|
ដាក់ពាក្សសុំអាហារូបករណ៍ធ្វើដំណើរទៅចូលរួមក្នុងព្រឹត្តិការណ៍ Wikimania ឆ្នាំ២០១២!
----
----
{{Projects}}
''This page is intended for discussing the creation of new language editions of existing projects. This is not the page to [[Proposals for new projects|propose a new project]].''
----
The [[Wikimedia Foundation]] aims to facilitate the dissemination of knowledge in many different languages. Currently, wikis have been created in over 200 languages. If you would like to work in a language that does not yet have a wiki, you may request it here.
==Procedure==
There are several steps to follow if you would like to create a new language [[Wikipedia]], [[Wiktionary]], [[Wikibooks]], [[Wikisource]], or [[Wikiquote]]. The [[Wikimedia Commons]] and [[Wikispecies]] are multi-lingual projects, meaning that there are no separate editions for individual languages. The Wikisource project has [http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Language_domain_requests its own page] to request a new language.
#Peruse the [[complete list of Wikimedia projects]]. If the language you are looking for is not listed, look for very similar languages. Your proposed language must be sufficiently different, in its written form, from any other already-created language.
#You '''must''' have an account here on the [[Meta]] wiki.
#Copy and paste the [[#Template|template]] to the [[#New proposals|new proposals]] section.
#Find the [http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/englangn.html ISO 639-2 code] or [[#What do I do if there is no ISO code for my language?|propose a code for your language]] (for future compatibility, be sure to consult the [http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/ ISO 639-'''3''' ''draft''], which covers most of the world's languages).
#Fill in '''all''' fields in the template.
#If many potential contributors to your language's wiki are likely to speak a different language that already has a wiki, try and drum up support at a community discussion area on that wiki. Encourage anyone who wants to contribute to your proposed language to come to this page and add their support for your proposal.
#If there is a consensus to create a wiki in your proposed language, send a message to the appropriate [[mailing list]] asking a developer to set up the wiki.
#Be patient, as our [[developer]]s are very busy volunteers. You may work on articles, interface files and help or instruction pages using an offline word processor so that you can quickly get your new wiki going. You may want to look at the [[List of articles all languages should have]].
==FAQ==
* 1. What do I do if there is no ISO code for my language?
::If there is no standard code (no [http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langhome.html ISO code]) for your language, you will need to propose a code that is more than three letters long. The most standard way to create a code is to use a generic code for a language family (such as ''gem'' for Germanic languages) and a three letter code for the proposed language, resulting in codes like ''fiu-vro'' (from the code for ''other Finno-Ugric languages'' and the Voro language) and ''roa-rup'' (from the code for ''other Romance languages'' and the Aromanian language). If your language has an SIL code or [http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-tags IANA code], you may use this code for the second part. This procedure may not be ideal for all circumstances, but should be followed if reasonable.
* 2. How do I know if my language is sufficiently different from a language that already has a wiki?
::This is an issue that is decided by consensus.
* 3. Can there be wikis in ancient languages?
::Yes. There are already wikis available in [[:en:Latin|Latin]], [[:en:Old English language|Old English]], [[:en:Gothic language|Gothic]] and [[:en:Pali|Pali]].
::Please add new requests for wikis in ancient languages to [[Requests for new languages/Ancient]].
* 4. Can there be wikis in artificial languages?
::Yes. There are already wikis available in [[:en:Esperanto|Esperanto]], [[:en:Ido|Ido]], [[:en:Interlingua|Interlingua]], [[:en:Occidental language|Interlingue]], [[:en:Lojban|Lojban]] , [[en:Volap%C3%BCk|Volapük]]. There used to be a [[:en:Toki Pona|Toki Pona]] wiki, but it was decided that the Toki Pona language was not used widely enough to support a wiki.
::'''However''', it is quite possible that a fictional language will get little favor. Many considered the existence of the [[:en:Klingon language|Klingon]] Wikipedia to be unacceptable, and a proposal to shut it down eventually succeeded (See also [[Talk:Requests for new languages#Klingon|Talk page]]).
::Please place all new requests for Wikipedias in artificial languages at [[Requests for new languages/Non-natural]].
* 5. How many speakers are necessary?
::No language has ever been refused ''solely'' because of an insufficient number of speakers. For natural languages, this will probably never be an issue; for artificial languages, however, a low number of speakers may be taken as evidence that the language is not widely spoken enough to deserve a wiki.
::The actual number of users who know the language and work on the wiki is an important issue, but it is not known how many are necessary for a wiki to gain momentum and solid growth. The dedication of the users may be more important than the number, since a few devoted users may write more, and higher quality, articles than a larger number of casual users.
==Template==
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''
*'''Proposer's user account in Meta and other wikis:''' {{{Wiki accounts of the proposer}}}
*'''User accounts of others who are willing to work on the proposed wiki:'''
{{{User accounts of others}}}
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' {{{Language code}}}
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' {{{Proposed ___domain}}}
|-
| '''Relevant infos:'''
*'''Link to article(s) on the language in an existing Wikipedia:''' {{{Wikipedia article}}}
*'''Native name(s):''' {{{Native name}}}
*'''Approximate number of speakers:''' {{{Number of speakers}}}
*'''Location(s) spoken:''' {{{Locations spoken}}}
*'''Closely related languages, if any:''' {{{Related languages}}}
*'''External links to organizations that promote the language:''' {{{Promoting organizations}}}
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' {{{Request on mailing list}}}
|}
==Approved==
# '''Nepal Bhyae / Newari'''
# '''Mazandarani'''
# '''Lak'''
# '''Emilian-Romagnol'''
# '''Buryat'''
(more details see [[Approved requests for new languages]])
===...but in need of native contributors===
# '''Ainu'''
# '''Balinese'''
# '''Bishnupriya Manipuri'''
# '''Coptic'''
# '''Gayo'''
# '''Karelian'''
# '''Kinaray-a'''
# '''Kiribati'''
# '''Ladin'''
# '''Maliseet-Passamaquoddy'''
# '''Manchu'''
# '''Mapudungun'''
# '''North Frisian'''
# '''Saterlandic'''
# '''Sorbian'''
# '''Sranang Tongo'''
These languages have consensus for creation but are in need of additional support from native speakers. If you are a native speaker willing to work in one of these languages, please indicate thusly at [[Requests for new languages/Native speaker support]].
==Moved requests ==
*All conlangs (except Tolkien languages, see below), play languages (such as Pig Latin or leet), and fictional languages: (please see [[Requests for new languages/Non-natural]])
*All ancient languages: (please see [[Requests for new languages/Ancient]])
*Sinitic languages / Chinese dialects: (please see [[Requests for new languages/China]] and [[Proposal for Sinitic linguistic policy]])
*Sami, Luba-Katanga, South Ndebele, North Ndebele, Ojibwe, Tigre, Inari Sami, Skolt Sami, Indian English, Kokborok, Porjidlo: (please see [[Requests for new languages/No supporters]])
*Hindustani, Unserdeutsch, Mayan, Baseldytsch, Mikasuki, Real Dutch, Palauan, Haida, Azeri with other alphabets, Europanto, Silbo Gomero, Tuvaluan, Fala&Extremaduran, American English, Bahasa Riau, Filipino: (please see [[Requests for new languages/One supporter]])
*Quenya, Sindarin: (please see [[Requests for new languages/Tolkien languages]])
*Simple German: (please see [[Requests for new languages/Einfach]])
*Former USSR minority languages: Aleut, Buriat, Crimean, Erzya, Ingush, Karachay-Balkar, Karakalpak, Mari, Moksha, Tuvinian, Yakut (please see [[Requests for new languages/Former USSR]])
==Discussion ongoing==
''Please don't forget to log in (especially if you want to vote on a request). Thank you!''
{{requests for new languages/zh-wuu}}
{{requests for new languages/zee}}
{{requests for new languages/bar}}
{{requests for new languages/pl-sl}}
=== West-palesian (5 support, 8 oppose) ===
{{New-language-template|
Wiki accounts of the proposer= [[User:Zlobny|Zlobny]]
|User accounts of others=
**[[User:trasianka editor]]
|Language code= no
|Proposed ___domain= [http://zpo.wikipedia.org/ zpo.wikipedia.org]
|Wikipedia article= no
|Native name=Заходнё-полесская мова/Zachodnio-polesskaja mova
|Number of speakers= 2-3 million
|Locations spoken= Brest region of Belarus, South-West of Belarus; North-West of Ukraine.
|Related languages= Ukranian; Belarusian; Polish.
|Promoting organizations= no information
|Request on mailing list= no information
See more information:
*[http://languages.miensk.com/Lang_Eu_As_Af/Indoeuropean/Westpalesian/Palesian.htm in Belarusian and Polish]
*Luft A. Das Westpolessische: Sprachliche Besonderheiten und Abgrenzung vom Weіssrussischen und Ukrainischen. Diplomarbeit Universitat Munchen, 1997
*Dulicenko A.D. The West Polesian Litetary Language// Language, Minority, Migration: Yearbook 1994/ 1995 from the Centre for Multiethnic Research. Uppsala, 1995
*Poljakov O. Das Westpolesische// Slavistica Vilnensis 1998 [Kalbotyra 47(2)]. Vilnius, 1998
*Kuraszkiewicz W. Ruthenica. Warszawa, 1985
}}
Comments.
* What about wikipedia in westpalesian language, which is mostly spoken in the Brest region of Belarus ([[en:polesie]])? --[[User:Zlobny|Zlobny]] 15:17, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''': the usual reason -- please, try to find some native speakers ''ready to contribute'', then you'll get support. By the time it might be a good choice to contribute to the Belorussian/Belarusan and other wikipedias. - [[User:Slavik IVANOV|Slavik IVANOV]] 17:17, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''': without the number of speakers <s>and probes in Internet of the relevancy of this language,</s> I vote oppose. --'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 08:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''':lack of native speakers who want the West-palesian Wikipedia[[User:Gdarin|<font color="#0000ff">'''Gdarin'''</font>]] | [[User_talk:Gdarin|<font color="#0000ff">talk</font>]] 12:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
: The discussion have just begun. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support ''' - Strongly support. THEMOOMIN
* If you can read German: [[http://www.fak12.uni-muenchen.de/forost/sprachdatenbank/sprachdatenbank.php?display=Westpolessisch:sprachdaten:sprachbezeichnung here's]] a little more info on West-Palesian. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 19:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
* @Zlobny: Is this language used in writing? -- [[User:Raetius|Raetius]] 11:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
: Yes, it is. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support'''[[ nl:Boudewijn Idema]] 19:11 1 March (UTC)
* '''Support''' [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 01:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' - for what? Who should write there? [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 20:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
: Me, for example. And others from Brest, Kobrin, Pinsk and other places. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
* Weak '''oppose''' as I said in Trasianka proposal... First develope be-wiki for some quite good quality level than you may think about my support for sub-projects :) And thanks for [http://languages.miensk.com/Lang_Eu_As_Af/Indoeuropean/Westpalesian/engelking.htm this] ;) [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 19:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
: Sorry, we are not talking about the ''sub-project'', but deffinitly ''the real project''. We are not 'staying in the queue ''after'' belarusian', but ''besides''. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
::Maybe you're right I always considered dialect wikipedias as a ''sub-project'', very closely related to ''sup-projcts''. However I continue my opposition until I will know if there are a native speaker willing to contribute and if the writting/spelling is clear for them. [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 11:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' --[[User:MaximLitvin|MaximLitvin]] 09:10, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
: Please, explain your position. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
* Definately '''Support'''. --[[User:Czalex|Czalex]] 20:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
* Weak '''oppose'''. I doubt in enough number of contributors. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
* Weak '''support'''. I'd love to see this become a success, but the number of editors is indeed a worrying thing. --[[User:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] 14:10, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''OPPOSE'''. I'm dealing with the Belarusian language for many years as an amateur linguist, and I can attest that there's virtually ''no written'' texts in "West-Polessian". They are non-existent. And throughout all these years I have never met a single person ''who can write'' in "West-Polessian". It's a spoken transitional dialect between Ukraine and Belarus, or some linguists consider it a separate language (a local microlanguage), but there's virtually ''nothing in written form''. I wonder if the proposer could show us ''his own writings'' in this "West-Polessian" language and show us Web pages in "West-Polessian" (can you provide at least 10 links to Web sites that are actually ''written'' in that language? Thank you). --[[User:Br23net|Br23net]] 14:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
=== Tarantino (9 support, 3 oppose) ===
{{New-language-template|bc
|Wiki accounts of the proposer=[[User:Beren85|Beren85]]
|User accounts of others= [[it:Utente:Capitanonemo]], [[it:Utente:Maximix]];
|Language code= (ISO639-1) ???.wikipedia.org (tar is impossible would be http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=tar)
|Proposed ___domain= tara.wikipedia.org
|Wikipedia article= [[it:Dialetto_tarantino]]
|Native name= Tarandíne
|Number of speakers= About 220.000
|Locations spoken= [[it:Taranto]] (Italy)
|Related languages= [[it:Salentino]], [[it:Lingua napoletana]]
|Promoting organizations=
|Request on mailing list=
}}
[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_new_languages&diff=prev&oldid=261346 Request made in this diff] December 28, 2005 20:33
*'''Support:'''I'm Pugliese too and I would like so much the Tarantino to be an official language [[User:82.59.9.56|82.59.9.56]] December 28, 2005 21:12
*'''Support:'''I think that this dialect is somewhat different by italian. Sometimes turists think tarantian dialect may be a sort of arabic language. Even if it has some morphological simile with the neapolitan language, it sounds completly strange for neapolitan people, infact they cannot understand each other if they speack quickly and with their own intonation. Its' amazing to see how the tarantinian people has become attached to their traditions and their customs. I think that a Tarantinian Wikipedia may be the best thing to emprove the popularization of the language of Taranto. [[User:Beren85|Beren85]] December 28, 2005 21:51
*'''Support''', but enough native or advanced spekers must be found. :o) [[User:Hégésippe Cormier|Hégésippe]] | [[User talk:Hégésippe Cormier|±Θ±]] 08:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* Haven't heard about it before. Because of the ___location: maybe a sub-dialect of Napolitan? -- [[User:Raetius|Raetius]] 11:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' basically it would be usefull to have a separate wiki even if I suppose we will not get enough people being able to edit such a wiki. On the nap wikipedia I was asked if we could integrate it there - well: if we find the right way to structure it, I would say: we can integrate local "minority languages" on any wikipedia. In some way I am thinking in the direction of the namespace manager and/or wikidata right now. We could also create portals that care about the single minority languages within a language code. It would make sense since the language of that specific town/region/city would be preserved. I know for a fact that writing and pronunciation from one place to the other within the "nap" language code region can differ a lot - even between Maiori where I live and Amalfi there are some basic differences. So: we just must find the right way to do things. I will come back on this matter after having talked with some poeple trying to understand how we could make this local language happen. --[[User:SabineCretella|Sabine]] 15:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
::Well ... as soon as I posted this we had someone who signed with "Nico" who told us '''ma chi ve lo ha detto che il napoletano si parla in Calabria e in Pugliavulite pazzia'?!Nico' ''' (without logging in) ... for now that user was blocked for spamming ... sorry ... but some people do not seem to understand. If this Nico' is around here: please contact me. - First of all: I would very much support this wikipedia because I know that it is a different language, but we have that strange situation that Pugliese is not known as a language of its own. Even if we cannot compare this problem directly to Sardinian, it is somewhat similar. Following Ethnologue Pugliese is part of "Italian" as a dialect. Following linguistic maps it belongs to the Neapolitan '''language group'''. Now Apulia is quite a big region with a huge variety of dialects or better languages since a language is a dialect and nothing else (or say it the other way round if you want). <br>
::I heard that there is an ISO standard for proposal ISO 639-6 that is for dialects - so I will try to find out if there is already some kind of code we could use. The next thing is: what to do if for now there is no way to start this wikipedia - well the next version of the Mediawiki software includes a Namespace Manager that can be of help in that specific situation. So please: before getting angry and saying that '''we''' say that Tarandíne is part of Neapolitan understand that it is not us, but that organisations that are about language codes and linguistics do that. Personally I am, like many others I suppose, for giving the possibility to write articles in this language - so if the wikipedia should not be possible, we will simply find a way to do it. Wikipedia is about NPOV and giving the possibility to all people to read encyclopaedic articles in their language ... well we are geting closer and closer to a stage where this will be really possible. But please also understand that sometimes it is not easy to create a wikipedia for a language where there is no official recognition. Thanks! --[[User:SabineCretella|Sabine]] 21:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' - not one more dialect-Wikipedia! [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 20:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
'''Support''' [[nl:Boudewijn Idema]], 13:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Just one doubt, which may be meaningless (I really cannot judge myself): cannot you guys unite all the apulian languages into a basic ''koiné''? I mean, this obviously would not include the albanian and greek minorities, but maybe would give you more users, readers and writers. Think about it. Making a wikipedia is a LOT of work [[User:bertodsera|bertodsera]] March 21, 2006 18:12
: retiring my doubt after getting a bit of further info. Tarendine appears as a neo-sannitic language, and obviously cannot be grouped with its neighbours. Wish you good luck, guys! [[User:bertodsera|bertodsera]] March 25, 2006 12:12 (GMT+2)
*'''Weak support''' Note that you cannot group all varieties of Apulia as a single language. The southern ones (Salento) belong to the Sicilian group, the northern ones belong to the Neapolitan group. It turns out that Taranto lies right on the isogloss between them, which is fairly sharp; hence Tarandine is a transition language, which does not typify the linguistic situation of Apulia as a whole. [[User:Speakhits|Speakhits]] 11:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
* Sorry but I must '''oppose''' this one. Not even SIL who assign the title "language" very generously consider this a distinct idiom. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 18:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
**I entirely disagree about SIL. They refuse to recognize the ''langues d'oïl'' (including Norman) as different languages from French, despite the fact that Jersey Norman (Jèrriais), at least, is a) politically separate from French, b) not mutually intercomprehensible with French, c) a recognized regional language by the British-Irish Council, and d) has a standardized orthography, literary tradition (dating back 800 years), and distinct regional dialects. The language is currently being taught in schools (as a separate language from French), and a GCSE in the language should appear shortly. Dictionaries exist between Jèrriais and English and Jèrriais and French. (And, furthermore, Jersey has its own regional version of French, which is ''not'' Jèrriais). Seeing as they, despite all this, do not recognize Jèrriais (or Norman in general) as a separate language, you can thus hardly say that SIL is "very generous". However, I'm '''neutral''' about a Tarantino Wikipedia—I think we'd need to see a very successful test-wiki before considering it. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 21:02, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strongly oppose''' I'm italian with strong knowledge in linguistic science and I have never been informed about this languages. In Italy there are some differences in the same dialects in several towns, but these are minor differences. Tarantino is only a variation in a bigger dialect which is "pugliese". --[[User:Ilario|Ilario]] 09:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
**Well Ilario, if you have never been informed about tha tarantinian language and the linguistic apulian situation, you're showing you haven't this "strong knowledge"... Read about this dialect a little bit more and then explain us (with real linguistic motivations) why it cannot be considered a separate idiom. [[User:Beren85|Beren85]] 20.13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Different enough to be considered a separate language. --[[User:Wodan|Wodan]] 11.46, 14 April 2006
**Here you are: this it the test-wiki about tarantino. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/tara
Obviously it can be made much better. ;-) [[User:Beren85|Beren85]] 21.00, 15, April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Mild support''' - it's true that it's hard to tell this language from any other of the 100+ dialects spoken in Italy, but if a sufficient number of speakers exists and they have the will to start the project and the perseverance to make it grow, they will get their right to exist "on the battlefield". --[[User:Paginazero|Paginazero]] 19:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
===Pfälzisch (8 support, 6 oppose<!--that anonymous vote should not be taken seriously-->, 2 neutral)===
{{New-language-template|
Wiki accounts of the proposer= [[de:Benutzer:SPS]], [[de:Benutzer:PälzerBu]]
|User accounts of others=
|Language code= '''pfl'''
|Proposed ___domain= pfl.wikipedia.org
|Wikipedia article= [[de:Pfälzische Dialekte]], but also a few lines in [[en:Pfälzisch language]], [[it:Dialetto del Palatinato]], [[nds:Pfälzisch]]
|Native name= Pälzisch
|Number of speakers=
|Locations spoken= much of Rhineland-Palatinate in Germany, some neighboring areas, several emigration communities (in the Americas + elsewhere)
|Related languages= Pennsylvania German [[:w:pdc|pdc]], Luxembourgian (Lëtzebuergesch) [[:w:lb|lb]]
|Promoting organizations=
|Request on mailing list=
}}
Words from person who made the request: Pfälzisch (in English perhaps Palatinian) is a German dialect, spoken in south west. Nearly everyone who lives there and whose anscistors come from there is able tospeak the dialect. [[User:84.171.216.148|84.171.216.148]] January 6, 2005 14:53 (CET)
*'''Support''' - [[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] <small>([[:nl:Gebruiker:Cars en travel|nl]] [[:na:User:Belgian man|na]] [[en:User:Belgian man|en]])</small> 13:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] Dear anonymous user, did you post a message about this at [[de:Wikipedia:Fragen zur Wikipedia]]? 13:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''', because I would like to get more information. But I've added the template above and the links to articles about the language, where there was only a ''poor'' paragraph to request. German users are the key for this request. I hope they will have some interest for it, and find enough native or advanced users to help it. :o) [[User:Hégésippe Cormier|Hégésippe]] | [[User talk:Hégésippe Cormier|±Θ±]] 05:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''moderate Support'''. I love the language, several near to me use it every day. I cannot support it as an author because I'm not in sufficient command of the language. Hint: [[Approved_requests_for_new_languages#Pennsylvania German (17 support; 1 oppose)|Approved_requests_for_new_languages]] has a section titled ''Pennsylvania German'' which is a closely related yet distinct language. [[User:Purodha|Purodha Blissenbach]] 01:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' - Who on earth would benefit from a Wikipedia in this German dialect? Not a single person because _every_ single speaker knows High German just as well or better. I don't live there but I bet when they write something down they write it down not in dialect but in High German like just everybody else in German. High German has specialised terms for all fields of science, the dialects mostly don't. The High German wikipedia will always be a source of information many times bigger and better then the Pfälzisch one - so the Pfälzisch one will actually be useless. I could go on with a few more points but I think it's enough now. -- [[User:Raetius|Raetius]] 11:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
**We have had some very similar discussions before: Pfälzisch should be considered a seperate language - and would, if the concepts of Germany, Germans and "the" German language didn't exist. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 13:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
** [[User:Raetius|Raetius]] is wrong. I personally know ''many'' people from Palatinate who do not speak the so called "High German" although they moderately understand it on TV etc. when they read (german) books or newspapers loudly, they do so in palatinian. Whenever wording or grammar do not match well enough, the outcome is funny for non-Palatinians. The majority of those people is from rural areas, elderly, hardly computer-literate, neither reading or writing English; so they're unlikely to show up here and vote. -- [[User:Purodha|Purodha Blissenbach]] 13:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
* <s>'''Oppose''' - Pfälzisch is not a separate language, just a specifing mispronouncing of a German province. Moreover, where should this trend to create new splitted WPs lead? [[User:84.163.38.161|84.163.38.161]] 21:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)</s> <small>non-argument, should not be taken seriously</small>
**Sorry, but if still have the dumb conviction that regioanl languages are "mispronunciations" of standard languages, you have '''absolutely NO business here!!!''' Dialects are older, much, much older, than standard languages, start reading at least ''something'' about West Germanic dialects before you '''ever''' do one edit to this page again! [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 23:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' - by the way, I oppose a Portuguese wikipedia. Portuguese is not a separate language. It's just a mispronouncing of a Spanish province [[User:Stettlerj|Stettlerj]] 22:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - as it was said, no one there would write down something in that dialect. The only German Dialects which are sometimes used as a written language are (AFAIK) Lower German and Swiss German, which both have already a Wikipedia. Everyone who speaks/understands Pfälzisch can also understand High German and get information at de:. That Pfälzisch Wikipedia would only be a copy of some easy "translated" de: articles to have many language links in the articles in High German. --[[User:Steffen Löwe Gera|Steffen Löwe Gera]] 09:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
**No it wouldn't. Any new Wikipedia is created of its own. The Limburgic Wikipedia is not just an easy translation of the Dutch Wikipedia, neither are the Platt and Alemannic Wikipedias, even though they all know German and write it with more ease than their own vernacular language. Any natural language (and Pfälzisch is a language of its own indeed!) deserves to be written down and cultivated, no matter whether it suffers low prestige or the presence of a standard language. The only thing we should be worried about is whether there are contributors for it, or perhaps if the proposed Wikipedia will not be redundant with an existing project. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 09:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose.''' No need for this. It's not Wikipedia's business to cultivate languages. All Pfälzisch speakers benefit from the German Wikipedia just as much as all the other German speakers do. That should suffice. – [[User:Jondor|Jondor]] 13:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
:It may not be WP's business to cultivate languages, but it certainly is Wikipedia's business to help out those who cultivate their languages and give them the opportunity to make their own Wikipedia. Mr. Jondor, all Catalan speakers can use the Spanish Wikipedia very well, but the Catalan Wikipedia was created on the '''very same''' day as the Spanish was. So not allowing certain languages their own Wikipedias goes counter to the policy Wikipedia has been leading for five years now. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 13:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I would work with, if sugh a wikipedia existed (I'm the one who asked for). I'm also a native speaker. My username on the German wikipedia is SPS, btw. -- [[User:84.171.227.43|84.171.227.43]] 17:22, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support'''I am a native speaker of Palatian, and would help with a palatian Wiki, whether it exists. If the alemannic wikipedia has a "right to exist", I would say a Palatian would have it, too. I would also propose another language code. PAL would be more apposite than PFL. If you aquate the "ä" with the "a", PAL would be the first three letters of te language name in English (Palatinate), and in Palatian itself (Pälzisch). [[User:PaelzerBu|PaelzerBu]] 13:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''.--[[User:Harvzsf|Harvzsf]] 05:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' --[[User:Melancholie|Melancholie]] 04:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
:I've just changed the title, cause I had counted six supports, and not just five ;-) --[[de:Benutzer:SPS]] 13.02.2006 12:46 (CET)
*'''Oppose''' - Pfälzisch is German. There is <u>one</u> common standard for writing German that covers all regional spoken variants. <u>No</u> other standard than Hochdeutsch is ever used in non-fictional texts (for good reasons, I guess). Ignoring this fact and trying to create Wikipedias for all different spoken "Germans" will very probably lead to a plethora of incomplete, unreliable wikis of inferior quality forever redundant with the mutually intelligible, first-rate standard German WP. Nichts gegen Lokalpatriotismus - but I'd strongly disencourage such a development. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 17:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' NO NO NO! See [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] - what next ''Berlinerisch''? Where the End, if an minor dialect gets his won Wiki? [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 20:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' [[User:Ciosek|Ciosek]] 20:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC) I see more logical arguments for support than to negate. Arguments for opose are quite illogical and some discriminatory - show NPOV love to standardization. [[w:Germanic substrate hypothesis]]
*'''Support''' A language, not a dialect.[[ nl:Boudewijn Idema]] , 13:52 , 19 March 2006 (UTC)
:Title actualized once again --[[de:Benutzer:SPS]] 22:20, 10 April 2006 (CEST)
*'''Oppose''' It's clearly a dialect, not a language. There's a definite dialect continuum and no "border" for Pfälzerisch. Plus, there's no standard orthography and not even a standardized "Hochpfälzerisch". Why didn't anyone suggest a Wikipedia in Sächsisch yet, or Erzgebirgisch? Or even better: Leipzigerisch (as the Sächsisch of Dresden and Leipzig is not the same). This request is quite silly in my opinion. If we had a Saxon Wikipedia, people from Dresden, Chemnitz and Leipzig would constantly edit between "ni", "net" and "nüsch". I imagine similar things for other dialects of German. —[[en:User:N-true]] 5:21, 15 April 2006
===Rarotongan (2 support, 1 oppose)===
*Link to request on mailing list:
*ISO code: <strike>mi-ck</strike> [http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=rar rar]
*Proposer: [[User:Scott Gall|Scott Gall]] 08:15, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
*People interested joining:
*Speakers: 43 000 in Cook Islands, French Polynesia and New Zealand
*Relevant links:
** [[:en:Rarotongan language]] [[:en:Cook Island Maori]]
*Notes/comments:
**Another request by Scott Gall with complete absence of native speakers, fluent speakers, or even advanced learners. Should be denied, along with all past and future requests from him. --[[User:Node ue|Node ue]] 16:49, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
**The two might look as if they were the same, both of them being called Maori, but they both have their differences. We could move the New Zealand Maori Wikipedia to mi-nz.wikipedia.org. [[User:Scott Gall|Scott Gall]] 08:15, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
***Is that the same than Rarotongan? [[User:Belgian man]]
**** There are specific ISO 639 code for [[:en:Rarotongan language]] (rar) and [[:en:Maori language]] (mi), and "mi-ck" (which i added) mean "Maori of Cook Island", but i don't know if mi-ck and rar are the same or differ. (10 Mar 2005)
**Scott Gall, after a few weeks, the link you mentioned above to an article on Cook Island Maori is still idle. Could you write that article, please. I think many of us are interested in the particular differences and similarities between New Zealand Maori and Cook Island Maori.--[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 15:08, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
***I created a redirect to the article on the Rarotongan language five minutes ago. Rarotongan and Cook Island Maori are the same as each other, but not the same as New Zealand Maori. [[User:Scott Gall|Scott Gall]] 04:27, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
**** So "rar" is better. (16 Mar 2005)
*****OK then. rar.wikipedia.org it is. Some New Zealanders call it Cook Island Maori, possibly because it's similar to Maori and the Cook Islands are part of New Zealand. [[User:Scott Gall|Scott Gall]] 00:29, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
****** It's no more similar to Maori than is Samoan. The reason some people call it Cook Island Maori is out of ignorance. --[[User:Node ue|Node ue]] 16:49, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
****** I can't see a difference between Cook Island Maori and Rarotongan either. [[User:NazismIsntCool|NazismIsntCool]] 08:50, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
**'''Support''' [[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] 21:04, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC)
**'''Strong Support''' Actually Rarotongan is one of the dialectal variation of Cook Islands Maori. The others dialects are the one of Ngaputoru (Atiu, Mauke, Mitiaro), Mangaia, Aitutaki, Rakahanga-Manihiki, Penrhyn (reo tongareva). There is a complete intelligibility between all these dialects. The only exception in Cook Islands is the language of Pukapuka which is closer to Samoan and the language of the three atolls of Tokelau. According to the Cook Islands Legislation (te reo Maori act 2003), Maori
"(a) Means the Maori language (including its various dialects) as spoken or written in any island of the Cook Islands; and
(b) Is deemed to include Pukapukan as spoken or written in Pukapuka; and
(c) Includes Maori that conforms to the national standard for Maori approved by Kopapa Reo"
http://www.paclii.org/ck/legis/num_act/trma2003130/
There is no intelligibility with tahitian and New Zealand Maori
I think mi-ck or mck would be the best choice. I'm not sure that people from outer islands would appreciate if you use rar for rarotongan. Moreover, they probably would not participate to it or it would create useless debates. There are no official census of the number of speakers but I think they must be about 30000 including those living in New Zealand, Australia or other parts of the world.
