[Foundation-l] IYL'08: Moratorium on deleting language projects?

[Mark Williamson]

So true -- there are now several groups of people who have been turned
down several times because the requirements keep changing.

STOP!

On 03/01/2008, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod at mccme.ru> wrote:
> I am not really sure that I agree with the idea of the moratorium, since
> the projects nominated for deletion are really those not active for years,
> former one-editor projects where the only editor has lost interest. Those
> with the slightest activity are not deleted, with the exception of clear
> fraud like ru-sib.
>
> I agree though that clear and transparent rules must be established for
> the release of the projects from the incubator. I feel that now the rules
> are on the harsher side, so that many projects which made it couple of
> years ago and can be now considered to be moderately successful, would not
> have a chance now. Even worse, the rules seems to change quickly and
> without notice, and are applied retroactively. For instance, Sakha
> Wikipedia was conditionally approved in 2006, then the rules were changed
> and they were told to translate the interface, and when they translated
> the interface, the project was still not open since the rules were changed
> again to require five active editors. I know that this really makes people
> extremely frustrated, and I will not be surprised if the whole project
> gets abandoned just because it stays in the Incubator for years.
>
> Cheers,
> Yaroslav
>
> > Greetings and Happy New Year 2008 to all!
> >
> >
> >
> > This year has been declared by the UN as "International Year of
> > Languages."*
> > What exactly that will mean depends in part on what UNESCO - which is
> > charged with coordinating the Year - and in part on what various groups
> > and
> > individuals dealing with languages and linguistics decide to make of it.
> >
> >
> >
> > I would like to propose that Wikimedia - which is in many ways on the
> > cutting edge of multilingual exploitation of the potential of the web, but
> > which has some language projects slated for deletion after a period of
> > being
> > "closed" (which I understand also means being placed in an "incubator"
> > status) - declare for the duration of the IYL (2008) a moratorium on
> > deletion of language projects.
> >
> >
> >
> > The moratorium period would also be used to discuss (and implement) new
> > means to save and develop projects in incubator status, which may involve
> > any of the following and more:
> >
> > * A "mentor" or "champion" for each project that is "closed"/"in the
> > incubator"
> >
> > ** This person would advocate for the project within Wikimedia and
> > outside,
> > and coordinate efforts on its behalf
> >
> > * Developing a methodology or set of guidelines for searching for relevant
> > experts and language bodies that might help with the project in question
> >
> > * An "incubator" period longer than the currently typical (as I understand
> > it) one year for languages that meet certain criteria
> >
> > ** The criteria would probably involve the number of speakers
> >
> > * Develop a project proposal for outside funding to support development of
> > Wikimedia projects in less-widely spoken languages
> >
> >
> >
> > A permanent change might also be considered:
> >
> > * Change in terminology since "close" and "delete" sound equally final to
> > average users, when in fact a "closed" project still lives
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm particularly concerned about this issue because some African language
> > projects are at risk, and I think that part of the problem is that there
> > needs to be new ways of proactively identifying people and resources to
> > save
> > and develop such editions. I would mention that for example the Afar
> > Wikipedia is slated for closure (which I understand means it is on the
> > "incubator" and not deleted), but at the same time Afar has a locale and
> > there is a project to localize AbiWord in it. That's an interesting
> > juxtaposition of facts, which is probably not unusual, but is not always
> > (or
> > perhaps almost never?) noted in discussions on closure/deletion.
> >
> >
> >
> > Part of the problem is successfully reaching people who are activists or
> > "mavens" (per Gladwell's Tipping Point) for/in the language who simply are
> > not connected with Wikipedia or perhaps not even really aware of it or how
> > it could be useful in their efforts. Setting up a system with something
> > like
> > a mentor and a longer stay of execution for inactive projects could pay
> > off
> > with more active projects in more languages sooner - beginning with the
> > ones
> > that exist but are not yet active.
> >
> >
> >
> > Part of the problem with closing a project while saying that "well, when
> > there's a community, they can apply for a new project" is that the bar is
> > also raised. It is much easier to work with the fact that the Wikipedia
> > space is already there and get a handful of individuals involved to get it
> > started than to have to prove the concept and get a group organized to
> > apply
> > for a new project. Much easier to push start a car with the key in the
> > ignition than to take away the key until they get a proper repair job
> > done.
> >
> >
> >
> > Anyway I put this forth for discussion in the spirit of IYL 2008. All the
> > best.
> >
> >
> >
> > Don Osborn
> >
> > Bisharat.net
> >
> > PanAfriL10n.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.