Spaniards. Again, the definition of maturity is clear, this > issue has been going around for years, and they prefer not to have a > Wikipedia with a code they find derogatory...a code, for Pete's sake! Cultures are different and "maturity" is a very subjective term. Our job *is* to be culturally sensitive. > I will check again with Wikimedia Chile, but I know the answer already: No > Wikipedia in ARN. Maybe because they know Mapuche culture better than you? Talk in detail with them. It would be good that you write here the report based on what Chileans told you. ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 00:38:08 +0200 From: Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting Message-ID: <CAJuBPbotAye9B0fDZ5jvqowHZQ-8pjyEoampEZ_oA_iOCNm4Mw(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:27 AM, MF-Warburg <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > By the way, I find it interesting that Steven mentioned that there are some > editors on Incubator currently at Wp/arn. It seems like not all the speakers > object that strongly to it that they feel they can't contribute. No. Their society is not centralized and one group can't tell the other one what to do. However, there is a general high level of animosity towards anything coming from the Spaniards and Chilean government. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 15:41:19 -0700 From: Karen Broome <klbroome(a)pacbell.net> To: "langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting Message-ID: <8EAE0E77-2435-4C66-AD8A-DC1716C4F19D(a)pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I share the view of Oliver, Gerard, and Michael for all the reasons stated. Gerard’s statement was compact and to the point. Regards, Karen Broome > On May 18, 2017, at 2:42 PM, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org> wrote: > > For the record: > I'm opposed to changing arn to qmp for the reasons given by Gerard and Michael already. > > Otherwise, I have no time to follow the unacceptable exchanges. I do expect appropriate apologies from Milos. > For now, I will remain silent on LangCom until proper behaviour has returned. > > Oliver > > > On 18-May-17 13:43, Michael Everson wrote: >> On 17 May 2017, at 22:14, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> This is response to Oliver, as well. >>> >>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Karen Broome <klbroome(a)pacbell.net> wrote: >>>> I agree that pressuring the JAC to adopt a less offensive code is futile. There are national libraries and government-funded software systems that use these codes that cannot be updated in any kind of timely way. Lots of countries would like representations that more closely resemble the native language names. I can’t remember the issue, but I have been up against something like this before and gave up, as interop and compatibility with legacy systems was paramount. 639-2 codes are not likely to change for that reason. >>> Here is the background of the story… >> Some of us were actually there. >> >>> This is not about "closer representation", but about replacing the code based on *offensive* language name. >> >> What about code stability in a widespread international standard? >> >>> Replacing code names because of more trivial (and racist reasons, BTW) have happened in at least in the case of ROM=>RON change. >> When do you think that change was made? What evidence do you have for it? >> >> In 1996, a ballot went out where some language codess were changed. The ballot had gd gae/gdh for Scottish Gaelic, ga iri/gai for Irish, and nothing for Manx. Ireland lobbied for gd/gla, ga/gle, and gv/glv which were accepted. On that ballot at that time the codes for Romanian were already rum/ron. 1996. TWENTY YEARS AGO. >> >>> (Poor Romanians were offended because the code had a meaning of a member of Roma ethnicity.) >> ROM is now used in ISO 639 as a macrolanguage term for the Romany languages. >> >>> Allowing a racist-based change requested by white people >> Kindly stop this racist bullshit. The very concept of “white” vs “non-white” is largely meaningless in South America, compared to the use of those categories in North America. In Europe we do not share the baggage that they do in the United States, and encouraging it as you are doing is not constructive. >> >> The correct terms to use are “endonym” and “exonym”. You maintain that at least some Mapuche dislike an exonym so much that they refuse to use a Wikipedia prefixed with “arn”. They live in Chile, right? In a region called Araucanía. They may call it something else in their language, but it would appear that this term would be widespread and visible everywhere. >> >>> and not allowing offensive-name-based change by indigenous people is a typical institutional racist behavior, no matter of particular excuse >> What about code stability in a widespread international standard? >> >>> I know there are always pretty valid excuses as long as it's not about interests and money of white people. >> This has nothing to do with melanin content of human beings of indigenous and European extraction in Chile. >> >>> We could, for example, see that in relation to not fixing many scripts inside of Unicode because of "reasons", while adding tons of nonsense emoticons afterwards because >>> "it's cool”. >> Whatever are you on about? “Fixing” scripts implies that some are “broken”. The addition of characters of all kinds proceeds every year. I just got 84 characters approved for Fairy Chess, an important intellectual activity to some humans. >> >> Please note that ISO/IEC 10646 and ISO 639 are unrelated standards. >> >>> It is not about ISO 639-2, but about ISO 639-3. We are using ISO 639-3 codes. If there is the rule which fixes ISO 639-3 to ISO 639-2, >> I don’t think you understand the relation between the standards. Firstly, ISO 639-2 is essentially fixed and frozen. No additional codes are to be added to it. This is for stability of the code set, which is implemented in billions of devices worldwide. >> >>> that’s definitely unfortunate and requires changes of the rules inside of JAC to avoid widespread institutional racism. >> Stop using this terminology. Clearly you don’t know how to do so. >> >>> A note to Oliver: First, thank you for really reading the document and finding the relevant part. >> You might thank him too for pointing out your error. >> >>> At the other side, can we or not JAC's and Unicode's behavior >> Unicode has NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH THIS. >> >>> put under the definition "The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.”