Jump to content

Language committee/Archives/2007-04

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
For a summary of discussions, see the archives index.

Wikipedia Kabyle and localization

[edit]

This discussion spans multiple months and is archived to "Kabyle Wikipedia and localization" (March 2007).

Wikipedia Montenegrin 2

[edit]
  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    05 April 2007 15:10

    Hello,

    I just read through the second request for Montenegrin Wikipedia, and I propose it be rejected (again) for the following reasons.

    1. [politics] Montenegrin is mutually comprehensible with the larger Serbo-Croatian language, for which a Wikipedia already exists. The primary arguments in favour are political independence and the precedent set by the (probably mistaken) creation of the Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian Wikipedias. Even those supporting the request often note that it would be better to have a single Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia, "but since we already have separate ones, I see no reason to exclude Montenegrin." However, the Wikimedia Foundation seeks to provide unbiased information, not information from the point of view of a particular nationality. (This comment is telling, for example: "I also think that the two-letter Montenegro ISO country code ME is better than CG".)
    2. [linguistics] Montenegrin is nearly identical to Serbian, but has no codified form or standard code. A variety of dialects exist because it is spelled phonetically, with no set guidelines. A few extra letters have been proposed, but they are proposed only and nobody actually uses them.
    3. [conflict] The Montenegrin community initially created a test project on the incubator, then closed it and forked two separate off-site test projects; this does not speak well for their ability to work together.


  2. Michal Zlatkovský (Timichal)
    05 April 2007 17:47

    I agree with rejecting. It is clear enough this proposal is only about policy and nationalism; also, we shouldn't accept a language just because they try again and again... In this case, stubbornness isn't the key to success.

  3. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    06 April 2007 17:57

    Hello,

    I implemented the decision after more than a day with no opposition. Timichal accidentally sent the following response only to me.


    On 4/5/07, Timichal <email censored> wrote:
    > I agree with rejecting. It is clear enough this proposal is only about
    > policy and nationalism; also, we shouldn't accept a language just
    > because they try again and again... In this case, stubbornness isn't the
    > key to success.

Wikibooks Sindhi

[edit]

The request for a Sindhi Wikibooks was rejected.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    06 April 2007 21:51

    Hello,

    I propose the rejection of the Wikibooks Sindhi request. This proposal was conditionally approved just over a month ago. Since that time, the test project has still not been created and there has been no response to comments on the request page. It does not have sufficient interested users to conform to the requisites for conditional approval.

    I'll reject it if there's no comment after more than 24 hours; if you need more time to formulate opposition, please say so.

  2. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    08 April 2007 01:04

    Hello,

    I implemented the decision.

Wikipedia Phoenician

[edit]

The second request for a Phoenician Wikipedia was rejected.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    07 April 2007 18:08

    Hello,

    I propose the rejection of the second Wikipedia Phoenician request, opened in early December 2006. There is only one interested user, the test project only has one page (the main page), and the language is completely extinct (not used ceremoniously as with Latin or some other ancient languages). It is poorly documented, with only small text fragments surviving today to give us an idea of the structure, so the language used would be mostly invented by the contributors.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  2. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    08 April 2007 02:59

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  3. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    08 April 2007 03:19

    Hello GerardM,

    I'm not sure what you mean by '+1'; "+1 support", "+1 oppose", "wait +1 day", or something else?

  4. Sabine Cretella
    08 April 2007 04:01

    I agree with the rejection.

    Btw. Happy Easter to all of you :-)

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    08 April 2007 04:03

    Thanks, and happy Easter to you. :)

  6. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    08 April 2007 04:55

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  7. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    08 April 2007 18:08

    Hello,

    I've implemented the rejection.

  8. —
    09 April 2007 17:58

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  9. —
    09 April 2007 18:19

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  10. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    09 April 2007 19:38

    Hello,

    I realize that some users may not have enough time to formulate objections within 24 hours, which is why I invite anyone to say "Wait!" if they object and need more time. I hadn't considered that anyone wouldn't have access to the email at all within that time, though.

    There's no problem using your home address as well. Recent archives do not include the email address, as you can see in the latest archive: <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_projects_subcommittees/Languages/Archives/2007-04>.

  11. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    09 April 2007 19:53

    Hello Karen,

    On that note, do you agree to publicly archive your messages to the subcommittee? I don't think you responded in the original discussions about archival. Your messages are currently replaced with a placeholder (for example, search 'Karen' on <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_projects_subcommittees/Languages/Archives/2007-04>).

  12. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    12 April 2007 06:37

    Hoi!

    Yes, reject. Sorry, I’ve had problems with my connection on changing to a broadband, I’m just back to the internet after a week or so. I have… 1289 emails in my box, so bear with me while I try to understand what’s spam and what’s real mail.

  13. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    12 April 2007 14:49

    Hello,

    This request has already been rejected; I forgot to mention it here. :)

Wikipedia Karakalpak 2

[edit]

The second request for a Karakalpak Wikipedia was rejected.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    08 April 2007 01:49

    Hello,

    I propose the rejection of the second Wikipedia Karakalpak request, opened in late December 2006. There is only one interested user and no discussion on the request page. The test project has 15 pages: seven one-sentence stubs, three articles that are almost one-sentence stubs, one main page (containing spam), one redirect, one test, one table of data, and one spam page. There were three edits to the test project in the last month, of which two were spam.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  2. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    08 April 2007 02:58

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  3. Sabine Cretella
    08 April 2007 04:02

    Same here: I agree with the rejection.

  4. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    09 April 2007 03:33

    Hello,

    I've implemented the rejection.

Wikisource Ben Gali

[edit]

The request for a Ben Gali Wikisource was rejected.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    09 April 2007 05:00

    Hello,

    I propose the rejection of the Wikisource Ben Gali request, opened in late December 2006. There is only one interested user, very little discussion on the request page, and no test project. All Wikisource content with no subdomain is permanently accepted on the multilingual Wikisource until they are moved elsewhere.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  2. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    09 April 2007 06:33

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  3. —
    09 April 2007 17:56

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  4. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    11 April 2007 13:55

    Hello,

    The proposal has been rejected.

Authority to approve a wiki

[edit]

This discussion (split from "Kabyle Wikipedia and localization" (March–April 2007)) concerned whether the subcommittee had the authority to approve requests without gaining the explicit approval of the Board of trustees for each request. The board executive secretary confirmed authorization to do so, so long as the board was given four-day notification in case of objections.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    08 April 2007 15:01

    Hello,

    I propose the approval of the Kabyle Wikipedia. The community has currently localized 75% of the interface, or nearly 100% excluding files marked as unnecessary and the administrator interface (which will be translated by the upcoming Kabyle Wiktionary community). It is currently conditionally approved.

    I'm discussing with Nikerabbit and the Kabyle community to work out the last few details before the translations are committed.

  2. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    08 April 2007 15:10

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  3. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC Erik Möller (Executive Secretary)
    11 April 2007 14:46

    Hello Erik,

    The language subcommittee recommends the creation of a Kabyle Wikipedia. This language is well-established, has a very wide audience, a large interested community, a unanimous discussion on Meta, a successful test project, a nearly complete Kabyle interface, and a standard code. Further information can be found on the request page, its discussion page, and the subcommittee archives (see links below).

    If the board approves the creation, we would appreciate it if you would point the developers to the summary request, or notify us so we can work with the developers directly.

    Thanks.

  4. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Erik Möller (Executive Secretary)
    11 April 2007 14:51

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC Erik Möller (Executive Secretary)
    11 April 2007 15:07

    Hello,

    The language subcommittee is currently chartered as an advisory body, though giving it the authority to officially approve a project (as GerardM suggests it already has) would definitely streamline the process.

    Erik, can you clarify whether the board prefers to explicitly consider every subcommittee-approved project itself?

  6. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Erik Möller (Executive Secretary)
    11 April 2007 15:22

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  7. Erik Moeller (Eloquence) Executive Secretary
    19 April 2007 21:52

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  8. Erik Moeller (Eloquence) Executive Secretary
    25 April 2007 15:17

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  9. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    25 April 2007 15:30

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  10. Erik Moeller (Eloquence) Executive Secretary
    25 April 2007 15:34

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  11. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    25 April 2007 16:16

    Hello,

    Thank you; I've adjusted the subcommittee scope appropriately.

Wikiversity Swedish

[edit]

This discussion about the request for a Wikiversity Swedish led to its rejection.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    10 April 2007 01:04

    Hello,

    I propose the rejection of the Wikiversity Swedish request. Since its opening in early November 2006, no interested community, discussion, arguments, or test project have developed.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  2. Sabine Cretella
    10 April 2007 01:48

    Well for now we don't have any policy for Wikiversity. I suppose Swedish sooner or later can get to the stage that they can create a functioning Project. I would therefore tell them to create their project on the incubator and there they can grow their community up to X (to be defined) active members. They can even stay for quite a long time adding their material there.

    Another possibility would be the proposal for a multiligual Wikiversity community at a certain stage. I suppose many less resourced language entity would also make use of that. That is a kind of a separate incubator where projects can work well.

    Wikiversity is one of those topics we need to talk about and create policies for.

    So: no general rejection I would say, but leading them to where they can work and grow community.

  3. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    10 April 2007 02:19

    Hello,

    I think this should be rejected. [[Requests for new languages]] is not the incubator; it is the place to request a new language subdomain. Although it is fine to take a few months to meet the requirements, it is not the place for long-term development (which is what the incubator is for). This is particularly true for requests showing no development whatsoever over five months.

    We can, of course, point them to the incubator and invite them to make a new request in the future. Rejecting the current request simply means that they're not ready for a wiki yet. The vast majority of rejections are simply caused by insufficient community, not the inadequacy of the language. Virtually *every* language deserves a project, but there's no reason to have a permanent open request for these until a community is ready to create them.

    I see a distinction between developing a community, and requesting the new wiki. The Language proposal policy is only applicable to making a request, not community development, so I don't see any need to expand it with Wikiversity-specific information. This type of information should be covered separately, maybe in documentation like "Project community development" on the incubator.

  4. Sabine Cretella
    10 April 2007 02:36

    >
    > We can, of course, point them to the incubator and invite them to make
    > a new request in the future.

    That is what I meant to do.

    > Rejecting the current request simply
    > means that they're not ready for a wiki yet. The vast majority of
    > rejections are simply caused by insufficient community, not the
    > inadequacy of the language. Virtually *every* language deserves a
    > project, but there's no reason to have a permanent open request for
    > these until a community is ready to create them.

    Well: they need a place where to grow community and where to take interested people to so that these can show how serious they are about contributing ... that is why all the rejected (but as languages valid potential projects) can start their community work there. Otherwise the Incubator would not make sense. So if anybody wants to work on contents in his language all alone without other supporters: they may well do it on the incubator and invite others to join them. I don't see this as problematic since some pages more or less on the incubator in a specific language don't hurt anybody and can help a language to grow the community.

    Once Multilingual Mediawiki is out we will probably have to reconsider some points in the policy

    >
    > I see a distinction between developing a community, and requesting the
    > new wiki. The Language proposal policy is only applicable to making a
    > request, not community development, so I don't see any need to expand
    > it with Wikiversity-specific information.

    Well: This eventually needs some talk as well. Not all projects can be treated in the same way. The way communities are developed is different. As for Wiktionary, for example, for Neapolitan we decided to work or on it.wiktionary by adding terminology there or on omegawiki.org (even if it is not a WMF project, but we consider it as a sister project). The reason is simple: less hassles for our less ressourced language and better availability in future when we need to create spell checkers, Apertium terminology files etc.

    > This type of information
    > should be covered separately, maybe in documentation like "Project
    > community development" on the incubator.

    Hmmm ... like I said: we will need to talk about it soooner or later.

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    10 April 2007 18:15

    Hello,

    Your last email seems to agree with me regarding development; I don't understand your objection. They can develop a community on the incubator at any time, with or without an open request. Rejecting the request simply means that they are not ready for a wiki at this time; it does not imply that the language is unsuitable or unwanted, or that we will not approve a future request when they *are* ready.

    If you look at current rejected requests (see links below), you'll notice that each one has a comment attached addressed to the individual community. In the one linked below, I invite anyone interested to open a new request in the future once they have gathered a community. This invitation could be expanded to explain how to coordinate development on the incubator and emphasize that they can open a new request whenever they are more ready.

    The policy does not need to be customized for individual projects; it is written to be as general as possible, giving much leeway for individual considerations. The only change that would be necessary would be to *generalize* where to develop it, since some projects (or even individual wikis) have more suitable places than the incubator. There's no need to explicitly codify where to develop the wiki, since that is up to the community to decide. Thus, documentation and recommendations are preferable to binding policy.

