Wikimedia projects are not for nation-building

This text is draft for proposed policy. Please, improve it and talk about it on the talk page.

Wikimedia projects such as Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikinews etc. are not the place for nation-building. This rule means exactly that, not less, not more.

If you and your people feel different than the dominant ethnicity/nationality in your country/area, please let the world know about you before you try to make your own Wikipedia. You are able to use one or more blogs (like using Blogspot) or you are able make your own wiki (like using Wikia) or you can make your own web site using free or paid hosting. You are able to make a lot of intellectual content without Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects.

And when your national and standard language constitution come up to the reasonable recognition (cf. almost 40,000 Google results for Aromanian language spoken by circa 300,000 people), then come here and ask for Wikipedia in your language.

What this page doesn't explain

• This guide is strictly related to the nation-building, and is not about starting new Wikipedias in various dialects.
  • If you are talking in some dialect which doesn't have official status in your country, you may make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in your language.
• This guide doesn't consider possibility of making Wikimedia projects in artificial languages and jargons.
• This guide intends to say what shouldn't be a Wikipedia, not what should be a Wikipedia. There are more conditions for what should be Wikipedia.
• This guide doesn't intend to close existing projects. If some project exists, there should be more conditions for closing the project then just those.

Examples

This is the guide through examples:

• Case Napolitan Wikipedia: (1) dialect Wikipedia (+), (2) significant difference between standard Italian and dialect (+), (3) without mentioning of nation/ethnicity-building even in reality (+) -- 3:0 -- project should pass this rules.
• Case Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian (1) standard language Wikipedias (+), (2) without significant difference between each other (-), (3) nations/ethnicity well constituted (+) -- 2:1 -- projects should pass this rules.
• Case Montenegrin Wikipedia: (1) proposed standard language [i.e. not yet fully standardized] (-), (2) without significant difference, only proposed orthography difference which isn't widely used (-), (3) nation/ethnicity good enough constituted (-) -- 0:3, if using different orthography 1:2 (shouldn't pass this rules until language is standardized)
• Case Moldovan Wikipedia: (1) No standard language Wikipedia (-), (2) significant orthography difference between Moldovan Cyrillic script and Romanian Latin script (+), (3) nation/ethnicity not well established (-) -- 1:2 -- project should not pass this rules.
  • This recommendations doesn't deal with:
    • the name of the language (it may be Moldovan, Moldovan Cyrillic, Soviet Moldovan or whatever);
    • possibility of creation of engine which would be able to translate Moldovan Cyrillic orthography to Romanian Latin orthography and vice versa;
    • how many users Moldovan Wikipedia has;
    • closing of Moldovan Wikipedia.
• Case Zlatiborian: (1) dialect Wikipedia (+), (2) without significant difference toward other standards (Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian) (-), (3) directly related to wishes for national/ethnicity building of one region -- 1:2 -- project shouldn't pass this rules.
  • This recommendations doesn't deal with:
    • how many speakers Zlatiborian has;
• Case Siberian Wikipedia: (1) not so well constituted artificial language (-), (2) significant differences toward Russian language (+) (3) nation/ethnicity building in the process (-) -- 1:2 -- project shouldn't pass this rules.
  • This recommendations doesn't deal with:
    • fact that Siberian is artificial language;
    • how many speakers Siberain has;
    • how many users Siberian Wikipedia has;
    • closing of Siberian Wikipedia.