It's not clear at all. Depends upon who you ask. It's a typical
language-dialect problem.

I do know that, the Saraiki community in Pakistan has also been demanding a
separate Saraikistan. So, for the community it's pretty much a separate
language.

If you are asking my opinion then even Punjabi and Western Punjabi
Wikipedias should have been one Wikipedia with two scripts (maybe a third
script as well). Even Hindi-Urdu for that matter. It's always the
socio-political reasons.

As per Wikipedia:


*Saraiki was considered a dialect of Punjabi
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjabi_dialects> by most British colonial
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Raj> administrators,[29]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraiki_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTERahman1996173-32>
and is still seen as such by many Punjabis
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjabis>.[30]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraiki_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEShackle2014a-33>
Saraikis, however, consider it a language in its own right[31]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraiki_language#cite_note-34> and see the
use of the term "dialect" as stigmatising
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stigma>.[32]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraiki_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTERahman1996175-35>
A language movement was started in the 1960s to standardise a script and
promote the language.[20]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraiki_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEShackle1977-22>[33]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraiki_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTERahman1997838-36>
*

Best
Satdeep

On Mon, 21 Oct, 2019, 9:20 AM MF-Warburg, <[email protected]> wrote:

> > While there may be a close similarity to Western Punjabi, I agree with
> Steven's point that the right time to bring that issue up would have been
> when we decided whether to mark the language as eligible. We *did* mark
> it as eligible (by Satdeep just over 2 years ago), and that has to mean
> something. To walk back on that now, after volunteers have spent hundreds
> and hundreds of hours working on it, is just not ok.
>
> I disagree with this notion.
> One of the tasks of the Language Committee is precisely to prevent new
> "Serbo-Croation" cases from happening. It has been suggested that this
> might be such a case here. So let us please discuss this issue and clear it
> up. I have done some reading and it seems to me that there might be enough
> differences between Saraiki and Western Punjabi anyway. But Satdeep brought
> up that that might not be the case, and on the request page there are also
> people who says that it's not a separate language (while others, of course,
> say the opposite).
> I just would like this to be clarified in order not to have a situation in
> several years where everyone acknowledges that it is most unfortunate that
> there are several wikis...
>
> (It is also a matter of fact that languages get marked as eligible all the
> time without a discussion, just because the majority of cases don't turn
> out to be problematic at all. I looked at the archives and saw that back
> then, Satdeep said on this list "There is some controversy regarding this
> but according to my analysis, it should be eligible." - That does not
> directly contradict his statement "Western Punjabi and Saraiki are pretty
> similar and my personal view is that this should be accommodated on one
> Wikipedia but the sociology-political situation in Pakistan calls for a
> separate Wikipedia for Saraiki." from 8 October, but I still would *love *to
> have the whole thing clarified as requested on 16 Oct.
> Back in 2017, Oliver Stegen said in reply to the mentioned mail: "Any
> controversies may come to ight and be discussed accordingly during the
> verification phase which has started now." and I agree with this; a random
> marking as eligible should not prevent a discussion about what the
> situation really is.)
> [Mails from 29 + 30 August 2017]
>
>
> Am So., 20. Okt. 2019 um 05:30 Uhr schrieb Jon Harald Søby <
> [email protected]>:
>
>> I finally heard back from the first person [1] I emailed now, and he
>> basically echoed what Satdeep said: All pages he checked, except the one I
>> mentioned in the first email, are in Saraiki.
>>
>> While there may be a close similarity to Western Punjabi, I agree with
>> Steven's point that the right time to bring that issue up would have been
>> when we decided whether to mark the language as eligible. We *did* mark
>> it as eligible (by Satdeep just over 2 years ago), and that has to mean
>> something. To walk back on that now, after volunteers have spent hundreds
>> and hundreds of hours working on it, is just not ok.
>>
>> Therefore I would like to officially propose that we approve the Saraiki
>> Wikipedia, as they meet all of our criteria.
>>
>> [1] I'll be happy to disclose his name and details on the private list if
>> anyone on the committee wants me to, but I don't want to do so here on the
>> public list since I never brought that up with him.
>>
>> ons. 16. okt. 2019 kl. 18:04 skrev Jon Harald Søby <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> I have not gotten a reply yet. Yesterday I emailed to more people from
>>> Pakistani universities with Saraiki departments, but no reply from any if
>>> them yet either.