  6. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    11 April 2007 21:27

    Hello,

    Do you still object? I have not received a response to yesterday's email.

  7. Sabine Cretella
    12 April 2007 02:12

    I did not object, I just wanted to point out that they should start to work on incubator. So they can grow their community. It does not make sense to create the project now.

  8. —
    12 April 2007 11:31

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  9. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    12 April 2007 14:30

    Hello,

    I've rejected the proposal.

Wikipedia European Portuguese

[edit]

The request for a Wikipedia European Portuguese was rejected.

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    11 April 2007 20:12

    Hi

    I propose the rejection of the European Portuguese Wikipedia. It was requested because a user was not happy with the policies of the ordinary Portuguese Wikipedia, and has only that one supporter. And of course there's the linguistic fact that European and Brazilian Portuguese are just two variants of one language, as we all know.

    I'll impl the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. I don't assume there will be any objections, but if you have any, voice them quickly. =)

  2. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    11 April 2007 21:25

    Hello,

    I agree.

  3. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    12 April 2007 01:11

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  4. Sabine Cretella
    12 April 2007 02:11

    Agree ...

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    12 April 2007 03:09

    Hello,

    For the record, this request was rejected.

Archival permission

[edit]

This was a request for archival permission addressed to three users. Steve Slevinski and Valerie Sutton accepted; one refused.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC —, Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 16:09

    Hello,

    I am the archiver for the Wikimedia language subcommittee. Discussion with the subcommittee is regularly copied to a public archive for transparency (see link below). Since you have not agreed to archival, your messages are currently replaced with the message "<this user has not agreed to public archival>".

    Even if you agree to archival, you can mark any email or comment as private and the message will be replaced by an appropriate note to that effect. The archives can be edited at any time to remove a message you forgot to mark as private.

    Could you tell me whether or not you agree to archival?

  2. Valerie Sutton guest
    12 April 2007 16:15

    Hello Jesse!

    Yes, of course!

    You have my full permission to archive and fully use my message. I do agree to archival of my message.

    Please forgive my inability to fully understand how to post a message on your site!

    But it was fun and from now on I will try to remember this archival permission...

    I want people to be able to read what I said publicly...

    Can you mark it for me, or do I have to return to the site to do this...?

  3. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 16:21

    Hello Valerie,

    There's no need to do anything else. I will archive all messages you send to the subcommittee, unless you mention in the message that it is private.

    Thanks. :)

  4. Steve Slevinski guest
    12 April 2007 16:57

    Sure, go ahead and archive anything I write. Do I need to do anything special?

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC Steve Slevinski
    12 April 2007 17:34

    Hello,

    You don't need to do anything special. I'll archive all messages you send to the subcommittee, unless you mention in the message that it is private.

    Thanks. :)

  6. —
    12 April 2007 17:20

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  7. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC —
    12 April 2007 17:48

    Hello,

    The only information archived is the name in your email headers, the date, and the message. The email address is not archived, and all addresses are carefully removed from the message text. You can mark a message as private in any way that is obvious; for example, simply writing "This message is private" or "Please don't archive this message". All previous messages by you are currently unarchived.

    Further, archival is done manually and individual considerations can be taken into account. As you can see, I don't think archival endangers your privacy in any way.

    Of course, you have no obligation to accept archival if you still prefer not to.

  8. —
    12 April 2007 18:07

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  9. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC —
    12 April 2007 18:14

    Hello,

    Okay. :)

Wikipedia American Sign Language

[edit]

This discussion about the request for an American Sign Language Wikipedia led to a consensus to conditionally approve such a wiki once it was technically possible in MediaWiki. The most likely solution proposed was the integration of existing "SignPuddle" technology for editing and displaying SignWriting online into MediaWiki. Valerie Sutton, developer of the SignWriting most likely to be used in such a project, suggested seeking a joint grant to fund development; the matter was forwarded to the internal wiki.

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 11:07

    Hi!

    I propose the conditional approval of a Wikipedia in American Sign Language. Because of the special circumstances of this language, it being the first sign language Wikipedia, and having to have some technical work for the writing system, SignWriting, to be able to work, the test project should be set up at the SignPuddle [1] website, like Valerie Sutton already proposed. When the technical issues are handled, and if the requirements of participation are fulfilled, it can get its own Wikipedia, on the domain ase.wikipedia.org (ase is ASL's ISO 639-3 code). Also, sgn-us.wikipedia.org should then probably be a redirect there, as that is its ISO 639-2 code. (asl.wikipedia.org, however, should not be a redirect, as that is the ISO 639-3 code of Asimilu, a language of Indonesia).

    [1] http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/

    I'm also CC'ing this mail to Valerie Sutton.

  2. Valerie Sutton guest
    12 April 2007 11:46

    Hello Jon and Everyone!
    Thank you for this message and for this positive response. We are happy to work with Wikimedia...

    I am writing to ask if we can include SignPuddle Developer Steve Slevinski in this email discussion?...

    Steve Slevinski
    <email address censored>

    Steve is the software designer and programmer of our SignPuddle software and works with our non-profit. Without him, we cannot function, and it is Steve who will be doing any extra programming needed later, to make SignPuddle fit with the Wikipedia environment. Plus Steve and I work as a team to give technical support to the SignPuddle Online Community, so he needs to be included in the discussions...

    Do I have your permission to share this email with Steve right now?

    Look forward to hearing from you!

    And thanks for your support of a Wikipedia in American Sign Language...I think this will slowly develop to be something historic...Most people do not realize that signed languages are becoming written languages now, so a Wikipedia in written ASL will educate the world that the language can we written, besides providing information...

  3. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 12:59

    Hoi!

    Okay for me, I'm very interested in this project.

  4. Jon Harald Søby
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 13:28

    I see no problems with Steve being included here; feel free to add him, he seems like an invaluable resource, much like our Brion.

    About the historic part, have you seen the post I made on the bottom of the request (media coverage...)? A Wikipedia in ASL might become historic quite fast. ;-)

  5. Sabine Cretella
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 13:39

    Hi, I added Steve to the discussion.

    I am just talking with Gerard about it :-) and he came up with a really funny idea: why not make the characters used in sign language part of UTF-8?

    Probably it would make sense to talk to Michael Everson (in Ireland) about this.

    How many distinct signs are there?

    btw. I am writing while we are talking.

    And of course: I am all for it.

  6. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 14:04

    Hello,

    I completely support conditional approval; this is a very promising project.

  7. Steve Slevinski guest
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 14:07

    Hi Sabine,

    Thanks for including me.

    There are symbols and then there are signs. A symbol is a base unit in SignWriting. It can relate to handshapes, contact, direction, facial expression and more.

    There are over 25 thousand symbols in the International Movement Writing Alphabet (IMWA). Each symbol has a unique ID that relates to a 6 part number system. (xx-xx-xx-xxx-xx-xx) Some symbols (especially handshapes) are repeated with 8 rotations and mirrors for a total of 16 symbols based one a single base. However, the unique ID is important for sorting, searching, and special commands.

    Each sign is made up of multiple symbols arranged in 2 dimensional space. I have been using something I call the build format for representing signs. It is a repeating comma delimited string made up of ID numbers with x & y coordinates, with optional color codes.

    There are an infinite number of possible signs.

    The current writing style is vertical, signs stacked in columns, so that right and left are easily apparent. Spacing and lanes are also used. It is an elegant writing system that is both simple and complex with multiple layers.

    I think that Unicode might be a good idea some day, but it would not help right now. We are currently using PNG images for each symbol. We need to move to SVG. A big job.

    Space has already been approved for SignWriting in Unicode, but only 256 spaces I believe. To be implemented properly, the IMWA would need it's own layer. (Is that the right term?) I think this would be justified because SignWriting is not limited to ASL, but can be used for any sign language that exists. We currently have 40 dictionaries with some having more than 5,000 entries.

    SignWriting has been used for over 30 years. We are making major progress and our current experience, knowledge and software are working very nicely together. The latest software was just released last month but has already been a great success. We are currently using a drag and drop system for writing, but there is also a typing system that was implemented in the past that was very effective once learned.

    I'm available to discuss technical issues.

  8. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    12 April 2007 14:11

    Hi All -
    Thank you for including Steve - I just sent Steve a copy of the communication prior to his name being added...

    Regarding Michael Everson. Michael and I worked together on developing the iso639/sign-language codes years ago. The code sgn-us, for example, exists because of a combined effort we made together:

    http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso639/sign-language.html

    So please send Michael my regards - We will be happy to work with you in any way...

    And yes, Unicode for SignWriting has been discussed for a long time, with both Michael Everson, Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), and others, and it can be done, but it will take funding and several years to really complete the job. That is why we are so grateful for SignPuddle right now...because it is working without Unicode, but could be developed to use Unicode someday with funding...

    Here is a web page mentioning Unicode and SignWriting:

    Bringing Recognition to the World's Signed Languages http://www.signwriting.org/forums/software/unicode/


    You asked how many distinct signs are there? In our terminology, symbols and signs are two different things...

    Sign-Symbol....equivalent to a letter in the Roman alphabet, like a or b or c....but instead a Sign-Symbol writes the movements of the body while signing

    Sign-Symbols are alphabetic characters in the SignWriting Alphabet...

    So I believe you are asking how many Symbols do we have in the SignWriting Alphabet?

    Answer: A lot, but we can put them into Unicode. It is systematically organized. This has already been discussed and there is no problem...it will just take time...The entire system for recording all body movement has around 30,000 symbols...but Sign Languages do not use all those symbols...it is a complex answer...I am sorry..

    Signs on the other hand, are equivalent to Words in a spoken language...

    In SignWriting, signs are written with symbols!

    American Sign Language alone probably has a vocabulary of at least 50,000 signs...I believe SignWriting and SignPuddle will show that in time because of the software allowing people to add signs so quickly on the web...

    The important point...Deaf children age 5 learn to read SignWriting faster than hearing children learn to read spoken languages...so all those symbols are not a problem for the user...only for Unicode developers!

  9. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 14:23

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  10. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    12 April 2007 14:55

    On Apr 12, 2007, at 10:28 AM, Jon Harald Søby wrote:
    > About the historic part, have you seen the post I made on the bottom
    > of the request (media coverage...)? A Wikipedia in ASL might become
    > historic quite fast. ;-)

    Hello Jon and Everyone! Thank you for pointing this out to me...I just read it. Important that I saw that!

    Yes...of course this is historic no doubt...

    And thank you for this opportunity too...

    As far as using SignPuddle for a test ground, I think it is wise, because in the Sign Language world, we are well-known, and people need to start somewhere.

    SignPuddle software is Wiki based too, although of course there would have to be development to become a part of your organization's sites ...that is why I suggested writing grants together....because that will take time..

    Meanwhile, on our wonderful SignPuddle 1.5 site, this morning new written-ASL literature in SignWriting was just added by several people on their own...from around the world...posting the documents themselves on the web, in an online community of signwriters...so we have a test area for us to use immediately with no funding required...

    We have no desire to use any of your trademarks...it will be up to you to tell us what to name the special SignPuddle Online Community we create for you...

    By the way, Jon, I am sure you know that SignWriting started in Denmark. I lived there and SignWriting started in the Danish School System back in 1982...lots has changed there now, but it is still used for training interpreters and for research etc...so yes, I even speak Danish as my second language (lousy at writing it though ;-)

    And SignWriting is used in Norway, and we even have a SignPuddle in Norwegian ;-)

    Nothing to do with the ASL Wikipedia however!

  11. Steve Slevinski guest
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 14:57

    Hoi GerardM,

    SignWriting symbols are not part of UTF-8. The IMWA would need it's own Unicode layer.

    The current writing system uses PNGs with a drag and drop interface and relies on Javascript. We need to convert the current symbols to SVG. Unicode would be cool, but I'm not sure what it brings to the party. The current 6 part symbol ID numbers are needed, so we would need a bidirectional conversion between Unicode ID and SSS ID.

    There are 2 ways to integrate SignWriting into MediaWiki: display and editor.

    Displaying SignWriting in MediaWiki is relatively easy. We can either use a custom XML, or column images. Last year I made a custom add-on for MediaWiki that accepted XML and displayed SignWriting. I don't have the code anymore but it wasn't hard to create. Since then, I've improved my display technique which would make it a bit more involved. This would be a quick solution, but not in the spirit of easy editing.

    Recreating an editor in MediaWiki is a lot more involved and would require Javascript to implement properly. The initial editor would be drag and drop. Future editors should also reimplement the typing system. Both systems have their place.

