Re: [Langcom] Project requests marked "eligible" that never had a test created - Langcom

26 Jun 2018

      OK. Those proposals marked "eligible" I will leave alone.
Sent from Outlookhttp://aka.ms/weboutlook
________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 07:59:21 +0300
From: Oliver Stegen oliver_stegen@sil.org
To: Langcom langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Langcom] Project requests marked "eligible" that never
        had a test created
As far as I understand, 'eligible' only means that the language in the
proposal has an ISO 639-3 code.
I agree with Gerard that eligibility is not affected by staleness.
Theoretically, a proposal can remain open for as long as someone works
on it sporadically (or if enough content has been created), even if it
doesn't fulfill the other requirements to go live. In that case, such a
proposal would just stay in the incubator.
(I wouldn't be surprised if there are projects that are happy to stay in
the incubator - I myself have one of those, namely lag:wt)
Fwiw,
Oliver
On 20-Jun-18 00:36, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
...
Hoi,
As always, eligible means that when people put in the effort and it is
proven to be that language it will be approved. Stale imho only means
that a past attempt was not succesful so that we do not have to
continually monitor it. Eligibility is not affected by staleness.
Thanks,
     GerardM
On 19 June 2018 at 23:14, Steven White <Koala19890@hotmail.com
mailto:Koala19890@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi. Please see this comment
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FTalk%3ALanguage_committee%23Some_old_requests_that_don%2527t_have_Incubator_tests_but_also_%25E2%2580%259Celigible%25E2%2580%259D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf078159a025f4261a27c08d5da933a6c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636655248225099801&sdata=OiS9Rs6bayxIDcVZHfMDtK0qD9Ox6lB5zYQQvqnF0xY%3D&reserved=0>
on Meta.

Contributors pointed out three cases in which a request was marked
"eligible" (usually long ago), but where a test project was never
started. Question I have for you is: Should I leave them alone, or
change them to "rejected as stale"?

I can go either way on this. If we were evaluating them now, we'd
close them as stale. But my big concern in trying to process all
of these requests is to try to clear the backlog of "discussion"
and "on hold" requests, because those make us appear as if we're
not doing anything. There are many old requests with the status of
"eligible" because people work on them only sporadically. In a
sense, these are no different.

I'd appreciate some opinions on this.

Steven

Sent from Outlook <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fweboutlook&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf078159a025f4261a27c08d5da933a6c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636655248225099801&sdata=EQSfXnFtMCTjsVJznnhJqBdRCG2WMmlpyOOxUliJpqs%3D&reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org>