Mark Williamson schreef: > Hello, > > Perhaps some of you are aware of the formation of the Langcom. > > Also, you may be aware of the recent reform of the language proposal

Hoi, The language committee has proposed things. It does not have the power to force issues. We are now at the stage where we have published our guidelines. We have given warning that we do adopt these guidelines as a rule if there was no indication of opposition to this. This has not happened. From our POV the rules as we published them apply. All projects for a new language that do not have a work in progress in the Incubator are denied. Starting in the Incubator is mandatory. Working on the localisation is a strong factor in favour for granting a new language a project. We have some questions outstanding with the board; particularly about the Belarus Wikipedia. In our opinion only the official Belarus Wikipedia has the right to the be.wikipedia label. We have asked at least a month ago for a resolution of this issue from the board. We do not want to take up new things that much if open things do not get resolved. It is a waste of our time otherwise. We have already denied one proposal for an artificial languages that has no wide support. That one was obvious. *The wls project has no reasonable amount of support at the moment, there are only 29,768 people speaking it .. Is this a reasonable

*The twd project has no reasonable amount of support at the moment, there is not even an estimation how many people are speaking it .. Is this a reasonable proposal ? *The stq project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess the localisation of the messages *The pfl project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess the localisation of the messages. There are insufficient articles of a sufficient length. *The lld project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess the localisation of the messages. There are insufficient articles of a sufficient length. *The kok project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess the localisation of the messages. There are no articles *The kab project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess the localisation of the messages. So basically from our point of view, it seems that the message files are not there. They are required. Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

Hoi, We are now at the stage where we have a policy. We are not interested in talking the proposal to death. We are first going to see how it

When we find that it does not work, we will tweak things carefully. The

of having message files for all languages is one of the major

in the current localisation procedures. You may think of it as a technicality or not fair. The point is that the developers proved to be unwilling to remedy things in the past (for

for Marathi). The only consequence can be that new projects have to have message files from the start. It is not fair to start new languages that are incomplete; it is not fair to require the localisation to be done again

a new project is requested in the same language. Thanks, GerardM On 3/5/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm not complaining about be.wp, I know that is a difficult situation > and I do not expect that it can be resolved soon. > > It doesn't appear that anybody told any of these people that they are > required to have a message file. > > These requests are simply sitting there, nobody has actually told > these people "We do not see ____, when you get that we will proceed > further with considerations for your Wiki." > > These people are very dedicated, I am sure if anyone had actually told > them what exactly it is that they need to do to move forward, they > would do it right away. I am sure the messages file would be > translated into Kabyle, for example, in less than a week, if anyone > had ever actually informed those people that it is needed. > > - Wls - if there is "no reasonable support", the number of speakers is > entirely irrelevant, of course the project is not viable since it has > 0 articles in the incubator and nobody currently asking for its > creation (there was only one person who did). > - Twd - this case needs to be probed further to see how much Twents > people would support it as a Wiki separate from nds-nl. There are > already over two hundred articles in it, but the majority are at > nds-nl.wp. User:Tubantia indicated preliminary support of such a > request some time ago, so it needs to be re-investigated to see if > this is a viable project or not, and whether the needs of > Twents-speakers are currently being surved by our existing project > (nds-nl) > - Stq - this is obviously a viable project. There is support of native > speakers, many many pages and very active on the incubator. So you > want a message file. Why didn't you tell the people working on this > project? I am sure they would prepare it in several days. > - Pfl - this project appears to still be in the early stages of > incubator development. At this point in time, I don't expect it to be > approved by anyone. > - Lld - same as pfl, except I do not expect its development soon. > Someone needs to investigate how well existing users are served by > rm.wp and fur.wp. > - Kok - although this is a major language of India with millions of > speakers, it is a problem that there are currently no articles. I'm > sure Frederick Noronha could remedy this, though; in the meantime, I > agree and do not think it would be reasonable to approve the project. > - Kab - same as stq. > > Others you failed to mention: > > - Bat-ltg/lv-ltg - same situation as stq. > - Crh - same situation as stq. > - Dsb - same situation as stq. > > It seems that if your rules mean that these Wikis are not able to be > created now, it is not necessarily the case that there is no > opposition (although it may be), the case currently is that _nobody > knows about the rules_. When you have a new policy with as much impact > as this one, it is imperative that it be solicited to all the persons > and communities to whom it is relevant, and their opinion awaited. > This is a Wiki, I am sure that even people who support the policy will > have suggestions for its improvement, but so far very few have shown > up because you have not advertised it much. > > Mark > > On 05/03/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Mark Williamson schreef: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Perhaps some of you are aware of the formation of the Langcom. > > > > > > Also, you may be aware of the recent reform of the language