    And then there's the searching and sorting... This is a big job.

    Once implemented, supporting additional sign languages would be trivial. And with additional development, we could add support for the entire MovementWriting system that includes dance, skateboarding, sports and all human movement. SignWriting is a subset of MovementWriting.

    As an organization, we are committed to bringing literacy to sign languages. We would be happy to work with the Wikimedia Foundation.

  12. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 15:10

    Hoi!

    Just to be clear on what things mean: based on this approach an ASL text is a series of IMG tags, right?

    I'm asking this because if it's so then the UTF-8 steps and the writing of an ASL interface could be a parallel process, since we would maintain a 1-1 correspondence between a single SVG hieroglyph and a future UTF-8 char.

    It could give you flexibility, because you'd start to accumulate ASL text you can later experiment upon with a converter.

  13. —
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 15:06

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  14. Steve Slevinski guest
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 15:32

    Currently, an ASL text is a series of IMG tags. Each image is a column of multiple signs. There are spacing issues between signs and punctuation. There are issues of centering signs in multiple lanes within a column. Our current implementation properly spaces and centers signs when creating the images for a column of sign text. The columns are displayed horizontally, so reading is from top to bottom within a column and then from left to right between columns.

    The ASL text is saved as an XML file (SWML-S) for later editing.

  15. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 15:41

    Hoi again,

    So if I get you right you have a javascript interface that loads the text proper.

    I suppose we have a couple for questions for our developers:

    1. Can we have this javascript added as an extension to Mediawiki?
    2. Will UI messages display properly (as they are going to be sequences of XML tags, not of chars)?

    Plus you should probably tell us a bit about the way in which you make the spacing tricks. Is it a table, a DIV or what? Honestly, what mostly worries me is that if some of the formatting is in the way you code your XML tags… making a converter may be not so trivial a business.

    Shouldn’t we invite NikeRabbit to this desk? After all this is mostly going to be a load of developers’ problem, probably it’s better if they start to define what can cost how many man/days to whom.

  16. Steve Slevinski guest
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 15:52

    I am using PHP to create the images from the XML. The javascript is used with the editor to create the XML.

    In the past, I was using a table for spacing individual signs, but that didn't work properly. All of the spacing issues are handled when PHP creates an entire column of sign text as a single image. This could be handled on the fly by Javascipt with DIVs.

    I don't see any reason why this couldn't be an extension for Mediawiki.

    UI is a bit tricky. Currently, SignPuddle is multilingual and supports any spoken or signed language.

  17. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 16:03

    Oh… so you build complex images that include spacing? Then I’m afraid my idea about “converting later” will be quite complicated to implement. I suppose this is a one-way only transformation, right? That is, you cannot rebuild the initial XML by looking at the final image. Or not?

  18. Steve Slevinski guest
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 16:23

    >> Oh… so you build complex images that include spacing?

    Yes. I build complex images from XML.

    >>I suppose this is a one-way only transformation, right?

    Yes. I can not build the XML from the image. However, I store the XML for editing and image recreation. The XML is simple and we can create any kind of converter that we want to play around with SVG or Unicode.

    Here is an example from "The Cat in the Hat"
    http://signbank.org/SignPuddle1.5/canvas.php?ui=1&sgn=5&sid=28

    You can see the XML:
    http://signbank.org/SignPuddle1.5/data/sgn/5/28.swml

  19. Sabine Cretella
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 16:42

    That may sound stange to you, but those few of you who know tmx and tbx standard might understand:

    I could imagine to see that xml in a translation memory or a tbx bilingual file for single words (well terminology).

    having

    <tu>
    <tuv xml:lang="EN">
    <seg>Whatever you want to see here.</seg>
    </tuv>
    <tuv xml:lang="EN-SIGN">
    <seg>

       <sign lane="0">
         <gloss>sign-14</gloss>
         <symbol x="103" y="52">03-01-001-01-01-05</symbol>
         <symbol x="64" y="115">08-01-001-01-01-03</symbol>
         <symbol x="103" y="52">03-06-001-01-01-04</symbol>
         <symbol x="71" y="90">01-05-014-01-04-16</symbol>
         <symbol x="79" y="117">02-03-001-01-02-05</symbol>
         <symbol x="103" y="41">04-03-001-01-01-04</symbol>
       </sign>


    </seg>
    </tuv>
    </tu>

    Well this is not an exact sample ... in the first segmento with xml:lang EN of course you need the corresponding of what is following ... and the example here is TMX - TBX is very similar ...

    Just imagining what would happen if we could get the "assemble from portions" option in OmegaT - this would mean that sentences are assembled using parts of existing sentences in a separate xml (mostly TBX) file ...

    Sorry, but I look at such structures always from a translator's pov.

    How much text could be converted in that way ??? hmmmm ....

    (sorry for throwing this idea in ... don't know for what it can be good ... it is just that I cannot avoid doing it)

  20. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    12 April 2007 17:23

    On Apr 12, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    Hello Everyone and Gerard -
    Thank you for mentioning this...I will be happy to prepare a presentation for Wikimania 2008, in collaboration with other GebärdenSchrift (SignWriting) users in Germany...

    The German SignPuddle for writing German Sign Language (DGS) is an active one. Stefan Woehrmann, a teacher of Deaf children at the Osnabruck School for the Deaf in Osnabruck, uses SignWriting in his classroom. Stefan has written a textbook on SignWriting in German. I am translating it from German to English right now. There was a half- hour show on German national television about his work several years ago...So DGS is being written in Germany, but by a small group of people, and mostly educators and Deaf students I believe. I am not sure how many Deaf adults in Germany realize yet, that their language can be written, but it is just a matter of time....obviously a presentation on Wikimania 2008 would help inform people ...so tell us what we need to do to make that happen...

    GebärdenSchrift
    http://www.gebaerdenschrift.de/
    http://www.signwriting.org/germany/germany.html

    German Sign Language and American Sign Language are two separate languages, as you know, so that would require a separate Wikipedia someday I assume...

  21. —
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 17:30

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  22. Jon Harald Søby
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 18:40

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    But isn't ISO 639-3 official by now? So it should be ase-Sgnw, not sgn-Sgnw-US. Or isn't ISO 639-3 cmopatible with XML tags yet? (I'm not very much into the technicalities here...)

  23. Jon Harald Søby
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 18:51

    On 4/12/07, Valerie Sutton wrote:
    > As far as using SignPuddle for a test ground, I think it is wise,
    > because in the Sign Language world, we are well-known, and people
    > need to start somewhere.

    Aye. But make sure that it is stated clearly that contributions that are to be part of Wikipedia must be under the GNU Free Documentation License, as material will not be compatible with Wikipedia if it isn't.

    > SignPuddle software is Wiki based too, although of course there would
    > have to be development to become a part of your organization's
    > sites ...that is why I suggested writing grants together....because
    > that will take time..
    >
    > Meanwhile, on our wonderful SignPuddle 1.5 site, this morning new
    > written-ASL literature in SignWriting was just added by several
    > people on their own...from around the world...posting the documents
    > themselves on the web, in an online community of signwriters...so we
    > have a test area for us to use immediately with no funding required...
    >
    > We have no desire to use any of your trademarks...it will be up to
    > you to tell us what to name the special SignPuddle Online Community
    > we create for you...

    Yup, but I think it will gather more attention from mainstream media if it is a Wikipedia project. But I assume what you wrote here is only for the test phase...

    > By the way, Jon, I am sure you know that SignWriting started in
    > Denmark. I lived there and SignWriting started in the Danish School
    > System back in 1982...lots has changed there now, but it is still
    > used for training interpreters and for research etc...so yes, I even
    > speak Danish as my second language (lousy at writing it though ;-)

    Nice, I didn't know that. da.wikipedia doesn't have an article on SignWriting yet, though.

    > And SignWriting is used in Norway, and we even have a SignPuddle in
    > Norwegian ;-)

    Yeah, I was looking at it earlier. A bit small yet, but I might expand it when I study sign language next year – provided that (a) I don't have to do military service, which I was called in for a few days ago – I might not have to go though, but this is a long story that probably won't interest you – and (b) I get into the school that has sign language. That school has Norway's only professor in sign language, who was appointed in March this year, and has been a Wikipedian since November last year.

    (So when the ASL Wikipedia is created and the use of SignWriting on Wikipedia runs smoothly, expect a request for a Norwegian Sign Language Wikipedia. ;-)

  24. —
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 18:56

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  25. Steve Slevinski guest
    CC Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 21:00

    Hi Jon,

    I haven't yet instituted copy right (left) controls for SignPuddle. I am planning on each puddle being able to set it's own license. I was going to include the Creative Commons licenses. I will also include the GNU FDL.

    For the ASL testing ground, we can have a single notice on the front page immediately, or I can have the license update ready within the next week or two. Then the notice will appear on each page.

  26. Sabine Cretella
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    12 April 2007 21:10

    Well: in any case the code I took was just one I took by chance. I did not consider if the tag was correct or not - it was just what came into mind in that moment and obviously needs to be veryfied. The thougt behind it was just: what could be possible by using an XML structure within an industry standard for translation. Probably sign language was not considered by TMX and TBX and should be for the future - in particular if we need to translate from normal wikipedias into sign language wikipedias.

  27. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 00:29

    Hoi!

    > However, I store the XML for editing and image recreation

    Then it should be okay. I think the ultimate goal should be a UTF-8 version, it would be very bad if we put the ASL community in the position of choosing between losing all they produced OR having an upgrade. If a temporary IMG based version remains upgradeable it’s okay. Having some extra time will also allow for building a larger team that can address the conversion problem.


    BTW, I can’t see why the input shouldn’t remain “as is”, with javascript, with just the converter running afterwards, on committing the result to the db.

  28. Jon Harald Søby
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 00:58

    On 4/13/07, Steve Slevinski wrote:
    > Hi Jon,
    >
    > I haven't yet instituted copy right (left) controls for SignPuddle. I
    > am planning on each puddle being able to set it's own license. I was
    > going to include the Creative Commons licenses. I will also include the
    > GNU FDL.
    >
    > For the ASL testing ground, we can have a single notice on the front
    > page immediately, or I can have the license update ready within the next
    > week or two. Then the notice will appear on each page.
    >
    > Regards,
    > -Steve

    Hi!

    SignPuddle can be of any license you want, but content written with it for this specific project will need to be GFDL to be transferable to Wikimedia servers later on.

  29. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 01:00

    Hoi!

    To avoid problems they could better double license it on both CC and GFDL, because GFDL alone is quite a pain in the backbone from all practical POVs.

  30. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 05:43

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  31. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 06:14

    Hoi!

    As a matter of fact it has little meaning to give out an approval when we do not give server space. We either host it or not, and if not we have no right to approve or refuse anything to anyone. What we can do is to start a feasibility evaluation period based on what our developers will tell us once they see the SignPuddle stuff. At this point there is nothing we can approve or refuse. We can only say we would be glad to have it (I would) but there’s no meat for us to cook, yet.

  32. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 07:24

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  33. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 08:07

    So okay. There is no doubt we all want this project. Let’s move to practice J

  34. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    13 April 2007 15:08

    Hello Gerard and everyone -

    I enjoyed reading your blog about SignWriting, and thank you for mentioning this to your readers!

    I am also personally happy to read what you had to say about the proposed project...I feel we can make this a reality and we are happy to work with you...and on our end, we can provide the programmers who know SignWriting, to work with your programmers...

    Do I have your permission to tell our SignWriting List, about your blog? I would like to give them the link to read it...

  35. —
    CC Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 15:15

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  36. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 15:45

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  37. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    13 April 2007 15:50

    Karen and Everyone -
    Yes, we most definitely use the sgn-us code everyday!

    There are many instances, but here are some of the SignPuddle 1.0 dictionaries that all use that code system:

    39 SignPuddle Dictionaries
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle

    1. American Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-US

    2. Arabic-Nations Sign Languages
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-AE

    3. Australian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-AU

    4. Brazilian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-BR

    5. British Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-GB

    6. Catalonian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-ES-ct

    7. Colombian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CO

    8. Czech Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CZ

    9. Danish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-DK

    10. Ethiopian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-ET

    11. Finnish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-FI

    12. Flemish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-BE-nl

    13. French Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-FR

    14. French-Swiss Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-fr

    15. German Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-DE

    16. German-Swiss Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-de

    17. Greek Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-GR

    18. International Signs
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-WO

    19. Irish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-IE

    20. Italian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-IT

    21. Italian-Swiss Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-it

    22. Japanese Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-JP

    23. Malaysian Sign Languages
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-MY

    24. Maltese Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-MT

    25. Mexican Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-MX

    26. Netherlands Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-NL

    27. Nicaraguan Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-NI

    28. Nigerian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-NG

    30. Norwegian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-NO

    31. Philippine Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-PH

    32. Polish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-PL

    33. Portuguese Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-PT

    34. Quebec Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CA-fr

    35. Signuno-Esperanto Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-EO

    36. Spanish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-ES

    37. Swedish Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-SE

    38. Taiwan Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-TW

    39. French-Belgian Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-BE-fr


    They are based on the web page Michael Everson posted with us, and as you can see, we capitalized the US so it was sgn-US...that is the way Michael has it on this web page:

    http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso639/sign-language.html

    and we used that web page for the basis of the above links for SignPuddle 1.0.


    To be honest, I have been sad to realize that people are thinking of changing the codes that we worked so hard on to develop, with Michael Everson. We use those codes everyday and they are a major part of our SignWriting world, and we created the codes the way they are for a reason...

    Of course I can see you might need a three-code or whatever, but they are not codes that are logical from the signing and SignWriting world's perspectives...

    Of course I am coming from a user's perspective...I know signers and how they feel about their languages...but that is not always practical...whatever you have to do...but I know I will continue to use the codes we are using with SignPuddle online because they work for our sign language users...

    Let me explain. First, the sgn came from the use of our first SignWriting processing program which we developed. The program is called SignWriter, developed by Rich Gleaves and our non-profit organization. The first version of SignWriter was for the Apple //e and //c. It came out in 1986, and the files that were created by the program used sgn within their file names. Then we transferred the program to become SignWriter DOS in MS-DOS and the files created with SignWriter DOS had this ending: .sgn

    The files were named like this:

    Hello.sgn
    Goldilocks.sgn
    etc...

    A .sgn file was typed (written) Sign Language in SignWriting.

    Later, the SignWriter//e, SignWriter DOS, and later SignWriter Java programs became out of date, and were replaced with SignPuddle.

    Meanwhile, Michael Everson and I worked together to create the coding for signed languages we borrowed the sgn we all knew from the SignWriter Computer Program, and attached it to the country code or regional code where the signed language came from...some countries have several signed languages as you know...

    So no matter what, we will continue to use sgn-US or sgn-us to represent ASL within computer coding for what we are doing...

    I am happy to give you feedback on your three-letter codes if you wish -

  38. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    13 April 2007 16:04

    Hello Gerard -
    Yes, the sgn code means any sign language in general. It came from our organization's work with SignWriting. I just sent another email on the history...sgn was the name of files written in any sign language, using our SignWriter DOS or Java programs...these were the first files in history to type the movements of signed languages directly with full grammar and no spoken language involved...and the files ended with .sgn

    But when we attach a code to the sgn it makes it a specific dialect or signed language. For example, sgn-US means the native signed language of the US. That is ASL.

    Since users use the name ASL, to call it ASL would be great. The problem was that Austrian Sign Language was also ASL and that was a confusion...

    But ase doesn't make sense either.... What does it stand for?

    That was why we went to something more neutral...using a generic sgn combined with a country or region code was a neutral way to get around the name issue ..and the controversy dissipated...

  39. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    13 April 2007 18:21

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    Hi all -
    To clarify one last thing about the sgn-US code. It does specifically mean ASL. It means the native signed language of the Deaf people living in the US.

    Michael Everson setup a good way to specifically explain how to code the many signed languages within one country. Some countries have multiple signed languages, as you know....

    http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso639/sign-language.html

    For example, in the US, there is something called Signed English. Signed English is not the same language as ASL. It changes some signs and definitely the grammar of ASL, and some feel it actually isn't even a language, but that is another topic...for right now, regarding how one would encode Signed English versus ASL...here is how. You will find it on Michael Everson's web page at the very bottom of his page.

    Signed English in the US: sgn-eng-US
    Signed English in the UK: sgn-eng-GB
    Signed English in Ireland: sgn-eng-IE

    and these Signed English communication systems are not the same...all three use different signs in English word order...crazy huh? ;-)

    but the native signed languages of Deaf people in the US, Great Britain and Ireland are coded this way:

    sgn-US: American Sign Language (called ASL by signers themselves)
    sgn-GB: British Sign Language (called BSL by signers themselves)
    sgn-IE: Irish Sign Language (called ISL by signers themselves)


    When a country has three signed languages, we did it this way, by adding the regional area to the end of the country code...signed languages are greatly influenced by the school systems within one spoken-language area..so sgn-CH-fr is French-Swiss Sign Language because the teachers who taught the Deaf in that area were speaking French! (even though the Deaf people were using French-Swiss signs)...

    French-Swiss Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-fr

    German-Swiss Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-de

    Italian-Swiss Sign Language
    http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-it


    By the way, the SIL codes, such as ASE for ASL, are on Michael's page too:
    http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso639/sign-language.html

    I guess this issue of codes will always be an ongoing discussion and thanks for including me!

  40. —
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    13 April 2007 20:04

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  41. Valerie Sutton guest
    CC Steve Slevinski
    13 April 2007 21:12

    Hello Karen -
    Thanks for this explanation...it helped me understand it better...

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>
    Yes, although I thought our way of handling the other signed languages within one country had been nicely solved with Michael's system...it certainly has worked for us...and I am happy we are using them within our SignPuddle Online Community...We easily know the difference between German-Swiss Sign Language and French-Swiss Sign Language even though they are both in Switzerland and different signed languages...and we know the difference between the Plains Indian Sign Language of South Dakota and Martha's Vineyard Sign Language easily, and it is never confused with the code for ASL...

    But you are right...I know time marches on...and our methods are old ones!

    The real problem is that real ASL users would never think of ase to mean ASL...nor does sgn-US really look like ASL either, although it is more generic...so it is a little more acceptable...

    If you want to reach ASL signers, the name of their language is ASL and they do not know these codes very well...they will just click on the link you give them...and if they can read the SignWriting signs there, and see it is ASL, that is all that matters!

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>
    Thank you for keeping the sgn...and I am glad to know the tags we are using will also remain valid...thank you for that...

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>
    Very interesting and informative!

    Today we had such an exciting day. People from all over the US and Canada are posting ASL documents written in SignWriting in our SignPuddle Online Community. It is quite exciting to see that complete articles are being added to a library online like this...my jaw just dropped when I saw portions of Sleeping Beauty, posted from someone in Canada, and children's stories posted from a teacher from the Georgia School for the Deaf in Georgia. Before SignPuddle, this would not have been possible. That is why I offered the idea, the other day, that our Online Community might enjoy writing articles for an encyclopedia in ASL and post it online too...but it is best, I think, for right now, to do this on our SignPuddle Online Community. If you all would like to visit SignPuddle, I would be happy to teach you how to read SignWriting and to use SignPuddle yourself. This could be your way of seeing what we can do...a little like a "proof of concept"...

    Then I would suggest, if you are interested, we could write a grant together to get funding for the ASL Wikipedia project? Would you all be interested in writing a grant with us? You can read about our proof of non-profit status on this web page:

    SignWriting Literature Project
    http://www.SignWriting.org/literature

    For 2007 our project received funding from the Claire Gianinni Fund, but we need funding for 2008, so perhaps we could start writing a grant in collaboration with Wikimedia fairly soon? This would be an honor for us, and I believe we are helping the world too...Do you know of particular foundations you would want to apply to?

    I am happy to start the grant writing process immediately if you wish, so I will wait to hear from you...

  42. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    14 April 2007 03:50

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  43. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    14 April 2007 06:31

    Hoi!

    Yes, you should also understand that our “strict” policy is not directed to any final user in particular. We are aware that nothing is perfect (ISO included) but if we admit even just one exception to the ISO rule then we cannot stop anyone else from requesting more exceptions. To make things even more complicated, most of these exceptions will have political character (people who represent “wannabe political entities” often need their “entity” to gain some form of international recognition, and a having a language issued is a pretty good formal start).

    We had a number of such cases in the past and already have wikies that will have to be examined because they are closer to a political pamphlet than to a wiki. It’s absolutely NOT your case, yet pls understand that an exception made for you will be later invoked by endless legions of such “advocates of freedom” who are only willing to get a top-10 trademark for free. This is the reason why we have to be strict on ISO codes.

    Whenever a different code has long been in use (as in your case) and using a new one can lead to some initial confusion, I’d suggest you started to produce informational material on the subject. An article on the ASE wiki (with redirs from all possible old code versions) will be a good “hook” to pick up people looking for previous codes. My feeling is that this should also be addressed on en.wiki, as en.wiki is after all one of the main information broadcasters on the planet.

    You may also use this to have an increase in traditional media attention. Media are always interested to whatever wikimedia does, so you’ll probably find out that a number of them will be willing to deliver information on this new wiki and on its code. In my experience there is no such a thing as a problem that cannot become a resource J We may help you in issuing a joint declaration for the media, asking them to repeat the information on world-wide basis.

  44. Valerie Sutton
    CC Steve Slevinski
    14 April 2007 11:10

    Hello Gerard -

    Whatever language-codes Wikimedia has to use is fine with me. And you are right, you have to use what is currently ratified. That is fine of course. When it comes to language codes, I believe you should follow what is ratified. I simply wasn't aware of all the changes that are happening in the world...so thank you for informing me!

    And thanks to Karen for asking me...that was good to discuss it.

    By the way, Michael's code that we have been using is sgn-US, not asl- US. But that is not important.

    The users won't even notice. I never even noticed that there was an en in the url that directed me to the English section of Wikipedia...I just enjoyed the benefits of reading English articles in Wikipedia and just followed the links you gave me...

    So signers in the US will most likely not even notice the code you use in the url that takes them to written ASL...they will be happy to find an article written in ASL, and that is all that matters!

  45. Steve Slevinski
    CC Valerie Sutton
    14 April 2007 11:12

    Sign languages can be political. The code sgn-US was created to diffuse that political aspect. No one can disagree that there is a majority sign language in the US. Minority languages get an additional code tacked onto the "sgn-US" and the combined code gets longer. This plays havoc with localization and causes problems.

    As a programmer, I would prefer that sign languages have a simple code like all of the other languages. "ase" is fine with me; however, there may be problems and rational explanations won't make the problems go away.

    Few, if any, will try to reach the asl Wikipedia using sgn-US.wikipedia.org. I don't think a redirect is needed.

    Some may try asl.wikipedia.org and wonder why they are not on the ASL Wikipedia.

    And then some will be confused when they see that the ASL wikipedia is pointed at ASE. A few may even become upset because of the E at the end and assume it stands for English and then a whole other set of problems will start.

    Most will be using links and open the page and ignore the URL.

    I agree with Wikimedia should use the latest ISO codes, but don't be surprised if the politics of the situation starts again.

  46. Valerie Sutton
    CC Steve Slevinski
    14 April 2007 11:19

    Steve just explained it perfectly for me....thanks Steve!

    And all we care about is writing the language, no matter what hearing people call it!

    So use the ratified language-code of the day, whatever that may be...

  47. Valerie Sutton
    CC Steve Slevinski
    14 April 2007 11:45

    Hello Bèrto!
    Everything is cool. Use the ratified language code of the day. Most Deaf people will never notice. They just want written ASL, and whatever url takes them to written ASL, that will be fine!

    We know it is political. We have been there.

    I think what matters now is to move to the next stage, which is writing grants to foundations to ask for funding for this future project.

    Do you have any suggestions how we can begin that process? Would Wikimedia want to join us in the grant writing? I would be grateful for that, because as a team we will have more chances to receive the funding....

    We have no funding for 2008 so this is important that we discuss this...


    Berto 'd Sera wrote:
    > You may also use this to have an increase in traditional media
    > attention. Media are always interested to whatever wikimedia does,
    > so you’ll probably find out that a number of them will be willing
    > to deliver information on this new wiki and on its code. In my
    > experience there is no such a thing as a problem that cannot become
    > a resource J We may help you in issuing a joint declaration for the
    > media, asking them to repeat the information on world-wide basis.

    Absolutely unnecessary! The language code does not matter to me..

    We have to get funding first...

    If we received funding, and we had a joint grant, for example, perhaps to place SignWriting into Unicode, then that in itself would be a media event...but we are not asking for media attention right now...but if they come to us that is ok too...I am used to being in the media...

  48. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    14 April 2007 14:53

    <this comment is marked as private.>

  49. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    14 April 2007 15:02

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  50. Valerie Sutton
    CC Steve Slevinski
    14 April 2007 15:28

    Hello Gerard and everyone!

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    No problem about the goof...ha! We all goof, and we knew what you meant!!

    The sgn.wikipedia.org concept would be wonderful!! It would solve a lot of the issues we discussed before...

