Look, at a certain level there's some truth to it. We certainly haven't made the
case here on whether or not this is actually in Bulgarian, after all.
This is a very unusual case in that we might well have seen this project as closable in
the first place. Instead, we gave a group of contributors time to revive the project. We
asked only that (1) they put a reasonable community in place to support the project going
forward, and (2) they remove questionable content. Really, we've only been evaluating
this situation on whether those two requirements were meant.
1. Three regular contributors is typically enough for a brand new project. But both the
project and the contributors here have some history problems, and we didn't really
even have three regular contributors (only two) until about two months ago, when it
started to become clear that we might really close the project. If we were deciding to
approve this project from scratch, this would perhaps be just barely enough activity to
say yes--but only barely.
2. As to the part about critiquing how that RfD went down, it ties to the request to
remove questionable content. I can only say that this project revival was on our watch,
and we are entitled to make sure that the revival was done responsibly. We thought it
wasn't. And to say that three users, one of whom has a conflict-of-interest, have a
right to exclude other opinions from the discussion and decision, seems inappropriate.
My personal opinion is that LangCom bent over backwards over the course of a full year to
allow the process to proceed fairly. We think we've done so. If the Board doesn't
agree, that's the Board's prerogative. And we think project closure on this basis
is within our remit. But if it's not, we need to rewrite the closing project policy to
narrow the scope for project closures. And that will be someone else's job; I will
have had enough.
Steven
Steven White
koala19890(a)hotmail.com
Sent from Outlook<https://aka.ms/sdimjr> for iOS
________________________________
From: Langcom <langcom-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of
langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org <langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2019 8:00:03 AM
To: langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Langcom Digest, Vol 71, Issue 12
Send Langcom mailing list submissions to
langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wik…
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
langcom-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Langcom digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Comments on this? (James Heilman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 10:14:11 -0700
From: James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
<langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Langcom] Comments on this?
Message-ID:
<CAF1en7Xt1gcSzho5-hv7dOiyJqx0UR0QXeqH7FVc7bGgeitH2Q(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipe…
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian