1.  I have asked the Gorontalo test community if it has access to any 
language experts (professors or linguists) for language verification.  I 
suggested to them that ideally such an expert would be someone who has had no 
substantial involvement with the test so far. However, as a backup, I suggested 
to them that someone who has been involved, but who has really unambiguous 
credentials, might be good enough. (My own personal opinion is that it has to 
be; if projects are going to remain frozen in Incubator because nobody can find 
a language expert, then we might as well tell people in such test communities 
not to bother. And I don't think we want to do that.)  As an aside, the Ingush 
Wikipedia test has been waiting for language verification for months; I intend 
to ask them along the same lines if they have access to any experts.
  2.  I think LangCom needs to decide what it considers to be an acceptable 
conlang and what it doesn't. The LFN test project team has been working hard 
and seriously on this project for months. The language is a serious attempt at 
an auxiliary language, and isn't a construction for a fictional world like 
Klingon or the Tolkien languages, so I don't think there is a concern that LFN 
Wikipedia would be considered a frivolous project. And LFN has more speakers 
than a couple of other conlangs that have Wikipedias already (albeit 
grandfathered ones). Bottom line: as proposals on conlang projects go, this is 
going to be about as good as it gets. If nevertheless you decide not to approve 
this project, then I think you really need to decide on some criteria, or 
decide that you are not going to accept any new conlangs at all.

Respectfully,
Steven White (User:StevenJ81)


Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

Reply via email to