    In realize this is not necessarily the decision right now, but just so you know, that idea appeals to me...

     From the Deaf perspective and the SignWriting perspective, sgn and .sgn are both well recognized to mean the generic code for signed languages in general. So that would do very well, without the political implications we were discussing before...


    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    Thank you, Gerard. As you know, SignWriting is an alphabet in its own right, to write body movement in general...So technically it can write any signed language in the world. It just takes signers knowledgeable in their own language and in SignWriting, to be able to write their languages...So creating a Wikipedia area on the web, that would be the portal or door to the world's Sign Languages, might be another way to go...There could be a choice, when people enter the Sign Language area, as to which Sign Language they want to read and write...and ASL could simply be the first one out of many. I suspect after ASL would come German Sign Language and Norwegian Sign Language and maybe French-Swiss and French-Belgian and Flemish Sign Languages next...those are some of the Sign Languages that are being written actively right now, and there are over 40 Sign Languages that have some SignWriting dictionary or literature in SignWriting, and projects are active in Nicaragua, Ireland and Spain as well...


    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    No problem. I understand! And there are also people who are against new ideas too, in the Deaf world, just because it is human. They are insecure because this is the first generation of Deaf adults who are faced with learning to read and write their own native languages, and they did not learn SignWriting in school because it didn't exist when they were in school...so we do have people who feel nervous about the idea of writing their own languages and they write to us and tell us what we are doing isn't possible! smile...

    For example, we write SignWriting by hand daily, but the other day, a man wrote to me and informed me that it was impossible to write SignWriting by hand, and I had just been reviewing 140 pages of Deaf students writing by hand from Albuquerque, New Mexico! And he was telling me it couldn't be done...when children age 8 and 9 had just done it! But if you see it from his point of view, at age 45 does he feel good about learning something new?...it scared him...

    so creating the Wikepedia for the world's signed languages might actually give people a good world perspective on the fact that all signed languages now can be written, and they will learn about themselves and how writing their language is a part of a bigger global picture -

    Please excuse my rambling...you just inspired me to tell you that story!

    Have a wonderful Saturday everyone!

  51. Valerie Sutton
    CC Steve Slevinski
    14 April 2007 16:21

    Hello all -
    Thank for this message, Bèrto!

    See my comments between paragraphs below...

    On Apr 14, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Berto 'd Sera wrote:
    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    This would be super... I look forward to it...

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>
    This is an excellent idea, since all signed languages benefit from access to all symbols in SignWriting. So although it is true that some signed languages do not need all symbols, we are using the entire SignWriting symbolset, called the IMWA (the International Movement Writing Alphabet) in SignPuddle, since every signed language benefits from choosing from the entire SignWriting symbolset...It is best to create Unicode for the entire SignWriting symboset (IMWA) which will give future signed languages the greater flexibility.

    I want you to know that discussions on Unicode development have been ongoing for years in the SignWriting world. Michael Everson and I worked on the beginnings of it years ago, and the Summer Institute of Linguistics has also been actively discussing working on Unicode for SignWriting, and work has already been done in France by researchers there. Developing Unicode in SignWriting will require full participation by me, as the inventor of the symbols, and my non- profit organization, because of the skilled Deaf people who work with us, and Steve Slevinski, the developer of SignPuddle, plus probably teams of Unicode experts (smile)...quite a project! But well worth the funding...a worthwhile gift to the world...


    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    That we already do everyday and it is growing fast...and Unicode is not necessary for writing signed languages...we are already writing on paper daily in volumes thanks to SignPuddle...and without Unicode. But developing the Unicode for SignWriting would simply broaden reaching more people...and that is great idea!

    <this text is quoted from a user who has not agreed to public archival.>

    Thank you very much, Bèrto!

    Good weekend!

  52. —
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    15 April 2007 19:15

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  53. Jon Harald Søby
    CC Steve Slevinski, Valerie Sutton
    23 April 2007 12:04

    Hi Valerie and all.

    Sorry about the delay lately, I have been busy with school (and still should be, as I have an important IT test tomorrow). Anyways, I have written about this situation on the Internal wiki, where the "important folks" will be able to help. However, our grants coördinator quit (without explanation) last week, so writing grants might take longer than it should.

    Anyways, the correct people in the Foundation have been informed now, so things should start moving soon.

  54. Valerie Sutton
    CC Steve Slevinski
    23 April 2007 12:44

    Hello all! Thank you for this message, Jon...

    On Apr 23, 2007, at 9:04 AM, Jon Harald Søby wrote:
    > Sorry about the delay lately, I have been busy with school (and
    > still should be, as I have an important IT test tomorrow). Anyways,
    > I have written about this situation on the Internal wiki, where the
    > "important folks" will be able to help. However, our grants
    > coördinator quit (without explanation) last week, so writing grants
    > might take longer than it should.

    Smile...that is ok...I am sure there are ways that we can find funding, without putting stress on anyone...

    Just like you, our organization is particularly busy right now too, and our work load is piled high in the next month...

    But when the time comes, just knowing that we have your support and interest for the project is what matters...

    I will be happy to do the paperwork, and even prepare the applications to different foundations, if we have Wikimedia's full approval of the application...

    > Anyways, the correct people in the Foundation have been informed
    > now, so things should start moving soon.

    Many thanks! I look forward to working with them ;-))

    Good luck on your IT test tomorrow!

Closure of the subcommittee wiki

[edit]

This discussion about the subcommittee wiki led to its deletion, with all pages moved to Meta.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    14 April 2007 00:22

    Hello,

    I propose the closure and deletion of the language subcommittee wiki. All pages have long since been moved to <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_projects_subcommittees/Languages>, and since it is public we cannot use it for private discussion as was originally intended.

    External links on the top 58 wikis have been corrected; there's no way to correct interwiki links until the prefix is disabled (which will make them show up on the list of redlinks), but this was never publicized and I doubt there are any outside Meta and perhaps en-Wikipedia.

  2. Jon Harald Søby
    14 April 2007 01:40

    Yup, sounds fine by me; the wiki has not worked as intended, so it is not necessary any more.

  3. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    14 April 2007 06:08

    Fine for me. It's been pretty useless thus far.

  4. Ascander
    17 April 2007 11:23

    No problem to close it.

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    17 April 2007 16:18

    Hello,

    The dispatch dispatched and the dire deed done, no monument may mind where once a wearied wiki weathered.

  6. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    17 April 2007 04:41

    LOLOL

    Jesse, I'm just getting rid of the mountain of old emails that accumulated while I was offline. I'm sorry you won't be with us anymore, honestly I hope you'll change your mind.

    Your voice has been quite "alternative" in the Committee mainstream, and it's always for the better when there are different positions.

    Apart from that, it's been nice to work with you, and you have done an impressive amount of work. So thanks for it and if you can't change your mind right now pls remember that you can still change it later ;)

  7. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    17 April 2007 14:11

    Hello,

    Thanks. I'll probably be staying a while until the process is working smoothly. :)

Wikipedia Quiché

[edit]

This discussion about the Wikipedia Quiché request led to its rejection.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    16 April 2007 04:04

    Hello,

    I propose the rejection of the Quiché Wikipedia. Since the request was opened in late January 2007, no native writers have come forth (and only one non-native writer) and no test project was developed.

    The only significant argument in favour actually describes a situation we're trying to avoid: empty wikis with no community which become open targets for vandalism, libel, and spam, and must be monitored (with difficulty) by the "Small Wiki Monitoring Team" <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/SWMT>. Users are free to make a new request in the future if they can attract a larger interested community.

    I will implement this decision in 24 hours if there are no objections. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  2. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    16 April 2007 04:09

    Oaky for me :)

  3. Sabine Cretella
    16 April 2007 04:13

    Agree :-)

    And thanks for your work!

  4. Jon Harald Søby
    16 April 2007 06:46

    Yup, fine by me too.

  5. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    19 April 2007 02:57

    Hello,

    'Tis done.

Conditional approval of some projects

[edit]

This discussion led to the conditional approval of Wikipedia Ao (test project), Wikipedia Crimean Tatar 2 (localization), Wikipedia Kinaray-a 2 (test project), Wikipedia Lower Sorbian 2 (localization), and Wikipedia Sakha (localization); the rejection of Wikipedia traditional Greek; and no action on Wikipedia Karelian 2, Wikipedia Palatinate German 2, Wikipedia Extremaduran, and Wikipedia Insubric.

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    17 April 2007 16:09

    I've gone through the list of new language requests now, and propose the conditional approval of the following languages. If there is a need to discuss some of them further, please start new threads for those ones (or else this thread will be a mess).

    • grc, Traditional Greek
    • njo, Ao
    • crh, Crimean Tatar
    • krl, Karelian
    • krj, Kinaray-a
    • dsb, Lower Sorbian
    • pfl, Palatinate German
    • sah, Sakha

    About these, I am not so sure.

    • ext, Extremaduran
    • [no code], Insubric

    (This, of course, provided that the conditional approval system works. My view of conditional approval is that we say "yes, we will approve your project if you prove that it is viable", that is what it is intended as, yeah?)

  2. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    17 April 2007 16:25

    I oppose insubric. My position has already been published in a dedicated list for cisalpin languages. As it is the insubric linguistic entity is half of the LMO wiki. They have no code but they already have a wiki they can work in (LMO). I’d like to have more data about Karelian. Is it Veps or what ?

  3. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    17 April 2007 21:34

    Hello,

    Following is more information on the requests listed above (except Extremaduran and Insubric) and my own opinions.


    ==Wikipedia traditional Greek==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Traditional_Greek>
    I propose this request be rejected.

    "Traditional Greek" covers a number of versions, including Ancient (c. 500–300 BCE), Koine (c. 300BCE–300CE), and Medieval Greek (c. 300–1453). These variants differ significantly, so there is the possibility of much conflict (which variant should a particular article be written in? Can multiple variants be used in the same article?). Wikis have been split apart for less significant differences, such as the Norwegian wikis.

    One editor has also expressed concerns that this will draw editors away from the already underpopulated Greek Wikipedia, which already contains traditional Greek as part of normal Greek speech and writing.

    There is only one interested editor and no test project.


    ==Wikipedia Ao==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Ao>
    I propose this request be conditionally approved. The language is suitable, and there are four interested users. However, the test project only has three articles since it was created in February 2007.


    ==Wikipedia Karelian==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Karelian_2>
    I propose no action be taken on this request, which was only opened two weeks ago.


    ==Wikipedia Crimean Tatar==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Crimean_Tatar_2>
    I propose this request be conditionally approved. The language is suitable, and there is a large interested community. The test project has 219 articles (including redirects) and regular activity. However, none of the interface is translated.


    ==Wikipedia Kinaray-a==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Kinaray-a_2>
    I propose that we conditionally approve this request. The language is suitable, but the test project is infrequently edited (March 19 and 21, April 16 and 17), the editing community too small, and none of the interface is localized.


    ==Wikipedia Lower Sorbian==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Lower_Sorbian_2>
    I propose that we conditionally approve this request. The language is suitable, there are six interested users, and an active test project with 284 pages. However, none of the interface is localized.


    ==Wikipedia Palatinate German==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Palatinate_German_2>
    I propose we look at this request later, since it is more controversial.


    ==Wikipedia Sakha==
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Sakha>
    I propose the conditional approval of this request. The language is suitable, there is a large interested community, and a semi-active test project. However, none of the interface is localized.

  4. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    18 April 2007 07:09

    Hoi!

    > Can multiple variants be used in the same
    > article?).

    It's a complex issue that becomes dominant whenever theirs is no normative version for a language. In PMS we use templates to identify these variations and allow them all. People are welcome to mix them (after all it's the same language and we understand each other anyway, no matter the accent, graphic "accents" included). The last writer overwrites the others, and that's it.

    Some pages that are maintained by very small minority groups are "protected", i.e., they bear a template saying that they should be fully in the local version. Thus we have a way for us to collect full texts in very rare variants AND a place in which minorities do not feel compressed by the dominating "turinese" trend.

    It's a largely a matter of internal politics. As long as there is one clearly dominant group things are easier, because all you need is warranties for minorities. When it's more equivalent groups (like in LMO) fighting dynamics can get very unpleasant. Secessionists do not necessarily belong in the losing group. The "insubric" group has the majority of content and users in LMO. What we have there is a "trademark war".

    Also... based on what happens in Italy I'd say that *SOME* territories that have a former political identity (Naples, Sicily, Piedmont) seem to have less problems than those who have not (Lombardy and Emilia Romagna). Too bad that Ligurian wiki has very little activity (the linguistic entity is almost extinct and my impression is that their current script is way too complex to have hopes to become mainstream) and Venitian wiki is just as fragmented in scripting style as the EML.wiki. As always, the only rule for Italy is a set of exceptions.

