[Foundation-l] Allow new wikis in extinct languages?

[Mark Williamson]

New York has less of a "dialect" than what is known in linguistics as
a regional variety. Dialects differ from each other more than New York
English does from most other American English varieties.

Mark

On 02/04/2008, Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Gerard Meijssen
>
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > Hoi,
>
> >  If I were not to believe in the usefulness of the Wiki model, I would not
>  >  invest so much in it. There is however a limit to its usefulness. For one
>  >  when we publish a text, we indicate in the meta data for that text that it
>  >  is in a specific linguistic entity. This list is based on standards, these
>  >  standards are shared and as a consequence things are inferred from the
>  >  correct usage of these standards. It is perfectly possible to write a
>  >  featured article on "Westfries". Westfries is a dialect of the Dutch
>  >  language. Writing a fa about this does not make for a standard that is
>  >  recognised by others.
>
>
> A featured article on a dialect is quite different from a featured
>  article on a dialect's literature.  For example, my native dialect is
>  [[New York dialect]], also known as "Brooklynese".  This dialect is
>  spoken by millions of people in the New York metropolitan area.  And,
>  although the dialect appears sometimes in fiction (usually spoken by
>  gangsters!) to add "local color", it is clearly not a standard
>  literary language of any kind.  [[New York dialect literature]] would
>  not be notable.
>
>  I don't know the case with "Westfries"; maybe it is similar, maybe it
>  is different.
>
>  Anyway, my proposal is directly about "historical" languages that
>  still have active literatures; the scope is important because this is
>  a category that the ISO chooses not to assess.
>
>  OK, so the only remaining issue then, appears to be the metadata codes.
>
>  Let me just say that I think the metadata issue should be distinctly
>  secondary, and that our -priority- should be recognizing the full
>  diversity of contemporary human expression.  We can file it under our
>  own code for the time being, and we could easily move it if the ISO
>  ever chooses to change their procedures on this, in say 10 years.
>
>
>  Thanks,
>  Pharos
>
>  >  On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 7:51 PM, Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  >  > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
>  >  > <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  > > Hoi,
>  >  > >  Having a criterion that is dependent on the English language Wikipedia
>  >  > is
>  >  > >  not and cannot be seriously considered as a standard. What it considers
>  >  > note
>  >  > >  worthy is not necessarily relevant from a linguistic or otherwise point
>  >  > of
>  >  > >  view.
>  >  >
>  >  > Are you denying the usefulness of the wiki model?
>  >  >
>  >  > To become a Featured Article, a literature article would have to go
>  >  > through the very serious Featured Article Candidates Review.  This is
>  >  > the best process we have -anywhere- on Wikimedia to weed out fake and
>  >  > non-notable things.
>  >  >
>  >  > I'll tell you one thing, there was never a Featured Article on
>  >  > [[Siberian language literature]].
>  >  >
>  >  > This is just one way for the Languages subcommittee to farm out the
>  >  > research work, to let an established review process advise their
>  >  > opinion on these particular cases, and spare the subcommittee many
>  >  > pages of useless back-and-forth arguments and spurious "facts"
>  >  > supporting different sides.
>  >  >
>  >  > And it's about literary relevance, not linguistic relevance.
>  >  >
>  >  > Neither is there a reason to privilege English: an FA is any
>  >  > major-language Wikipedia would demonstrate the same point.
>  >  >
>  >  > Thanks,
>  >  > Pharos
>  >  >
>  >  > >  On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com>
>  >  > wrote:
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)
>  >  > >  > <pathoschild at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  > >  > > Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  > >  > >
>  >  > >  > > >  >  What is "notable"?
>  >  > >  > >  >
>  >  > >  > >  >  Notable enough to have a Featured Article about [[Modern Latin
>  >  > >  > >  >  literature]] or [[Modern Coptic literature]] on English
>  >  > Wikipedia or
>  >  > >  > >  >  another major-language Wikipedia.
>  >  > >  > >  >
>  >  > >  > >
>  >  > >  > >  English should not have a wiki? I don't think it's a very good
>  >  > >  > >  criteria if even our most prolific non-extinct language doesn't
>  >  > >  > >  qualify.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  > I'm proposing a standard for languages that don't have native
>  >  > >  > speakers, which must be judged solely on the output of their written
>  >  > >  > literatures.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  > This would not restrict Wikipedias for languages with native
>  >  > speakers.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  > (Obviously [[Modern English literature]] is notable enough a subject
>  >  > >  > to be FA-worthy anyway, and it would hardly need to be demonstrated)
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  > Thanks,
>  >  > >  > Pharos
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >
>  >  > >
>  >  > > > _______________________________________________
>  >  > >  > foundation-l mailing list
>  >  > >  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  >  > >  > Unsubscribe:
>  >  > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  _______________________________________________
>  >  > >  foundation-l mailing list
>  >  > >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  >  > >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >  > >
>  >  >
>  >  > _______________________________________________
>  >  > foundation-l mailing list
>  >  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  >  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >  >
>  >  _______________________________________________
>  >  foundation-l mailing list
>  >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  foundation-l mailing list
>  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>