I have posted about this on Talk:Language committee now:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_committee#Approval_of_the_Moroccan_Amazigh_Wikipedia

tor. 12. okt. 2023 kl. 22:44 skrev Tochi Precious <[email protected]
>:

> I actually went through it this afternoon and saw how engaged and active
> it has been for 3 years. I recommend the approval.
>
> ---
> Tochi
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2023, 2:23 PM Jon Harald Søby <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> I would like to suggest the approval of this test wiki. Any objections?
>> Anass can surely verify the content personally, I don't think we need any
>> external verification in this case.
>>
>> lør. 26. aug. 2023 kl. 12:48 skrev Gerard Meijssen <
>> [email protected]>:
>>
>>> Hoi,
>>> There may be some who consider languages in the Arabic family as
>>> ineligible. This is not the case, one example is the Egyptian Arabic
>>> Wikipedia. The notion that everyone who speaks one kind of Arabic
>>> understands every other version of Arabic is wrong.
>>>
>>> There are many languages derived from Arabic, all have their own ISO
>>> code they may all have their own dialects. The notion of politics is
>>> EXACTLY why many people want to standardise on one Arabic Wikipedia.
>>> Thanks,
>>>      GerardM
>>>
>>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2023 at 02:56, Sotiale Wiki <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> Standard Arabic is arb (Arabic: ara) and still if someone posts a new
>>>> language request for Wp/arb, it won't be eligible. Unless the speakers of
>>>> Arabic Wikipedia are unable to communicate in Standard Arabic. But I don't
>>>> think there's any reason a native speaker of Arabic can't speak Standard
>>>> Arabic. So there is no reason for existing Arabic Wikipedia to be
>>>> disqualified for this reason, but even so, the Arabic Wikipedia was created
>>>> prior to the LPP and is therefore unaffected.
>>>>
>>>> The requirement to be a distinct language is to ensure that there are
>>>> no multiple Wikipedias for a language that is sufficiently communicative at
>>>> the dialect level equivalent(If this were incomprehensible to native
>>>> speakers, it would have been recognized as a separate language). In
>>>> general, these branches are likely for political reasons, which may be
>>>> on-wiki as well as off-wiki reasons. This permission of Wikipedia
>>>> jeopardizes NPOV by creating Wikipedia with different views of the same
>>>> language for that purpose. Even if it has no such purpose, it is likely to
>>>> be abused as such.
>>>>
>>>> Sotiale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>  바이러스가
>>>> 없습니다.www.avast.com
>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>> <#m_-3835623023056331121_m_-681473850486263020_m_922395621415868508_m_8888600196279916464_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>
>>>> 2023년 8월 26일 (토) 오전 3:32, Anass Sedrati <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Sotiale and thank you for your answer,
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for my late reply as I was travelling back from Singapore and
>>>>> had also other engagements.
>>>>>
>>>>> So regarding your argumentation, if you consider zgh not a distinct
>>>>> language "because it is just a standard representation of Berber
>>>>> languages", then we have also to consider standard Arabic (ISO
>>>>> 639:ara) not a distinct language because it is not spoken in any
>>>>> country/region and is "a standard representation of Arabic languages". Of
>>>>> course, there are many more sources and books in standard Arabic due to
>>>>> religious and historical reasons, but it is still a standardized language,
>>>>> and only a written one. This said, it will of course never be considered 
>>>>> to
>>>>> close the Arabic Wikipedia because of it. Therefore, it can be really
>>>>> tricky to base the decisions on this argument, although it is
>>>>> understandable that some languages are "bigger" or more established than
>>>>> others. What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Anass
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 3:08 PM MF-Warburg <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> NB: there has also been a discussion at <
>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Moroccan_Amazigh#Clerking_note>.
>>>>>> I believe there are several requests open for related languages. It would
>>>>>> be good to have some clarity to avoid the community being split into
>>>>>> multiple incubator test-wikis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Fr., 18. Aug. 2023 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sotiale Wiki <
>>>>>> [email protected]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for your kind explanation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If this can be understood as the relationship between Standard
>>>>>>> Arabic (ISO 639:arb) and Arabic (ISO 639:ara), then zgh is not a 
>>>>>>> distinct
>>>>>>> language because it is just a standard representation of Berber
>>>>>>> languages. This is true even in light of the current LPP, which excludes
>>>>>>> different written forms of any language.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore, it seems that eligibility for this language cannot be
>>>>>>> recognized.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sotiale
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2023년 8월 16일 (수) 오후 10:48, Anass Sedrati <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am very familiar with this case as I come myself from Morocco and
>>>>>>>> speak Berber. The standard Tamazight (
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Moroccan_Amazigh) is not a
>>>>>>>> spoken language, but only a written one. It was created by the official
>>>>>>>> Academy of Berber languages in Morocco (
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institute_of_Amazigh_Culture)
>>>>>>>> in an attempt to standardize the Berber languages, as there are many of
>>>>>>>> them spoken in Morocco (
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_languages).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So to answer you, standard Tamazight is exactly like modern
>>>>>>>> standard Arabic (
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Standard_Arabic). It is a
>>>>>>>> standardized language with rules, but not a spoken one (nobody speaks
>>>>>>>> standard Arabic as a mother tongue, every Arab country has its own 
>>>>>>>> dialect).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is to explain that even if it not native, Zgh can be treated
>>>>>>>> as modern standard Arabic in terms of linguistics. I hope that this 
>>>>>>>> gives a
>>>>>>>> bit of context, but I am happy to expand on any aspect if you have
>>>>>>>> additional questions!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anass
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 3:00 PM Sotiale Wiki <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi all.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not familiar with the Moroccan languages, so I'd love to hear
>>>>>>>>> from other colleagues.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm considering this language project as a potential candidate for
>>>>>>>>> approval, but I'm wondering if this is a standardization of other
>>>>>>>>> languages, or a distinct language from others?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since this site[1] states that there are no native speakers, I
>>>>>>>>> wondered if this was just standardization of other languages(the case 
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> native speakers have a standardized language while using their own
>>>>>>>>> languages).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] https://www.ethnologue.com/language/zgh/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sotiale
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>>>>>>  바이러스가
>>>>>>>>> 없습니다.www.avast.com
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>>>>>> <#m_-3835623023056331121_m_-681473850486263020_m_922395621415868508_m_8888600196279916464_m_3445872535440906073_m_5983961874573513948_m_-52777032840040729_m_-1496450384923849562_m_5794971244151197459_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> *Anass SEDRATI*
>>>>>>>> *(+46) 70 508 51 07*
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *Anass SEDRATI*
>>>>> *(+46) 70 508 51 07*
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> mvh
>> Jon Harald Søby
>> _______________________________________________
>> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>


-- 
mvh
Jon Harald Søby
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to