    IMHO we should not encourage secessions in small projects. It may make sense to have a well categorized version for the Greek wiki. If and when the community is big enough to justify a split we can have a different decision (after all a congruent linguistic environment for people studying different flavors of the Greek Classical Language could be an interesting online resource).

  5. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    18 April 2007 08:20

    Hoi!

    > ==Wikipedia Crimean Tatar==

    I can assist them with the translation, they should all be Russian speakers so we won't have problems.

  6. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    20 April 2007 01:57

    Hello,

    I will implement the proposed decisions tomorrow night (72 hours after proposal) if there's no opposition. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  7. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    21 April 2007 00:31

    Hello,

    I've implemented to proposed decisions, namely:

    • the conditional approval of...
      • Wikipedia Ao (test project);
      • Wikipedia Crimean Tatar (localization);
      • Wikipedia Kinaray-a (test project);
      • Wikipedia Lower Sorbian (localization);
      • Wikipedia Sakha (localization).
    • the rejection of Wikipedia traditional Greek;
    • no action on Wikipedia Karelian, Wikipedia Palatinate German, Wikipedia Extremaduran, and Wikipedia Insubric.

    There is currently no Sakha and Lower Sorbian interface messages on BetaWiki; I'll contact Nikerabbit to correct that.

Algero-Moroccan Arabic Wikipedia

[edit]

The request for a Algero-moroccan Arabic Wikipedia was rejected.

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    23 April 2007 15:44

    Hi!

    Just for your information, I just closed the request for an Algero-Moroccan Arabic Wikipedia. The reasons for this was the proposer's post of April 17, "Since there is no body interested except me, I give up, i propose to close this request.", and the reasons for his post, e.g. the lack of participants. And thirdly because of the fact that no sources as to whether this actually is one language have been posted. (Ethnologue has Algerian Arabic, Saharan Algerian Arabic, Moroccan Arabic as well as Judeo-Moroccan Arabic. I asked the proposer if any of these matched the request, but the next thing he did was to propose the closure of the request, saying he's not interested any more.

Subcommittee mailing list

[edit]
See also "Private mailing list?" (March 2007).

This discussion concerned the creation of langcom-l per earlier discussion.

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    24 April 2007 15:11

    Hi folks!

    We finally have our own mailing list, so that we won't have to copy-paste eachother's email addresses every time. This way we will only have to mail langcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org , and all members will receive the mail. When corresponding with outsiders, however, we will still need to add them in the receiver line, but that shouldn't be a big problem.

    Currently I am the only list administrators, but if any of you want to become one, just say so. Ideally all langcom members should be listadmins, but some might not be interested in that (it's only a technical thing), so therefore I'll ask instead.

    Archiving is set to private, so that only members can read the archives. That way, we can still keep the manual archives the way we have (only that they'll be a lot easier to maintain), while the members who don't want their posts to be archived publicly, will have their wishes respected.

  2. Jon Harald Søby
    24 April 2007 16:07

    Please reply to this thread so I can know that you are in and are able to read what's here. Thanks.

  3. Michal Zlatkovský (Timichal)
    25 April 2007 13:08

    Great, thanks!

    (test asdf ;) )

  4. Ascander
    25 April 2007 15:10

    Second Try. Ascánder.

  5. —
    25 April 2007 15:59

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  6. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    25 April 2007 08:06

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  7. Jon Harald Søby
    25 April 2007 08:10

    Do you mean that you are fine with your posts being archived publicly? You could have that as "default", and if there's something you don't want to be archived, you could say so. =)

  8. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    25 April 2007 08:14

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  9. Jon Harald Søby
    25 April 2007 08:16

    Have you seen this [1] email?

    [1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/langcom-l/2007-April/000000.html

    "Archiving is set to private, so that only members can read the archives. That way, we can still keep the manual archives the way we have (only that they'll be a lot easier to maintain), while the members who don't want their

    posts to be archived publicly, will have their wishes respected."
  10. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    25 April 2007 08:20

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  11. —
    25 April 2007 16:08

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

Wikipedia Hakka

[edit]

The request for a Hakka Wikipedia was conditionally approved.

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    24 April 2007 16:04

    Hi!

    I propose the conditional approval of a Wikipedia in Hakka (ISO 639-3 hak). The request was opened only on April 12, yet it has a lot of interested contributors, and has a quite large base of articles in the Incubator [1]. The project on Incubator has been there for half a year or so, but there is a lot of activity as of late, and I believe this will be a very successful Wikipedia.

    The only thing I think they need now, is to localise the interface. I'll contact the user Hakka (he seems to be the most active) tomorrow, and ask if he is willing to/able to do that.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

    [1] http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Prefixindex/Wp/hak

  2. Jon Harald Søby
    24 April 2007 16:06

    I'll make that 72 hours, as this list is brand new, and perhaps not everybody will receive the email.

  3. Jon Harald Søby
    27 April 2007 18:04

    It has now been conditionally approved. I've asked Nikerabbit to add Hakka on Betawiki, and posted a slightly modified version of the message Pathoschild posted on the talk page for the Kabyle Wikipedia proposal on the talk page for the Hakka Wikipedia proposal. If there are no replies there tomorrow evening, I will contact the individual users.

Ethiopian Wikipedias

[edit]

This discussion concerned a series of requests by a single user, which were all rejected.

See also:

  1. Jon Harald Søby
    25 April 2007 17:49

    Hi!

    I propose the rejection of the following proposals for Wikipedias in languages of Ethiopia. They were all filed by one user, Blake C, claiming to be a native speaker of all of them(!). Since the rejects were opened on April 24, there have been no interested users (except this Blake C). I propose that we reject these requests now, and wait until there are any actual contributors that are interested in creating Wikipedias in these languages.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 48 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

  2. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    26 April 2007 02:24

    ok

  3. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    26 April 2007 04:12

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  4. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    26 April 2007 14:52

    Agreed.

  5. Jon Harald Søby
    27 April 2007 18:02

    It is done.

Multilingual MediaWiki

[edit]
  1. Sabine Cretella
    26 April 2007 16:42

    Another thing: we also should not forget that something called multilingual mediawiki is being programmed and that this feature is not too far away ... so it could solve quite a bunch of problems.

    /me going to bed - have to get up at six.

    good night!

  2. Jon Harald Søby
    26 April 2007 17:31

    I have heard some talk about it before, but don't know what it is. Do you have a link?

  3. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    26 April 2007 17:37

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

Require approval for test projects?

[edit]
  1. Sabine Cretella
    26 April 2007 00:53

    Hi, just two things:

    when I originally wrote the proposal about how to create new projects the goal was to avoid the request for new languages, all the trouble around it with discussions and voting.

    At a certain stage for some reason we started to approve/reject language requests of the "old type" - well that is additional work that does not help us at all. As much as I remember we did not write down any policy that says: before you open a project on incubator you need to ask for getting it. Instead the sense was that people simply do and when they meet certain requirements they get their project without thousands of problems and discussions.

    Now why should we give conditional approval? A project can grow even driven by one person quite a lot on incubator ... well so if this person wants to build the project and grow the community by working on his project: he/she can well do that on the incubator.

    Please show me where we said: from now on you need to make a request to open a new project on incubator. If we have this - and I did not find it - that needs to be changed, because the "request for new languages" on meta must become superfluous, otherwise we just eliminated one thing to get another one that is even more bureaucratic and time consuming.

    I wanted to search all e-mails I have here about this theme ... hopefully I will be able to do this in the evening when I am back.

  2. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    26 April 2007 02:33

    Hoi!

    Can't think of any other good reason to stop people from opening a project in the incubator other than... missing an ISO code. When they don't have one they are going to get rejected anyway, so maybe it's better if we do not have people working like crazy to be later told "oh, sorry, you cannot have a wiki and we knew it from the start".

    Apart from that it should be okay. If anyone has a valid ISO code I will always approve an incubator project, so basically this could be automated.

  3. Michal Zlatkovský (Timichal)
    26 April 2007 02:34

    I don't think the conditional approval is meant to _allow_ having a test on incubator. You can still create a test on incubator freely; the conditional approval just encourages the editors to do so.

    Quoting from meta:Meta:Language proposal policy#Conditional approval: "The users should begin writing a test project on the Incubator wiki now, _if they haven't already._"

  4. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    26 April 2007 04:10

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  5. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    26 April 2007 05:17

    <this message is marked as private.>

  6. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    26 April 2007 14:48

    Hello,

    Conditional approval has nothing to do with editing the Incubator. Users may start a test project at any time before or during a request. They can even start one after their request was rejected, though they would probably be wasting their time, and the Incubator community may just delete it eventually anyway.

    Conditional approval is simply an intermediate step between discussion and meeting final requirements. Once discussion has let us reach a decision, conditional approval serves to redirect interested users from the discussion to the relevant requirements. The alternative is months or years of discussion while we futilely wait for someone to notice a subcommittee comment on page fourteen pointing out that "Yes, we'll accept this request when you do this one last thing".

    The fact that editors can start a test project at any time is very explicitly pointed out in the policy. I suspect users simply do not want to invest time in a test project until they know their work won't be rejected and archived to the Incubator, awaiting future deletion.

  7. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    26 April 2007 16:05

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  8. Sabine Cretella
    26 April 2007 16:28

    it is simple: like in the case of Montenegrin their writing in their language on incubator would give proof that it can be merged with Serbian ... so: we reserve the possibility to indicate a project a language should co-operate with when there is such a possibility.

    and for other languages: well there are "living languages" that simply don't have an iso 639 code ... so these can work there and in the meantime ask for the code ...

    it is just a matter of making this clear in our policy ... maybe it needs some integration in such sense.

    sorry for being so short ... have just some mins and don't know if/whenn I will be here tomorrow.

  9. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    26 April 2007 16:36

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  10. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    27 April 2007 02:33

    <this message is marked as private.>

  11. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    27 April 2007 17:02

    Hello,

    I don't understand the objections here. Do you suggest that we prohibit volunteers from writing without our permission? Allowing them to write on their own initiative *reduces* bureaucracy. The incubator is not under our control, nor should it be; we are not the ultimate authority to whom all must beg permission to edit.

    Consider the Montenegrin Wikipedia requests, for example. It was (clearly) rejected in late November 2006, following which the users insisted on creating no less than two test projects. Nonetheless, the second request was rejected again early this month, and the failed test projects confirmed our initial decision.

    We very clearly stated that the Montenegrin Wikipedia would not be created. Prohibiting them from editing the Incubator would have made no difference, particularly considering that their test projects weren't even on the Incubator. Further, we are not perfect: we may make a decision, and a future request with new arguments may lead us to make a new decision.

    Demanding that users ask permission from us to start a test project ruins initiative, creates needless bureaucracy, and fosters discontent in the wiki community.

  12. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    27 April 2007 18:16

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  13. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    27 April 2007 19:08

    <this message is marked as private.>

  14. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    27 April 2007 22:58

    Hello,

    First, the incubator is not under our control; it is managed by the Incubator administrative community. Therefore, we have no authority (nor should we) to prevent users from creating test projects if the incubator community allows them to.

    Second, such a requirement will force the people who made the request into the position of waiting for approval from some high, mysterious tribunal for every step of their volunteer work. That is intimidating, overcomplicated, bureaucratic, and unnecessary, and thus ruins initiative. The more complicated we make the process, the less willing people will be to go through with it.

    We should remember that people are requesting a new wiki to create an encyclopedia or other project. The process to get one should be designed to ensure that they succeed in creating a flourishing project (or prevent a failed project), *not* serve our own interests by giving our opposition less straw men to complain about, and *not* to discourage requests by making the process as tortuous as possible.

    Third, note that the ISO code is a largely technical requirement. A language without an ISO code can receive one in the future, and a language *with* an ISO code can be rejected.

  15. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    28 April 2007 03:33

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  16. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    28 April 2007 13:12

    Hello,

    If they have a valid case, their "blackmail" will present new arguments for us to reconsider. If they do not have a valid case, their "blackmail" will be rejected again. I don't care what our critics will think; I joined the subcommittee to ensure requests are processed smoothly and fairly, not to win a popularity contest on Foundation-l.

    You obviously mistake my arguments. You say that there are already many languages in ISO639, including orthographic variants (which are generally not acceptable). I say that a standard code is a technical requirement that says nothing about whether the language itself is suitable. We seem to be in agreement on that point, at least.

