Hoi,
This is not that strange. The time span for discussion is brief. Discussion
is relevant until the moment when it is decided that a language is eligible.
When a language is eligible, the people who work on a proposal have to
fulfill the rest of the requirements but do so in the understanding that
their work will not be in vain. Most of the discussions about EA were from
the time when the proposal had already been given the eligible status.
Most of the arguments used are the same arguments seen in other requests.
People often feel really strongly about "their" language. The results are
often quite ugly; for one language the choice of the official orthography
makes you a Stalinist. The choice of an "official" orthography splits
languages along the lines of borders. People writing their mother tongue
are called dumb.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster(a)gmail.com>
So, there are
two conclusions: (1) I may imagine the process which had
happened in relation to EA approval: no one made any serious objection
and it passed. (2) There are two LangCom members introduced better in
the linguistic issues, so the expertise level is raised and I think
that it will be raised more in the future.
I find it hard to believe that the tons and tons of discussion on EA's
proposal page didnt generate any comments from the committee except a brief
conversation between Gerard and one member. That may mean that they were
disengaged at the time or have not been given enough time to consider
before the actual approval occured. Either way it points out a fault in the
policy because both of which are practically undetectable in the current
process. It is strange that we require a minimum number of people to
participate in most of our actions (like admin elections for example) but
approving a new wiki will occur with only a request and one reply.
--
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l