Hoi,

We had in the past really well functioning languages that were also shifted to Wikia. It is all part and parcel of the original idea of the policy to prevent the easy creation of new projects. This was needed because at the time there was a groundswell of sentiment to prevent new projects all together.

When one member of the committee says "NO", it will not happen. Wen doubts are raised it is not no. So please be clear what your intentions are.

Thanks,

GerardM

On 1 February 2017 at 01:57, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen@sil.org> wrote:

Well, fair enough - LFN has an ISO 639-3 code and thus is technically eligible. However, how would it reasonably fulfill the criterion of native speaker editors? I'm even more doubtful than what Amir and Anthony expressed. I don't see how LFN can be sustainable enough to ever be allowed to leave the incubator. Sorry for my obstinacy.

On 31-Jan-17 19:00, Michael Everson wrote:

Klingon has a ridiculously limited vocabulary. LFN is as interesting and useful as Esperanto, and has a large and preactical vocabulary. I favour inclusiveness. It costs us little.

On 31 Jan 2017, at 17:48, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen@sil.org> wrote:

Please note that SIL accepted a change request (submitted by the inventor of this language, cf. http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/cr_files/2007-144.pdf) but Ethnologue did not include lfn in their editions ever.

So? That’s Ethnologue’s business.

Given that LFN has a wiki on Wikia (cf. http://lfn.wikia.com/wiki/Paje_xef), I don't see why we should accept it as a Wikimedia project. Let it go the way of Klingon ...

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom