2005/11/8, SJ 2.718281828@gmail.com:
** Perhaps we can have a standard procedure that assumes an ISO-2 code language, and provide for exceptions. Some current non-ISO wikipedia languages, illustrating various reasons different users might have not to stick blindly to such a standard :
- zh_min_nan (1,200 articles; listed in places as "taiwanese") ,
- tpi (tok pisin, recent conlang, 160 articles),
- fiu_vro (Võro, 105 articles & activity),
- roa_rup (Aromanian; 29 articles & little activity, but just got ISO
639-2 approval for "rup" in September).
tpi *is* an official ISO 639-2 code. It is also not a conlang, but a creole - I think you're confusing it with Tokipona, for which the Wikipedia has been closed.
Apart from that, I am of the opinion that it is good to go by ISO 639-2, but as a default rather than an absolute. That is, we don't always follow ISO 639-2, but for languages on the list we will include unless there is a strong argument being made against, whereas languages not on the list will not be included only if there is a strong argument being made in support. Personally I would like to be slightly more strict - ISO 639-2 for living languages, but dead languages will have to show that there is recent material written in the language as well, rather than just an ISO 639-2 code because of old work.
-- Andre Engels, andreengels@gmail.com ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels