Hi, I wrote to the expert.
I have to say that although the statistics look good, my first impression is that a lot of articles are still a bit too short. But I'll take a closer look at more articles, as there are over 700 of them, and I'll wait for the expert's reply. -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore 2016-12-04 1:39 GMT+02:00 MF-Warburg <[email protected]>: > Hi all, > > I think Ingush Wikipedia can be approved, from the activity viewpoint. The > translation of the most-used messages is complete (< > http://tools.wmflabs.org/robin/?tool=codelookup&code=inh>) and there has > been a quite high activity since almost ten months now < > https://tools.wmflabs.org/meta/catanalysis/index.php? > cat=0&title=Wp/inh&wiki=incubatorwiki>. > > Now we would of course need verificiation of the content. Searching the > archives, I found a mail from Amir from 10 November 2011. Back then, a > linguist had said the language in the test-wiki was not quite what would be > expected from literary Ingush. However, the current editors are all > different from the ones that were active five years ago. > Amir, could you check with that linguist or someone else from the Ingush > State University again about the quality of the content? > > Best regards, MF-W > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > >
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
