I saw no objections (or any other types of comments) to the idea of rejecting Wikipedia Northwest African Arabichttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Northwest_African_Arabic and Wikipedia Colloquial Cantonesehttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Colloquial_Cantonese, so I am going forward with those.
I would still like some thoughts on the subject of Wikipedia Marwarihttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Marwari. It's a macrolanguage, but on the other hand as far as I can tell this is a decently active test project—and none of its consituent languages has a test project. So I'm inclined to mark this eligible.
Steven
Sent from Outlookhttp://aka.ms/weboutlook
Hoi, What is different why this should be deemoed eligible? Activity is not an argument. Thanks, GerardM
Op ma 2 apr. 2018 om 17:54 schreef Steven White Koala19890@hotmail.com
I saw no objections (or any other types of comments) to the idea of rejecting Wikipedia Northwest African Arabic https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Northwest_African_Arabic and Wikipedia Colloquial Cantonese https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Colloquial_Cantonese, so I am going forward with those.
I would still like some thoughts on the subject of Wikipedia Marwari https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Marwari. It's a macrolanguage, but on the other hand as far as I can tell this is a decently active test project—and none of its consituent languages has a test project. So I'm inclined to mark this eligible.
Steven
Sent from Outlook http://aka.ms/weboutlook _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom