I actually went through it this afternoon and saw how engaged and active it has been for 3 years. I recommend the approval.

---

Tochi

On Thu, Oct 12, 2023, 2:23 PM Jon Harald Søby <jhsoby@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello folks,

I would like to suggest the approval of this test wiki. Any objections? Anass can surely verify the content personally, I don't think we need any external verification in this case.

lør. 26. aug. 2023 kl. 12:48 skrev Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:

Hoi,

There may be some who consider languages in the Arabic family as ineligible. This is not the case, one example is the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia. The notion that everyone who speaks one kind of Arabic understands every other version of Arabic is wrong.

There are many languages derived from Arabic, all have their own ISO code they may all have their own dialects. The notion of politics is EXACTLY why many people want to standardise on one Arabic Wikipedia.

Thanks,

     GerardM

On Sat, 26 Aug 2023 at 02:56, Sotiale Wiki <sotiale.wm@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi.

Standard Arabic is arb (Arabic: ara) and still if someone posts a new language request for Wp/arb, it won't be eligible. Unless the speakers of Arabic Wikipedia are unable to communicate in Standard Arabic. But I don't think there's any reason a native speaker of Arabic can't speak Standard Arabic. So there is no reason for existing Arabic Wikipedia to be disqualified for this reason, but even so, the Arabic Wikipedia was created prior to the LPP and is therefore unaffected.

The requirement to be a distinct language is to ensure that there are no multiple Wikipedias for a language that is sufficiently communicative at the dialect level equivalent(If this were incomprehensible to native speakers, it would have been recognized as a separate language). In general, these branches are likely for political reasons, which may be on-wiki as well as off-wiki reasons. This permission of Wikipedia jeopardizes NPOV by creating Wikipedia with different views of the same language for that purpose. Even if it has no such purpose, it is likely to be abused as such.

Sotiale

바이러스가 없습니다.www.avast.com

2023년 8월 26일 (토) 오전 3:32, Anass Sedrati <sedranas@gmail.com>님이 작성:

Hello Sotiale and thank you for your answer,

Sorry for my late reply as I was travelling back from Singapore and had also other engagements.

So regarding your argumentation, if you consider zgh not a distinct language "because it is just a standard representation of Berber languages", then we have also to consider standard Arabic (ISO 639:ara) not a distinct language because it is not spoken in any country/region and is "a standard representation of Arabic languages". Of course, there are many more sources and books in standard Arabic due to religious and historical reasons, but it is still a standardized language, and only a written one. This said, it will of course never be considered to close the Arabic Wikipedia because of it. Therefore, it can be really tricky to base the decisions on this argument, although it is understandable that some languages are "bigger" or more established than others. What do you think?

Best regards,

Anass

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 3:08 PM MF-Warburg <mfwarburg@googlemail.com> wrote:

NB: there has also been a discussion at <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Moroccan_Amazigh#Clerking_note>. I believe there are several requests open for related languages. It would be good to have some clarity to avoid the community being split into multiple incubator test-wikis.

Am Fr., 18. Aug. 2023 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sotiale Wiki <sotiale.wm@gmail.com>:

Thank you for your kind explanation.

If this can be understood as the relationship between Standard Arabic (ISO 639:arb) and Arabic (ISO 639:ara), then zgh is not a distinct language because it is just a standard representation of Berber languages. This is true even in light of the current LPP, which excludes different written forms of any language.

Therefore, it seems that eligibility for this language cannot be recognized.

Sotiale

2023년 8월 16일 (수) 오후 10:48, Anass Sedrati <sedranas@gmail.com>님이 작성:

Hello,

I am very familiar with this case as I come myself from Morocco and speak Berber. The standard Tamazight (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Moroccan_Amazigh) is not a spoken language, but only a written one. It was created by the official Academy of Berber languages in Morocco (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institute_of_Amazigh_Culture) in an attempt to standardize the Berber languages, as there are many of them spoken in Morocco (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_languages).

So to answer you, standard Tamazight is exactly like modern standard Arabic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Standard_Arabic). It is a standardized language with rules, but not a spoken one (nobody speaks standard Arabic as a mother tongue, every Arab country has its own dialect).

This is to explain that even if it not native, Zgh can be treated as modern standard Arabic in terms of linguistics. I hope that this gives a bit of context, but I am happy to expand on any aspect if you have additional questions!

Best regards,

Anass

On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 3:00 PM Sotiale Wiki <sotiale.wm@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all.

I'm not familiar with the Moroccan languages, so I'd love to hear from other colleagues.

I'm considering this language project as a potential candidate for approval, but I'm wondering if this is a standardization of other languages, or a distinct language from others?

Since this site[1] states that there are no native speakers, I wondered if this was just standardization of other languages(the case that native speakers have a standardized language while using their own languages).

[1] https://www.ethnologue.com/language/zgh/

Sotiale

바이러스가 없습니다.www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

--

-----------------------------------------------------

Anass SEDRATI

(+46) 70 508 51 07

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

--

-----------------------------------------------------

Anass SEDRATI

(+46) 70 508 51 07

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

--

mvh

Jon Harald Søby

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org