? >> Their language has been recognized and given a three-letter identifier which serves to identify texts written for the benefit of the 260,000 native speakers. >> >>> If *you* think not, please send me a private email with the reasons. I would be happy to be convinced by you in opposite and will apologize here. If convinced, will do that partially for JAC, as well, because I think that it's not possible to defend Unicode's institutional racism. >> Miloš Rančić, I hereby request an immediate formal apology from you right now, here, in public, for having attacked the Unicode Consortium as perpetrating “institutional racism”. The Unicode Consortium, along with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2, maintains the Universal Character Set, known as the Unicode Standard and ISO/IEC 10646. This standard has nothing whatever to do with the language codes of ISO 639. >> >> It appears to me that you do not understand the development of these international standards. >> >> Michael Everson >> _______________________________________________ >> Langcom mailing list >> Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. >> http://www.avg.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 01:08:16 +0200 From: MF-Warburg <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Voting changes Message-ID: <CAJKMOMUD3q8qiB6xwDakYKZemi-27gT+-j3kZvJZffu_OA27MA(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Forgot one important point: :''Eligibility of a language without a valid ISO 639-3 code, but with a valid BCP 47 code.'' This would be a novelty. 2017-05-19 0:33 GMT+02:00 MF-Warburg <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com>: > I put my draft on <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_committee/ > Voting_policy>, comments on the talk page, and reproduce it below. > It shouldn't have anything new in it that wasn't already mentioned before. > Feel free to edit on Meta or write your opinions here. > > {{draft}} > > The Language Committee, with the approval of the Board, decided to change > its rules for decision-making. So far, every decision required "consensus", > defined as "no objections". > * Decisions of the Language Committee will continue to be made on the > mailing list and the committee will continue to try to achieve consensus > for them. If there has been no objection to a proposed decision one week > (two weeks for policy changes?) after the proposal was made, it is so > decided. > * When there is an objection to a proposed decision, any member may call > for a vote. A vote must then be held, but it should only start after the > question was discussed thoroughly. > * A vote will last for one week (two weeks for policy changes?). A vote > starts when a member sends a mail with the exact question to the list. The > subject of all the mails must include [VOTE] so that every member can > easily filter and notice such important mails. > * The following majorities of participating members are needed for a > decision to be adopted by vote: > **Simple majority > ***[[Language_proposal_policy#Requisites_for_eligibility|Eligibility]] of > projects in languages that have a valid ISO 639-3 code > ***Eligibility of a language without a valid ISO 639-3 code, but with a > valid BCP 47 code. > ***Final approval > **2/3 majority > ***Any change of the rules, including the committee's role in possible > changes of the [[Language proposal policy]] and [[Closing projects policy]]. > > Some special provisions: > * The procedures according to the [[closing projects policy]] are > unchanged. > * Full consensus is still required for accepting new members. Like all > personal issues, they will be discussed on the non-public mailing list. > * Any committee member can mark clearly eligible [[requests for new > languages]] as eligible. Requirements are: the language has a valid ISO > 639-3 code, there are no significant issues with regard to the language > itself, the population of speakers is significant. > ** If a request turns out to be contentious, the commitee can remove the > eligibility status again. > * It is not possible to vote on approving a project which doesn't meet the > [[Language_proposal_policy#Requisites_for_final_approval|requisites for > final approval]]. > > ==Comments== > :''(two weeks for policy changes?)'' > Yay or nay? > > :''When there is an objection to a proposed decision, any member may call > for a vote. A vote must then be held, but it should only start after the > question was discussed thoroughly.'' > I added this to prevent a voting is started immediately after someone says > something against an idea/proposal. Because of the current system, > discussions pretty much stop at that point, but under the new system, it > would be good if they went on first before everyone has to take a side. > > :''The subject of all the mails must include [VOTE] so that every member > can easily filter and notice such important mails.'' > This was requested in Berlin. > > > 2017-05-18 9:00 GMT+02:00 Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org>: > >> Hi again, >> >> that really makes me sad. We had really good rapport and momentum when we >> met in Berlin, and I would've thought that we'd be able to transfer that to >> our online communication. Is there still hope to mend what happened >> yesterday? (Now my troubles no longer seem so far away ...) >> >> Yours for the under-represented language communities of our planet, >> Oliver >> >> On 18-May-17 07:52, Gerard Meijssen wrote: >> >> Hoi, >> No as far as I am concerned the conversation has soured. I prefer for us >> to take stock and not rush on. >> Thanks, >> GerardM >> >> On 17 May 2017 at 23:08, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> We could do that. MF-Warburg could put the proposal on wiki, so we >>> could discuss and comment there, as well. (But, we'll make the final >>> decision and final changes, if necessary, here. So, Gerard, don't >>> worry if you prefer to talk just on list.) >>> >>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org> >>> wrote: >>> > Thanks to both of you, Milos and MF-Warburg, for providing the text. >>> > >>> > I was simply thinking that discussing a text with comments in an online >>> > document would be much less cumbersome than doing so in an email list >>> with >>> > stacked responses. But whatever you prefer ... >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On 17-May-17 22:54, Milos Rancic wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:52 PM, MF-Warburg < >>> mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> By the way, I created a draft for a policy on "calling votes", which >>> >>> includes these details. I can send it in a few hours. >>> >> >>> >> Thank you very much! :) >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Langcom mailing list >>> >> Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> --- >>> >> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. >>> >> http://www.avg.com >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Langcom mailing list >>> > Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Langcom mailing list >>> Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >>> >> >> >> >> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_cam…> Virus-free. >> www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> >> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_cam…> >> <#m_-4221379748092000586_m_3111046316371638656_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Langcom mailing list >> Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >> >> >