> process. > > > > > > However, what you may not be aware of is that the Language

> > > is taking a while to actually get underway and to the point where

> > > can excersise control over the creation of new Wikis. > > > > > > Despite that, it seems that they are already looked to as an

> > > in this area, while they do not act as such. > > > > > > There are several new Wikipedia requests which were

> > > when first posed. Many of dozens of voices of support, and have > > > thriving tests on the Incubator. > > > > > > However, their requests were deleted by PathosChild who said that

> > > would have to remake them, which they have. So far, no proposals

> > > Wikipedias in new languages have been _approved_ under the new > > > proposal process, despite its having been around for several

> > > now. They just sit there. And sit there. And sit there some more. > > > > > > I think it's about time something happened. I think it's about

> > > welcomed these people -- the Kabyles, the Latgalians, the Lower > > > Sorbians, the Crimeans, and all the others -- into our Wikipedia > > > family. They have waited long enough. Why can't somebody do

> > > Why do they have to wait for the langcom to get underway? For all

> > > know, that could take years. > > > > > > Mark > > Hoi, > > The language committee has proposed things. It does not have the

> > to force issues. We are now at the stage where we have published our > > guidelines. We have given warning that we do adopt these guidelines

> > rule if there was no indication of opposition to this. This has not > > happened. From our POV the rules as we published them apply. > > > > All projects for a new language that do not have a work in progress

> > the Incubator are denied. Starting in the Incubator is mandatory. > > Working on the localisation is a strong factor in favour for

> > new language a project. > > > > We have some questions outstanding with the board; particularly

> > the Belarus Wikipedia. In our opinion only the official Belarus > > Wikipedia has the right to the be.wikipedia label. We have asked at > > least a month ago for a resolution of this issue from the board. We

> > not want to take up new things that much if open things do not get > > resolved. It is a waste of our time otherwise. > > > > We have already denied one proposal for an artificial languages that

> > no wide support. That one was obvious. > > > > *The wls project has no reasonable amount of support at the moment, > > there are only 29,768 people speaking it .. Is this a reasonable > proposal ? > > *The twd project has no reasonable amount of support at the moment, > > there is not even an estimation how many people are speaking it ..

> > this a reasonable proposal ? > > *The stq project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess

> > localisation of the messages > > *The pfl project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess

> > localisation of the messages. There are insufficient articles of a > > sufficient length. > > *The lld project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess

> > localisation of the messages. There are insufficient articles of a > > sufficient length. > > *The kok project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess

> > localisation of the messages. There are no articles > > *The kab project does not have a message file.. so we cannot assess

> > localisation of the messages. > > > > So basically from our point of view, it seems that the message files

_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

Hoi, I will be happy to see that you are right once the message files exist. Thanks, GerardM On 3/5/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm not protesting it, I am simply saying that obviously nobody is > aware of this requirement. > > The people who are working on these projects are very dedicated, if > they knew that this requirement existed, you can be sure that it would > be fixed right away. > > Mark > > On 05/03/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hoi, > > We are now at the stage where we have a policy. We are not

> > talking the proposal to death. We are first going to see how it > functions. > > When we find that it does not work, we will tweak things carefully.

> lack > > of having message files for all languages is one of the major > shortcomings > > in the current localisation procedures. > > > > You may think of it as a technicality or not fair. The point is that

> > developers proved to be unwilling to remedy things in the past (for > instance > > for Marathi). The only consequence can be that new projects have to > > have message > > files from the start. It is not fair to start new languages that are > > incomplete; it is not fair to require the localisation to be done

> when > > a new project is requested in the same language. > > > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > > > > > On 3/5/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I'm not complaining about be.wp, I know that is a difficult

> > > and I do not expect that it can be resolved soon. > > > > > > It doesn't appear that anybody told any of these people that they

> > > required to have a message file. > > > > > > These requests are simply sitting there, nobody has actually told > > > these people "We do not see ____, when you get that we will

> > > further with considerations for your Wiki." > > > > > > These people are very dedicated, I am sure if anyone had actually

> > > them what exactly it is that they need to do to move forward, they > > > would do it right away. I am sure the messages file would be > > > translated into Kabyle, for example, in less than a week, if

> > > had ever actually informed those people that it is needed. > > > > > > - Wls - if there is "no reasonable support", the number of

> > > entirely irrelevant, of course the project is not viable since it

> > > 0 articles in the incubator and nobody currently asking for its > > > creation (there was only one person who did). > > > - Twd - this case needs to be probed further to see how much

> > > people would support it as a Wiki separate from nds-nl. There are > > > already over two hundred articles in it, but the majority are at > > > nds-nl.wp. User:Tubantia indicated preliminary support of such a > > > request some time ago, so it needs to be re-investigated to see if > > > this is a viable project or not, and whether the needs of > > > Twents-speakers are currently being surved by our existing project > > > (nds-nl) > > > - Stq - this is obviously a viable project. There is support of

> > > speakers, many many pages and very active on the incubator. So you > > > want a message file. Why didn't you tell the people working on

> > > project? I am sure they would prepare it in several days. > > > - Pfl - this project appears to still be in the early stages of > > > incubator development. At this point in time, I don't expect it to

> > > approved by anyone. > > > - Lld - same as pfl, except I do not expect its development soon. > > > Someone needs to investigate how well existing users are served by > > > rm.wp and fur.wp. > > > - Kok - although this is a major language of India with millions

> > > speakers, it is a problem that there are currently no articles.

> > > sure Frederick Noronha could remedy this, though; in the meantime,

> > > agree and do not think it would be reasonable to approve the

> > > - Kab - same as stq. > > > > > > Others you failed to mention: > > > > > > - Bat-ltg/lv-ltg - same situation as stq. > > > - Crh - same situation as stq. > > > - Dsb - same situation as stq. > > > > > > It seems that if your rules mean that these Wikis are not able to

> > > created now, it is not necessarily the case that there is no > > > opposition (although it may be), the case currently is that

> > > knows about the rules_. When you have a new policy with as much

> > > as this one, it is imperative that it be solicited to all the

> > > and communities to whom it is relevant, and their opinion awaited. > > > This is a Wiki, I am sure that even people who support the policy

> > > have suggestions for its improvement, but so far very few have

> > > up because you have not advertised it much. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > On 05/03/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Mark Williamson schreef: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps some of you are aware of the formation of the Langcom. > > > > > > > > > > Also, you may be aware of the recent reform of the language > proposal > > > process. > > > > > > > > > > However, what you may not be aware of is that the Language > Committee > > > > > is taking a while to actually get underway and to the point

> they > > > > > can excersise control over the creation of new Wikis. > > > > > > > > > > Despite that, it seems that they are already looked to as an > authority > > > > > in this area, while they do not act as such. > > > > > > > > > > There are several new Wikipedia requests which were > uncontroversial > > > > > when first posed. Many of dozens of voices of support, and

> > > > > thriving tests on the Incubator. > > > > > > > > > > However, their requests were deleted by PathosChild who said

> they > > > > > would have to remake them, which they have. So far, no

> for > > > > > Wikipedias in new languages have been _approved_ under the new > > > > > proposal process, despite its having been around for several > months > > > > > now. They just sit there. And sit there. And sit there some

> > > > > > > > > > I think it's about time something happened. I think it's about > time we > > > > > welcomed these people -- the Kabyles, the Latgalians, the

> > > > > Sorbians, the Crimeans, and all the others -- into our

> > > > > family. They have waited long enough. Why can't somebody do > something? > > > > > Why do they have to wait for the langcom to get underway? For

> we > > > > > know, that could take years. > > > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > Hoi, > > > > The language committee has proposed things. It does not have the > power > > > > to force issues. We are now at the stage where we have published

> > > > guidelines. We have given warning that we do adopt these

> as a > > > > rule if there was no indication of opposition to this. This has

> > > > happened. From our POV the rules as we published them apply. > > > > > > > > All projects for a new language that do not have a work in

> in > > > > the Incubator are denied. Starting in the Incubator is

> > > > Working on the localisation is a strong factor in favour for > granting a > > > > new language a project. > > > > > > > > We have some questions outstanding with the board; particularly > about > > > > the Belarus Wikipedia. In our opinion only the official Belarus > > > > Wikipedia has the right to the be.wikipedia label. We have asked

> > > > least a month ago for a resolution of this issue from the board.

> do > > > > not want to take up new things that much if open things do not

> > > > resolved. It is a waste of our time otherwise. > > > > > > > > We have already denied one proposal for an artificial languages

> has > > > > no wide support. That one was obvious. > > > > > > > > *The wls project has no reasonable amount of support at the

> > > > there are only 29,768 people speaking it .. Is this a reasonable > > > proposal ? > > > > *The twd project has no reasonable amount of support at the

> > > > there is not even an estimation how many people are speaking it

> Is > > > > this a reasonable proposal ? > > > > *The stq project does not have a message file.. so we cannot

> the > > > > localisation of the messages > > > > *The pfl project does not have a message file.. so we cannot

> the > > > > localisation of the messages. There are insufficient articles of

> > > > sufficient length. > > > > *The lld project does not have a message file.. so we cannot

> the > > > > localisation of the messages. There are insufficient articles of

> > > > sufficient length. > > > > *The kok project does not have a message file.. so we cannot

> the > > > > localisation of the messages. There are no articles > > > > *The kab project does not have a message file.. so we cannot

> the > > > > localisation of the messages. > > > > > > > > So basically from our point of view, it seems that the message

_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

No, But I can expect them to read the mailing list. Thanks, GerardM On 3/5/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I take it, then, that you have informed these people of the reason > their requests are not approved yet? > > We can't expect them to be telepathic, after all. > > Mark > > On 05/03/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hoi, > > I will be happy to see that you are right once the message files

> > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > On 3/5/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I'm not protesting it, I am simply saying that obviously nobody is > > > aware of this requirement. > > > > > > The people who are working on these projects are very dedicated,

> > > they knew that this requirement existed, you can be sure that it

> > > be fixed right away. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > On 05/03/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hoi, > > > > We are now at the stage where we have a policy. We are not > interested in > > > > talking the proposal to death. We are first going to see how it > > > functions. > > > > When we find that it does not work, we will tweak things

> The > > > lack > > > > of having message files for all languages is one of the major > > > shortcomings > > > > in the current localisation procedures. > > > > > > > > You may think of it as a technicality or not fair. The point is

> the > > > > developers proved to be unwilling to remedy things in the past

> > > instance > > > > for Marathi). The only consequence can be that new projects have

> > > > have message > > > > files from the start. It is not fair to start new languages that

> > > > incomplete; it is not fair to require the localisation to be

> again > > > when > > > > a new project is requested in the same language. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > GerardM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/5/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm not complaining about be.wp, I know that is a difficult > situation > > > > > and I do not expect that it can be resolved soon. > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't appear that anybody told any of these people that

> are > > > > > required to have a message file. > > > > > > > > > > These requests are simply sitting there, nobody has actually

> > > > > these people "We do not see ____, when you get that we will > proceed > > > > > further with considerations for your Wiki." > > > > > > > > > > These people are very dedicated, I am sure if anyone had

> told > > > > > them what exactly it is that they need to do to move forward,

> > > > > would do it right away. I am sure the messages file would be > > > > > translated into Kabyle, for example, in less than a week, if > anyone > > > > > had ever actually informed those people that it is needed. > > > > > > > > > > - Wls - if there is "no reasonable support", the number of > speakers is > > > > > entirely irrelevant, of course the project is not viable since

> has > > > > > 0 articles in the incubator and nobody currently asking for

> > > > > creation (there was only one person who did). > > > > > - Twd - this case needs to be probed further to see how much > Twents > > > > > people would support it as a Wiki separate from nds-nl. There

> > > > > already over two hundred articles in it, but the majority are

> > > > > nds-nl.wp. User:Tubantia indicated preliminary support of such

> > > > > request some time ago, so it needs to be re-investigated to

> > > > > this is a viable project or not, and whether the needs of > > > > > Twents-speakers are currently being surved by our existing

> > > > > (nds-nl) > > > > > - Stq - this is obviously a viable project. There is support

> native > > > > > speakers, many many pages and very active on the incubator. So

> > > > > want a message file. Why didn't you tell the people working on > this > > > > > project? I am sure they would prepare it in several days. > > > > > - Pfl - this project appears to still be in the early stages

> > > > > incubator development. At this point in time, I don't expect

> be > > > > > approved by anyone. > > > > > - Lld - same as pfl, except I do not expect its development

> > > > > Someone needs to investigate how well existing users are

> > > > > rm.wp and fur.wp. > > > > > - Kok - although this is a major language of India with

