Please give a link…

Even without seeing the discussion, there’s no reason to close be-tarask. It has 61K articles, and is a well-accepted orthography.

> On 16 Oct 2017, at 18:54, Steven White <Koala19890@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> This request is also generating a lot of heat, and not necessarily a lot of light.
>
> For what it's worth, here's how I evaluate the arguments that have been made here:
>       • Members of the be-tarask community strongly oppose (as you might expect)
>       • Among replies (at Meta and on bewiki) from the bewiki community, there seem to be none to really favor the proposal as written.  Either they oppose closure, or else they favor closure because they think the Taraskievica orthography should be suppressed.
>       • The proposer has a grand total of 1 (one) edit on be-tarask, and 0 (no) edits on bewiki. He is mostly flitting around Meta and Incubator inserting opinions about projects he thinks should and should not continue to exist.
>
> As far as I can tell, the bewiki and be-tarask communities seem to coexist side-by-side well enough. So in the short term, I'd encourage you to reject this proposal. If you think in the long run that these wikis should be merged, then tackle that later. And I think the Nahuatl situation needs attention more immediately than this does.
>
> Steven White (User:StevenJ81)
>
> Sent from Outlook

> _______________________________________________
> 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