If you create a wikipedia in Cook Islands Maori, people there would appreciate even if I do not think there will be hundreds of articles everyday. It will take time. I have a basic knowledge of the language but it would be better if a Cook Islander start it. It should not be too difficult to find.
They also call it "te reo ipukarea", litterally "the language of ancestral homeland". So why not "ip-ck"...????
[[fr:Utilisateur:Nevers|fr:Utilisateur:Nevers]]
*'''Neutral'', but oppose to a proposal (present, past of future) because it was written by Scott Gall is a '''bad idea'''. [[User:Hégésippe Cormier|Hégésippe]] | [[User talk:Hégésippe Cormier|±Θ±]] 07:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - not still a dialect-Wiki more, spoken by 43.000 (!!! - wow... /:) native speakers. Who should write there? [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 19:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
*:I recommend reading all the comments ''before'' voting if you don't know anything about the topic. As stated several times above, this is an entirely separate language from Maori in New Zealand, and from other Polynesian languages. The name "Cook Islands Maori" is widely used in part because traditionally there was no name covering all the languages (and dialects) spoken in the Cook Islands, and excluding those spoken in other countries. --[[User:Chamdarae|Chamdarae]] 18:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
*::Chamdarae, just ignore it. Ken clearly thinks he is omniscient in the area of languages, and that languages that are not oficially recognised don't exist. Or don't you? You seem to think so. Tell me, do you really think there are only 200 languages in the world rather than the 6,000 Ethnologue lists? Tell me, have you '''ever''' red one word in or on the Pacific languages? [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 09:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
'''Support''' [[nl:Boudewijn Idema]], 13:52 , 19 March 2006 (UTC)
=== South Azerbaijan (Guney Azerbaijan) (5 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral) ===
{{New-language-template|
Wiki accounts of the proposer=[[User:BayBak|BayBak]]
|User accounts of others=
|Language code= [http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=azb azb]
|Proposed ___domain=azb.wikipedia.org
|Wikipedia article=
|Native name=[[Azeri , آذری]]
|Number of speakers= About 40,000,000 in East and West Azerbaijan-Iran (includes Erdebil, Astara, Zenjan, Hemedan, Tehran, Merkezi and all nearby cities), 8,000,000 in Republic of Azerbaijan (uses different Alphabet setting)
|Locations spoken=[[S-Azerbaijan]], Republic of Azerbaijan
|Related languages=[[Turkic]] family of languages
|Promoting organizations=http://www.baybak.com
|Request on mailing list=
}}
;Comments
* <s>'''Strong Opposse''': Is a lie</s>, in the Ethnologue refers only [http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=azb] 24 million of people. And this is a dialect, not a separated language, the reference is in [[en:Azerbaijani language]].--'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 18:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
::If the South Azerbaijan use only arabic script, maybe use both scripts, as the [[:lad:|Ladino Wikipedia]].--'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 05:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
:::'''I do not agree with the opposer [[User:Taichi|Taichi]].'''
* This is the language of the people who have a very long history of civilisation and saing that it is a dialect (from what?) is funny (or even silly) we are not talking about political references (not strong enough to be argued) this is the language of 40,000,000 people who are living in this real world (if not say how). This is not about me or your wishes or hopes.
* [[User:BayBak]] somewhat clarifies the situation on his userpage: he wants to start an Azeri Wikipedia in Arabic script. Due to the shorthand-like nature of the Arabic script, it is impossible to write mutual script convertors for Latin script and Arabic script Azeri, so a seperate Wikipedia does make sense. However, I want to see some more native speakers supporting this initiative before I give my support. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 13:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - not more dialect-Wikipedias! [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 19:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
::This is less to do with dialect and more to do with alphabet
*'''Support''' [[nl:Boudewijn Idema]], 13:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - I have heard that the differences are stronger than only a alphabet, South Azerbaijan has many words from arabic or persian language. [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 19:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - Even if it was only an alfabetic difference, you won't break the digital divide, unless you can produce documentation for both reading styles [[User:bertodsera|bertodsera]] 19:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Azeri in Iran is now quite different from that spoken in the Republic of Azerbaijan - the difference is more than just a difference in script. The official ISO code is [http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=azb azb]. --[[User:Chamdarae|Chamdarae]] 18:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' simply because I do not know how different this is from Azerbaijan. However, if integrating two scripts into one Wikipedia (as done in Romani and Ladino) is possible, I would prefer it. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Support'''</s> '''Oppose''' Initially I thought of technical difficulties involving the set up of bi-alphabet Wikipedia, but I am convinced that the creation of a new Wikipedia just because of different script does not serve any purpose. [http://ku.wikipedia.org Kurdish] Wikipedia has already made use of Arabic and Latin scripts for three different Kurdish accents.
:I can think of few bennefits for single bi-alphabet Azerbaycani Wikipedia :
::# Better use of resources.(One Wikipedia for one language . )
::# Allowing the users of both scripts to co-operate in developments of articles
::# Mutual learning of alternative scripts.
::# Following successful example of other Wikipedias such as Kurdish [http://ku.wikipedia.org Kurdish], using Arabic and Latin scripts already.
:I suggeste the use of bothe alphabets in one Azerbaijani Wikipedia. [[User:Mehrdad|Mehrdad]] (n)
*'''Oppose (Reluctantly)''' I wanted to be neutral, but decided that it does not really serve any purpose. The difference, other than the script, is at the dialect level and it is in the spoken language. There is no official Azerbaijani use in Iran, as far as I know, and the language used in South Azerbaijani press and the literature is standard Azerbaijani. Literature sometimes do have local influences though, but it is the case with any language and in the Azerbaijan Republic too. Furthermore, Azerbaijani Wikipedia itself needs serious improvement and diverting the attention of a very limited number of native Azerbaijani speaking users will create two almost useless Wikipedias. My suggestion is that the [[:lad:|Ladino Wikipedia]] example is suitable here and we should modify Azerbaijani Wikipedia to include articles in both scripts. --[[User:TimBits|TimBits]] 21:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' --[[User:Absar|Absar]] 16:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' [[User:Memty|Memty]] 19:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' I am also suggesting to modify the current [http://az.wikipedia.org Azerbaijani] Wikipedia so that it supports both scripts. As a native Azerbaijani language speaker, besides knowing that what we are talking about here is the same language except the scripts used in Iran and Azerbaijan Republic, the reasons for doing so are the same as the reasons provided by [[User:Mehrdad]] and [[User:TimBits]] above. --[[User:Sed|Sed]] 14:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
:::'''I do not agree with the opposers'''
* '''Note:''' I am very interested to know the level of the knowledge of opposers about '''South Azerbaijani Language'''. They do suggest something with no meaning. They do not have enough information. They are not able to understand the '''differences between a language and a dialect'''. Also they can not understand the '''differences between tow scripts'''.'''Azeri language''' is spoken by almost 40,000,000 people (we have wiki for languages with less than 10 million speakers). '''Azeri language''' is going to be recognised as the second official language of nowadays Iran on '''2009'''. So this is proven by the authority that '''has banned it for years'''. If you do support banning a language, do it and be as clearly as you can. As I have mentioned before, I do not want to start any political argument (or discussion) on this page, but I am sure about the truth and need of my request. It is needed because we will have the right to use and improve our own language in near future. Please do not get upset of recognising an alive language (even if you do not like it). '''Reality is not what we wish! It is what it is.''' Many thanks to supporters. [[User:BayBak|BayBak]] --Baybak 21:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
:*Dear BayBak , If there was no Azeri Wikipedia I could understand your frustration, but there is one in Latin script, ad currently we (Sys Admins of [http://az.wikipedia.org Azerbaijani Wikipedia]) are discussing the work involved for inclusion development of Azeri with Arabic script[http://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azeri]. Having Visited and impressed by the site you have developed single handed, wish you can help us develop the Azeri Wikipedia (Arabic Script). I am native speaker of Azeri, and familiar with both scripts, I would be more than happy to discuss your proposals further. sagolun . [[User:Mehrdad|Mehrdad]] 03:09, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
:* سایقیلی مهرداد بَی، سیزون بو ایستک گرچک بیر ایستک اُلا بولمز چونکی (I wrote it to show the difference between 2 scripts) Dear Mehrdad, you are suggesting that we may have completely different scripts in one wiki! If this is the case, please tell me about benefits of that. You do not realise that the people who are able to read, write and understand these 2 scripts (like your self) are less than %5 (majority of South Aeries are not able/not willing to read/write Azeri by crylic script which is introduced to the North Azeries by Russian in 1980s. Before that we had same scripts, borders and actually everything), also we have people who do not want to use crylic /latin, they prefer to use their own scripts (improved and changed from sumerian - source for Azeri language) like myself. The main fact is that our language is banned in nowadays Iran, and because we are not happy of it and fighting for independence, so having everything written in our language by using our script is essential. Please do accept that having one wiki in 2 scripts has no use for this situation. [[User:BayBak|BayBak]] 15:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
::Dear BayBak. Your efforts are really appreciated and we need contibutors like you in Azerbaijani Wikipedia. Currently we do not have too many users who can write in Azerbaijani with Arabic script. And by the way, there is no Azerbaijani Wikipedia in cryllic script, but this raises a question. There are many Azerbaijanis, especially older generation, who can write in cryllic but not in the current latin script. Then we might as well have a cryllic Azerbaijani Wikipedia too. One might say, yes why not. But the real question is that who will maintain 3 wikipedias in one single language? So, please come and join Azerbaijani Wikipedia. Oh, and I realized your page, it is a great work I should say, and you have the name birolmali.com- I just couldn't help but realize the irony and paradox of this and your position here. Thank you. --[[User:TimBits|TimBits]] 16:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
::*Dear [[User:TimBits|TimBits]], I personally appreciate people, their beliefs and their language. But our problem lies here: We do not want/we can not force at least 30,000,000 to change their writing system which they are familiar with for ages. Also I have to point that this is a bit early to have this AZB wiki because of not having enough writers and admins, but having said that in near future and after introducing the wiki to my people in South Azerbaijan, there will be good activity started on that wiki. I strongly believe there is no use of having one wiki with mixed scripts. Literate people of South Azerbaijan can not follow Azeri written in either Crylic or Latin scripts. You will see it easily in our books, papers, web sites and all other written materials those are being produced every day in S-Azerbaijan. Please take time to research and read about our past before suggesting any thing. --Baybak 18:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
:::I know about our past and that's why I am suggesting that we should work together to produce a useful wiki page. I do not beleive that a bi-script page is any less useful than a single script one. I do not have any reason to beleive it. And you still haven't responded wthether you want to be a part of this project or not. Whatever your decision is, I respect it. --[[User:TimBits|TimBits]] 22:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
::* Dear [[User:TimBits|TimBits]] Thanks for asking, this is kind of you, but I am sure that I will continue to build an independent wiki for South Azeri (AZB). I will continue as I am doing now (reading, writing and thinking in my own language). I wish you a successful life.[[User:BayBak|BayBak]] '''یاشاسین آذربایجان''' --Baybak 03:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''': Differences are not solely in script. There are more people literate in Southern Azerbaijani than in Northern Azerbaijani. Furthermore, script is never only script the language has a history of a culture language written in Arabic script for centuries. [[User:Behemoth|Behemoth]] 01:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
{{requests for new languages/diq}}
===Present Belarusian (6 support, 13 oppose)===
{{New-language-template|
|Wiki accounts of the proposer= [[User:Sidorsky|Sidorsky (N)]]
|User accounts of others= [[User:Semashko|Semashko (N)]]<br>
[[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]]<br>
[[User:Alexander Gouk|Alexander Gouk (N)]]
|Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]])= bel
|Proposed ___domain= [http://bel.wikipedia.org/ bel.wikipedia.org]
|Wikipedia article= [[en:Belarusian_language]]; [[ru:Белорусский язык]]
|Native name= Сучасная беларуская мова (Present Belarusian)
|Number of speakers= 8 million (at least)
|Locations spoken= Official language of the Republic of Belarus
|Related languages= Ukranian, Polish, Russian, Czech, Slovak, Bulgarian, Serbian.
