I agree with Steven's recommendation.
> On 24 Apr 2019, at 17:09, Steven White <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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: > • 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. > • (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: > • 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? > • (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 > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
