There are still different opinions on this: Gerard and Michael would reject the proposal,
MF-W would accept it as eligible. Let me outline points of agreement first, then points of
disagreement. Then I'd like to propose a next step, and see what people think.
Agreement:
1. Even MF-W agrees that, at least in the short-to-mid-term, nobody is talking about
pulling apart the current zhwikisource, and spinning the lzh content into a new project.
2. (I think) All agree that lzh served a role in East Asia similar to the role of Latin
in Europe. Accordingly, policy allows a separate lzh project and doesn't demand that
lzh content be moved into a zh project.
Disagreement:
1. If we mark this as "eligible", does that mean that when the test on
Multilingual Wikisource becomes approvable (if ever), we categorically MUST move all the
lzh content from zhwikisource into the new project? Or can lzh content exist in both
places?
2. (I think) Just because policy allows a separate lzh project doesn't mean it
requires one; we can still require all lzh content to be put into the zh project.
* If #2 is true, though, there is still a concern that the zh project will not meet
the needs of non-Mandarin speakers with respect to lzh content.
The only reason we really even have a problem is the bullet point under "Disagreement
#2". If not for that, we could reject the language request without a problem. And
I'm convinced that at present, that's more of a theoretical issue being put out by
the proponents of an lzh Wikisource than it is a practical problem people are having right
now. Still, we can't entirely discount it.
In the short run, I think we could keep everyone happy by not touching current lzh content
on zhwikisource, while allowing other lzh content to be created on oldwikisource. (There
is precedent for allowing content on oldwikisource in parallel to content in a separate
Wikisource, though in the main case I think of, Polish, that's done for copyright
reasons. And we'd want to encourage some ground rules about duplication of documents,
since that's not a concern in the Polish case.) Even if we agree to that, though, the
question remains: How do we resolve the status of the language request? So here's how
I see all the possible options playing out:
* Eligible. This does mean that at some point, if the lzh test becomes approvable, we
agree it can be approved. I'm OK with this option if the answer to "disagreement
#1" is that we are not necessarily committing that all lzh content would have to be
moved to an lzh Wikisource. We can kick the can down the road, and also don't have to
commit that lzh content will not be moved, either. If we do this, I would make it clear on
eligibility that we are not committing to what that means for the future for the current
lzh content of zhwikisource.
* Place on hold. (option 1) We can see if enough contributors actually come to work on
lzh content on oldwikisource to make that viable, or whether by a year from now it becomes
a non-issue. (option 2) It goes on hold because we decide that we're just not going to
decide now, and we'll revisit it if and when that's appropriate.
* Reject. This doesn't actually mean we don't allow lzh content to stay on
oldwikisource. After all, there are a number of projects in ancient languages that have
been rejected by LangCom but where tests still exist on Incubator because the rules for
Incubator are less strict than the rules for subdomain project eligibility/approval. Since
the rules for oldwikisource are even less strict than the rules for Incubator, the lzh
"test" could stay on oldwikisource. But this option basically says that this
content will always stay on oldwikisource.
My recommendation
* I think we need to leave the content of zhwikisource alone now, but allow additional
lzh content on oldwikisource, with rules against duplication.
* By process of elimination, I'd recommend "placing on hold" for now. I
really don't see consensus coalescing here. Also, I think there's a good enough
chance that this test never goes anywhere that we may as well wait to see what happens
before committing to a decision. (And, to tell the truth, in most cases like this, where
there is little actual activity in the test, that's what we actually usually do until
there is proof of activity.)
* If you're not willing to do that, I would go for "eligible" IF AND
ONLY IF that doesn't mean we're committing to the future of any existing content
either way. In principle, this lzh ought to be eligible, and there's nothing wrong
with saying so. But if we think that "eligible" automatically means that content
MUST be moved in the future if an lzhwikisource is created, then I would
"reject", because I don't think that moving content out of zhwikisource will
ever be a viable option.
Please respond promptly to this if you will. I'd love to close this off (finally).
Steven
Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>