I think a larger question is that should wikiquote be given same exempt to the condition of whether the language is living when it come to eligibility like wikisource?
在 2018年5月9日週三 13:25，Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> 寫道： > Hoi, > A comparison with Ancient Greek does not serve as a reason for > consistency. It was only accepted because of it being actually used in > schools. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 8 May 2018 at 18:37, Steven White <[email protected]> wrote: > >> These three are the only pending requests for Wikiquote and Wikivoyage >> projects dating back to 2012. >> >> >> Wikiquote Pashto >> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikiquote_Pashto> >> (ps): Eligible. >> >> Wikivoyage Malayam >> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikivoyage_Malayalam> >> (ml): Eligible. >> >> >> Wikiquote Syriac >> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikiquote_Syriac> >> (syc): Syriac, of course, is a historic language. Frankly, there are >> arguments to be made on either side of this one. >> >> >> *Leaning towards "eligible":* >> >> - There is a Wikipedia in this language already. Frequently, >> languages with Wikipedias are allowed to expand into other projects. >> - In 2010 Milos marked a Wikiquote test in Ancient Greek as >> "eligible". Possibly this case isn't much different, except that more >> people know Ancient Greek than know Classical Syriac. (But see below.) >> >> *Leaning towards "reject" (outright):* >> >> - The written policy on historical languages reads, "The proposal has >> a sufficient number of living native speakers to form a viable community >> and audience." I have the impression that at this point, LangCom is >> starting to loosen up a little about whether the speakers are "native" >> speakers, as long as there are enough (reasonably) fluent speakers to form >> a viable community. But that "loosening" seems to apply mostly to >> Wikipedias *(e.g., *Coptic), and certainly not to Wikinews or >> Wikivoyage. I'm not sure about Wikiquote, as Ancient Greek is the only >> example to look to. And in any case, I'm not sure that Classical Syriac >> really has enough speakers to create a community; in that, the case >> potentially differs from Ancient Greek. >> >> *What about "reject" (stale)?* >> >> - There are about 14 pages in the test; all (except maybe one) were >> created in the first three months of its existence. Since then, the test >> has been pretty dormant. So far, tests that I have closed as stale have >> had >> no more than five pages created, and those generally within the same month >> of starting the test project. So while this test has been fairly dormant, >> it's been more active than that. >> >> >> I'd appreciate some opinions on what to do here. I will say straight out >> that even if the decision is to reject, I see no reason that the test can't >> stay on Incubator, as it meets the less stringent requirements for a test >> to be hosted on Incubator. So you're deciding between >> >> >> - Rejecting outright, but test remains on Incubator, probably >> permanently >> - Marking eligible (consistent with what was done with Ancient Greek) >> >> >> Steven >> >> Sent from Outlook <http://aka.ms/weboutlook> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Langcom mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