}}
*'''Comments.'''
*Present-day Belarusian, the official language of the Republic of Belarus is significantly different from that archaic form of language that is used by administrators of [[:be:|Belarusian Wikipedia]]. These distinctions concern the basic sections of philology: orphoepics, graphemics, spelling, grammar, morphology, lexicology and others. The Grammar of the archaic (or classic, as they say) Belarusian is developed in 1920s in Northwest areas of Belarus (now it is the Republic of Lithuania) and is based on regional phonetic, grammatic and lexic features of character. However it considerably differs now from the language which is used by the slavic population of that region. Thus, this variant of the Belarus language is not a dialect. Since it is poorly unified we may compare it more likely to a slang, than to a modern national language. It stopped its development due to cession of Vilnius region and WWII emmigration.
*The roots of the Present Belarusian literary language are in the most populated Central Belarus. It is a state language of Belarus, a language of official documents, sciences, education, culture, media. The language used in Belarusian Wikipedia today is a language of amateurs of olden time, and their work is a form of escapism. This prevent educated men and women of Belarus from participation in Wikipedia. We ask you to support the creation of Present Belarusian Wikipedia.
*'''SUPPORT''' - Two (even three) different standards in one encyclopedia are very confusing. Many articles contain a mixture of both official and alternative languages, preventing the community of editors from growth. It is still a difficulty for many students to use current belarussian wikipedia for educational aims because of different standards. The present belarussian Wikipedia is dominated by users (and administrators) writing in alternative and not official version of Belarussian: a new article created in alternative language cannot be edited in the official language even it's a stub (a rule in Be-Wiki). The creation of a new project would also prevent many of local "wiki"-conflicts between users, still taking place there. And last but not least: belarussians grow up with literature - excellent prosa and poetry - written in official present-day belarussian language, also an official language of sciences in Belarus. Isn't it a reason enough to launch a new project? [[User:Alexander Gouk|Alexander Gouk]] 21:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Every time writing an article in the present Belarussian Wikipedia or editing an existing one I have a feeling that i put the text into the wrong place. It's not possible to get rid of it. There are articles written with latin characters, articles written with usage of ciryllic characters not listed in the alphabet, articles written in official language are linked to categories in alternative language... It' confusing... Every time... And there is no wish and sense to begin the discussion... It will lead to nothing. This words are not agains administrators and users promoting the alternative language, most of them are enthusiasts. But they startet at the very beginning, offen creating stubs in alternative language, which cannot be replaced with official language, even containing only some words. There should be a solution... [[User:Alexander Gouk|Alexander Gouk]] 20:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
: ''Comment about changing spelling policy''. There is simple policy to change spelling of article: to get permission form author(s) or (if not author available) administrators. As far as I remember, you did not try to ask such questions. So please don't claim that this is impossible. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 04:01, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''SUPPORT''' - I support Present Belarusian Wikipedia [[user:Semashko]] (N) 11:39, 09 February 2006
*'''Oppose''' - there is currently a request for a Trasianka Wikipedia; see elswhere on this page. Disputes about how to write Belarusian should be solved on the be: Wikipedia, not by splitting up a Wikipedia. It's essentially the same language we're talking about, and you and the be:-administrators should be a little more cooperative and tolerant towards each other's concept of what written Belarusian should be like. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 11:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
*: Dear Caesarion, can you say that Old English and English is essentially the same? In my opinion Belarusian ("Present Belarusian") and a complex of regional dialects plus strong Polish influence ("Belarusian") are different. You are right as for "Trasianka" - it's not the separate language. The relation between these three forms is the following: be.-Belarusian (archaic Northwestern dialects + Polish + US English americanisms) - Present Belarusian (the official language of Belarus) - Trasianka (Belarusian + Russian). If you think it's normal situation when Belarusian wiki is written not in Belarusian, so perhaps you can propose how to find a place for the real Belarusian language in Wikipedia? It's not so easy as splitting up a Wikipedia for hardly existing Germanic dialects but could you try, please? - [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 09:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
*::I don't know about the details of this situation, but a comparision with Modern English and Old English is certainly absurd. By the way, the English article about Belarusian already boasts a strong influence of Polish, and this article was edited several times by some of the most prominent be: users, including [[en:User:Rydel|Rydel]], just to name one. What they most likely do is keeping Russian influences out, but are they really reconstructing a language that was spoken some 1,200 years ago, as Old English was? Compare, for example, "Þā Geānlǣhtan Rīcu American is land in þǣm American. Sceortlīce wrīteþ man USA, and þis land hæfþ 297 millionen lēoda" and "The United States of America is a country in America. In short, it is written ''USA'', and this country has 297 inhabitants." Are present day spoken Belarusian and Belarusian the way it is written really as dissimilar as old and modern English? I bet not. (Btw tell me why some German regional languages "hardly exit", according to you). [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 12:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
*:::OK, that's not such differs as between old English, snd Present, cause we talk about the 1920's grammar + polonisms and '''hand-made''' "neologisms" (from, for example, Viačorka). [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*:::What Wikipedia is being constructed for: languages, nations or cultures? If first, we have more strong position than those who promote dead language for cultural-ideological reasons. After all, I highly appreciate your efforts to improve Wikipedia, and it's a sad surprise for me, that you've decided to help people pursuing other aims. - [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 09:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
*::I'm not particularly helping people who promote archaic, maybe unnatural forms of a language. As I said before, I am in favour of a more cooperative solution. Maybe the be: community should be more tolerant towards a form of Belarusian that is closer to the living, spoken language. If necessary, contact the Board of Trustees and make them resolve this dispute. They are very, very unlikely to allow two separate wikipedias in the same language. Moreover, it is a fact that they usually favour an official, standardised form of a language. You should absolutely try to come to terms with the be: community before you jump into steps like these. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
*:::Thank you, Caesarion. Hope, your advice will work and the Board of Trustees will be able to make a wise and peaceful decision. - [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 12:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
* '''SUPPORT''' I '''definitly support''' Ivan Sidorsky and willing to help. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 18:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
* I mean, if somebody could tell, what would you recommend to do, where to write in such case, it would be reasonable to close the discussion here, because it makes no more sense now, after you've told, that it is not the way of solving such problems. Where is that '''Board of Trustees''', how could it look, I mean what are we to write? [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 00:57, 07 March 2006 (UTC)
*:I'm not able to answear you that question, but if you wan't make a deal with actual be-wiki admins I can support your effort to help large amounts of educated present Belarusan language speakers to contribute to Wikipedia. [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 20:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
*: Thanks, we really have to work it out. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 13:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' - An original, living language with nearly 8 Million native speakers - a good coause for an own Wikipedia. [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 19:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
*: Thanks, Ken. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:07, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
''COMMENT'' Ken, how long since you have been in Belarus'? some 200 years? Belarusian is a dying language, and it's really worth saving it because of this. But claiming an 8 million figure is at the very least ridicolous. Most people there speak russian, and the more ''evoluted'' (prodvinutye) drop in an english word each every two. Same applies to Ukraine, where I live. Languages must be judged as languages, not as political pawns. It's a BIG piece of Europe's culture we deal with, not just flags on some generals' strategical map. Breaking a small, weak and dying language into further bits just because admins do not like each other is a wonderful way to kill it once and for all. Think about it. Then maybe vote to remove the old admin, if he really is so uncapable to do a good job. I'll support you. [[User:bertodsera|bertodsera]] 21 March 2006 (UTC)
*:: Also a good point. Belarusian is mother-tongue for 80% of Belarusians - the statistics say. It's 8 mln people. They know the language, they've learn at school, and heard from parents and grandparents - '''it's Present Belarusian'''. Now, in Internet the percentage of archaic form users, is bigger then in the real (not ''virtual'') world, so often people have to, let me say, 'reload' their language-sense to the archaic form. But more often they just don't want to play those games - they just use Russian, not even trying to use the official, literary present form, cause mostly people are unpolitical, not interested in nationalist's games and plans. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*::: Statistics is great, bur real life is not... How much people in Minsk (1.7 mln) who speak (and potentially will contribute to any form of Belarusian Wikipedia) Belarusian? I fear that bigger part of them is opposition... --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*:::: That's it. You make us involved in '''politics'''. I say Wikipedia must not be connected or depend on politics at all. I don't stay on neither the government position, nor the opposite views; I only can ascertain that there's a living language, and it has its own wide spread academic norms which we are to follow (and the Belarusian people does), especially on Wikipedia or other scientific sources. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 19:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*::::: I didn't talk about politics, and did not involve anybody in politics. I talked about Belarusian language situation. That millions of speakers is a little bit overestimated number... Belarusian language exists in forms of classic (łacinka included) and official spelling independently from what you think about classic spelling. And you could not do too much with this fact. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose'''. [[:be:|Belarusian Wikipedia]] does not favor classic spelling over official (present days). It contains articles on both spellings. There were some edit wars based on spelling at beginning of 2005, but since that time both spellings coexists peacefully without major problems. Belarusian speaking Internet community is not so big, so further spelling dividing will do more harm then good. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 15:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
: It's absurd what you say. First, ''there's no right'' to call the archaic form "classic" as you all do. 'Classic' means literary, present, codified, fixed in literature, encyclopedias (not in nationalist's manifests) - that's the present Belarusian. Then '' 'does not favor' '' - what should it mean? It's all not about doing favors anybody, but to conform the existing spelling and orthoepic norms. How can 'two spellings coexist'? Especially when you have to mark they even do not obtain the same codified form of their '' 'classic' '' language, but as anyone wants - "taraškievica"/"viačorkavica"/"našanivaŭka"/"dziejasłovica" and so on. Plus "łacinka" - more one completly another project. It seems totally abnormal. The norm means the norm. A law is a law. It prevents any 'spelling dividing'. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
** <s>So '''oppose'''</s> <small>(s-tagged [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 18:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC))</small> - as I said previously (I also voted against sub-be-wiki projects like trasianka and west-palesian) that will only support if described by Trasianka editor struggle at be-wiki won't seem to stop, and according to EugeneZelenko it doesn't so I oppose present Belarusian proposal. Regards, [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 19:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
*: If it seems to him that there's no conflict - it's only because they don't give us the right of voice. He is be: admin and defends his own power. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*:: Please disclose your user name on Belarusian Wikipedia, just to verify facts that somebody didn't give you right to write articles on official spelling. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 20:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*::: Absurd. There are 3 (at least) spelling systems on one Wikipedia. I'm not telling, you couldn't write on present Belarusian in be:Wiki, I'm saying, that's you, who have no right to write articles in some nationalistic half-archaic half-puristic language project spelling/orthoepics - as a '''main''' project or mixing it with normal. There's '''one''' normal codified form. '''Not 3 equal.''' [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 01:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*:::: So I assume, that your claims about ''right of voice'' just reflect your wish to make own POV official policy of Belarusian Wikipedia. As about codification of classic spelling, see [http://www.svaboda.org/articlesfeatures/culture/2005/9/5D4AB075-09D9-4AC7-93C6-15AC36CC8FDC.html]. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*::::: You overturn it all from legs up on a head. Modern literary Belarusian language with its owen grammatic norms is not my personal point of view, it is the fact fixed in millions of pages of scientific and fiction literature. At the same time the imaginations of mister Viačorka and its followers really is his personal sight and vision of the Belarusian language. Therefore I say that the official policy of Belarusian Wikipedia should follow the official rules and the norms existing at present in Belarusian. Do not confuse the NPOV policy to elementary following literacy in spelling and orthoepics - in fact it is impossible, that people write ''as they want'' within the limits of the same project. On the maintenance of articles - there can be different points of view; but on a writing of articles in any language there can be only one position: it's following the academic grammar as it is. As if to "codification of "classical" spelling" - the last creation of "філёляг" ("philologist") Viačorka - you know very well, that this edition has not brought any unity even to admirers of "reformers-classics" and a pair of newspapers and magazines have continued to write in their own ways. And the same: diffirent treatments (and sometimes just elementary illiteracy) - now in be:Wiki too. And it's all because of your ''"spelling democracy"'' (which de-facto is anarchy). [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:12, 3 April 2006
* '''Oppose'''. --[[User:MaximLitvin|MaximLitvin]] 18:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