> of > > > > > speakers, it is a problem that there are currently no

> I'm > > > > > sure Frederick Noronha could remedy this, though; in the

> I > > > > > agree and do not think it would be reasonable to approve the > project. > > > > > - Kab - same as stq. > > > > > > > > > > Others you failed to mention: > > > > > > > > > > - Bat-ltg/lv-ltg - same situation as stq. > > > > > - Crh - same situation as stq. > > > > > - Dsb - same situation as stq. > > > > > > > > > > It seems that if your rules mean that these Wikis are not able

> be > > > > > created now, it is not necessarily the case that there is no > > > > > opposition (although it may be), the case currently is that > _nobody > > > > > knows about the rules_. When you have a new policy with as

> impact > > > > > as this one, it is imperative that it be solicited to all the > persons > > > > > and communities to whom it is relevant, and their opinion

> > > > > This is a Wiki, I am sure that even people who support the

> will > > > > > have suggestions for its improvement, but so far very few have > shown > > > > > up because you have not advertised it much. > > > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > On 05/03/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>

> > > > > > Mark Williamson schreef: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps some of you are aware of the formation of the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, you may be aware of the recent reform of the

> > > proposal > > > > > process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, what you may not be aware of is that the Language > > > Committee > > > > > > > is taking a while to actually get underway and to the

> where > > > they > > > > > > > can excersise control over the creation of new Wikis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Despite that, it seems that they are already looked to as

> > > authority > > > > > > > in this area, while they do not act as such. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are several new Wikipedia requests which were > > > uncontroversial > > > > > > > when first posed. Many of dozens of voices of support, and > have > > > > > > > thriving tests on the Incubator. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, their requests were deleted by PathosChild who

> that > > > they > > > > > > > would have to remake them, which they have. So far, no > proposals > > > for > > > > > > > Wikipedias in new languages have been _approved_ under the

> > > > > > > proposal process, despite its having been around for

> > > months > > > > > > > now. They just sit there. And sit there. And sit there

> more. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's about time something happened. I think it's

> > > time we > > > > > > > welcomed these people -- the Kabyles, the Latgalians, the > Lower > > > > > > > Sorbians, the Crimeans, and all the others -- into our > Wikipedia > > > > > > > family. They have waited long enough. Why can't somebody

> > > something? > > > > > > > Why do they have to wait for the langcom to get underway?

> all > > > we > > > > > > > know, that could take years. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > Hoi, > > > > > > The language committee has proposed things. It does not have

> > > power > > > > > > to force issues. We are now at the stage where we have

> our > > > > > > guidelines. We have given warning that we do adopt these > guidelines > > > as a > > > > > > rule if there was no indication of opposition to this. This

> not > > > > > > happened. From our POV the rules as we published them apply. > > > > > > > > > > > > All projects for a new language that do not have a work in > progress > > > in > > > > > > the Incubator are denied. Starting in the Incubator is > mandatory. > > > > > > Working on the localisation is a strong factor in favour for > > > granting a > > > > > > new language a project. > > > > > > > > > > > > We have some questions outstanding with the board;

> > > about > > > > > > the Belarus Wikipedia. In our opinion only the official

> > > > > > Wikipedia has the right to the be.wikipedia label. We have

> at > > > > > > least a month ago for a resolution of this issue from the

> We > > > do > > > > > > not want to take up new things that much if open things do

> get > > > > > > resolved. It is a waste of our time otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > We have already denied one proposal for an artificial

> that > > > has > > > > > > no wide support. That one was obvious. > > > > > > > > > > > > *The wls project has no reasonable amount of support at the > moment, > > > > > > there are only 29,768 people speaking it .. Is this a

> > > > > proposal ? > > > > > > *The twd project has no reasonable amount of support at the > moment, > > > > > > there is not even an estimation how many people are speaking

> .. > > > Is > > > > > > this a reasonable proposal ? > > > > > > *The stq project does not have a message file.. so we cannot > assess > > > the > > > > > > localisation of the messages > > > > > > *The pfl project does not have a message file.. so we cannot > assess > > > the > > > > > > localisation of the messages. There are insufficient

> a > > > > > > sufficient length. > > > > > > *The lld project does not have a message file.. so we cannot > assess > > > the > > > > > > localisation of the messages. There are insufficient

> a > > > > > > sufficient length. > > > > > > *The kok project does not have a message file.. so we cannot > assess > > > the > > > > > > localisation of the messages. There are no articles > > > > > > *The kab project does not have a message file.. so we cannot > assess > > > the > > > > > > localisation of the messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > So basically from our point of view, it seems that the

_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l