Hello
On 11/22/05, Anthere Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi
I was asked yesterday if it was mandatory that during votes for new languages creation, the editor
- has an account on meta
- has an account on any already existing project
I do not know what the current policy is.
I'm afraid we have no an established policy on new lang edition vote at all at least for Wikipedia .. for Wikinews there is A fixed rule but I am not sure IF it could be applied on Wikipedia ...
For Wikinews vote the current policy says: *All voters should have an account on meta *Some voters should have a resonable amont of edits on the same lang project. *All voter should have edits on a certain project.
It works for Wikinews fairly ... as far as Japanese Wikinews is concerned. 5 supports, including 4 regular ja users could indicated a certain number of potential contributors. On the other hand, as for Wikipedia vote, we can't use the second criteria though. In my humble opinion the second one is the core of those rules: a new launched project should be have a number of regular who can prove themselves to be a regular editor on the target language. But for most Wikipedias, there is no previous project in the same language.
Let me run a random thought ....
My general opinion about voting eligibility on meta is "a registered user whose user page has a link to at least one local project". But I am not sure if it is the case for the current issue. Perhaps it would be nice to say "at least one supporter should be so-and-so" but I am very dubious if we expect all voters have been fairly active on another language project.
So my proposal is, let them start a test wiki somewhere, on meta or on a separate wiki, and if they have some core project documents (like NPOV, Licensing and copyright, Requests for adminship ... and "Ignore all rules" if preferable) and a certain number of pages of test articles and then ask the community to vote - support or deny their proposal.
Somehow it is more generous than for potential Wikinewsies, but I don't think it unfair; the communities we can guess behind the proposal are different, so such difference could be reasonable, hopefully.
-- Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com