Hi,
I wrote to the expert.
I have to say that although the statistics look good, my first impression
is that a lot of articles are still a bit too short. But I'll take a closer
look at more articles, as there are over 700 of them, and I'll wait for the
expert's reply.
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
2016-12-04 1:39 GMT+02:00 MF-Warburg <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com>om>:
Hi all,
I think Ingush Wikipedia can be approved, from the activity viewpoint. The
translation of the most-used messages is complete (<
http://tools.wmflabs.org/robin/?tool=codelookup&code=inh>) and there has
been a quite high activity since almost ten months now <
https://tools.wmflabs.org/meta/catanalysis/index.php?
cat=0&title=Wp/inh&wiki=incubatorwiki>.
Now we would of course need verificiation of the content. Searching the
archives, I found a mail from Amir from 10 November 2011. Back then, a
linguist had said the language in the test-wiki was not quite what would be
expected from literary Ingush. However, the current editors are all
different from the ones that were active five years ago.
Amir, could you check with that linguist or someone else from the Ingush
State University again about the quality of the content?
Best regards, MF-W
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom