Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Nyungar

submitted	verification	final decision

	This language has been verified as eligible. The language is eligible for a project, which means that the subdomain can be created once there is an active community and a localized interface, as described in the language proposal policy. You can discuss the creation of this language project on this page. Once the criteria are met, the language committee can proceed with the approval and will verify the test project content with a reliable neutral source, such as a professor or expert. If you think the criteria are met, but the project is still waiting for approval, feel free to notify the committee and ask them to consider its approval. A committee member provided the following comment: Project is eligible. Please contribute to the test project at incubator:Wp/nys. For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The community needs to develop an active test project; it must remain active until approval (automated statistics, recent changes). It is generally considered active if the analysis lists at least three active, not-grayed-out editors listed in the sections for the previous few months.
The community needs to complete required MediaWiki interface translations in that language (about localization, translatewiki, check completion).
The community needs to discuss and complete the settings table below:

What	Value	Example / Explanation

Proposal
Language code	nys (SIL, Glottolog)	A valid ISO 639-1 or 639-3 language code, like "fr", "de", "nso", ...
Language name	Noongar	Language name in English
Language name	Noongar	Language name in your language. This will appear in the language list on Special:Preferences, in the interwiki sidebar on other wikis, ...
Language Wikidata item	Q7049771 - item has currently the following values: English label: Noongar native label (P1705): instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279): natural language, modern language / Pama–Nyungan Wikimedia language code (P424): nys writing system (P282): Latin script number of speakers, writers, or signers (P1098): 232	Item about the language at Wikidata. It would normally include the Wikimedia language code, name of the language, etc. Please complete at Wikidata if needed.
Directionality	LTR	Is the language written from left to right (LTR) or from right to left (RTL)?
Links		Links to previous requests, or references to external websites or documents.
Site URL	nys.wikipedia.org	langcode.wikiproject.org

Settings
Project name	Wikipedia	"Wikipedia" in your language
Project namespace		usually the same as the project name
Project talk namespace		"Wikipedia talk" (the discussion namespace of the project namespace)
Enable uploads	yes	Default is "no". Preferably, files should be uploaded to Commons. If you want, you can enable local file uploading, either by any user ("yes") or by administrators only ("admin"). Notes: (1) This setting can be changed afterwards. The setting can only be "yes" or "admin" at approval if the test creates an Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) first. (2) Files on Commons can be used on all Wikis. (3) Uploading fair-use images is not allowed on Commons (more info). (4) Localisation to your language may be insufficient on Commons.
Optional settings
Project logo		This needs to be an SVG image (instructions for logo creation).
Default project timezone	UTC +8 - Western Australia	"Continent/City", e.g. "Europe/Brussels" or "America/Mexico City" (see list of valid timezones)
Additional namespaces		For example, a Wikisource would need "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk", "Author", "Author talk".
Additional settings		Anything else that should be set
Once settings are finalized, a committee member will submit a Phabricator task requesting creation of the wiki. (This will include everything automatically, except the additional namespaces/settings.) After the task is created, it should be linked to in a comment under "final decision" above.

Proposal

Already completed the 762 MediaWiki important messages on translatewiki [1]
Have had an incubator project since September 2015 currently have 48 subcategories and 429 pages[2]