*: Please, explain your position. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*:: Already is be:! I Shall support if bel: will duplicate be: and that between them there was no struggle. But I think bel: provocation as you initiated also tra: & zpo:. --[[User:MaximLitvin|MaximLitvin]] 10:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*::: Sorry, it wasn't me who proposed zpo:Wiki and bel:Wiki, I've only supported them. The only problem of tra:Wiki is now lack of supporters but I'll try to manage it. It's neither provocation, nor fun. We are going to make an encyclopedia. Neither zpo:Wiki is a provocation. It's a language of ethnic minority as for example Ligurian ([[:lij:]]) or Emilian-Romagnol. You call it provocations? Be:Wiki is not in Present normal Belarusian, in fact, there's ''language anarchy'' there - 'write as you want and don't oppose others in their own views on how should we write and tell it in "classic" Belarusian'. It's probably be: (archaic form) which could dublicate Present Belarusian Wiki as ''sub-project'' or some kind of interface for the amateurs of archaic while bel: should be official; not as you say. The struggle or discussions about probably reforming (as you propose) present Belarusian should not be held in Wiki (or any other encyclopedias or sources) but in Akademy of Sciences or among philologists. But there's official grammar and lexics and Belarusians use it. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 13:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*:::: The Belarus language one. There is no archaic language - there are different norms of language. Distinctions in norms of language are caused by the political reasons - the antiBelarus policy of communists. I badly know classical norms. It is impossible to divide Byelorussians on the basis of "ь" (conditionally). Especially now, when the Belarus language can die. Why two do not suggest to make ru: - for those who uses the letter "ё" and for those who does not use the letter "ё"? I not against bel: as subproject. I against bel: as separate project. West-palesian not language of a national minority (there is no minority). It not established a dialect (there are no strict norms, literatures) the Belarus language (or a Ukranian language). It to you will tell in any Academy of sciences :) --[[User:MaximLitvin|MaximLitvin]] 13:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*::::: 1.There can be the '''only''' norm of language and it exists - the academic literary present Belarusian. 2.I'm not going to argue on any ''antiBelarus policy of communists'' - I'm not talking about any politics. 3.It's amatours of "classic norms" who divide people, not me: I say there's one language and one grammar/spelling/lexics norms. 4.Your comparison to Russian ''"ё" situation'' makes no sense: there they don't have any weird projects, but some people say they ''can'' use "ё" (or not), the others say they ''must''. They are talking about only one letter, not the hole grammar system. And everybody in Russia knows the situation - it even can't be called serious problem, while in Belarus the majority of people just are not interested in any "classic"-projects. 5.As I've said before, it's any ''alternative systems'' are to be '''sub'''-projects - the official form is to be '''main''' project. 6. Let's discuss zpo:Wiki on its own part. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 20:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
*:::::: Sorry, but I think (as person who lived in Minsk for 27 years POV and studied in school and university there) that majority of people in Belarus are not interested in any form of Belarusian language projects. Sorry for remind this fact, but sad truth is better then sweet self-deception. --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
*:::::: '''1.''' Long time all languages developed without norms. Developed on personal sensations of native speakers (separate people). More recently (to historical measures) there were strict language norms. Strict norms of the Belarus language have appeared only in the beginning of 20 centuries - "classical" norms. In 1930 years on political grounds "classical" norms have been replaced "academic". The Belarus language has not changed. The Belarus speech can be written down on "classical" or on the "academic" norms - to Byelorussians it will be well clear. Distinctions between norms are not significant. Who to you prevents to write on "academic" to norms in be:? '''2.''' It is a political question. Initiating bel: you initiate discussion of a political question. '''3.''' Norms do not differ with lexicon and a pronunciation. Norms slightly differ with rules of transfer to writings softness and hardness of sounds, and also rules of transfer of foreign words. The fact in that there are two norms, is people which consider correct first or second norm. Byelorussians perfectly will understand all written both on the first, and on the second norm. The majority of Byelorussians cannot distinguish the first norm from the second norm. '''4.''' The situation with "ё" is similar to a situation with two norms of the Belarus language. One speak, that is necessary "ь", and others speak, that is not necessary "ь" - however "ь" nothing changes. One speak, that is necessary "е", and others speak, that is necessary "э" - however nothing changes it. The majority of Byelorussians does not know, that there are two norms and cannot distinguish the first norm from the second norm. '''5.''' be: it is created by the first - it is necessary to respect with work of compatriots which two years work. I wish to explain. If bel: it has been created by the first I would express against creation be:. I against two separate Belarus projects. I for one general Belarus project (it is possible with two subprojects). '''6.''' Well. --[[User:MaximLitvin|MaximLitvin]] 14:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
'''Support''' [[nl:Boudewijn Idema]], 13:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
*: Thanks. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' - If the problem is the administrator of be:Wiki, then you should have the admin changed, instead of wasting common space and work. Both styles can coexist in a sigle language. Nobody speaks Chaucer's english anymore, but that does not keep people from publishing it in the en:Wikipedia. So it should be for the opposite situation. If not so, then you have a weird admin structure in be:wikipedia, not two different languages. I believe that there must be a way to obtain an indipendent Wiki authority to impose a minimal democracy in be:wiki, instead of starting up a confusing secession. [[User:bertodsera|bertodsera]] 21 March 2006 (UTC)
*: OK, we are not speaking about two different languages, but the archaic system with a lot of polonisms (as for example kelnerka, pastarunak), supported by nacionalists and rusofobes, with some weird orthography and orthoepics. Please, tell us where are we to write (where's that Board of Trustees?). [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' --[[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] 21:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
*: Thanks. [[User:trasianka editor|trasianka editor]] 21:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''; the orthographical differences between the varied types of Belarussian can hardly be as big as those between Cotentinais and Jèrriais, and yet we all manage to get along and coexist (with currently two standards, and the potential for at least three) on the [[:nrm:|Norman Wikipedia]]. (Examples would be the words "clioche" and "clloque"; "itou" and "étout", "achteu" and "à chu jouo", etc. Cotentinais and Jèrriais even use two completely different standards of capitalization.) One possible solution for your differences may be to include two versions of every page, such as the Norman pages [[:nrm:clloque|clloque]] and [[:nrm:clioche|clioche]]. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
*:Seems wise ;) What do you think about it? [[User:D T G|D_T_G]] 18:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC) P.S. I've s-tagged my opposition temporarily....
*:: As for now we creates redirects in alternative spelling. Duplicating contents is possible, but some problems will arise: who will synchronize content and where interwiki should be placed. Redirects to categories is not working (see [http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3311 bug 3311], big Commons trouble). Templates could contain both spellings and right one could be chosen with conditional template (I did so in one of latest infoboxes). --[[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - I don't speak Belarusian. However, two things are for sure: 1. we have a Wikipedia reserved for (modern, not some ancient form) Belarusian. 2. If some users there are using a different standard than the official one or - worse - are preventing other users from writing in that standard, creating a new Wikipedia is not an appropriate solution. Please try to solve this problem internally within the be-WP. I think Jade Knight's above suggestion is one worth being considered. 99% of all Wikipedians are intelligent, reasonable folks so I think it should be possible to bring about a sound solution. If everything should fail, however, please post a message to the Wikipedia-l mailing so that some neutral outsiders can assist in finding a compromise. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 15:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' of course no! I am belarusian and I want to speak real belarusian language, wich is not beaten by soviet ideologists..
:: Meaningless quasi-political discourse. We do not discuss politics here, we try to make useful wikipedia section for people. By the way, signature is always welcomed. - [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 12:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. First of all, I do not think that the modern spelling, artificially created by communists for a single reason of brining Belarusian to Russian standards has the right to exist. Besides that, it's obvious that the "taraškievica" is the modern choice for those, for whom Belarusian is a '''live''' language (not those who only see it during Belarusian classes at school or univercity). The transition to the proper spelling is the question of time. Second, why should we split the effort? Our cooperation is required in order to revive Belarusian language, and the spelling conflict does not good. [[User:Juras14|Juras14]] 13:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
:: How funny! So if something was "artificially created by communists" (say, an artificial satellite or a house, builded after the last horrible war) it can not be used by "modern men and women", right? All of your opposes are based on political connotations and misapprehensions like: "Beware of Red Communists!" and "Russians are coming!". The only way to merge our efforts is to split Belarusian section to allow us to contribute to wikipedia. It will help to revive Belaruisian language also. Or do you think we must revive your language version only? It hardly can be the basis for partnership. - [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 13:01, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. Of course, this idea is crap. First of all because [[be:]] is NOT "arhaic" and so on, it is updated in BOTH spellings! So you can always write in your preferred spelling into usual be: Wikipedia, and there is no reason to create any other wikipedia just because of writing system. --[[User:Monk|Monk]] 14:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC) ([[en:Monkbel]], [[be:Monk]])
*'''Oppose'''.
**1) My personal impression is that '''Taraškievica is the very preferred writing system of active Belarusian speakers'''. It is the Narkamaŭka that tends to be the ''dying Belarusian language'' because it is used mostly by back-to-USSR-university theoreticals and school language teachers - the people who never actually speak Belarusian outside the classroom. People who speak Belarusian in every-day life definately prefer Taraškievica as the purer version of the language. Just check the Belarusian-speaking [http://by.livejournal.com blogosphere] to see that 90% use Taraškievica (with more or less Narkamaŭka elements).
**2) '''Narkamaŭka was created in 1933 under Soviet occupation - actually, it was nothing but russifying the Taraškievica''', a language tradition formed in the 19th century. It wasn't a different version of the language basing on other dialects - it was simply cutting differences between Belarusian and Russian aiming to assimilate Belarusians. There were further russification steps planned (p.e. ''весна'' instead of ''вясна'', ''цеатр'' instead of ''тэатр'') that luckily were not realised by the Soviets
**3) Yes, '''Taraškievica''' is an unofficial writing system - but still, it '''has been codified''' in the ''Беларускі клясычны правапіс'' published last year. These rules are accepted by main Taraškievica-using media: [http://www.svaboda.org Radio Free Europe] Belarusian edition, [[en:Naša Niva|Naša Niva]], [http://www.http://www.polskieradio.pl/polonia/by/ Radio Polonia] Belarusian edition etc and by the regular users. By the time this standart will push aside various marginal language versions.
**4) '''The differences between T and N are, frankly speaking, not radical enough''' for creating a whole new Wiki. Main problems are writings of foreign words and the usage of ''ь''. There is not even a huge diference in pronounciation. Come on, we do not have separate Wikis for British English and American English, do we?
**5) '''[[be:]] is the smallest Slavic Wikipedia''' except the tiny Kashub language version. Languages with much less "official" speakers (Slovene, Slovak etc) have much larger Wikis than we do. Shouldn't we better develop the one Belarusian language wiki we have (even though it is far from ideal in many aspects) instead of dividing our potential?
**6) '''[[be:]] is created for both Belarusian writing systems'''. The rules say, that both Taraškievica and Narkamaŭka are welcome there. I admit that maybe there should be more discipline and more attention and respect to Narkamaŭka users - and I really propose to discuss the topic "at home" and in our common Belarusian language :) --[[User:Czalex|Czalex]] 20:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
:::: '''Why are you afraid of the plan to create a wikipedia in Present Belarusian language? ''' We do not prevent you from developing your language section, so why do you reject this possibility for us? Perhaps, it will be obvious how weak Taraškievica's positions are. [http://www.svaboda.org American radio], [http://www.polskieradio.pl/polonia/by/ Polish radio], and [http://www.nn.by/ tiny emigrant newspaper] on the one hand, and whole Belarus on the other. I respect minorities but not aggressive ones. Make your archaic be.-section, and let us make our own. It will be democratically. - [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 13:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
::::: Dear friend, '''where did you see fear in my comment'''? Moreover, '''try to answer any of my arguments what you didn't do'''. Nasa Niva is not a "tiny emigrant newspaper", unless it will be closed down by the Lukašenka regime. Uchite matchast. '''Very few people who speak Belarusian at home use Narkamaŭka'''! And ''archaic'' is the exact word for it and not for Taraškievica.--[[User:Czalex|Czalex]] 05:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
:::::: I am not your friend. There is a great difference between us: my ancestors fought against Nazism, and I respect Soviet heritage, as well as the majority of Belarusians. We cannot be friends, we cannot have common things. End. -- [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 08:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
::::::: If you want to say that people who support Classical Belarusians are fascists or something along those lines, then do so. Here's something to think about: Janka Kupala has an awesome poem called "Zydy" ("Jews", not "Yids"). In modern Russian it is considered an offensive term. I bet you think that Kupala was an anti-Semit. Well, you are wrong. Kupala was a good friend of Zmitrok Biadulia whose real name was Samuil Plaunik. If you have not understood it from his real name he was far from being of any Slavic descent. Moreover, he was one of the biggest supporters of Belarusian statehood in 1918. So shut it, and don't accuse unless you know for sure. --[[User:Wolny|Wolny]] 00:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
::::: Excuse me, [http://www.nn.by Nasa Niva] may be a small newspaper comparing to [http://www.sb.by Belarus Segodnya] (former Soviet Byelorussia) just because nobody forces to subscribe to it, but it is definately not "emigrant newspaper", and that is not mentioning that it is the oldest newspaper in the country. By the way, you forgot to mention [http://arche.home.by "a useless literary journal"] that does not have an equivalent published in official Belarusian. Why don't you give examples of literary and academic use of official Belarusian beyond school and university curriculum, or any other application of the official spelling? Even [http://www.president.gov.by Lukasenka's website] does not bother having a Belarusian version! --[[User:Wolny|Wolny]] 00:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose'''. As to my humble opinion, be: Wiki (as well as a number of contibutors in it) is not so big to split it between two separate projects. The splitting of existing be: Wiki community to two new parts can just kill them both. --[[User:Shao|Shao]] 13:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
:: Just the contrary. Creating a new section will revitalize both (at least in a form of competition). But what is more important, today a very small sub-cultural group tries to speak in the name of the entire nation, and so the much bigger part of Belarusian people has no voice in wikipedia. It would be morally proper if you could change your opinion to '''support''', please. Otherwise wikipedia will have only a small odd section in the language which is not Belarusian really. -- [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 08:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
::: Did try you to contribute to be: at all (and where did you contribute at all)? I'll repeat my words again: nobody prevents you to write articles on official spelling on be: and nobody will change your spelling to classic without your approval.
::: If you prefer to play politics here, you are free to do so. But please don't use loud words like ''whole Belarus'', ''entire nation'' and etc.
::: [[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]] 14:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
:::: You know it is absolutely impossible for educated people to write into that section dirtied with ungrammatical experiments. Will you make interface grammatically correct to allow us participate? Please, do not show your unconvincing bureaucratic fears. People of Belarus are forced to contribute to Russian, English etc sections because of your determination to support helpless sectarian attitudes. Sorry. -- [[User:Sidorsky|Ivan Sidorsky]] 07:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
::::: My impression is that the guys who propose a separate wiki based on a sovietized narkamauka spelling are not really interested in it and would not maintain it. They rather want to destroy the existing one, and that explains their tirades here, in the English part of Wikipedia.
Czalex is right – the real archaic language is narkamauka. Modern-day Belarusian speakers rarely use it, and moreover, it does not develop. Narkamauka petrified with the collapse of the USSR, and the new wave of Belarusian literature, Belarusian-language publications prefer taraskievica as an authentic Belarusian norm reflecting our phonetics. Taraskievica is vibrant. Last year’s codification of it reflects its development and growth. It is widely used by the youth and intellectuals, whereas some old school language teachers resort to narkamauka, as they have to teach it to students who either choose to speak Russian or adopt taraskievica – the speak of modern Belarus. Narkamauka is not natural and russified, and this evokes repugnance. I can call many brilliant modern-day literati using taraskievica. And can you recall any worthy ones adhering to narkamauka. I doubt it.
So again, I assert that the discourse is inane. Ok, you create your own soviet-style wiki. For how long will you run it? I bet it’ll die in about a month.
* '''Oppose''' - First, stop interchanging terms and mixing up the facts! Narkamauka & Tarashkevica as well as Lacinka are simply three ''codified'' spelling systems. The grammar is the same for all of them. Yes, Taraskievic wrote a book called "Taraskievic's Grammar", but it was the first grammar book of Belarusian ever published. There were no substantial changes to grammar rules after that. The Soviet reform changed spelling and allowed to use words borrowed from Russian. Nevertheless, the "polonized" equivalents were still in dictionaries and/or used by the general public. Give me an example of a "polonism" that exists in Classical Belarusian, but does not exist in the official one. Rovar (bicycle) is an English word (rover).
:Second, most of those who do use Belarusian in everyday life use the classical language with few variations of pronounciation and spelling. This concerns only words borrowed from Germanic languages, Latin, and Greek. Viacorka's last year's publication mainly concerned spelling of those words. It did not change the grammar. The percentage of everyday Belarusian speakers who use the official version is small. It is even smaller given the total number of people who know the language.
:Third, Classical Belarusian is the accepted language of modern Belarusian literature and music. A major literary journal ARCHE uses both spellings for texts published, but the staff uses Classical Belarusian. Official Belarusian is rarely used in music for the simple reason that "official musicians" prefer Russian over native Belarusian, and only rock-musicians who miraculously happen to be in the "nationalistic" opposition use Classical Belarusian.
:Fourth, a person who uses official Belarusian can perfectly understand a person using Classical Belarusian and vice versa. The differences concern spelling, but reading rules are the same. It does not take a lot of time neither it is hard to get accustomed to reading Classical Belarusian for a person who has always used the official version.
:Fifth, there are handmade neologisms in every language. That is the whole concept of neologisms - creation of new words that describe new concepts. It is a usual practice for languages to borrow words from other languages and adapt them grammatically. Unfortunately, Slavic languages have rules of creation of words that significantly differ from Germanic and Romance languages, thus making it easier to borrow a word than to create a new one. If one looks at Russian technical jargon one will find tons of borrowed words. However, being a purist, I prefer creating words with Slavic roots for Belarusian where possible.
:A little note on Trasianka. It is a non-codified mixture of Russian and Belarusian, which appeared when native Belarusian speakers got exposed to Russian-speaking environment. Given the similarity of languages it came to be Russian with heavy Belarusian language unlike Spanglish where both English and Spanish words are used equally, but with Spanish grammar. Having Wiki in Trasianka has no sense for it would be a waste of time for pure entertainment of readers. If one is so desperate to read Wiki in Trasianka, open a Russian article, copy it, and paste it into [http://www.pravapis.org/trasianka.asp this form].
:P.S. If anyone desires to get personal on the issue, I dare you! Just do not forget to strap on before being blown out of water. --[[User:Wolny|Wolny]] 23:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
'''WEAK OPPOSE'''. I don’t have anything against Soviet spelling (narkamauka) per se, as long as we keep the politics out of it. And I don’t see a need for another Wikipedia version, because (1) the two spelling systems are ''very-very close''. It's the same language, just the spelling rules are a little bit different; (2) Probably 99% of differences between the Classical and Soviet orthography can be ''automatically converted by a simple programming script'' (replacing soft signs, soft/hard l’s, e vs ie, etc.).
But even if the community decides to have a separate version for the Soviet spelling (which I find bizarre). I don't really oppose it that strongly, because it's still our language, it's just spelled a little bit differently in some cases. Let them spell that way, if they want, though I find it a bit destructive that they want to do it in a separate Wikipedia (political, not linguistic decision?)
P.S. Frankly speaking, I'm much more concerned about the fact that certain Russian contributors on the English Wikipedia have been butchering Belarus-related articles on WP in the last year, deleting factual information and inserting pro-imperial, pro-Russian, ''pro-Soviet POV''. See discussion here, for example: http://www.br23.net/en/2006/04/29/english-wikipedia-belarus/ --[[User:Br23net|Br23net]] 14:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
=== Brněnský hantec (5 support, 8 oppose)===
It is a specific version of the Czech language or a very special dialect of it which is spoken mainly in the city of Brno (the biggest Moravian city) and generally not comprehensible to people not born in Brno. It has very interesting history and is based on German. I think that the Wikipedia in Brněnský hantec would be a graeat idea. Many citizens of Brno would be happy to have it. (And, as there is already Wikipedia project in Allemanic, I see no reason why not to allow this.--[[User:Tintin|Tintin]] 18:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
: '''Support''' - I support the idea as well and I would definitely contribute to it. [[User:FerdinandH|FerdinandH]] 19:09, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
::Tintin - are you a Moravian? Can you tell me if you have heard about Hanacky janzyk? And about Brnensky hantec -> how many native speakers? Czech dialects are interesting, I have already heard lacky from neighbourhood of Moravia-Silesia - so from my neighbourhood, Cieszyn Silesian (a Pole, but feeling a child of culture of three nations including Czech :), [[User:D T G|D T G]] 22:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
:Of course I have heard about it. Hanácký jazyk (or hanáčtina) is spoken mainly in the neighbourhood of Olomouc and Prostějov (Central Moravia, we may say). Yes, I am native Moravian but currently I live in Straßburg. How many native speakers of Brněnský hantec? All habitants of Brno to some degree (approximately 500,000). Needless to say, that elder people command this language much better than the youth. (Another reason why to start Wikipedia in Brněnský hantec!) --[[User:Tintin|Tintin]] 05:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks Tintin, can you give me some links to get know better Hanacky and Brnensky? I'll try to inform one Moravian I know from cs-wiki about this (yet) uninformal proposal :) Zdravim, [[User:D T G|D T G]] 09:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
:::Try to browse [http://slovniky.centrum.cz/search.php?hantec=1 this on-line dictionary]. No explanation, but gives a clue how much the languages differ. --[[User:Slady|slady]] 11:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
* Hi, I am a Prague citizen not Brno and I know only a few words in ''hantec''. Though, I'd like to point out some facts. The language has no code defined in [[:en:List of ISO 639 codes|ISO 639-1]]. The language has no oficial standard and I'm not sure whether there is some unofficial. I think there would be disputes among Brno citizens about what is the correct form. Moreover, the city has only about 370 thousand citizens, not all of them having Internet access and by far not all of them speaking hantec. Is it enough to build a quality Wikipedia? Establishing a new Wikipedia for ''hantec'' would only drain potential editors from Czech Wikipedia. That's not good. On the other hand, ''hantec'' Wictionary would be lovely! --[[User:Egg|Egg]] 12:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
::Norman may have as few as 25,000 speakers, and yet our wikipedia is doing very well because we're dedicated to it (already over 200 articles). However, we should make sure that people would be devoted to this project before assigning it a Wikipedia. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
:Hantec is, very roughly, Czech equivalent to [[en:Cockney]] and even more pointless to found its own Wikipedia than thet would be. --[[User:Maly ctenar|Maly ctenar]] 15:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC) [I think this comment is supposed to be counted as '''oppose''' - [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 18:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)]
*'''Comment''': seeing quite slow progress of Czech Wiki and ''their'' lack of people I do not give ''hantec Wiki'' slightest chance to get over initial 20 pages. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 20:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC) [I think this comment is supposed to be counted as '''oppose''' - [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 18:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)]
It is an excellent idea. I '''SUPPORT THIS.'''--[[User:85.160.26.36|85.160.26.36]] 19:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I am from Brno and I do support Wikipedia in Hantec. It is a nice idea and a good way of spreading our language.
* '''Oppose''' Wikipedia in dialects is stupid (sorry). Nobody need them. It would be better, the Supporters would be do more at the Czech Wikipedia. [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 19:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
**Not knowing the true nature of the terms 'dialect' and 'language' is very, very stupid (sorry). How dare you mingle what Wikipedia someone should contribute to??! I don't say this request is a good idea, but you really should study the subject better before jumping into cries like these. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 14:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' Is a dialect. No need for more dialects--'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 04:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' [[nl:Boudewijn Idema]], 20:46 , 17 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Neutral''' [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 14:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 'Hantec' is, of course, a clearly defined concept: the vernecular language (mind: ''language'' refers here to any linguistic system, whether it is considered a separate language or not) of one city. However, I don't think a Wikipedia in it would be a good idea. It is relatively close to standard Czech, its scope is confined to one city (which wouldn't be so bad if Hantec was a totally different language, but it ain't), it has no ISO code, no recognition - just a combination of these matters make a Wikipedia in it little feasable. Please consider broadening your scope to the Moravian dialects together, which would probably be more successful (I can't promise, however, that I will support in Wikipedia in Moravian). [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 14:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' Hantec is exactly indefinable dialect, that has no complete word-stock, that has maximum only several hudreds native speaker. And I am afraid, proposer and all here voting adherents don't speak hantec. [[User:Cinik|Cinik]] 09:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' --[[User:Til Eulenspiegel|Til Eulenspiegel]] 22:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - An encyclopedia written in a city dialect (no matter how special and noteworthy it might be) is hardly in line with Wikipedia's goals. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 18:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''', I'm familiar with Moravian language(s). --[[User:Ђорђе Д. Божовић|Ђорђе Д. Божовић]] 10:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - As a joke - fine. As a wiki - stupid. [[User:130.230.1.90|130.230.1.90]] 22:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral'''. I am of Caesarian's opinion. However, my vote is '''Oppose''' until a Test Wiki with at least 50 articles has been created, and a '''Weak Support''' once the Test Wiki reaches 150. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - There are more than 10 main dialects based on Czech language. I am living in Brno, but I does not meet any person, that can fully speak in Brněnský hantec. Hantec became very popular thanks to TV spots, that advertising a local brewery. The spots contain many neologisms, because word stock is very poor. Hantec is not well defined, its usage requires own research and therefore it is not good tool to create an encyclopedia. --[[User:RuM|RuM]] 10:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
====But why not open a Wikicity in it?====
I don't think Hantec is suitable for a Wikipedia, but it is perfectly suited for Wikicities. It is after all the dialect of one city. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 15:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
:Seconded. [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
=== Punjabi Shahmukhi (3 support, 2 oppose) ===
{{New-language-template|bc
|Wiki accounts of the proposer=[[:en:User:Sukh|Sukh]]
|User accounts of others= [[:en:User:AyyoubW|AyyoubW]] (N)
|Language code= (ISO639-1) pa-PK (also pnb, pmu, lah)
|Proposed ___domain= pa-pk.wikipedia.org
|Wikipedia article= [[:en:Punjabi_language]]
|Native name=Punjabi (Shahmukhi) پنجابی شاہ مکھی
|Number of speakers= 62 million
|Locations spoken=Pakistan
|Related languages=Punjabi (Gurmukhi)
|Promoting organizations=
|Request on mailing list=
}}
A wiki for Punjabi already exists, however this is predominantly in the [[:en:Gurmukhi]] script. Can we have a separate Wikipedia for the Arabic script? This enables easy interwiki linking and stops the current wiki from getting cluttered with multiple scripts. [[User:Sukh|Sukh]] 00:33, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
:'''Question''':I'm not entirely sure I agree with this request. Also, why should Gurmukhi get the pa: ___domain while Shahmukhi gets the pa-pk: ___domain??