1 0

Proposed short-to-mid-term solution for Mapudungun/Mapuche
by Steven White 19 May '17

19 May '17

It seems to me that the best immediate solution is for us to assign them a q-code, maybe qmp. This has the following advantages: * It's something we can do without worrying about anyone else. Q-codes are for local use, so what we do with them is our business. * It's unlikely ever to be overridden by a decision on the part of someone else (SIL or a successor) to assign the code to someone else. * In order for us to maintain compatibility with ISO-compliant systems, we can easily redirect arn.wik*.org > qmp.wik*.org, just as we do now with redirections like yue > zh-yue. * Presumably, if the code arn ever is changed, we could move qmp wikis to the new code in the future. (OK, this has proved hard even now. But if/when it gets solved for already-existing cases, it will be solved for this case as well.) I suppose it's possible that someone, somewhere, is using qmp for some other local use, and that this will interfere. I think the chance of there being a truly material conflict anywhere is remote. And short of our getting someone to change the code—which may or may not be appropriate, but in any case is not directly within our power—this is probably the best solution in terms of both (a) local ability to implement and (b) unlikeliness of interference in outside systems. The Mapuche test projects on Incubator have not been very active lately. It shouldn't be too much trouble to move them from W?/arn > W?/qmp. Steven White (Incubator administrator) Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>

