I agree with Steven's recommendation. Am Mi., 24. Apr. 2019 um 18:10 Uhr schrieb Steven White < [email protected]>:
> There are still different opinions on this: Gerard and Michael would > reject the proposal, MF-W would accept it as eligible. Let me outline > points of agreement first, then points of disagreement. Then I'd like to > propose a next step, and see what people think. > > *Agreement: * > > 1. Even MF-W agrees that, at least in the short-to-mid-term, nobody is > talking about pulling apart the current zhwikisource, and spinning the lzh > content into a new project. > 2. (I think) All agree that lzh served a role in East Asia similar to > the role of Latin in Europe. Accordingly, policy allows a separate lzh > project and doesn't demand that lzh content be moved into a zh project. > > *Disagreement:* > > 1. If we mark this as "eligible", does that mean that when the test on > Multilingual Wikisource becomes approvable (if ever), we categorically MUST > move all the lzh content from zhwikisource into the new project? Or can lzh > content exist in both places? > 2. (I think) Just because policy *allows* a separate lzh project > doesn't mean it *requires* one; we can still require all lzh content > to be put into the zh project. > - If #2 is true, though, there is still a concern that the zh > project will not meet the needs of non-Mandarin speakers with respect to > lzh content. > > The only reason we really even have a problem is the bullet point under > "Disagreement #2". If not for that, we could reject the language request > without a problem. And I'm convinced that at present, that's more of a > theoretical issue being put out by the proponents of an lzh Wikisource than > it is a practical problem people are having right now. Still, we can't > entirely discount it. > > In the short run, I think we could keep everyone happy by not touching > current lzh content on zhwikisource, while allowing other lzh content to be > created on oldwikisource. (There is precedent for allowing content on > oldwikisource in parallel to content in a separate Wikisource, though in > the main case I think of, Polish, that's done for copyright reasons. And > we'd want to encourage some ground rules about duplication of documents, > since that's not a concern in the Polish case.) Even if we agree to that, > though, the question remains: How do we resolve the status of the language > request? So here's how I see all the possible options playing out: > > - *Eligible. * This does mean that at some point, if the lzh test > becomes approvable, we agree it can be approved. I'm OK with this option if > the answer to "disagreement #1" is that we are not necessarily committing > that all lzh content would have to be moved to an lzh Wikisource. We can > kick the can down the road, and also don't have to commit that lzh content > will not be moved, either. If we do this, I would make it clear on > eligibility that we are not committing to what that means for the future > for the current lzh content of zhwikisource. > - *Place on hold. *(option 1) We can see if enough contributors > actually come to work on lzh content on oldwikisource to make that viable, > or whether by a year from now it becomes a non-issue. (option 2) It goes on > hold because we decide that we're just not going to decide now, and we'll > revisit it if and when that's appropriate. > - *Reject. *This doesn't actually mean we don't allow lzh content to > stay on oldwikisource. After all, there are a number of projects in ancient > languages that have been rejected by LangCom but where tests still exist on > Incubator because the rules for Incubator are less strict than the rules > for subdomain project eligibility/approval. Since the rules for > oldwikisource are even less strict than the rules for Incubator, the lzh > "test" could stay on oldwikisource. But this option basically says that > this content will always stay on oldwikisource. > > *My recommendation* > > - I think we need to leave the content of zhwikisource alone now, but > allow additional lzh content on oldwikisource, with rules against > duplication. > - By process of elimination, I'd recommend "placing on hold" for now. > I really don't see consensus coalescing here. Also, I think there's a good > enough chance that this test never goes anywhere that we may as well wait > to see what happens before committing to a decision. (And, to tell the > truth, in most cases like this, where there is little actual activity in > the test, that's what we actually usually do until there is proof of > activity.) > - If you're not willing to do that, I would go for "eligible" IF > AND ONLY IF that doesn't mean we're committing to the future of any > existing content either way. In principle, this lzh ought to be > eligible, > and there's nothing wrong with saying so. But if we think that > "eligible" > automatically means that content MUST be moved in the future if an > lzhwikisource is created, then I would "reject", because I don't think > that > moving content out of zhwikisource will ever be a viable option. > > Please respond promptly to this if you will. I'd love to close this off > (finally). > 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
