It's pretty clear that there is no support for closing Cebuano Wikipedia. So I will close the discussion as rejected. On the whole, I think this committee sees it as the community's business what it does about bot contributions, although there was some support for asking the community to be more mindful of its quality control.
Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 06:08:36 +0000
From: Steven White <koala19890(a)hotmail.com>
To: "langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Langcom] Request for Closure of Cebuano Wikipedia
Message-ID:
<MWHPR12MB1805D92DD7846A89A02EC3E39EFB0(a)MWHPR12MB1805.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
See https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wiki…. This has been sitting open since October.
In general, I think this should be rejected. First, it was created by someone who was mostly just creating requests (for both project creations and project closures) for sport. In and of itself, that gives this request poor provenance.
That said, the request did garner support from a number of other editors on Meta. The basic reasoning is that while Cebuano Wikipedia has a very large number of pages (rivaling English Wikipedia), the vast majority of its content was created by bots, and much of that content--not all--ranges from useless to problematic. The community has not worked all that actively to fix things, and if anything they (and the community of the Waray Wikipedia) seem to be competing on who can have more pages. That's really not a good situation.
But comments I've seen suggest the cebwiki community, as well as the PhilWiki Community<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wiki…>, are starting to get more interested. So given the general rules of project autonomy, it's probably not our place to step in. Therefore, I think the request should be rejected.
I do wonder if people think we should make a _suggestion_ to the community that it stop the bots for a while.
Steven
Sent from Outlook<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fw…>
Dear LangCom:
Pursuant the closing projects proposal and considering the request to close
xalwiki made in bad faith and disruptive, I went ahead and closed <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_K…>
as rejected. As per policy, a LangCom member has to review and confirm or
overturn my decision.
Best regards, M
See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_C…. This has been sitting open since October.
In general, I think this should be rejected. First, it was created by someone who was mostly just creating requests (for both project creations and project closures) for sport. In and of itself, that gives this request poor provenance.
That said, the request did garner support from a number of other editors on Meta. The basic reasoning is that while Cebuano Wikipedia has a very large number of pages (rivaling English Wikipedia), the vast majority of its content was created by bots, and much of that content--not all--ranges from useless to problematic. The community has not worked all that actively to fix things, and if anything they (and the community of the Waray Wikipedia) seem to be competing on who can have more pages. That's really not a good situation.
But comments I've seen suggest the cebwiki community, as well as the PhilWiki Community<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/PhilWiki_Community>, are starting to get more interested. So given the general rules of project autonomy, it's probably not our place to step in. Therefore, I think the request should be rejected.
I do wonder if people think we should make a _suggestion_ to the community that it stop the bots for a while.
Steven
Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
OK. I'm assuming that (a) the concept of closing stale requests as I've proposed is generally acceptable, and (b) that at least in the cases other than Teochew I can proceed.
With respect to Teochew, I'm going to mark it as "on hold/waiting", pending a language code. But if we don't see a new request at SIL in a year, then I'm going to close. Please let me know if that is acceptable.
There are, in fact, a couple of other requests from 2010 still open. There are two requests on different Balochi projects, which I thought should wait until Satdeep finished his investigations into that. There is a request for "Southern Min in Hanji," which I intended to leave sitting until we had a discussion of when different scripts need different projects and when not. But apparently phabricator T165882<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T165882> says that the community has agreed to a namespace for Hanji, so this can be closed as resolved. There is a request for Wiktionary Pitcairnese<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wiktionary_Pitca…> that can be closed as stale along the same lines as the others here. And there is a request for Wikipedia Chinuk wawa that is supported by a few pages in the Incubator, so I'm going to mark it eligible.
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: Friday, January 26, 2018 7:00 AM
To: langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Langcom Digest, Vol 52, Issue 24
Send Langcom mailing list submissions to
langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://nam01.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: Final group of projects with requests lingering since
2010 (Phake Nick)
2. Re: Final group of projects with requests lingering since
2010 (MF-Warburg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:53:21 +0800
From: Phake Nick <c933103(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
<langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Final group of projects with requests lingering
since 2010
Message-ID:
<CAGHjPP+tUooqAWcJdrKA+nYNZY3Qi+MZnrJquY0ywOVYamSKfA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2018年1月25日 03:49 於 "MF-Warburg" <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com> 寫道：
>
> Well, but it's equally true (and written) that "If there is no valid ISO
639 code, you must obtain one. The Wikimedia Foundation does not seek to
develop new linguistic entities".
My understanding on the description of "does not seek to develop new
linguistic entities" is that WMF does not seek to develop new language and
thus it would like confirmation from ISO standard regulation body, instead
of the code itself.
> We do absolutely not want to invent our own codes, because that gets
really messy, especially when at some point a language does get a real code.
Why not tentatively use e.g. ISO639-6 code as a working code in incubator
or for the project before it could get a 639-1/2/3 code? after it get a
code in ISO 639-1/2/3 then it should be possible to move things over.
Although all the code change requests have been piled up for years in
phabricator but that should hopefully be sorted out one day.