Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Henry H. Tan-Tenn wrote:
Delirium wrote:
If it did work, Wikipedia would suddenly become the source of 99% of extant Gothic texts, which would be somewhat interesting.
Perhaps the Gothic writers could start off with Wikisource. Various technical issues could be worked out there (encoding, font, spelling). Just annotating the texts in Gothic could be a small, yet unprecedented (?) step toward more original writing.
Another good place to start is wiktionary; to me artificial or dead languages make themselves more credible if a wikipedia customer can find what the words actually mean. I would propose that a minimum of say 1500 of the most used words have entries in one wiktionary. After this is done, the people who propose a new wikipedia have proven themselves to be serious by giving our users a change to understand what is says.
These are all excellent suggestions. The other thing that should be considered is a Gothic grammar in Wikibooks. These are all broad considerations that could go into establishing criteria for determining whether a dead language should have its own Wikipedia.
The 1500 word minimum may be somewhat arbitrary, but the principle is good. I would even say that it does not have to be in "one" wiktionary, but it could be the total of all Gothic words in all Wiktionaries. I'm not at all supporting the premature establishment of a uniquely Gothic Wiktionary.
Ec