We have done that. When a language has an ISO-639-3 it is admissible for Wikidata.

On 28 November 2016 at 02:57, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry the last reply was with a phone.. Not a good idea..

Yes, this email sounds definitely better :)

> Having a code for Canadian French is as relevant as 18th century British
> English for instance.
> In the past British English came in after localisation at Translatewiki.net.
> For me Canadian French is no different.

I wouldn't agree that a living language is as relevant as a dead
language. In the case of a living language, localization is relevant,
while it's not true for a dead language.

So, I suppose you want them first to make the basic localization, then
to add it as a Wikidata language? I agree with that.

> When you ask do we have something better to do..

No, I didn't say that. I said that we are not overwhelmed by various
requests and that it's not big deal to approve a language for
Wikidata. Said so, I will repeat that I agree that the basic
localization should be the requirement.

We also need to amend the Language policy for localization and
Wikidata purposes. Like: If you want your language variety to be added
into Wikidata and Wikimedia localization, you need to do translate the
most common messages; etc.

Langcom mailing list