Some comments, I invite your additions and comments. I hope we can have a consensus so we can give our comments "as Langcom", not as individual members.
=== Approving new language projects - standards setting ===
[1]
* The Language Committee (LangCom) reports to the Global Council. The
Global Council makes the final decisions on form and structure of
LangCom, subject to the provisions within the Movement Charter.
[2] * The Global Council may modify prerequisites for language projects to be recognised.
[3]
* The Global Council may choose to allow LangCom to directly recognise
new language projects or retain that authority for itself.
[4] * In this new structure, LangCom is tasked to verify that proposed projects are substantial and sufficiently supported.
=== Closure of lingual and sister projects ===
[5]
* The Global Council possesses the authority to veto decisions to close
a lingual project. It may set its own standards on whether to vote on
such matters. Where it does not vote, the Language Committee (LangCom)
will take the decision.
[Does
not relate to Langcom] * An affirmative vote of the Global Council is
required to progress with closing a sister project. The Global Council
may set additional criteria before voting. The viability of project
continuation and necessity of closing will be extensively checked before
final voting by Global Council.
[6]
* The Global Council, through LangCom, would have the authority to set
standards to close an incubator project. In the absence of Global
Council action, LangCom will continue to set its own standards.
To point 1. I suggest acknowledging that Langcom already exists and has a structure and a [[m:Language_committee#Charter|charter]], which however still shows signs of being from the time Langcom was established.
To point 2. I suggest making clear that this relates to the [[m:Language proposal policy]]. It should be made clear if the Global Council should have the competency to change this policy (alone?).
To point 3. Please make clear what "recognise" means. Currently we have "verification as eligible" and "final approval", both are done by Langcom. The Board has years ago waived the requirement that they formally be consulted for a final approval (i.e. wiki creation). I suggest keeping it that way and striking this point, as the current process works and it would be strange to reserve the creation of wikis to a different body.
To point 4. Please make clear if this is supposed to be a change from current policy.
To point 5. Please use "language version" instead of "lingual project". This is the established terminology and, I think, also clearer than the relatively unknown adjective "lingual".
To point 6. What would it mean to close an Incubator project? Currently,
projects on Incubator can get deleted / prevented from creation, but
that is an Incubator community / admins decision. Also, don't forget that Wikisource and Wikiversity are being incubated on the Multilingual Wikisource and BetaWikiversity, respectively.