Hoi, I read on the list of "approved" project a proposal for a bua.wikipedia.org The code bua is NOT an ISO-639 code. The article about this language on the en.wikipedia is almost a stub. I find the quality of the requests for many new projects really low. Have a few people, find yourself a code .. or make one up who cares .. :(
This is not the first time we have projects started where it is assumed that the facts given are solid. This is definitively another one of them.
I object to the start of this project under this code. As it is for the special projects committee to accept new language versions or projects, I urge them to be diligent in the checking of the basic facts.
Thanks, GerardM
Gerard, you're quite wrong. BUA is a perfectly valid iso 639-2 code.
Mark
On 07/05/06, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I read on the list of "approved" project a proposal for a bua.wikipedia.org The code bua is NOT an ISO-639 code. The article about this language on the en.wikipedia is almost a stub. I find the quality of the requests for many new projects really low. Have a few people, find yourself a code .. or make one up who cares .. :(
This is not the first time we have projects started where it is assumed that the facts given are solid. This is definitively another one of them.
I object to the start of this project under this code. As it is for the special projects committee to accept new language versions or projects, I urge them to be diligent in the checking of the basic facts.
Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
Hoi, Right, but we moved from 639-2 to 639-3 and as a 639-3 code it is not a language at all. Have a look at http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90484 it shows that Buriat is a language family. It is not a language, it is many languages. Consequently the proposal is deficient. Thanks, GerardM
Mark Williamson wrote:
Gerard, you're quite wrong. BUA is a perfectly valid iso 639-2 code.
Mark
On 07/05/06, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I read on the list of "approved" project a proposal for a bua.wikipedia.org The code bua is NOT an ISO-639 code. The article about this language on the en.wikipedia is almost a stub. I find the quality of the requests for many new projects really low. Have a few people, find yourself a code .. or make one up who cares .. :(
This is not the first time we have projects started where it is assumed that the facts given are solid. This is definitively another one of them.
I object to the start of this project under this code. As it is for the special projects committee to accept new language versions or projects, I urge them to be diligent in the checking of the basic facts.
Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
Hi!
Mmmm... I know people from the Altaj region who are buriat. AFAIK, the language is now taught in schools in full parity with russian. I'll have to check it, though. It's quite a while since I've have been talking to them about this.
Bèrto
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 8:17 PM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] An "approved" project ??
Hoi, Right, but we moved from 639-2 to 639-3 and as a 639-3 code it is not a language at all. Have a look at http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90484 it shows that Buriat is a language family. It is not a language, it is many languages. Consequently the proposal is deficient. Thanks, GerardM
Mark Williamson wrote:
Gerard, you're quite wrong. BUA is a perfectly valid iso 639-2 code.
Mark
On 07/05/06, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I read on the list of "approved" project a proposal for a bua.wikipedia.org The code bua is NOT an ISO-639 code. The article about this language on the en.wikipedia is almost a stub. I find the quality of the requests for many new projects really low. Have a few people, find yourself a code .. or make one up who cares .. :(
This is not the first time we have projects started where it is assumed that the facts given are solid. This is definitively another one of them.
I object to the start of this project under this code. As it is for the special projects committee to accept new language versions or projects, I urge them to be diligent in the checking of the basic facts.
Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Have a look at http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90484 it shows that Buriat is a language family. It is not a language, it is many languages. Consequently the proposal is deficient.
Speakers only in Russia: 300.000
It's official language of Buryat Republic (republic within Russian Federation), so where are education and regulation in the language. Where are many dialects, but was elected as official.
Website of local goverment in Buryat language: http://egov-buryatia.ru:8082/
Russian-Buryat dictionary http://www.buryatia.org/modules.php?name=Encyclopedia&op=list_content&am...
textbook of Buryat language: http://uchebnik.netfirms.com/less1-4.htm
active webforum in the language: http://www.buryatia.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=7
Why it is deficient?
-- Alexander Sigachov
Hi!
Why it is deficient?
I guess the problem is that sometimes ethnologue codes may differ from reality. The further away languages get from the west, the lower is the probability of having people inform ethnologue of the problem, in order to correct the situation. Now maybe there really are a number of variations of the buryaty language, one of which has got govt recognition. The problem is that no ethnologue code was issued, following this event. I suspect that more than just one language may find itself in this situation, in the area of the Russian Federation. It would be nice to set up a systematic verification process and clear up the mess.
Gerard, is there any standard procedure we should follow to report the problem to ethnologue?
Bèrto
Actually there is an ethnologue code for "Russian Buryat" (as opposed to Mongolian or Chinese Buryat). That would probably be appropriate here.
Mark
On 09/05/06, Berto albertoserra@ukr.net wrote:
Hi!
Why it is deficient?
I guess the problem is that sometimes ethnologue codes may differ from reality. The further away languages get from the west, the lower is the probability of having people inform ethnologue of the problem, in order to correct the situation. Now maybe there really are a number of variations of the buryaty language, one of which has got govt recognition. The problem is that no ethnologue code was issued, following this event. I suspect that more than just one language may find itself in this situation, in the area of the Russian Federation. It would be nice to set up a systematic verification process and clear up the mess.
Gerard, is there any standard procedure we should follow to report the problem to ethnologue?
Bèrto
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org