6 16

Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting
by MF-Warburg 19 May '17

19 May '17

By the way, I find it interesting that Steven mentioned that there are some editors on Incubator currently at Wp/arn. It seems like not all the speakers object that strongly to it that they feel they can't contribute. 2017-05-19 0:24 GMT+02:00 Maor Malul <maor_x(a)zoho.com>: > For Wayuunaiki speakers, GUC comes from Guajiro, also a derogatory term > imposed by the Spaniards. Again, the definition of maturity is clear, this > issue has been going around for years, and they prefer not to have a > Wikipedia with a code they find derogatory...a code, for Pete's sake! > > I will check again with Wikimedia Chile, but I know the answer already: No > Wikipedia in ARN. > > > Sent from my HTC > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Milos Rancic" <millosh(a)gmail.com> > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee" <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > Subject: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting > Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 1:15 AM > > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Maor Malul <maor_x(a)zoho.com> wrote: > > I find it outrageously narrow-minded that the Chileans won't accept a > > Wikipedia in Mapudungun because they find the code offensive. So, they care > > more about the code than having a Wikipedia? Come on..if they disagree with > > the code, present their case to the JAC or whoever takes care of that. We > > should not waste our resources in doing something they have refused to do > > themselves. As a speaker of two minority languages, one of them aboriginal, > > I can't care less about the code as long as we have the wiki, and I have > > discussed the subject with my Wayuunaiki-speaking friends, and they dislike > > "guc", because is a name imposed by the Spaniards, but they can live with > > it. The code LAD is used for Ladino, but we don't use that name in the > > language, we use Djudeo-Espanyol or simply Espanyol, and we can still live > > with it despite the other name ignores the North African dialects. > > > > I oppose using movement resources to request something that is neither our > > responsibility, nor is a mature request. > > One thing is using the code based on not preferred exonym, the other > thing is forcing usage of the code based on the exonym treated as > derogatory. > > JAC doesn't care about that. > > I suppose you have the definition of maturity. > > Also, may you check the issue with folk from Wikimedia Chile before replying? > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > >

2 1

Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting
by Milos Rancic 19 May '17

19 May '17

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Maor Malul <maor_x(a)zoho.com> wrote: > For Wayuunaiki speakers, GUC comes from Guajiro, also a derogatory term > imposed by the Spaniards. Again, the definition of maturity is clear, this > issue has been going around for years, and they prefer not to have a > Wikipedia with a code they find derogatory...a code, for Pete's sake! Cultures are different and "maturity" is a very subjective term. Our job *is* to be culturally sensitive. > I will check again with Wikimedia Chile, but I know the answer already: No > Wikipedia in ARN. Maybe because they know Mapuche culture better than you? Talk in detail with them. It would be good that you write here the report based on what Chileans told you.

1 0

Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting
by Maor Malul 19 May '17

19 May '17

For Wayuunaiki speakers, GUC comes from Guajiro, also a derogatory term imposed by the Spaniards. Again, the definition of maturity is clear, this issue has been going around for years, and they prefer not to have a Wikipedia with a code they find derogatory...a code, for Pete's sake! I will check again with Wikimedia Chile, but I know the answer already: No Wikipedia in ARN. Sent from my HTC ----- Reply message ----- From: "Milos Rancic" <millosh(a)gmail.com> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee" <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 1:15 AM On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Maor Malul <maor_x(a)zoho.com> wrote: > I find it outrageously narrow-minded that the Chileans won't accept a > Wikipedia in Mapudungun because they find the code offensive. So, they care > more about the code than having a Wikipedia? Come on..if they disagree with > the code, present their case to the JAC or whoever takes care of that. We > should not waste our resources in doing something they have refused to do > themselves. As a speaker of two minority languages, one of them aboriginal, > I can't care less about the code as long as we have the wiki, and I have > discussed the subject with my Wayuunaiki-speaking friends, and they dislike > "guc", because is a name imposed by the Spaniards, but they can live with > it. The code LAD is used for Ladino, but we don't use that name in the > language, we use Djudeo-Espanyol or simply Espanyol, and we can still live > with it despite the other name ignores the North African dialects. > > I oppose using movement resources to request something that is neither our > responsibility, nor is a mature request. One thing is using the code based on not preferred exonym, the other thing is forcing usage of the code based on the exonym treated as derogatory. JAC doesn't care about that. I suppose you have the definition of maturity. Also, may you check the issue with folk from Wikimedia Chile before replying? _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

1 0

Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting
by Milos Rancic 19 May '17

19 May '17

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Maor Malul <maor_x(a)zoho.com> wrote: > I find it outrageously narrow-minded that the Chileans won't accept a > Wikipedia in Mapudungun because they find the code offensive. So, they care > more about the code than having a Wikipedia? Come on..if they disagree with > the code, present their case to the JAC or whoever takes care of that. We > should not waste our resources in doing something they have refused to do > themselves. As a speaker of two minority languages, one of them aboriginal, > I can't care less about the code as long as we have the wiki, and I have > discussed the subject with my Wayuunaiki-speaking friends, and they dislike > "guc", because is a name imposed by the Spaniards, but they can live with > it. The code LAD is used for Ladino, but we don't use that name in the > language, we use Djudeo-Espanyol or simply Espanyol, and we can still live > with it despite the other name ignores the North African dialects. > > I oppose using movement resources to request something that is neither our > responsibility, nor is a mature request. One thing is using the code based on not preferred exonym, the other thing is forcing usage of the code based on the exonym treated as derogatory. JAC doesn't care about that. I suppose you have the definition of maturity. Also, may you check the issue with folk from Wikimedia Chile before replying?

1 0

Re: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting
by Maor Malul 19 May '17

19 May '17

I find it outrageously narrow-minded that the Chileans won't accept a Wikipedia in Mapudungun because they find the code offensive. So, they care more about the code than having a Wikipedia? Come on..if they disagree with the code, present their case to the JAC or whoever takes care of that. We should not waste our resources in doing something they have refused to do themselves. As a speaker of two minority languages, one of them aboriginal, I can't care less about the code as long as we have the wiki, and I have discussed the subject with my Wayuunaiki-speaking friends, and they dislike "guc", because is a name imposed by the Spaniards, but they can live with it. The code LAD is used for Ladino, but we don't use that name in the language, we use Djudeo-Espanyol or simply Espanyol, and we can still live with it despite the other name ignores the North African dialects. I oppose using movement resources to request something that is neither our responsibility, nor is a mature request. Sent from my HTC ----- Reply message ----- From: "Oliver Stegen" <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org> To: <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: [Langcom] Notes from the Berlin meeting Date: Fri, May 19, 2017 12:42 AM For the record: I'm opposed to changing arn to qmp for the reasons given by Gerard and Michael already. Otherwise, I have no time to follow the unacceptable exchanges. I do expect appropriate apologies from Milos. For now, I will remain silent on LangCom until proper behaviour has returned. Oliver On 18-May-17 13:43, Michael Everson wrote: > On 17 May 2017, at 22:14, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> This is response to Oliver, as well. >> >> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Karen Broome <klbroome(a)pacbell.net> wrote: >>> I agree that pressuring the JAC to adopt a less offensive code is futile. There are national libraries and government-funded software systems that use these codes that cannot be updated in any kind of timely way. Lots of countries would like representations that more closely resemble the native language names. I can’t remember the issue, but I have been up against something like this before and gave up, as interop and compatibility with legacy systems was paramount. 639-2 codes are not likely to change for that reason. >> Here is the background of the story… > Some of us were actually there. > >> This is not about "closer representation", but about replacing the code based on *offensive* language name. > > What about code stability in a widespread international standard? > >> Replacing code names because of more trivial (and racist reasons, BTW) have happened in at least in the case of ROM=>RON change. > When do you think that change was made? What evidence do you have for it? > > In 1996, a ballot went out where some language codess were changed. The ballot had gd gae/gdh for Scottish Gaelic, ga iri/gai for Irish, and nothing for Manx. Ireland lobbied for gd/gla, ga/gle, and gv/glv which were accepted. On that ballot at that time the codes for Romanian were already rum/ron. 1996. TWENTY YEARS AGO. > >> (Poor Romanians were offended because the code had a meaning of a member of Roma ethnicity.) > ROM is now used in ISO 639 as a macrolanguage term for the Romany languages. > >> Allowing a racist-based change requested by white people > Kindly stop this racist bullshit. The very concept of “white” vs “non-white” is largely meaningless in South America, compared to the use of those categories in North America. In Europe we do not share the baggage that they do in the United States, and encouraging it as you are doing is not constructive. > > The correct terms to use are “endonym” and “exonym”. You maintain that at least some Mapuche dislike an exonym so much that they refuse to use a Wikipedia prefixed with “arn”. They live in Chile, right? In a region called Araucanía. They may call it something else in their language, but it would appear that this term would be widespread and visible everywhere. > >> and not allowing offensive-name-based change by indigenous people is a typical institutional racist behavior, no matter of particular excuse > What about code stability in a widespread international standard? > >> I know there are always pretty valid excuses as long as it's not about interests and money of white people. > This has nothing to do with melanin content of human beings of indigenous and European extraction in Chile. > >> We could, for example, see that in relation to not fixing many scripts inside of Unicode because of "reasons", while adding tons of nonsense emoticons afterwards because >> "it's cool”. > Whatever are you on about? “Fixing” scripts implies that some are “broken”. The addition of characters of all kinds proceeds every year. I just got 84 characters approved for Fairy Chess, an important intellectual activity to some humans. > > Please note that ISO/IEC 10646 and ISO 639 are unrelated standards. > >> It is not about ISO 639-2, but about ISO 639-3. We are using ISO 639-3 codes. If there is the rule which fixes ISO 639-3 to ISO 639-2, > I don’t think you understand the relation between the standards. Firstly, ISO 639-2 is essentially fixed and frozen. No additional codes are to be added to it. This is for stability of the code set, which is implemented in billions of devices worldwide. > >> that’s definitely unfortunate and requires changes of the rules inside of JAC to avoid widespread institutional racism. > Stop using this terminology. Clearly you don’t know how to do so. > >> A note to Oliver: First, thank you for really reading the document and finding the relevant part. > You might thank him too for pointing out your error. > >> At the other side, can we or not JAC's and Unicode's behavior > Unicode has NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH THIS. > >> put under the definition "The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.”? > Their language has been recognized and given a three-letter identifier which serves to identify texts written for the benefit of the 260,000 native speakers. > >> If *you* think not, please send me a private email with the reasons. I would be happy to be convinced by you in opposite and will apologize here. If convinced, will do that partially for JAC, as well, because I think that it's not possible to defend Unicode's institutional racism. > Miloš Rančić, I hereby request an immediate formal apology from you right now, here, in public, for having attacked the Unicode Consortium as perpetrating “institutional racism”. The Unicode Consortium, along with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2, maintains the Universal Character Set, known as the Unicode Standard and ISO/IEC 10646. This standard has nothing whatever to do with the language codes of ISO 639. > > It appears to me that you do not understand the development of these international standards. > > Michael Everson > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

Langcom May 2017