He's probably thinking of Lower Sorbian =
http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/dsb (approx. 300 pages
already), Saterlandic =
http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/stq
(approx. 300 pages already), and Latgalian =
http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/bat-ltg (approx. 150 pages
already), among others.
The new policy has been confusing for the people who made these
requests originally. They cannot understand why they should have to
make a second request. And besides, if their first request can just be
shot down for no reason at all, why couldn't their second request? I
think this is starting to seem pointless to them. Going directly from
"approved requests" to "automatically denied requests"... makes 0
sense.
Mark
On 31/03/07, Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Aside from the kabyle, ottoman turkish, and crimean tatar wikipedias, what
requests are you thinking of where editors are serious about starting
their wiki?
By the way -- I haven't said it often enough since incubator.wikimedia
got set up, but Three Cheers for that lovely site. It is wonderful to
have a proper space to develop a new language wiki, precisely so that
these issues of how to fix a reasonable language policy can take place
without preventing interested editors from developing new articles in
their chosen language.
I'm not sure anyone is saying "everything is fine, move along", but I
think we also have a familiar exaggeration on both sides of the issue of
what the differences are between two fairly similar positions about what
is required to start a new wiki... perhaps it is time for a loud
broadcasting of the new language policy, and a call (in more languages
than just English) for interested participants to return to
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_languages
and weigh in?
SJ
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Arbeo M wrote:
2007/3/30, The Cunctator cunctator(a)gmail.com:
The reasonable assumption is that something in
the process is broken.
That's exactly the point. On one side we have a number of well-advanced
requests for new languages with good potential. There's a number of editors
who are serious about starting their wiki. And on the other side we have a
committee in charge enabling this type of progress. Yet, nothing ever
happens, instead today we're "celebrating" half a year without a single
new
Wikipedia.
That's just the cold hard facts and they speak for themselves.
I don't want this discussion to revolve in circles or drift off into
polemics but we'd be a whole lot further if the committee would acknowledge
this reality instead of insisting that everything is fine a long as the holy
rules are left untouched. Please!
--Arbeo
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.