On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Crazy Lover always_yours.forever@yahoo.com wrote:
visit our proposal page http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Language_proposal_policy/Community_draft the baselines are definied. please help us to refine them.
Why, if I don't agree with the baselines, would I help you refining them?
My objections: * I _still_ am not convinced that translating the interface should be necessary for a project to go on * It seems that criteriums 2 (ISO 639) and 3 (no language variations) would better be combined - ISO 639 codes are in general not given to language variants, so having it as a separate requirement seems overkill. - criterium: should have an existing body of written language - criterium: should be sufficient distinct from existing languages Followed by: As a default, we consider a language to have these two properties if and only if it has an ISO 639 code. Exceptions in either direction can be made if there are particularly good arguments.
As for refining the points: At point 4 I would like to add that the audience should not only be people who are able to use that language, but also people who would want to use it - as an example, millions of people would be able to read an "English written backward" Wikipedia, but none or almost none would prefer it to the existing English one (of course English written backward falls short of criteriums 2 and 3)