Hoi,
As I have been saying before, the language committee works on the basis that
if only one person objects, something does not move forward. Many subjects
are raised on our mailing list where people are notified that something is
going to be done and when nobody objects within a certain time frame, the
proposal is moved forward.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/1/11 Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster(a)gmail.com>
So Based on the the Archives Jesse and Casey
graciously provided the link
to, the only discussion about Masry I found was:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee/Archives/2008-07#Wikip…
When I raised the issue of Masry on this mailing list, raising what I
thought was valid concerns, and at the same times others were raising such
concerns on meta, Gerard's response was, and I quote:
I have indicated that the language
committee was unanimous in deciding that the
Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia
request was eligible.
As indicated earlier, all members of the language
committee were explicitly asked to consider the
issue that you raise. The
consequence of this is that in my opinion you refuse people the freedom
to
work on a project in their language, languages
that are eligible under
the
language policy of the WMF.
Per above link, I see a discussion only between two members (Gerard and
Jon). I am pretty confused how did that constitute a 'unanimous decision'.
Wouldn't that be a gross mis-characterization?
Wouldn't refusal to point me to archived discussion *then*
mis-characterizing what really happened on the list be grounds for some
kind
of audit?
Forgive me If I am wrong, but that is the only information I have to work
on, if I am wrong, I apologize to Gerard.
Best Regards,
Muhammad Alsebaey
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l