::'''Answer''':Locale data on the CLDR [http://www.unicode.org/cldr/] lists only Gurmukhi for pa. The Pakistan government does not support Punjabi and so it has had no official push in the Shahmukhi (arabic) script. The Indian state of Punjab uses it as an official language in the Gurmukhi script.
::There is no greater reason to have Gurmukhi under 'pa' other than it's already in use there, with a partially translated interface. Indeed, more people speak Punjabi in Pakistan than in India (although few are literate in the language in Pakistan, no matter what script because Urdu is the official language). Pakistan has made it its aim to exterminate all of the native languages in the country in favour of Urdu, which incidentally is not native to the country :) [[User:Sukh|Sukh]] 17:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
:'''Question''': Can the scripts be converted automatically, similar to what's done on sr and zh? [[User:Speakhits|Speakhits]] 21:16, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
::'''Answer''': No, they can't, since the Arabic script is very shorthand-like and leaves all vowels out. Superficially, Devanagari script has a similar approach but it is better suited for the Indian languages than Arabic script is. They're pretty incompatible. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 09:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
::'''Answer''': Caesarion is correct. Indic abugidas (like Gurmukhi, Devanagari) can be converted to one another (Devanagari to Gurmukhi and back without loss of information), but not so easily to Arabic script. In actual fact, converting from Gurmukhi to Shahmukhi may not be too difficult, but doing it the other way round would cause problems. There is ways of doing it using dictionary look-ups I suppose, but no reliable method exists at the moment.
::I think crucially, there is not a one-to-one mapping of characters and in several circumstances it would be impossible to detect which character to use without analysing the context (in terms of the word) it is used in. [[User:Sukh|Sukh]] 17:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' [[nl:user:Boudewijn Idema]], 14:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' [[User:bertodsera|bertodsera]] 00:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''', though I think it's quite unfair to relegate it to pa-PK. Both Shahmukhi and Gurmukhi are scripts used by millions and millions of Punjabi people. Neither is less important. --[[User:Node ue|Node ue]] 06:17, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::I honestly wish that were the case. But Punjabi is neither encouraged or extensively used in text form in Pakistan (be it Shahmukhi, Gurmukhi or Latin). I suppose a different code could be "pa-arab" or something similar? Maybe Gurmukhi could move to "pa-guru" aswell? [[User:Sukh|Sukh]] 21:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose.''' I support in principle as I know a number of Panjabi people, but there are so few contributors as it is, that I suggest waiting until a technical solution is developed. There are workings in place like Wikidata that could solve the multiple script problem. I don't see the value in splitting a project with so few contributors, though if you could recruit 30 or so contributors I'd be listening. I recommend just getting by in the meantime with articles in both scripts on the same wiki for now. And no, I haven't had any luck myself so far encouraging those people I know to contribute. - [[User:Taxman|Taxman]] 15:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
::Ultimately there will be no reliable automatic transliteration that is possible. However, if there is a reliable mechanism for dual scripts in the Wikis, then that's definately a plus - although I'm unsure about the consequences of interwiki linking.
::I'm against the idea of waiting for enough people to contribute. There is one user in particular who wishes to start writing Shahmukhi articles and that should be enough. It'll always be more hassle to transfer at a later date. [[User:Sukh|Sukh]] 21:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
:::I wasn't assuming automatic transliteration, just good facilities for multiple scripts, and that is beeing worked on. Having two scripts on the same language isn't that big a problem, just set up a convention to link to the other version of the article, either through a link in the same spot on every article or use a template or a mediawiki message. The right to left and left to right sounds like more of a problem, try filing bug report for that. - [[User:Taxman|Taxman]] 14:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak Oppose'''; the Punjabi Wikipedia barely has over 40 articles—what are the odds that this would do any better, if even as well? I recommend that articles written in Shahmukhi be included in the Punjabi Wikipedia, if at all possible (we deal with dialects in other Wikipedias, like Normand and Cornish, and the [[:rmy:|Romani Wikipedia]] even uses dual orthographies—perhaps it could be used as a model for Punjabi). [[User:Jade Knight|The Jade Knight]] 09:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
::There are problems with having it on the same Wiki, because the software does not provide adequate facilities for both scripts. For example, unless the user signs up and changes their preferences, page layout will still be left-to-right for Arabic readers. Also, there is a complication in terms of interwiki linking - how can you specify two script translations for articles in one wiki? Finally, there is the fact that we will end up with two communities of contributors who will be very unlikely to be able to communicate with each other, unless they resort to romanisation (wow, script number three) or English. Personally I think the excuse of there only being forty articles has nothing to do with the matter. It's a language spoken by nearly 100 million people... as more of them get online you'll get more contributors. [[User:Sukh|Sukh]] 18:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm not sure what you mean by two script translations for articles in one wiki. If you mean interwiki linking from another wikipedia, just do <nowiki>[[pa:Shahmukhi title]] and [[pa:Gurmucki title]]</nowiki>. And two communities of editors that both speak the same language is no worse to be on the same project than it is for them to be on separate projects and not communicate at all. And the short answer being if you can get more contributors, you'd get a ton of support votes. I and many others don't see the value of creating projects with few contributors. - [[User:Taxman|Taxman]] 14:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
===Wikiquote in french===
[[Image:Bandeau wikiquote.jpg|right|350px|]]
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''
*[[User:Greudin|Greudin]] (N)
*
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' fr
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' FR.WIKIQUOTE.ORG
|-
| '''Relevant infos:'''
*'''Link to article(s) on the language in an existing Wikipedia:''' [[w:fr:Wikiquote]]
*'''Native name(s):''' Francophones, wikiquoteurs, wikiciteurs ;)
*'''Approximate number of speakers:''' lot of but declining
*'''Location(s) spoken:''' Europe, Africa, Americas, Oceania
*'''Closely related languages, if any:''' [[w:en:verlan]]
*'''External links to organizations that promote the language:''' l'Académie
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' maybe wikipedia-fr-l if I retrieve the link
"By Grabthar's hammer, by the sons of Worvan, we shall be avenged."
|}
====Comments====
*There is currently no community. I'll be glad to support such an attempt to rebuild the french wikiquote, but only if you can find at least ten reliable and '''established''' Wikimedians/Wikipedians ready to invest themselves to help you with the project. [[User:Solensean|Solensean]] ᛁ[[User_Talk:Solensean|<big><big><big>ᛉ</big></big></big>]]ᛁ 01:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
:Plus que 8 on est deux ;) [[User:Greudin|Greudin]]
::No :) You're alone..[[User:Solensean|Solensean]] ᛁ[[User_Talk:Solensean|<big><big><big>ᛉ</big></big></big>]]ᛁ 13:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
* Maybe you should have provided us with some info on why the old French Wikiquote was closed. Well, I've searched for myself and don't mind sharing what I've found ;-) [[Communications subcommittees/Press/2006/03/28 fr.Wikiquote brief|'''<info en>''']] [[Communications subcommittees/Press/2006/03/28 fr.Wikiquote brief/fr|'''<info fr>''']] -- [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 14:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
====Support====
*I would like to contribute to this project. [[User:Poppypetty|Poppypetty]] 18:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC) ([[fr:User:Poppy]]).
*I can also help, particularly in the beginning. [[User:Seb35|Seb35]] 22:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
*Quand vous voulez, on peut s'y mettre --[[User:Jonathaneo|Jonathaneo]] 13:08, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
* Une 5e...--[[User:BeatrixBelibaste|BeatrixBelibaste]] 18:17, 14 April 2006 (UTC) ([[fr:User:BeatrixBelibaste]]).
*--[[User:Absar|Absar]] 11:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
* Moi aussi, mais tant qu'à faire je préférerais Wikicitations. [[User:86.217.125.20|86.217.125.20]] 12:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
:Enregistre toi, ça a bcp plus de poids ! [[User:Greudin|Greudin]]
: <small>« Wikicitations » est une bonne idée d'intitulé. L'emploi d'un nouveau titre permettrait de symboliser le changement par rapport à la précédente version. [[User:Teofilo|Teofilo]] 12:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)</small>
* I can help you a bit. Je souhaiterais surtout faire le ménage/rengement comme je le fais déjà sur Wikipédia. Et puis commencer un nouveau projet c'est se conduire en batisseurs. --[[User:Pseudomoi|Pseudomoi]] 21:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
====Oppose====
* I support a new fr.wikquote for old texts in the public ___domain only. I oppose the new rules that allow quotes from films and contemporary authors, because I believe this clashes the French copyright law. See [[Talk:Wikiquote FR]]. <small>Je suis pour la réouverture d'un Wikiquote francophone seulement pour les textes anciens tombés dans le domaine public. Je suis opposé aux nouvelles règles qui incitent à citer des films et des auteurs contemporains, parce que je pense que cela n'est pas compatible avec les lois françaises sur les droits d'auteurs. Voir [[Talk:Wikiquote FR]]</small> [[User:Teofilo|Teofilo]] 12:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
:A bit franco-centred, isn't it? [[User:Greudin|Greudin]]
::Though it is the same reason why the fr.wikiquote was closed in the first place, because of those French(France) copyright laws. [[User:132.204.207.108|132.204.207.108]] 12:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
J'ai perdu sans préavis mes deux pages utilisateurs qui fourmillaient de citations tout à fait légales. Je pense, avant de créer quoique ce soit, qu'il faudrait réactiver cette partie de l'ancienne version quelques semaines et nous laisser recouvrer notre travail initial. Signé QuoiNonne aka [[User:82.224.88.52|82.224.88.52]] 17:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
===Pangasinan Wikipedia and Wiktionary (7 support)===
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''N
*'''Proposer's user account in Meta and other wikis:''' [[User:Batobalani|Batobalani]]
*'''User accounts of others who are willing to work on the proposed wiki:'''
: [[Sonny Villafania]](N)
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' pag
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' http://pag.wikipedia.org and http://pag.wiktionary.org
|-
| '''Relevant infos:'''Pangasinan is one the twelve major languages of the Philippines that is spoken by about 2 million people.
*'''Link to article(s) on the language in an existing Wikipedia:''' [[:en:Pangasinan language]]
*'''Native name(s):''' Pangasinan
*'''Approximate number of speakers:''' 2 million
*'''Location(s) spoken:''' [[:en:Pangasinan Province|Pangasinan province]], [[:en:Philippines|Philippines]]
*'''Closely related languages, if any:''' [[:en:Ibaloy|Ibaloy]], [[:en:Ilokano|Ilokano]], [[:en:Tagalog|Tagalog]], [[:en:Malay|Malay]]
*'''External links to organizations that promote the language:''' http://www.dalityapi.com
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' {{{Request on mailing list}}}
|-
| '''Link to test wikipedia:''' [[Test-wp/pag]]
|}
====Comments====
This is a request for a Pangasinan Wikipedia and a Pangasinan Wiktionary.
====Support====
*'''Support'''--[[User:Harvzsf|Harvzsf]] 05:00, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''--[[User:Bentong Isles|Bentong Isles]] 09:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''--[[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] <small>([[:nl:Gebruiker:Cars en travel|nl]] [[:na:User:Belgian man|na]] [[en:User:Belgian man|en]])</small> 16:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''', also due to our good experiences with other Philippine languages. - [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 15:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' --[[User:85.107.92.109|85.107.92.109]] 17:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' --'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 22:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Yes, another Philippine language! :-) --[[en:User:Christopher Sundita|Chris S.]] 01:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
=== Hebrew MediaWiki Site (8 support; 1 oppose) ===
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''
*'''Proposer's user account in Meta and other wikis:''' [[User:Rotemliss|rotemliss]], [[w:he:User:Rotemliss|rotemliss in Hebrew Wikipedia]]
*'''User accounts of others who are willing to work on the proposed wiki:'''
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' he
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' http://he.mediawiki.org/
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' There is no one currently
|}
====Comments====
I suggest a Hebrew MediaWiki site (there are already Hebrew Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wikibooks and Wikinews), because it's hard to write an RTL language in an LTR, and with English interface (even if I change the language to Hebrew, the interface remains LTR), [http://www.mediawiki.org/ MediaWiki site]. It's better to seperate the languages, and the Hebrew project will be able to use a Hebrew, and RTL, interface and text.
Thanks. – [[User:Rotemliss|rotemliss]] – [[User Talk:Rotemliss|Talk]] 16:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
: a good idea! [[User:Idand|Idand]] 20:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
====Support====
# '''Support''' – [[User:Rotemliss|rotemliss]] – [[User Talk:Rotemliss|Talk]] 09:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC) ('''N''')
# '''support''' [[User:Idand|Idand]] 09:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC) ('''N''')
# '''Support''': [[User:None|None]] 04:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC) ('''N''')
# '''Support''' --'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 05:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
# '''Support''' [[User:Kenwilliams|Kenwilliams]] 08:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
# '''Support''' [[User:Troll Refaim|Troll Refaim]] 14:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC) ('''N''')
# '''Support''' [[User:Whaa?|Whaa?]] 14:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC) ('''N''')
# '''Support''' [[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] <small>([[:nl:Gebruiker:Cars en travel|nl]] [[:na:User:Belgian man|na]] [[en:User:Belgian man|en]])</small> 16:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
====Oppose====
# --[[User:Absar|Absar]] 11:21, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
#:Hello, could you please explain the opposition? What do you suggest instead? – [[User:Rotemliss|rotemliss]] – [[User Talk:Rotemliss|Talk]] 11:51, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
====Alternative====
The reason why you ask for a Wikimedia in Hebrew is technical. In the proposal for [[Multilingual MediaWiki]] we will get an environment where a page can be completely in Hebrew or English, Hindi or whatever language. One of the things Multilingual MediaWiki will do is to allow for multiple languages in projects like Meta and Commons.
Programming has started. Two developers are working on it. I propose to wait for this new functionality. Thanks, [[User:GerardM|GerardM]] 20:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
:I don't know what is the project, and what will be exist when finished; but let's say it will allow to specify the page language via "uselang" or the preferences, to completely differ the languages and allow everyone to use his language. Let's also say it will allow interwiki within the wiki, using "uselang". Why should someone prefer such a Multilingual wiki and not different wiki sites, can be more easily maintained? In Commons, it should be the same wiki for all the langauges for there should be only one source of shared images; but in MediaWiki site it is not the problem, so there is no need to compress everything in one site. – [[User:Rotemliss|rotemliss]] – [[User Talk:Rotemliss|Talk]] 07:18, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
::By the way, I think the Meta should be also Multilingual, like Commons (and it is, but not using the proposed features, and Commons also doesn't, because these features are not exist) – one site where we decide things in diffferent languages (although most of the discussions should be in English, for everyone will be able to understand them – for example, this discussion); but MediaWiki site is not the Meta, and it is mainly a content site, which should be translated. – [[User:Rotemliss|rotemliss]] – [[User Talk:Rotemliss|Talk]] 07:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
===Wikisource in lithuanian===
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''
*[[User:Redagavimas|Redagavimas]] (N)
*
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' lt ([[w:en:Lithuanian language]])
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' LT.WIKISOURCE.ORG
|-
| '''Relevant infos:'''
*'''Link to article(s) on the language in an existing Wikipedia:''' [[w:lt:Wikisource]]
*'''Native name(s):''' Lituanophones, wikisourceurs, wikitexteurs ;)
*'''Approximate number of speakers:''' lot of but declining
*'''Location(s) spoken:''' Baltic States, Europe, Australia, Africa, Americas, Oceania
*'''Closely related languages, if any:''' [[q:lt:User:Redagavimas]]
*'''External links to organizations that promote the language:''' Atviras Kodas (Open Source, LT)
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' .... "
|}
*'''Support''' Why not? [[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] <small>([[:nl:Gebruiker:Cars en travel|nl]] [[:na:User:Belgian man|na]] [[en:User:Belgian man|en]])</small> 14:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' No problem --'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 22:38, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Suport'''. [[User:Zordsdavini|Zordsdavini]] 07:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. --[[User:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] 12:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. [[User:Hégésippe Cormier|Hégésippe]] | [[User talk:Hégésippe Cormier|±Θ±]] 21:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
===Wikipedia in Chinglish and Singlish===
Chinglish and Singlish are the dialects of English, when Chinglish is spoken in Hong Kong and Mainland China and Singlish is spoken in Singapore. These two languages are formed due to the English colonization in Hong Kong and Singapore and the trading between Chinese and British started from middle 1800s. [[User:Oscarcwk|Oscarcwk]] 08:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' Unnecessary and useless, IMHO. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 15:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' I think that is non-sense dialects. --'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 14:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
* Oppose Chinglish; '''Support Singlish'''. Chinglish is what's known as a "nativised variety" of English. It cannot entirely be called a dialect, but at the same time it is not a creole because it was never a pidgin. I don't support it because the phenomena that are called "Chinglish" range from almost pure English with the occasional particle or cantonese word, to something that's more half-and-half. Singlish, on the other hand, is a fully-formed creole language, drawing words and grammatical structures from English, Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese, Malay, Tamil, and more recently, Mandarin. There is no standard writing system, though; when most people write it, it usually looks somewhat similar to English (but a bit strange), but if you wrote it even slightly phonetically, and if you marked tones (which it does have, although they are only sometimes phonemic, English-origin words are pronounced in a very "singsong" way), it would really demonstrate accurately the uniqueness of Singlish. Singlish as a spoken language bares little resemblance to standard English, in fact English speakers often mistake it for Chinese. So to the opposers, I ask you: Want Wikipedia in Singlish, got? Why oredi dun got!? Can make or not ah??? CAN LAH! --[[User:Node ue|Node ue]] 02:31, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
===Riverense Portuñol Wikipedia and Wiktionary (3 support, 2 neutral)===
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''
*'''Proposer's user account in Meta and other wikis:''' [[User:Muñata|Muñata]] '''(N)''' [[User:Muñata|meta]] [[en:User:Muñata|en]] [[es:User:Muñata|es]] [[de:User:Muñata|de]]
*'''User accounts of others who are willing to work on the proposed wiki:'''
{{{User accounts of others}}}
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' No ISO code ([[en:linguasphere language code|linguasphere code]] 51-AAA-am (Fronteiriço) [http://www.linguasphere.net/secure/ip/pdf/zones/51.pdf]
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' http://riv.wikipedia.org and http://riv.wiktionary.org or alternatevely http://pt-riv.wikipedia.org and http://pt-riv.wiktionary.org
|-
| '''Relevant infos:'''
*'''Link to article(s) on the language in an existing Wikipedia:''' [[es:portuñol riverense|portuñol riverense (in Spanish)]], [[en:Riverense Portuñol language|Riverense Portuñol language (in English)]]
*'''Native name(s):''' portuñol, fronterizo (internationally known as Fronteiriço, also)
*'''Approximate number of speakers:''' 100,000
*'''Location(s) spoken:''' Northern Uruguay
*'''Closely related languages, if any:''' [[en:Brazilian Portuguese|Brazilian Portuguese]] and [[en:Rioplantense Spanish|Rioplatense Spanish]]
*'''External links to organizations that promote the language:''' {{{Promoting organizations}}}
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' {{{Request on mailing list}}}
|}
*'''Comments''': The term portuñol is ambiguous, but it is the term used by the speakers of this language when refering to it. If you want to understand the different meanings of the term portuñol, there's a good [http://www.personal.psu.edu/jml34/portunol.pdf article] about it. In this document, the language I'm proposing here is called fronteiriço. Because of this ambiguity, the word riverense is added to the name. --[[User:Muñata|Muñata]] 07:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - Because I feel that the phrase ''"a language is a dialect with an army and a navy"'' is true but unfair. --[[User:Muñata|Muñata]] 07:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' --[[User:Lin linao|Lin linao]] 06:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' - I think that a continuum dialect is very unclear, ¿the standard is only in two cities?, maybe this wiki grow very slowly if exist few native speakers.--'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 15:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
::Being a dialect continuum doesn't seem to be a problem. For example, Alemannisch is a dialect continuum (see [[en:Alemannic German]]) and got its Wikipedia. Besides that, the dialect continuum is what Elizaincín calls DPU (dialectos portugueses del Uruguay). I'm being more specific when I added the word Riverense, to avoid this possible problems. There are more than 100,000 speakers, and the region covers the cities of Rivera / Santana do Livramento (between 150,000 and 200,000 inhabitants), part of the department of Artigas, part of the department of Tacuarembó, and the riverense cities of Tranqueras, Minas de Corrales and Vichadero (actually, all the [[en:Rivera department|department]]).
::Regarding the ammount of native speakers, AFAIK there is no such prerequisite, and there are examples of wikipedias which are doing very well, despite the language having few native speakers (please see: [[en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia articles per population]]). --[[User:Muñata|Muñata]] 01:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
:::Puedo cambiar de opinión si se hace la test wiki en portuñol, y atraer más hablantes nativos al proyecto y que puedan colaborar.--'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 02:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' - I surely wouldn't like to see Wikipedias for dozens of border/contact/code-switching language variants like "Spanglish" or "Chinglish" which is being requested above. But if this is a true creole which is stabilized enough to serve as a tool for conveying encyclopedic knowledge (which I can't really assess, of course), Riverense Portuñol might qualify. Needless to say that being able to write an encyclopedia requires some sort of orthographic standard or at least consensus, too. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 18:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
::This language (or dialect, I don't want to enter in that meaningless discussion) is not a simple code-switching. It is stabilized enough and it is a contact language for sure, but which language is not, to some extent? I'm sure that if it were not a language of the third world, and if the Uruguaian linguistic policy were not like it has been until now, this language/dialect would be more recognised and would have the same status as various languages of the world. I have a lot of them in my mind, but I don't want to mention them, because I think that they are in the right place, Portuñol Fronteiriço, is the one (as well as others) which is not in the place it deserves. --[[User:Muñata|Muñata]] 02:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
::The kind of articles that I envision for this Portuñol Wikipedia, are articles of the list of articles that all wikipedia should have + articles about the language itself (that could be better expressed in his own words) + regional articles (that again, could be better expressed in words of his own people). I think that once this Wikipedia gains momentum, it could grow faster, because "fronteriso" speaking people are eager of expressing themselves in his mother tongue, after so much repression, stigmatization and discrimination.
::Being this said, I also know that a wikipedia needs a community and that it cannot be run only by one person (despite that I am a computer engineer and will have no problem in understanding the technichal issues of setting up a new Wikipedia, and that I could do it very fast). I'm trying to contact people that could be interested in this project.
::Another thing I want to say, is that if we cannot have a Wikipedia, at least we diserve to have a wiktionary. See for example [[es:Portuñol riverense (vocabulario)|this vocabulary]]. According to the rules, it has to be in wiktionaries, but portuñol riverense doesn't have a wiktionary yet. These definitions can be moved to the Spanish, Portuguese, English (or whatever) wiktionary; but would them be accepted in those wiktionaries, being from a language that doesn't have a wiktionary/wikipedia itself?
::This wiktionary could grow very fast. I know that I can add 1000 terms in few days, myself alone. And I also know that this wiktionary could attract the attention of the portuñol speaking community more than a wikipedia (is easier to write a dictionary definition than a full-fledged article), and after that, they will be attracted to the wikipedia also. --[[User:Muñata|Muñata]] 02:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
:::Eso me parece muy prudente. ¿Entonces por qué no empezar con el diccionario y hablar de la Wikipedia más tarde ? -- [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 15:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
*'''SUPPORT''' <u>only</u> for wiktionary ('''N''': native speaker of portuguese-brazilian dialect) [[User:555|555]] 15:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
===Madurese (2 support) ===
{| class="toccolours" cellspacing="3"
|-
| '''People interested [if native speaker, please mark (N)]:'''
*'''Proposer's user account in Meta and other wikis:''' [[User:Slamet Serayu|Slamet Serayu]] (Nearly Native)
*'''User accounts of others who are willing to work on the proposed wiki:'''
{{{User accounts of others}}}
|-
| '''Language code ([[w:ISO 639|ISO 639]]):''' mad
|-
| '''Proposed ___domain:''' http://mad.wikipedia.org
|-
| '''Relevant infos:'''
*'''Link to article(s) on the language in an existing Wikipedia:''' [[en:Madurese language]], [[en:Madura]], [[en:Madurese]]
*'''Native name(s):''' Bhèsa Mèdura
*'''Approximate number of speakers:''' ± 10 Million
*'''Location(s) spoken:''' Mostly East Java, Indonesia
*'''Closely related languages, if any:''' Probably [[jv:]] I'm not so sure.
*'''External links to organizations that promote the language:''' {{{Promoting organizations}}}
|-
| '''Link to request on a mailing list:''' {{{Request on mailing list}}}
|}
*I will work for this. If I may, I will become as acting native speaker. I am Javanese but I wrote '''Nearly Native''' for Madurese because of I have many Madurese relatives and neighbor. [[User:Slamet Serayu|Slamet Serayu]] 07:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC). Candidate for mad.wikipedia.org will be looks like [[http://map-bms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad.wikipedia.org | this]]. [[User:Slamet Serayu|Slamet Serayu]] 03:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
* A mad Wikipedia? - looks like just the right place for me... But honestly, I really believe this could become a sucessful project. However, what I'm slightly worried about is that you already seem to be playing a pivotal role at the new Banyumasan Wikipedia, Slamet Serayu. Running two start-up Wikipedias is veeery much for one editor and the odds are that one of them will eventually lose momentum, which would be kinda sad. I'd be happy if you could find a few committed native speakers and would then wholeheartedly support a Madurese WP, of course. [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
** Thanks, great Arbeo. I fully understood what you're worried about, just keep my promise and I promise as well to bring a real native speaker for this mad.Wikipedia, I just need another computer set. Meanwhile, map-bms.Wikipedia User are increasing rapidly and many of them are Banyumasan native speaker, of course it will become a great help. Beside me as a sysop, [[User:Meursault2004|Meursault2004]] (I'm sure you know him) is Banyumasan Wikipedia bureaucrat now so it's in the right hand. Ok great Arbeo, I hope it will convincing you.-[[User:Slamet Serayu|Slamet Serayu]] 02:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
**'''Support''' - Madurese is the fourth language of Indonesia. [[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] <small>([[:nl:Gebruiker:Cars en travel|nl]] [[:na:User:Belgian man|na]] [[en:User:Belgian man|en]])</small> 11:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
* '''Support''' --[[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 13:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
===Kabyle (6 support)===
*Link to request on mailing list:
*ISO code: kab
*People interested joining:
**[[en:user:Agurzil|Agurzil]]
*Relevant links:
**[[:en:Kabyle language]]
*Notes/comments:
** Number of speakers: ~ 3 million
** '''Supporter''': --[[User:Agari|Agari]] 16:32, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
** '''Support''' --[[User:Chamdarae|Chamdarae]] 11:31, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
*:Following vote ''Moved here from the "1 supporter subpage"'' [[User:Arbeo|Arbeo]] 17:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
** '''Support''': --'''[[User:Taichi|Taichi]]''' - ([[User talk:Taichi|あ！]]) 20:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
** '''Support'''. [[User:Hégésippe Cormier|Hégésippe]] | [[User talk:Hégésippe Cormier|±Θ±]] 21:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
** '''Support''': Conditional support though. I support if it will use Tifinagh instead of Latin script and contribute to install Tifinagh as the Pan-Amazigh alphabet. [[User:Behemoth|Behemoth]] 01:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
** '''Support''' - [[User:Belgian man|Belgian man]] <small>([[:nl:Gebruiker:Cars en travel|nl]] [[:na:User:Belgian man|na]] [[en:User:Belgian man|en]])</small> 11:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
| 