Define unreasonable. Amir gave an estimation when it is reasonable to
expect a result.
For the current instance, based on where we are now, Amir's estimation is fine. As
long as someone is actually trying to follow up on these projects, and gives a reasonable
estimate as to how long it will take, I'm fine.
James's question, and mine, is more around the big picture. Please remember that
three of the four projects we are talking about here (Guiane Creole WP, Saraiki WP,
Tacawit Wiktionary) were identified in an email I wrote on 17 December 2018 (about eight
months ago) as already being provisionally approved and awaiting language verification.
The fourth (Mon WP) is perhaps a month newer. But 7-8 months and longer—Saraiki WP was
provisionally approved in October 2018—is absolutely not reasonable by any standard.
Quite frankly, I was desperate to do something to move these along, because being nice and
playing by the rules was doing absolutely nothing. (Remember, too, that I wrote pleasant,
polite reminders to the committee about these four projects on March 14 and June 6.)
I'm sorry, Gerard, that you didn't like me doing what I did. But what I did is far
less objectionable than requiring communities to wait this long for us to complete
To that end, I am proposing the following amendment to the provision about language
verification. I am open to some adjustments, but allowing projects to sit this long and
wait for us is just not acceptable. Where this amendment is to be added is in the
Language Committee's Handbook, Final
item #2. Subitem #3 is to be followed by new subitem #4:
4. The Language Committee has 30 days from the time a project is provisionally
approved—meaning: approved, except for language verification—to identify and contact an
expert for the language verification. If no expert is contacted within 30 days, then on
the assumption of good faith, the project will be finally approved. If an expert is
contacted within 30 days, the Language Committee has an additional 60 days to obtain the
final language verification. If no language verification (or failure of language
verification) is received by then, on the assumption of good faith, the project will be
finally approved. Overall, any project for which the Language Committee has failed to get
language verification (or failure of language verification) within 90 days will be
approved on the assumption of good faith.
I think this gives us plenty of time to do what we need to do, without requiring
communities to wait on us for months without comment. This would apply for all projects
receiving provisional approval from this point on. But in parallel, given that Amir
started working on these four projects around August 15, I would also propose that if we
have not finalized language verification by October 15, these four projects also be
Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>