Hoi,
One person really want this .... the community does not. There are no real
arguments in favour, I am against.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 00:03, Steven White <[email protected]> wrote:
> MF-W, I felt the same way you did at first. But in truth this is an
> extremely borderline case that the policy can allow to go in either
> direction. There have been further discussions both here
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_committee#Wikisources:_Latin_vs._other_old_languages_(re:_Chinese)>
> and here
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Literary_Chinese>.
> Let me summarize a key point here, and then suggest what I think the real
> issue is.
>
> Culturally, the comparison to Latin is apt. Literary Chinese was
> unquestionably the lingua franca of the region, and people everywhere used
> it. And the writing system of Literary Chinese was definitely used/adapted
> for other languages like Japanese and Korean. On the other hand, neither of
> those languages is actually linguistically descended from Literary Chinese.
> Korean is a linguistic isolate, while Japanese is only related to some
> languages used in and around Japan and neighboring islands. So Chinese is
> the clear principal descendant of Literary Chinese; it's not like Latin,
> where there are several strong descendants.
>
> As I see it, the real nub of the discussion goes something like this:
>
> PRO LZH WIKISOURCE: One user really wants this. Perhaps one other user
> supports the idea in principal, on the mostly theoretical grounds that
> housing lzh content in Chinese/Mandarin Wikisource may inhibit non-Mandarin
> speakers from participating.
>
> ANTI LZH WIKISOURCE: Most of the community feels that things are working
> fine as they are now. There is substantial lzh content in zhwikisource, and
> the community tells me that it is confident that the content is being
> curated openly and appropriately. I will add that I requested the community
> to create a mechanism to facilitate non-Mandarin discussion there, and an
> English Scriptorium was created. Whether it's being used, and whether that
> is sufficient, is a separate question. But that's a start.
>
> In my mind, there are some choices we can make. Any of these can be
> tweaked, but I think the general approaches go like this:
>
> 1. Mark eligible, and based on the substantial lzh content that
> already exists, more or less immediately create an lzh Wikisource. I will
> tell you that I think the current Chinese Wikisource community would object
> strenuously to this approach, and that community is responsible for most of
> the content that currently exists.
> 2. Mark eligible and allow lzh content on Multilingual Wikisource in
> parallel to Chinese Wikisource. We can set up some rules to minimize
> outright duplication. But the idea here is to see if a community that would
> otherwise not contribute on Chinese Wikisource appears.
> 3. Mark "on hold" and allow lzh content on Multilingual Wikisource in
> parallel to Chinese Wikisource. This is similar to the previous, but with a
> stronger implication that if this parallel community never materializes, we
> will close this test project down at some point and merge appropriate
> content into Chinese Wikisource.
> 4. Reject, and merge appropriate content now. The party requesting
> eligibility here has not created a ton of content so far, so this wouldn't
> be hard to do.
>
> I know what approach I favor. But I would ask what others think first.
> 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
