I think you've missed the point.
Mark
On 11/08/2008, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi.
Given the current practice, this whole issue is irrelevant. There is an Arab
project and this will continue to be the case.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Crazy Lover <always_yours.forever(a)yahoo.com
wrote:
Reviewing the requirements of current policy
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Language_proposal_policy
i thought in standard arabic language, and the inevitable consecuense:
this
language cannot meet the requirement. Standard arabic isn't speak anymore
as
first language. it's based in Religious arabic languages, it's archaic,
and
it is neccesary to learn at school to understand it. its situation is
similar to medieval latin. Then, the consecuense will be absurd: the
rejection of any new project in this useful language.
on the other hand, there are several native languages, all daugthers of
classical arabic, like Egyptian arabic (or Masri), whose
proposal has been approved
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Egyptia…
precissely for its native condition.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l