  17. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    28 April 2007 21:24

    Hoi,

    I thought we were here to make sure wmf had a consistent linguistic policy. I now have the impression that we are here to make sure that mailing-list X and private conversation Y will all celebrate us all as "Wikibopper of the Year". I don't rate virtual popularity any better than I rate virtual sex, so let's stick to business. We are LangCom and are supposed to help newcomers.

    Now, I wish everyone would remember that:

    1. I opened a wiki just one year ago, I DO KNOW what it means to deal with the Holy Community, that is, with a place where every second guy poses as a God because you don't know the local lingo (same people will get upset when we now ask an ISO code but will find it ab-so-lu-te-ly normal to tell a new sod "use request templates" and will react to any question with a "What!? You mean they don't they have templates in their funny villages!?" stance. Yeah, we all do it, sooner or later.)
    2. When you open a wiki in a small language you are yourself part of a community and you do risk your OWN image to convince them that doing such an idiotic thing as writing an encyclopedia instead of getting out on Sundays is a nice thing. People think you are crazy and they are absolutely right...
    3. To add an insult to an injury you have to use the stupidest tool ever (wiki-markup) when just ANY contemporary interface would be WYSIWYG. So you also have to tell your perplexed people that they have to learn that silly mumbo-jumbo...
    4. Nobody in the idealistic community EVER thought that there is no such a thing as a well evident link to "open a new wiki here". We are too clever for that, ain't we? So as a newcomer you look for the damn Holy Grail for weeks and end up in lots of different places where various wikifreaks tell you villain what you should better do... Okay, you report that to your evermore perplexed community, yet since any wik-a-billy you meet has yet another "brilliant vision" of how new wikies are born you keep on looking like a fool on acid for months. People look at you while you describe how to get approved you are either supposed to seduce the wikimobs (what do you use? Lipstick and miniskirts for languages? Cultural lingerie?), or how someone just whispered you that you should just "make one yourself in the incubator" (whaddaf**k an incubator for wikies IS????? Shouldn't you have wikisex before having a wiki premature birth???). You may laugh about it, but that's just how idiotic the wiki-lingo is and how idiotic it all sounds when translated, because you obviously have to report in YOUR language what those crap-minded wikiboppers told you.
    5. These days, when you open a wiki you are usually one of the few (possibly the one and only) guy in your community who has a decent command of English. This means spending an incredible amount of YOUR OWN time finding out what needs to be done and you must do it ALONE, while the "Community" here disputes on whether it's more theologically correct to have Committees, or to decide by public mob voting or based on random numbers to ensure the Will of the Gods of Chaos gets respected. I mean, it's soo posh to speak about self-governance and anarchy on the internet while sipping a drink at a meeting, ain't it? Why the hell should you care about silly real-life problems when you already have en.wiki under your ass or you have already opened 15 one-man band wikies just for the fun of it? Yeah, I'm a nasty bugger, but that's the kind of people that mostly makes the "linguistic community" and we all know about it. In the meantime your TRUE COMMUNITY (the people who speak your language) will dispute whether you are only as idiot as it seems or worse... so if you cannot make that bloody wiki you'll remain "the one and only wiki-idiot" in your tribe for the rest of your life...
    6. While you desperately look for documentation, standards and anything that even a microwave would have (and you find NONE, not even an outdated index) you keep being proudly repeated until forever that "we are open source". Open source my socks! Open source means I can find a source and read it (let alone modify it). Now try and google the damn "community" to find out which is which. You'll have fun in the process, I tell you. The only available manuals are on (and FOR) en.wiki. Yes and en.wiki is a planet on its own, because its extensions aren't like yours (what!? You mean they ain't even got fuc**ng exteeensions in their villages!?? Poor sods, it must be TERRIBLE...). Then you have stubs and bots and stewards (and it takes a while before you ignorant bugger learn they are not those who sing "I am saaaailing" while taking a shower with Britt Ekland) and Commons, oh yeah, the Free Files... great idea, too bad en.wiki admits fair-use, what's fair-use!? Maaan... you must have just come down from the Alps, ain't ya?... then you get told you'd better have chosen anything BUT GDFL, too bad you bugger already have 1500 articles in your stupid wiki and it's too damn late. You complain about never having been told about it and get answered with some sort of - What!? You mean you haven't read the 157 tomes on "Copyright and sexual disease in the wikipedia age" we have published JUST (posh stance here) after the (mumble any name here) scandal!? How weeeiiird!!!! It was on all respectable wikizines!!! I must blog this!!

    This is what a newcomer gets by the bloody "Community" as seen from his own immediate perception. If you laugh while reading it means you are this side of the community wall: you're wiki-positive and need urgent treatment. If not it means you're still sane and human.

    Now we are supposed to draw a human-readable map and hang it in a VERY visible place for newcomers to use it, so they get infected and can start to laugh about us wikisods, too. Let's be CLEAR: the fucking map is made for everybody BUT the bloody Community. If anyone's already in the Community they do NOT need the map, so they are kindly invited to mind their bloody community business while we write/speak in human-readable form for those poor old buggers like me who still prefer to speak and read human languages and have no damn templates in their funny alpine villages.

    Being clear also means that if we know it's "no" we must say "no" and we must say it immediately and crystal clear (with a crystal clear reason, too). It means we do not have a group of people swallow that much "culture" I just listed only to be later told they wasted their time. What do you mean "we might change our minds"?? You mean you'll rape a girl who said "no" because "she might be turned on later"??? You mean you can look at people aiming a gun at me and keep shut about it, to later tell me in the hospital that "after all, they might have missed you"??? You'll better be VERY quick runners if you do that, because next I'll do is sharing the experience of being shot on peer-2-peer basis (my gun-server - your body-client).

    Work, time and personal image of the newcomers are their own private property and we cannot use them to pay our community bills. Buy your neighbors a beer with YOUR OWN money if you want good relations within your block. If we feel that the "community" is experiencing "discontent" we can send them flowers and chocolate (but strictly at our OWN cost) or sing them sweet songs, but we cannot use newcomers as Guinea pigs just to keep the wikiwasps happy.

    Oh GOD, after such an embarrassing public message I'll never become popular within the Community, now nobody will nominate me to be the head of their Look-How-Clever-We-Freakeepedians-Are Committee... Gosh, I won't even get invited to dinner on Tagsgiving... No I can't stand that; I'll better kill myself before my mom gets to know :))))))))))))))) I think I'll deliberately read "all pages" on meta to kill myself with boredom :)))))

  18. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    28 April 2007 21:40

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  19. Michal Zlatkovský (Timichal)
    29 April 2007 04:58

    Huh?

  20. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    29 April 2007 06:38

    Hello,

    > I joined the subcommittee ... not to win a popularity contest on
    > Foundation-l.

    I always did have that impression, too and that's why I did and do personally support your presence here. Nevertheless your phrase "it fosters discontent in the Community" sounded weird.

    That's the only thing that worried me in your message. Entering wmf is already unpleasant for a newbie AS IS, without any need to be used as a football for "internal mafia" games.

    Many people don't like it, yet in my country we have the tradition to call things their names and making it in front of the people. I'd rather have a public fight than spend my time curtseying to you on scene to later stab your back as soon as you don't see me. Get used to it, because I won't change.

    Happy weekend everybody :)

  21. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    29 April 2007 07:31

    Hoi!

    >Huh?

    Which part was unclear, exactly? :)

  22. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    29 April 2007 15:05

    Hello,

    By "community" I meant the requesting community that is forced into the described position, not the wider Foundation community that has nothing to do it. That was the point of my whole message, which is why my response to your message is rather similar to Timichal's "huh?". ;)

    The situation you described is largely caused by two problems: insufficient documentation and excessive bureaucracy. With the new process, we provide documentation for requests at <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:LPP> and for localization on the relevant talk pages such as <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Kabyle#Localization>. This documentation is expanded every time someone asks a good question. If users have trouble finding this documentation, perhaps we should place a notice at the other places they look first.

    Excessive bureaucracy is a real danger. I would suggest that anyone who wishes to expand the policy first read <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Practical_process>. In particular, we should consider whether the expansion is actually necessary.

    Can we discourage users from wasting their time on doomed test projects without stifling progress on *all* requests, can we do it with something less than an iron fist, and can we avoid demanding users endlessly submit forms HX41-a (request to begin a test project) or HX41-b (requests to edit a test project) or HX48 (request to speak a language of class 7C)?

  23. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    29 April 2007 15:26

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  24. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    29 April 2007 17:11

    Hello,

    >By "community" I meant the requesting community that is forced into
    >the described position, not the wider Foundation community that has
    >nothing to do it.

    Happy to hear that. It confirms the general positive impression I have from you :) I think we need to adopt a terminology that will make very clear what we mean, because "community" is hyper-abused web 2.0 marketing lingo and can be totally deceptive (not only for me, I'd say).

    One point remains: we must not have people waste their time. If we feel that ISO is not a criterium we must change that, but putting the requesting community in the hand of our arbitrary moods MUST be excluded.

    Since nobody seems to have problems in accepting that ISO is the best existing international standard I cannot see why we cannot

    1. have a bot creating ALL legal codes immediately on the incubator, so we get rid of ANY pre-request processing
    2. have a mandatory link published on all wikies stating "where you go to open a wiki" (people see wikies, not meta) and have a simple page stating
      a) where to find a list of ISO codes
      b) how to access your ready-made incubator page
      c) a clear refusal in case there's no code

    This is what I call "no bureaucracy" and "clear messages".

    By doing so we can

    1. get rid of much of the administrative process on the incubator (no new stuff to make)
    2. abolish requests and paperwork "as such"
    3. prepare criteria to evaluate real projects.
    4. automate the process to have betawiki "know" about all legal ISO codes
    5. canalize requesting communities on self-making a "manual for dummies" while they learn

    We have an added problem when we have codes that can be allowed to develop an interface but not a wiki, i.e. we need an intermediate authorization level by which users can only edit the interface (i.e. work on betawiki). The access point should be one for all, from the incubator.

    >Excessive bureaucracy is a real danger.

    Nobody is asking it, but being unclear or even contradictory in our messages is even worse. Apart from being annoying for requesters bureaucracy is something we simply cannot afford, since we don't pay people to work in it.

  25. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    29 April 2007 18:11

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  26. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    30 April 2007 02:32

    Hoi!

    What’s the problem? 7000+ is something any bot will do. AFAIK 639-6 will be here long after that (and will not alter the existing 639-3 3-letter codes).

    I seem to understand that all we need is a list and the will to review it manually (putting a Y/N aside the question “conditionally approved?”). We don’t need to do it in one go, we can simply have some 100 codes a week, in 15 months we will be over, say 14 because in the meantime individual requests will add up to our “work for the future”. It’s always 3-4 of us in active mode, if any of us reviews 5 codes/day we can do it no probs.

    Or is there any other source of variability?

  27. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 03:44

    Hello,

    It's not that simple. Conditional approval is given if "discussion and past experience indicates that the project is a good idea and would prosper". An ISO code does not guarantee success; we must also consider the size and activity of the editing community, whether it can easily be merged into a larger wiki (which depends on the compatibility of the communities as well as the degree of difference), how it will affect other projects, et cetera.

    Conditional approval suggests that the project will be approved as soon as a few last requirements are met. It is intended to divert the interested community to those requirements. If we conditionally approve all requests immediately, there's no point to conditional approval in the first place.

    Further, the bot creation of 7000+ wikis is not practical. Will we list 7000+ empty tests on the Incubator main page, and how will a bot write a main page in 7000+ languages?

    Furthermore, "discussion and past experience" implies that we learn from our mistakes. We can't do that if we do all requests in advance, and you run into the problem you've mentioned before. If we conditionally approve a language by mistake in advance, and someone puts a lot of effort getting it together, do we just say "Oops, typo; sorry, we were doing them in batches. Try again next time!"?

  28. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    30 April 2007 03:59

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  29. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 15:09

    Hello,

    The policy states the following regarding ISO codes:

    "If there is no valid ISO-639 or RFC 4646 code, it should be a natural

    language or a well-established constructed language. The Wikimedia Foundation does not seek to develop new linguistic entities; there must be an extensive body of works in that language. The information that distinguishes this language from another should be sufficient to

    convince standards organizations to create an ISO-639 or BCP 47 code."

    Where there is an existing body of works in that language but no standard code, a flourishing test encyclopedia or other significant project may encourage the standards organization to consider it more closely. There is no harm in having test projects in the Incubator for a while waiting for a code, if they are otherwise acceptable.

    Again, the Incubator is managed by the Incubator community, which may set its own policy. The Incubator even allows test wikis for completely new projects, not only new language subdomains. We do not have the authority to prohibit editors from contributing to the Incubator; at most, we can discourage them from doing so and let them assume responsibility if they wish to do so anyway.