Gnangarra (talk) 12:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

It more looks like Wikia material currently. While the efforts have been great, this project has some notability (although that might be me poorly understanding the local culture) as well as linguistic problems. As this page name describes, this is a request for a new language, not a request for a new wiki which solely focuses on one subject. For the latter, Wikia might be a better place. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 10:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Unlike english where knowledge is an exclusive set that can be isolated and presented in isolation with Noongar language, knowledge, culture, place and identity are all rolled into one complex relationship between each other. Thats why its taken four years to get to this point, there are not even equivalents when it comes to measuring time. Noongar relates to the environmental cycles not to solar or luna cycles, it contains knowledge accumulated and acquired over 50,000 years the place for this is where we gather and share the sum of all knowledge. This is a request for a new language, new languages should focus on aspects related to that language. Noongar speakers are all at least bi-lingual nys & en for subjects like pencil sharpeners from Birmingham they are going to contribute that knowledge to en wikipedia Gnangarra (talk) 12:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather Oppose creation such wikis as that looks very like what Wiktionary handles. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:40, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- there is a Wikitionary project in development at https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/nys it is a differing set of information between the two. There would be a significant loss of knowledge in such a move Gnangarra (talk) 05:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Gnangarra: I mean, if you are creating Nyungar contents, then those should be in Nyungar contents, but as far as I analysised as more than 90% are in English, it looks that those "articles" are just what English Wiktionary can host. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Very supportive of this. This is such an important pilot project which explores and expands Wikipedia's use as a place for active and participatory language preservation as well as sharing of content/knowledge. The establishment of this as a new language is an important step enabling Indigenous participation on Wikipedia in their own languages. Wikipedia should not simply a place where English speakers can explore Noongar content in English. In Australian Indigenous cultures knowledge/language/stories/information are so closely linked that for Wikipedia to increase deeper participation/engagement with this community it must be accessible in Noongar as well. This sets a fantastic precedent for the movement.--tenniscourtisland (talk) 12:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenniscourtisland: If you think teaching Nyungar grammars to English (or other languages) users is a great thing to you, just create Nyungar teaching materials on any of the existing Wikibooks (e.g. b:en:Nyungar) or Wikiversity (e.g. v:en:Nyungar). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Liuxinyu970226:Thanks for your reply, but my whole point is that Wikipedia needs to be MORE than resources for English users. In order to properly engage with Indigenous cultures in Australia, there needs to be content in Indigenous languages such as Noonngar. These languages should be recognised and officiated in the same way as any other language. tenniscourtisland (talk) 24:44, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The noongar project has been in incubator status for over 2 years, and has had considerable input from a range of communities within Australia. The indigenous community, the academic community, and the wider western australian community. And most noticeably support from the wikipedia community. In WP:AGF it (the project) is clearly well beyond the understanding of the two editors who have responded to date - and this feels quite problematic. There are over 300 Australian indigenous languages - most which will never have their own wikis, but there are potentially languages from all over Australian states and territories that would realistically be able - with suppor, be able to start work on a wikipedia of their own language. The problem of being the first of these projects, attempting to be the first cab on the rank - is that simple hurdles of the limited views of current reviewers to date illustrates the hurdles which innovatory imaginative projects like this one must endure. The broader perspective of language diversity of indigenous populations in Australia, means that adequate clarification and explanation of context and impact on a larger fields of possible projects is required. Presumably the hindrances or limited views of reviewers to date will be overcome, where potentially comparable situations in other countries with indigenous languages that are inadequately recognised for what they are to the people who speak them. :JarrahTree (talk) 06:07, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- yes Indigenous knowledge is a political minefield in Australia, without free access to knowledge there is a permanent threat to it from the government https://www.welcometocountry.org/julie-bishop-ban-aboriginal-culture-in-schools/ it these threats that drive people from publicly sharing their language skills. WMF projects bring it into realm where its treated respectfully, with an equality to that of other languages and free from the whim political pov. Gnangarra (talk) 07:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

： Strong oppose per liuxinyu970226, this project MUST not be approved unless and until they agree to at least translate their articles from English to real Nyungar contents. --180.97.68.225 23:02, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comment - in genuine discussions on wp:en, and commons, such fly-ins - an unidentified IP which flies in with such comment, surely has limited credence with the process, if any at all. real noongar/nyungar contents ? - I fail to see anywhere in the discussion above that suggests that the project will not have real noongar contents. :JarrahTree (talk) 05:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JarrahTree: I don't think IP votes are also prohibited on Meta-Wiki, and FWIW requests for new languages is not a vote game. Maybe this IP user make ad hominem to you, but the point is good, that means if your friend make contributions to incubator:Wp/nys as this, then it can lead other languages' speakers to daydream that, *we can create articles in Spanish Wikipedia like: Copenhague is the Spanish word for Copenhagen, the capital of Reino de Dinamarca (Kingdom of Denmark)* (1. then how do the Spanish peoples find contents in their native languages? 2. Aren't such behaviors just violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? 3. Any benefit to create them out of Wikibooks, Wikiversity and/or non-WMF sites?) --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:45, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vote game - I was not making any assumption of the sort - I do not think that a context free comment should be understood as being more sound in its expression than a well expressed argument with points that can be grappled with - simply to express 'real nyungar contents' is neither an argument or specifically helpful point - if there was further reasoning or examples, there is more likelihood that someone else reading this is able to see where an argument is coming from or leading, as it is a 'strong' point made, with little to substantiate where the point is coming from. I am not sure where the 'friend' make contributions is coming from - and I have no possible understanding what on earth the universal declaration of human rights has to do with establishing an Australian indigenous language wiki, I am very sorry but I fail to see where that came from or what is leading. I really thought this was about creating a new language wiki. My understanding is this needs to be re-phrased or re-written, I do not understand what you are trying to say :JarrahTree (talk) 12:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The project has already started working on translations and is working towards being solely in language. There many complexities in this process including the fact that the nys language as spoken has adopted considerable amounts of english. For many concepts and words the nys language has no direct equivalent, while we set about building the community we cant just make up words nor just call tanks - gnamar because amar, gabbie booarra, balyan, barup are also equally right translations, its not my place to prescribe to the Noongar community how they must speak & write their language. These decisions will come over time as the community works together to reach consensus something that the incubator format has a limiting negative impact in facilitating. It gets even worse when you move into the translate wiki where every word becomes effectively the default that itself puts a heavy burden on an individual. All of this was discussed in good faith with the language committee back in Berlin in April 2017, and path forward was mapped out then for progression to nys.wikipedia.org. In december 2017 we completed that path by achieving those requirements. We know there is a lot more to do all we ask is that path that was set out then is enabled with equal good faith. Gnangarra (talk) 12:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not having your own words is not a problem. Even Dutch translations have a lot of English words in them. I think the only thing that is required is manually translate the pages in one by one. Replacing only words such as "and" while leaving the rest of the page in English makes them illegible to both English speakers and Nyungar speakers. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 12:59, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ooswesthoesbes: Yeah that's what I'm concerning, anyway I strongly recommand Steven to currently strike the eligibility status of this request page, as no one actual member should agree something I mentioned above "Copenhague is the Spanish word for Copenhagen, the capital of Reino de Dinamarca (Kingdom of Denmark)". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:01, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

： Strong oppose The comparison between Dutch and Limburgs is not applicable here. Noongar is not a dialect of English. Noongar Wikipedia must be writtten 99% in the Noongar language and grammar. If User:Gnangarra wishes to continue writing 'Noongar' articles in Englissh, then he can apply for a new site at Wikia.--Ernesztina (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Solution to the linguistic issue

The main issue here seems to lie in two things: 1. the desire to spread/record knowledge of the local culture; 2. the inability of many tribal people (no offense meant, I'm not from Australia, nor am I a native English speaker, so please do correct my terminology) to speak or understand the Nyungar language fluently. A simple solution to this would be the creation of a separate namespace in which English translations are provided, while the pages themselves are written in Nyungar. This will keep the main namespace free of English, while the knowledge to the culture is still available to those interested, who are not able to understand or have difficulty understanding the language itself. This way, the Wikipedia can be used both to spread the knowledge of the Nyungar culture, as well as providing a base for a broad encyclopedia written in the Nyungar language about all subjects. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to go with that solution. Gnangarra (talk) 10:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- But will it be possible at all to write all articles in Nyungar completely? --MF-W 09:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes it will see https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Maya_waabiny/ode Gnangarra (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnangarra and Ooswesthoesbes: I strongly suggest you take a look at the discussion that has been taking place on this subject, and possibly to respond yourself (yourselves). LangCom seems to be OK with this overall, but does have some concerns:

Why would we need the English versions of articles in this wiki? If the articles are already in the English Wikipedia [and this means they'd be linked through Wikidata–SJ81], wouldn't that be sufficient for the purpose?
But there are related concerns. For example: If the only references on the Noongar English pages would not meet enwp's (fairly strict) referencing policy, is that OK? Or does that mean that this becomes a repository for unreliable information? Or does it mean this wiki becomes a POV fork from enwp?

The assumption the committee has now runs along the lines of:

These wouldn't be duplicates of enwiki articles. They would be translations of the Noongar articles, so that the translations would help users improve their Noongar language skills, too. The English would simply be about making the Noongar more available/accessible,

My sense is that if this is essentially correct, LangCom will go along. So initially, I would only articulate the confirmation of that; I think (!) you should only answer the other questions if asked directly.

That said, you probably need to be prepared to answer the other questions. Make sure that you (and WM Australia, if it's supporting this institutionally), have good answers.

Having looked at pages on the Noongar project in the past, though not recently, I think that part of the response on those questions probably runs along the following lines:

There are personalities and concepts that are important within the cultural milieu of the Noongar community that simply look different inside the community than they do outside. Either they do not appear notable in the outside world, or the sources that demonstrate notability seem too parochial to the enwp community to be accepted as RS. Perhaps, they are simply not important enough to the outside world for the outside world to care one way or another.

