Esc3300 added a comment.
I suppose you refer to the timeframe for langco review of proposed new codes. I don't think it's entirely new. It is already used for language codes on Wikidata for some time, given the lack of response and sometimes entirely incomprehensible arguments we had during reviews. I think the situation has much improved lately, but during my recent cleanup (also thanks to you), but I still came across countless requests by contributors that were lost in phabricator without a clear reason. Maybe you can explain why https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T262922 took so long (you were ping three times over a period of six months). > The whole point of the Language committee is to prevent hoaxes, invalid languages, and duplicates. The question here is mainly about codes for Wikidata, these are generally trivial in nature and I don't think I have seen any of "hoaxes, invalid languages, and duplicates". Even a potential duplicate could eventually be merge. This is somewhat different from the usual incubator business langco was formed for, The consensus on Wikidata is that langco review isn't needed, but I think the review (if done in a timely and comprehensible manner) can still help formulate clearer proposals. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T284276 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: Esc3300 Cc: Mahir256, Mbch331, Amire80, jhsoby, Lydia_Pintscher, Aklapper, Esc3300, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Nikki, Wikidata-bugs, aude
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
