Talking about removal...
Mark... the request for permission was stating artificial languages are perfectly acceptable.
Aphaia added a paragraph which reflected better the current most agreed upon idea on the topic, which is precisely that creation of artificial languages may indeed ... just not happen.
You removed Aphaia comments.
I placed them back, slightly rephrased. I hope my rephrasing is acceptable to you.
But please, admit that the community generally do not share your opinion on the matter of artificial languages... and that these pages should reflect the reality of what is happening... rather than what you hope should happen. Writing down a misrepresentation will not help, but to confuse people.
Actually, as you can see from my vote at [[Artificial languages equal rights]], you are right that the majority do not share my opinion. But they also don't share Aphaia's (which is the same as mine): the majority believe that they should in fact get equal treatment.
ant
By the way... why does a foundation-wide vote exactly mean ? I must confess I am a bit worried to see you make many changes to this page. Generally, you confess opinions on the matter of new languages which are significantly different from community opinion... and I would prefer you avoid removing to many comments. For example : http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_new_languages&c...
I confess I forgot about the Foundation wide vote on the matter of
Some languages that have been decided are too similar to another language include a proposed [[:en:Filipino language|Filipino]] wiki (redundant with [[:en:Tagalog language|Tagalog]]), [[:en:Basel German|Basel German]] wiki (redundant with [[:en:Alemannic language|Alemannic]]), East German wiki (redundant with [[:en:German language|German]]).
No, no, I was talking about artificial languages. See [[m:Artificial languages equal rights]] (a meta page). The majority disagrees with the opinion shared by both Aphaia and myself that artificial languages should not get Wikipedias.
"have been decided are too similar to another language" section I removed, because by whom has it been decided? East German surely had a number of comments saying it was stupid, but there was also a comment saying that it was ambiguous. Filipino is a little bit different from Tagalog in certain ways, but it had too few comments for anything to have been "decided" even by popular opinion. Baseldytsch was never completely resolved, though there was not a majority in favour of its creation.
For my own opinion on those: I don't think there should be a separate East German or Tagalog Wikipedia, but I think that maybe there should be a separate Baseldytsch WP.
Mark