_______________________________________________Have we heard from the expert yet?
On a related subject: Do we have any Wiktionary experts here? Saraiki Wiktionary is also now approvable in theory (assuming that the language issue on the Wikipedia clears). My concern about the Saraiki Wiktionary is only that compared to a lot of Wiktionary projects, this one appears pretty basic to me: just a straight Saraiki dictionary, with little in the way of bells and whistles (pronunciation, translations to other languages, etc.). But that's just based on the gross appearance of pages, as I do not read Saraiki (or any other language written in Perso-Arabic script). So Satdeep and anyone else: Does the content look ok? Are there greater expectations of what a Wiktionary should contain—expectations we have not communicated, I will add—or is this project appropriate and acceptable?
Steven
Sent from Outlook
From: Langcom <langcom-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of Jon Harald Søby <jhsoby@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 3:38 PM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Wikipedia in SaraikiI am still waiting to hear back from the expert. If he says the rest of the pages look fine, then I think we can move forward – Steven makes some good points as usual.
tor. 10. okt. 2019 kl. 21:03 skrev Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
Hoi,The final stage is that we verify if the language it is said to be. When we find it is not or are not certain we have all the room to seek another authority to move forward. At this stage it becomes confusing and I am not convinced at all that we should.Thanks,GerardM
_______________________________________________On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 at 19:21, Steven White <koala19890@hotmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________This is effectively the same problem as we saw in the discussion of Montenegrin Wikipedia—although since all but two of us are from Europe, North America or Israel, we feel more confident making calls in a case like Montenegrin than we do here. (And, candidly, there is less chance in the Montenegrin case of being accused of racism/Euro-centrism, even if that accusation would be totally without merit in this case.)
But as I said back then, the rule as currently written is fine when the language area starts with a clean slate. If there were no Western Punjabi Wikipedia now, we could reasonably try to get a single project to try to accommodate both Western Punjabi and Saraiki. (Whether that effort would be successful is a different question, but we could try.) However, I take Satdeep's comment below to indicate that there would be serious problems trying to integrate a new Saraiki-language community into a ten-year old Western Punjabi-language community, and that he recommends against it, based on the current "facts on the ground". Besides, to some extent the time to say "no" has passed, since Satdeep marked the project as "eligible" in 2017. So I think we need to move forward with this.
Steven
Sent from Outlook
From: Langcom <langcom-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of Jon Harald Søby <jhsoby@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2019 4:44 AM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <langcom@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Wikipedia in Saraiki...
As for the Western Punjabi/Saraiki issue, I don't know enough about that to have any opinion either way.
tir. 8. okt. 2019 kl. 19:00 skrev Satdeep Gill <satdeepgill@gmail.com>:
...
P.S. Western Punjabi and Saraiki are pretty similar and my personal view is that this should be accommodated on one Wikipedia but the sociology-political situation in Pakistan calls for a separate Wikipedia for Saraiki.
RegardsSatdeep Gill
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
--
mvhJon Harald Søby
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom