[Wikipedia-l] Request for creation of Dutch-Low Saxon (nds-nl)

[Walter van Kalken]

Mark Williamson wrote:

>I will say it again: "Before whinging to us about that, can you at
>least actually try to use your dialect on nds.wiki to prove to us that
>it really doesn't work?"
>
>Mark
>
>  
>
There is two people from NDS both admins there supporting the creation 
of NDS-NL they are:
Slomox and HeikoEvermann 
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:HeikoEvermann&action=edit>. 
They are native speakers of the dialects involved. You are most 
definately not. Read their arguments. Apart from that there is a minimum 
of 5 for and if you count Slomox 6.

You really want me to hustle up more support? I can do that if you want. 
It says 5 in support. Those are the rules. May I also point out that 
nl.wikipedia is doing quite well so is li.wikipedia and fy.wikipedia. So 
a wikipedia in another language in the Netherlands area might just do 
very well.

And on another point Papiamentu and Surinamese have also reached support 
of more than 5 people.

Here are the arguments in favour of NDS-NL by native speakers (Which 
Node most obviously is not)

Lowlands-l does not help here. After some discussions we have decided to 
use the German based spelling according to SASS for the nds wikipedia. 
The spelling proposed by Lowlands-l is no option for us. And I can 
understand very well, that the dutch based spelling and our spelling do 
not match. In addition to that we have another problem: when Low Saxon 
lacks a word, we (on the German side of the border) have the tendency to 
borrow a German word, and on the other side of the border they would 
certainly prefer to borrow a dutch word. The language fell apart a long 
time ago. In fact most people in Germany do not even know that there is 
a Low Saxon language on the other side of the border. When I think about 
the two different versions of the Norse wikipedia that are made for one 
single country and when I think about the Aromunian wikipedia, I think 
that having a separate wikipeda for nds-nl is the best option. 
HeikoEvermann 
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:HeikoEvermann&action=edit> 
11:01, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

For what shall we try first? I looked for a comparison in English 
language and I would say, that nds-de and nds-nl are as far apart in 
pronounciation and in spelling as modern English and the 1400 example of 
middle English in en:Middle English 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_English> (this isn't the best 
comparison because one is a parallel development and the other serial, 
but the best example I found). If it were possible I really would like 
and want *one* Wikipedia for both. But it would be very hard to 
understand. Sure, if there would be a common orthography neither based 
singly on German nor on Dutch, this would be easier, but there is no 
such common orthography that is in broader use. The actual reality is, 
that we need two Wikipedias. --Slomox 
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Slomox> 16:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)