  30. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    30 April 2007 15:20

    Hoi!

    Obviously. No ISO code = no incubator access AT ALL. This is an automated part that requires no bureaucracy at all, no requests, no faking we are N native speakers, etc. The Committee judges the ISO code (whether it can be a wiki or only an interface) and that’s it. People are not expected to sing sweet songs under our windows to make sure we (or the mobs) are in the right mood. If the policy doesn’t say so, then let’s vote immediately and let’s get rid of the old policy.

    No arbitrary space must be allowed on the pre-filter phase. I don’t need people to be on their knees and ask Our Majesties to give them a code, I want them to be able to know whether they are eligible or not without us. Once they are eligible we will help to become also elected (community, localization, learning the idiotic wiki-markup, etc), but that’s another story… Hopefully we will have something better than a wiki for newcomers (like a manual users can comment in PHP style and a normal, maybe not-so-trendy but usable forum, instead of using wikimedia even to cook eggs when it’s obviously unfit for most of these tasks). It’s thousands of open source softwares we can use if we ever learn to admit that wmf is not the whole universe.

    Who’s to say that it’s ISO code or die?

  31. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    30 April 2007 15:22

    > There is no harm in having test projects in the Incubator for
    > a while waiting for a code, if they are otherwise acceptable.

    That's what YOU think. On the opposite it's terrible, because it means you and I become the Lords of the Yes/No. I'm not here to be a feudal power.

  32. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 15:29

    Hello,

    That is not Incubator policy at the moment. The Incubator main page states:

    '...if no code can be found, please use "x-languagename" in English
    (rather than inventing codes that are not in RFC 4646), or ask an
    administrator for help.'

    If you would like to change this, I suggest you become a member of the Incubator community and push for a stricter policy. However, the language subcommittee does not have the authority to impose policy on the Incubator or override the community.

  33. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 15:35

    Hello,

    Quite the opposite. If we prohibit editors from contributing on the Incubator, we are unilaterally declaring their language unsuitable and officiously prohibiting them from encouraging online development. If we allow editors to edit the Incubator according to current Incubator policy, we take no stance on the language and simply await a standard code and request.

    The subcommittee is tasked with managing requests for new language subdomains, *not* controlling everything everywhere related to language in any way. Therefore, it is prohibiting the free use of the Incubator that makes us "the Lords of the Yes/No".

  34. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    30 April 2007 15:47

    Sorry, no. I have no time to be a citizen of the Duchy of Feronia, an advisor of the Sheriff of Bolgrovia and also a Respectable Member of the Guild of Borombia. My calendar says the Middle Age is finished long time ago. If the newcomers are less relevant than our internal power games let's say it clear. Maybe the people should better look for more friendly projects than wmf, projects in which people are still more important than our fat "communities".

  35. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 16:08

    Hello,

    You're right. Why should I bother being an administrator on several projects, a member of the subcommittee, a steward, and an editor elsewhere? We can just have the board tell us what to do. Totalitarian committees work so much better than communities of volunteers working through consensus.

    If you disagree with the fundamental principles of the Wikimedia Foundation, that's your own opinion. However, I personally prefer the concept of volunteers working through consensus to top-down decisions by mysterious [[star chamber]]s.

    What this has to do with is *preventing* committee power games.

  36. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    30 April 2007 17:30

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  37. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    30 April 2007 22:18

    C'mon Jesse, you don't expect me this nasty old bastard to shed tears for the heroic wmf green-berets, do you? :)))))))))))

    Let's talk business:
    1) I say decisions must be taken outside the wmf, by ISO (taking away power from our mafia, this peculiar Committee included). You want the local powers safe and say that a no-compromise renounce to any power is Totalitarism. Okay, noted (not without questions like "what the hell did you smoke tonite?", yet... okay, noted)
    2) I say we should get rid of any requests in principle and deliver ready-made points on the incubator for the people to use them without ANY requests to ANYONE. You want the blank 2HJK4 published to the Earls of the Meta, from which (depending on the mood of the streetgangs in somewhere else, provided that we all can always "change our minds later" if we find it politically useful) a project will be allowed or not, and then the newcomers will be allowed to fill request 234thj77 to the Sheriff of the Incubator to receive a blank of the type 66GGT that they are supposed to present to the Baronets of the Committee here... Sorry I'd rather not open a wiki if this was the procedure I had to tolerate as a requester... anyway, such seems to be your idea of "no bureaucracy"... Okay, noted, too.

    Now... Try drawing a path with arrows and baloons. A baloon is a center of power (the source for an authorization) and arrows show how requesters move from standing in line here to standing in line there. If you use that you'll never be deluded by empty marketing expressions like Fundamental Principle, Ideal, Community, Democracy or Totalitarism. It's called "diagram" and works pretty well to define processes. Maybe it's not Sacred, but at least it works and it's 100% politically neutral. When you have a small number of balloons and arrows people get a quicker service... yeah... THAT easy.

    I find it amazingly ironic that people who allegedly want to deliver the larger encyclopedia on the planet will be so passionate in defending a medieval power structure made of countless petty tyrants and endless contradictory policies, which is the exact opposite of the need for rationality expressed by Enlightment Age, according to ALL sources.

    Basing the structure on the figure of the "heroic volunteer" is no better than basing it on that of the "noble knight". It's but a set of small local powers anyway, as far as a traveller is concerned. As soon as we will all stop writing masturbatory articles on "notable wikipedians" and will try and ask ACTUAL USERS what it is like to read a wiki we will understand that part much better.

    When your emotions will calm down I'm positive you'll notice that, too. I think you'll find very interesting materials for such comparisons if you look at the structure of the French society before and after the French Revolution. Other interesting material maybe found on studying the decomposition of the Soviet Power into an endless number of conflicting administrative tribes, which marks the opposite vector.

    They both have striking similarity to much of what's happening within wmf, and since I'm positive you have electoral plans studying a bit of technical tricks will only do good ;) You can't live on moving rethoric only, you know, sometimes you need strategy, too ;)

    Anyway, think about it twice before becoming a candidate. I wouldn't accept a paid post in wmf even if it was the last available job on earth. Too many weirdos (me at the first place) to deal with for such a low wage, IMHO :)))

    Happy trails :)

  38. —
    30 April 2007 22:33

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

  39. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 23:08

    Hello,

    Please avoid personal attacks and polemic. I am not a politician and my opinions are my own, not those of some partisan electoral platform. The vocabulary used is accurate; what would you call the requesting community? The "requesting group of cooperating editors"?

    Compare:

    The current policy is rather simple. You read the policy, meet the requirements, and make a request. (There is no need to apply for anything besides the actual wiki.) Within a month, you're translating the interface (if it's not already translated) and you're done.

    Your proposed requirement makes things not so simple. Users must make a request and wait for discussion and a decision. (They may not do anything else while waiting, like working on a test project.) Then they must apply for permission to begin a test project and wait for a decision on that. Then they work a while on that until a third decision is reached. Then they begin translating, and eventually start.

    Rather than one or two decisions, we have no less than three different decision procedures, one of which usurps the existing simple method (with no requirements or processes) designed and maintained by those who actually work on the Incubator. Users could no longer save time by, for example, making a test project before a request, and why? So we can avoid criticism and help users who can't understand "no".

    All that said, I'm no longer a member of the subcommittee (see the related email), so this last comment is merely advisory. I hope my comments in our many kilobytes of discussions have been helpful overall.

    Fare well. :)

  40. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    01 May 2007 08:31

    Listen... I'll avoid polemics, you please explain who of us is a native English speaker, because I'm starting to have doubts about it.

    > The current policy is rather simple.

    I already wrote a lengthy message to explain how simple and pleasant it is to deal with us wiki-idiots when you first come here, so how am I to interpret this "simple"? Is it supposed to be ironical or what?

    > You read the policy, meet the requirements, and make a request.

    How sweeet :))))))))) the same can be said just of ANY procedure on the planet, including that needed to buy a flight to the Moon. Really, big content you put here. How long it takes to "meet the requirements", what are they and the fact that "we can always change our minds" have kind of magically vanished somewhere... sweet, indeed.

    > Your proposed requirement makes things not so simple. Users must make
    > a request and wait for discussion and a decision.

    Now here are my doubts about who's a native speaker in what. In my home land they say that "nobody is more deaf than the one who does not want to hear". So... To make sure I'm not playing tricks, this is the text you are referring to:

    =====================

    1. have a bot creating ALL legal codes immediately on the incubator, so we get rid of ANY pre-request processing
    2. have a mandatory link published on all wikies stating "where you go to open a wiki" (people see wikies, not meta) and have a simple page stating
      a) where to find a list of ISO codes
      b) how to access your ready-made incubator page
      c) a clear refusal in case there's no code

    ======================

    WHERE do you see requests? There's no request AT ALL. And no discussion, there is just us sitting and saying (once and for all) that code ZXX is a wiki and the code for (say) swiss german is but an added interface for de.wiki. OVER. Everything else is a direct access to DIY (do it yourself) for everybody. I even mentioned how long it could take to be done with the job. What requests? What discussion to wait for?

    The one and only thing that shall be someday discussed (not by us, hopefully, 'coz I'm already too nauseated by the amount of bloody internal political games met on deciding these simple things for me to venture into anything else) is whether a project has sufficient human structure to be launched or not.

    Yet even in that case I will die before accepting that decisions may be made "depending on someone's personal/collective moods towards a certain project/social group". They will need to fix clear general public rules and have them work for all and everyone, so that people KNOW what they are requested to do and do not depend on decoding our political lingo/moods/secret personal networks (mafia, my dear, in the purest form ever).

    Now, will you stop playing the pitiful role of the poor offended child and explain where the hell you see discussions and requests?? If you care that much about consensus the minimum I expect from you is to be able to carry on a discussion, no matter how open and direct.

    Bèrto ‘d Sèra

Multilingual MediaWiki

[edit]

A brief reminder about a Multilingual MediaWiki in development, which would resolve problems with some request.

  1. Sabine Cretella
    26 April 2007 20:42

    Another thing: we also should not forget that something called multilingual mediawiki is being programmed and that this feature is not too far away ... so it could solve quite a bunch of problems.

    /me going to bed - have to get up at six.

    good night!

  2. Jon Harald Søby
    26 April 2007 21:31

    I have heard some talk about it before, but don't know what it is. Do you have a link?

  3. Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)
    26 April 2007 21:37

    <this user has not agreed to public archival.>

Wikisource Tamil

[edit]
  1. Jon Harald Søby
    27 April 2007 22:17

    Hi!

    I propose the approval of the Tamil Wikisource [1]. It has a lot of interested participators, there are supposedly a lot of texts on the Tamil Wikibooks that are really supposed to be on Wikisource, and also a lot of other texts that are publishable on it. No need for a test project or localization, so I say we should just approve it.

    I'll implement the decision if there's no opposition in 24 hours. If you need more time to formulate your objections, please say so.

    [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Tamil

  2. Bèrto 'd Sèra
    27 April 2007 23:22

    ok

  3. Jon Harald Søby
    08 May 2007 23:15

    Just for procedural purposes, the Tamil Wikisource has now been created.
    http://ta.wikisource.org/

Pathoschild's resignation

[edit]

Pathoschild resigned with this announcement following a three-week advance notice. He joined the subcommittee in November 2006 after drafting a language proposal policy that became the basis of the current policy.

  1. Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
    30 April 2007 21:09

    Hello,

    In accordance with the advance notice earlier this month (quoted below), I hereby resign from the language subcommittee. The following users may be valuable additions to the language subcommittee, if needed.

    Fare well.

    On 4/6/07, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <email censored> wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I will step down from the subcommittee in the near future. There are
    > various reasons for this, but they essentially boil down to more time
    > and effort than I can easily allocate. I originally joined the
    > subcommittee to help smooth the implementation; it has required vastly
    > more time and effort than I anticipated since, taking over other free
    > time tasks that I care more deeply about.
    >
    > Before publicly resigning, though, I'd like to propose that we take in
    > some new proactive members. Much of our lack of progress is due to the
    > inactivity of many of our members, however much they may be justified
    > in that through time or other constraints. The problem will be
    > magnified when we begin processing requests at full speed, which will
    > require regular participation from as many members as possible.
    >
    > I propose that we communicate with Bastique (the Volunteer
    > Coordinator) and Shanel (who has some good ideas for possible members)
    > to find new members who would be more interested and qualified than I
    > to deal with language issues on a regular basis.
    >
    > Any thoughts?
    >
    > Yours cordially,
    > Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)
    >

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Language_committee/Archives/2007-04&oldid=24877089"