>>>
>>> ons. 16. okt. 2019, 16:29 skrev Steven White <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> Have we heard from the expert yet?
>>>>
>>>> On a related subject:  Do we have any Wiktionary experts here?  Saraiki
>>>> Wiktionary is also now approvable in theory (assuming that the language
>>>> issue on the Wikipedia clears). My concern about the Saraiki Wiktionary is
>>>> only that compared to a lot of Wiktionary projects, this one appears pretty
>>>> basic to me: just a straight Saraiki dictionary, with little in the way of
>>>> bells and whistles (pronunciation, translations to other languages, etc.).
>>>> But that's just based on the gross appearance of pages, as I do not read
>>>> Saraiki (or any other language written in Perso-Arabic script). So Satdeep
>>>> and anyone else: Does the content look ok? Are there greater expectations
>>>> of what a Wiktionary should contain—expectations we have not communicated,
>>>> I will add—or is this project appropriate and acceptable?
>>>>
>>>> Steven
>>>>
>>>> Sent from Outlook <http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> *From:* Langcom <[email protected]> on behalf of Jon
>>>> Harald Søby <[email protected]>
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 10, 2019 3:38 PM
>>>> *To:* Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Langcom] Wikipedia in Saraiki
>>>>
>>>> I am still waiting to hear back from the expert. If he says the rest of
>>>> the pages look fine, then I think we can move forward – Steven makes some
>>>> good points as usual.
>>>>
>>>> tor. 10. okt. 2019 kl. 21:03 skrev Gerard Meijssen <
>>>> [email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>> Hoi,
>>>> The final stage is that we verify if the language it is said to be.
>>>> When we find it is not or are not certain we have all the room to seek
>>>> another authority to move forward. At this stage it becomes confusing and I
>>>> am not convinced at all that we should.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>         GerardM
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 at 19:21, Steven White <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is effectively the same problem as we saw in the discussion of
>>>> Montenegrin Wikipedia—although since all but two of us are from Europe,
>>>> North America or Israel, we feel more confident making calls in a case like
>>>> Montenegrin than we do here. (And, candidly, there is less chance in the
>>>> Montenegrin case of being accused of racism/Euro-centrism, even if that
>>>> accusation would be totally without merit in this case.)
>>>>
>>>> But as I said back then, the rule as currently written is fine when the
>>>> language area starts with a clean slate. If there were no Western Punjabi
>>>> Wikipedia now, we could reasonably try to get a single project to try to
>>>> accommodate both Western Punjabi and Saraiki. (Whether that effort would be
>>>> successful is a different question, but we could try.) However, I take
>>>> Satdeep's comment below to indicate that there would be serious problems
>>>> trying to integrate a new Saraiki-language community into a ten-year old
>>>> Western Punjabi-language community, and that he recommends against it,
>>>> based on the current "facts on the ground". Besides, to some extent the
>>>> time to say "no" has passed, since Satdeep marked the project as "eligible"
>>>> in 2017. So I think we need to move forward with this.
>>>>
>>>> Steven
>>>>
>>>> Sent from Outlook
>>>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fweboutlook&data=02%7C01%7C%7C27b14763c84b4b786fe808d74db9839a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063331479640783&sdata=%2Be5t%2F8MN7boQ1F1ZLIYwwDG0L5Y2w685G48TmpiTLN8%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> *From:* Langcom <[email protected]> on behalf of Jon
>>>> Harald Søby <[email protected]>
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 9, 2019 4:44 AM
>>>> *To:* Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Langcom] Wikipedia in Saraiki
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> As for the Western Punjabi/Saraiki issue, I don't know enough about
>>>> that to have any opinion either way.
>>>>
>>>> tir. 8. okt. 2019 kl. 19:00 skrev Satdeep Gill <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> P.S. Western Punjabi and Saraiki are pretty similar and my personal
>>>> view is that this should be accommodated on one Wikipedia but the
>>>> sociology-political situation in Pakistan calls for a separate Wikipedia
>>>> for Saraiki.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Satdeep Gill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Langcom mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
>>>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C27b14763c84b4b786fe808d74db9839a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063331479640783&sdata=vRDOwHRLv%2B6qFNok%2BLJNeiRAFrzuBWGo6pRn1BO1%2B9g%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Langcom mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
>>>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C27b14763c84b4b786fe808d74db9839a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063331479650791&sdata=XOi5ymt%2Fz8fi71Oltu04freVjNcHF97HV0YlMZsR4p4%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> mvh
>>>> Jon Harald Søby
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Langcom mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> mvh
>> Jon Harald Søby
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

Reply via email to