Understand that within the enwp community, there is a watchword, if you will, that notability is notability, reliability is reliability, and either something is or isn't. In my view, personally, there is much truth to that, but life isn't quite that black-and-white, either.

For example, with respect to standards of the reliability of sources, I can see it being entirely possible that there are certain persons or concepts that are just not broadly enough interesting to, say, mainstream Australian media or academia, for them to offer coverage. (It's a matter of interest, focus and prioritization, not inherent notability.) Sources internal to the community do offer coverage. Because the sources are internal to the community, the outside (enwp) community sees them as biased and of questionable reliability. Yet within the community, they are seen as being internally unbiased. So the community ought to have some right, within this project, to make those calls for itself.

Still, you probably will need to make sure that some mechanism is in place to assure that standards for notability, reliability and verifiability are articulated and maintained. And you will need to make sure that this doesn't become about POV forking.

StevenJ81 (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of a minority community, this is something that is well-known. F.e. the Limburgish Wikipedia has a page about the local cover rockband Fever of Life. This band would have 0 notability and will be deleted from the Dutch Wikipedia. However, this band is well-known in the Limburgish language area, and therefore meets the notability standard of the Limburgish Wikipedia.

The same is true for a well-referenced page such as Hoes mit de Trepkes. This page is about a demolished building in Montfort, and is well-sourced. However, it will never meet the standard for inclusion of a Dutch-type Wikipedia. But as it is a building essential to the Montfortian community, it meets the inclusion standard for the Limburgish Wikipedia.

Notability differences are perceived differences that vary from community to community (the smaller the size of the community, the easier it will meet a certain notability if it is a local topic). As long as the pages are written in an objective style and preferably well-sourced, this does not violate NPOV. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 09:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

en.wikipedia policies have always been used as a guide for nys, nys has no policy pages as yet for that very reason. As the nys commuity develops it too like every other wikipedia will develop its own policies. En.wp would never accept being forced to follow de.wp policies nor the other way around though each might choose to follow what the other has in developing that which suits them. As we progress more deeply into colonial dispossessed or oppressed languages to build diversity and truly share the sum of all knowledge, we must become more conscious of how we communicate to these communities on our expectations. To tell a community that we dont understand why sharing their knowledge in the language wikipedia of their oppressor following their oppressors cultural norms doesnt help to break those barriers. These cultures have already experienced enough of their culture being appropriated and them losing that connection to it as result, we should at least recognise that repeating those mistakes doesnt do our aim any good either. The idea of having an english project space is a great idea, with article space being that where Noongar is used, though it'd be much better if the noongar community is able to decide when an article is ready to cross over namespaces. As for notability, verifiability, and reliable sourcing that must always sit with the language projects there so much more we can learn in community building if we give trust to communities to work in ways we arent experienced with rather than prescribe when we are happy they meet our ways. Gnangarra (talk) 10:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnangarra: Well, I just wanna ask you that, how does a random London man or a DC women don't know what "He is a musician, public speaker wer cultural workshop facilitator." is? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:28, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the same way they would understand Kaya wanju gnala boodjar wer mia qwobba qwobba wiern, its a Noongar language project that uses english as well because the Noongar speakers mix the two languages, its also an oral language with multiple spelling variants of the same words. Gnangarra (talk) 04:39, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple dialects/spellings does not have to be a problem. Take a look at the Limburgish Wikipedia. Limburgish is also an oral language without a recent written tradition. That issue is solved by indicating on top of the page what spelling/dialect is used, f.e.: Góldmol (Dit artikel is gesjreve (of begós) in 't Mofers. "This page is written in the Montfort dialect.), with the different spellings redirecting to the page, so it is easy to link and find the page (list of redirects to "Góldmol"). This could also be a solution to the different spelling variants in Nyungar :) --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 08:33, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are solutions we are using, I recently had a template made to help with listing the variant within the articles https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wp/nys/spelling to help with that. Gnangarra (talk) 09:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnangarra Not sure if you're successfully notified or not, you may be interested in incubator:Incubator:Requests for deletions#Wp/nys. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wasnt aware of this thanks Gnangarra (talk) 07:13, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's been bloody near impossible to address the issues raised when was admin and stopped from deleting english content, critized for using awb to do mass translation of commonly used en words, and had the community destroyed by constantly shifting goal posts with the bonus of rehash of colonialist language that had been removed from the Australia language over the last 40 years. Still waiting for a response to the archive request sent to Language committee 3 months ago. Gnangarra (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]