Hoi,
The problem is how to deal with the NPOV..
Thanks,
GerardM
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 16:08, Steven White <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, as I have said many times, the current rule as written is
> problematic, and we have no business rejecting Montenegrin at this point.
>
> Please understand, again, that I don't object to the rule in principle. If
> we were starting today with a situation where there were no Serbo-Croatian
> projects existing (or no Punjabi projects existing), we might well try to
> say, "You know what? There's only going to be one, and you're all going to
> have to get along, and this needs to be irrespective of political
> perspective."
>
> But at this point, it doesn't work in either situation, for several
> reasons:
>
> 1. There are long-existing communities already. They each already have
> a culture, rules, and perspectives.
> 2. Based on a different, very firm WMF policy, "central authority" is
> almost never allowed to intervene on individual projects to "force" them to
> be more accommodating to the political and/or cultural minorities that
> could choose to participate.
> 3. The policy, as written, says *"The committee does not consider
> political differences, since the Wikimedia Foundation's goal is to give
> every single person free, unbiased access to the sum of all human
> knowledge, rather than information from the viewpoint of individual
> political communities."* You have to read the whole sentence there,
> not just the first phrase. By "not consider[ing]" political differences,
> the committee in fact perpetuates the fact that *existing* projects
> may already have "the viewpoint of individual political communities". In
> these cases, people in minority communities are tremendously disadvantaged
> in that they have to overcome (possibly) hostile political/cultural
> viewpoints—and may well not be able to do so.
>
> It seems to me that there is only one way to operate this rule exactly as
> it is already written: "Central authority" must have the power to intervene
> on certain projects, and to establish and enforce rules that guarantee the
> neutrality that every project is supposed to have anyway. If that's not
> going to happen—and I'm pretty sure it's not, for a whole lot of
> reasons—then we need to allow new projects where (a) there is a language
> code, and (b) there are going to be significant political and cultural
> barriers in integrating minority communities into existing projects.
>
> Steven
>
> Sent from Outlook <http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Langcom <[email protected]> on behalf of
> MF-Warburg <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 27, 2019 11:05 AM
> *To:* Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee <[email protected]
> >
> *Subject:* Re: [Langcom] Wikipedia in Saraiki
>
> Thanks for the info. So, what can we do?
> If we boldly reject requests for new Serbo-Croatian language/dialect
> Wikipedias and say the existing ones wouldn't be allowed today, isn't this
> case the same?
>
>
> Satdeep Gill <[email protected]> schrieb am Mo., 21. Okt. 2019, 16:12:
>
> 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://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPunjabi_dialects&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372208727&sdata=bNKrEABp7UtyVVq6suOmBTaBWCv6foUQYvyOA%2FFg24c%3D&reserved=0>
> by most British colonial
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBritish_Raj&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372218732&sdata=c66RdPKBtrF3Emn%2F6CYl5S7pcqoAuStFpPG7XB6VmAU%3D&reserved=0>
> administrators,[29]
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSaraiki_language%23cite_note-FOOTNOTERahman1996173-32&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372218732&sdata=aA5novZh957MHcmbqPXkeTwbykdW5HLKif0N9XVT6nw%3D&reserved=0>
> and is still seen as such by many Punjabis
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPunjabis&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372228737&sdata=kFQxmWqwm0qnQAjJbtH6V2cCCXCzeu3PrYK49MUbst4%3D&reserved=0>.[30]
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSaraiki_language%23cite_note-FOOTNOTEShackle2014a-33&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372228737&sdata=NuAn6n0SWGtSzgFX1tim%2FcEGQfAkQiy2FAUb7Zf2aPY%3D&reserved=0>
> Saraikis, however, consider it a language in its own right[31]
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSaraiki_language%23cite_note-34&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372238746&sdata=C2mw5YlDLd7zCh%2BaNPXMqNDIX1MhL9%2BMkyjDLNvI1Eo%3D&reserved=0>
> and see the use of the term "dialect" as stigmatising
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSocial_stigma&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372238746&sdata=3QIHc8AuksXwi8sN0Abv1gGZmA1WiIXmVvBGVLPonfU%3D&reserved=0>.[32]
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSaraiki_language%23cite_note-FOOTNOTERahman1996175-35&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372248756&sdata=maRBbWYHsAF1TM7skiFG%2BXV2ZkE6KvydnYqVrp1VFfU%3D&reserved=0>
> A language movement was started in the 1960s to standardise a script and
> promote the language.[20]
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSaraiki_language%23cite_note-FOOTNOTEShackle1977-22&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372248756&sdata=0qmkxF9J8wJonpGAYSFUBnQ%2BbYVH8Q9%2B0Dr%2BFCoyf5o%3D&reserved=0>[33]
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSaraiki_language%23cite_note-FOOTNOTERahman1997838-36&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372258761&sdata=BuXlT8suNibyi%2F0sHh39DzCH6IBqEISRgiZxRCuM6IA%3D&reserved=0>
> *
>
> 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
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fweboutlook&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372258761&sdata=IGPUr9peR48UjQDnnr5lVxSPRioTAKpfPQSVFiVLLqg%3D&reserved=0>
>
> ------------------------------
> *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://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fweboutlook&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372268770&sdata=7LkZK3TFcYhgd9nSLrMgNaZdR2CxsnEKGdv%2FmkCNSwE%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://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372268770&sdata=70A9bZIjJTe4%2BFlUO3IXILzsNHtF%2BHMex16nYlSS3lo%3D&reserved=0>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372268770&sdata=70A9bZIjJTe4%2BFlUO3IXILzsNHtF%2BHMex16nYlSS3lo%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> --
> mvh
> Jon Harald Søby
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372278775&sdata=arfRgGfkKAx4U9L64K8BrdPr4CBJRg8RXuwB4APJ0Is%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> --
> mvh
> Jon Harald Søby
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372278775&sdata=arfRgGfkKAx4U9L64K8BrdPr4CBJRg8RXuwB4APJ0Is%3D&reserved=0>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372288784&sdata=3d9tKR9p4zAho4Ys53eMPSmAbhRyc24vTyO4PtKs0dE%3D&reserved=0>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C068e7dc2150941c9230e08d75aef1ee4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637077855372288784&sdata=3d9tKR9p4zAho4Ys53eMPSmAbhRyc24vTyO4PtKs0dE%3D&reserved=0>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
>
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
