Phake Nick: There are a couple of similar questions that I’ve been waiting for a time to formulate and then propose, and I think it’s getting to be time to do so. That having been said:
It seems to me that if a seriously historical language has a few quotes that someone wants to preserve natively, then the documents containing those quotes could well be put in Wikisource, and that would be a reasonable approach.
Steven
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 18:14:19 +0000
From: Phake Nick <c933103@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
<langcom@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Back to 2012: Wikiquote and Wikivoyage requests
Message-ID:
<CAGHjPPKXGzgE9SXbGdAi-2MnLt7tRwZg_tjp4QeGc8-Nk44ULw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I think a larger question is that should wikiquote be given same exempt to
the condition of whether the language is living when it come to eligibility
like wikisource?
在 2018年5月9日週三 13:25,Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> 寫道:
> Hoi,
> A comparison with Ancient Greek does not serve as a reason for
> consistency. It was only accepted because of it being actually used in
> schools.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On 8 May 2018 at 18:37, Steven White <Koala19890@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> These three are the only pending requests for Wikiquote and Wikivoyage
>> projects dating back to 2012.
>>
>>
>> Wikiquote Pashto
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRequests_for_new_languages%2FWikiquote_Pashto&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=dnrq7VTopmpoIA%2F0ql7rMVN2CRBZ8M1qqufHtR01dpM%3D&reserved=0>
>> (ps): Eligible.
>>
>> Wikivoyage Malayam
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRequests_for_new_languages%2FWikivoyage_Malayalam&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=DH9v3B1PC1706iVXk6yCRB5mBU%2F29KVC%2FTQ1J%2BpcdoY%3D&reserved=0>
>> (ml): Eligible.
>>
>>
>> Wikiquote Syriac
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRequests_for_new_languages%2FWikiquote_Syriac&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=aLcKnd4JdppNqqEzROpYSbbFPoZSMt5gf92m9b6%2B2zk%3D&reserved=0>
>> (syc): Syriac, of course, is a historic language. Frankly, there are
>> arguments to be made on either side of this one.
>>
>>
>> *Leaning towards "eligible":*
>>
>> - There is a Wikipedia in this language already. Frequently,
>> languages with Wikipedias are allowed to expand into other projects.
>> - In 2010 Milos marked a Wikiquote test in Ancient Greek as
>> "eligible". Possibly this case isn't much different, except that more
>> people know Ancient Greek than know Classical Syriac. (But see below.)
>>
>> *Leaning towards "reject" (outright):*
>>
>> - The written policy on historical languages reads, "The proposal has
>> a sufficient number of living native speakers to form a viable community
>> and audience." I have the impression that at this point, LangCom is
>> starting to loosen up a little about whether the speakers are "native"
>> speakers, as long as there are enough (reasonably) fluent speakers to form
>> a viable community. But that "loosening" seems to apply mostly to
>> Wikipedias *(e.g., *Coptic), and certainly not to Wikinews or
>> Wikivoyage. I'm not sure about Wikiquote, as Ancient Greek is the only
>> example to look to. And in any case, I'm not sure that Classical Syriac
>> really has enough speakers to create a community; in that, the case
>> potentially differs from Ancient Greek.
>>
>> *What about "reject" (stale)?*
>>
>> - There are about 14 pages in the test; all (except maybe one) were
>> created in the first three months of its existence. Since then, the test
>> has been pretty dormant. So far, tests that I have closed as stale have had
>> no more than five pages created, and those generally within the same month
>> of starting the test project. So while this test has been fairly dormant,
>> it's been more active than that.
>>
>>
>> I'd appreciate some opinions on what to do here. I will say straight out
>> that even if the decision is to reject, I see no reason that the test can't
>> stay on Incubator, as it meets the less stringent requirements for a test
>> to be hosted on Incubator. So you're deciding between
>>
>>
>> - Rejecting outright, but test remains on Incubator, probably
>> permanently
>> - Marking eligible (consistent with what was done with Ancient Greek)
>>
>>
>> Steven
>>
>> Sent from Outlook <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fweboutlook&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=qu%2BgqDJ%2FQq7QcdyORdqIA7KGHh6SDNFwdixVDKYuKXY%3D&reserved=0>
>>