Phake Nick: There are a couple of similar questions that I’ve been waiting for a time to
formulate and then propose, and I think it’s getting to be time to do so. That having been
said:
* Do remember that we have a multilingual Wikisource that can serve as the repository
for source documents in languages that would not be eligible for projects otherwise. The
same is not true for Wikiquote.
* The purpose of Wikiquote (or at least a purpose) is to provide a repository for
people looking for quotes to be able to find them. That means that it makes little sense
to have WQ projects in languages that people don’t really use.
* LangCom seems a little more amenable to Wikipedia projects in languages that are not
used as L1 any more, provided there are still communities available to support them, and
provided there is a body of written material to serve as a basis for content. I don’t
think LangCom is willing to stretch that point on Wikinews or Wikivoyage at all. Question
will be more whether Wikiquote could be like Wikipedia in that regard, not whether it
would go as far as being like Wikisource.
* Finally, remember that quotes can be translated and used in any number of WQ
projects.
It seems to me that if a seriously historical language has a few quotes that someone wants
to preserve natively, then the documents containing those quotes could well be put in
Wikisource, and that would be a reasonable approach.
Steven
Sent from
Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 18:14:19 +0000
From: Phake Nick <c933103(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
<langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Back to 2012: Wikiquote and Wikivoyage requests
Message-ID:
<CAGHjPPKXGzgE9SXbGdAi-2MnLt7tRwZg_tjp4QeGc8-Nk44ULw(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I think a larger question is that should wikiquote be given same exempt to
the condition of whether the language is living when it come to eligibility
like wikisource?
在 2018年5月9日週三 13:25，Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> 寫道：
Hoi,
A comparison with Ancient Greek does not serve as a reason for
consistency. It was only accepted because of it being actually used in
schools.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 8 May 2018 at 18:37, Steven White <Koala19890(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> These three are the only pending requests for Wikiquote and Wikivoyage
> projects dating back to 2012.
>
>
> Wikiquote Pashto
>
<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRequests_for_new_languages%2FWikiquote_Pashto&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=dnrq7VTopmpoIA%2F0ql7rMVN2CRBZ8M1qqufHtR01dpM%3D&reserved=0>
> (ps): Eligible.
>
> Wikivoyage Malayam
>
<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRequests_for_new_languages%2FWikivoyage_Malayalam&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=DH9v3B1PC1706iVXk6yCRB5mBU%2F29KVC%2FTQ1J%2BpcdoY%3D&reserved=0>
> (ml): Eligible.
>
>
> Wikiquote Syriac
>
<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRequests_for_new_languages%2FWikiquote_Syriac&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=aLcKnd4JdppNqqEzROpYSbbFPoZSMt5gf92m9b6%2B2zk%3D&reserved=0>
> (syc): Syriac, of course, is a historic language. Frankly, there are
> arguments to be made on either side of this one.
>
>
> *Leaning towards "eligible":*
>
> - There is a Wikipedia in this language already. Frequently,
> languages with Wikipedias are allowed to expand into other projects.
> - In 2010 Milos marked a Wikiquote test in Ancient Greek as
> "eligible". Possibly this case isn't much different, except that
more
> people know Ancient Greek than know Classical Syriac. (But see below.)
>
> *Leaning towards "reject" (outright):*
>
> - The written policy on historical languages reads, "The proposal has
> a sufficient number of living native speakers to form a viable community
> and audience." I have the impression that at this point, LangCom is
> starting to loosen up a little about whether the speakers are "native"
> speakers, as long as there are enough (reasonably) fluent speakers to form
> a viable community. But that "loosening" seems to apply mostly to
> Wikipedias *(e.g., *Coptic), and certainly not to Wikinews or
> Wikivoyage. I'm not sure about Wikiquote, as Ancient Greek is the only
> example to look to. And in any case, I'm not sure that Classical Syriac
> really has enough speakers to create a community; in that, the case
> potentially differs from Ancient Greek.
>
> *What about "reject" (stale)?*
>
> - There are about 14 pages in the test; all (except maybe one) were
> created in the first three months of its existence. Since then, the test
> has been pretty dormant. So far, tests that I have closed as stale have had
> no more than five pages created, and those generally within the same month
> of starting the test project. So while this test has been fairly dormant,
> it's been more active than that.
>
>
> I'd appreciate some opinions on what to do here. I will say straight out
> that even if the decision is to reject, I see no reason that the test can't
> stay on Incubator, as it meets the less stringent requirements for a test
> to be hosted on Incubator. So you're deciding between
>
>
> - Rejecting outright, but test remains on Incubator, probably
> permanently
> - Marking eligible (consistent with what was done with Ancient Greek)
>
>
> Steven
>
> Sent from Outlook
<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fweboutlook&data=02%7C01%7C%7C122a3e7653d147faef4108d5b9190a05%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636618439545490276&sdata=qu%2BgqDJ%2FQq7QcdyORdqIA7KGHh6SDNFwdixVDKYuKXY%3D&reserved=0>
>