Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Chechen Wikipedia (2)

The following discussion is closed: The result is Keep.

Proposal to close Chechen Wikipedia

Despite the overwhelming keep in the last vote, the project has grown only to 370 articles. Looking at the recent changes pages one can see mainly bot edits, interspersed with human ones - 5 a week maybe? The wiki visibly lacks upkeep, lots of red links on the main page, a Meta link (with the old logo) that points to... Russian Wikipedia - all says that Chechen Wikipedia is getting dusty and rusty. Lack of interest since the last vote mentioned above makes me file a request to close the project. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 11:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

For closing

Support The poponent's motives seem to be stringent because of several facts which corroborate them:

  • In the recent changes there seems to be only one active user - User:Girdi (for 1 week). In all dicussions on opening one Wikipedia the conditio sine qua non is finding several users ready to maintain it. One is not several.
  • After scrutinising some other users' activity it turns out that 2 or three from the other contributors (including User:Malafaya) have no knowledge of the Chechen language(ce-0).
  • The layout is Russian, id est, the knowledge of two languages is indispensable in order to contribute. Confer to the Gothic Wikipedia, where the entire layout beside "create" has been rendered in the appropriate language. The sheer fact of one previous discussion infers the prolonged availability of the Chechen version, which makes the foreign languages present in their layout even more flabbergasting.

(Besides this question) User:Girdi on his user page in Chechen seems to confess not to have any knowledge of the English (en-0) language, which is highly discrepant witht the sheer existance of his edits below and dubitable, to say the least. Bogorm 20:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

These reasons are invalid. But this proposal will never succeed. You wasted your time. --Girdi 02:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
But this comment from the impartial Spanish-speaking user, who had just made himself familiar with the matters of fact there is convincing not only because of its veracity, but because what he foretold (Hasta ahora nadie ha sido capaz de escribir un artículo normal, sería un milagro que la situación mejore) has en effet been confirmed by my present observations, wherewith it coheres entirely. Bogorm 08:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Target for vandalism - yes, Chechen wikipedia will always be a target of Russian and Anti-Islamicist vandalism as long as Chechens continue the great struggle for freedom and independence, this is not Wiki-issue, but Wiki-users bringing current events in the world into Wikipedia.
Provides no useful information - no, Chechen wikipedia has extremely detailed correct history of the Chechen Republic, very nice articles about Chechen grammar which the English wikipedia doesn't even have, nor is there information on the english wikipedia.
A decent article hasn't been written - no, there are over 300 decent articles, all human made, no bot made, I mean, of course if you think a stub doesen't count as a decent artcile, then we should probably close the Polish wikipedia since over 80% of their articles are either bot made or useless stubs.
On a final note, why can't you just leave the Chechen Wikipedia alone and let the Chechen people have their pride, freedom, and chance to expand their literary language with their own free encyclopedia. What gives you the right to tell another race of people that their language doesn't matter, is useless, and so on? That is a very racist thing to do, so I suggest you come up with a better reason for your approval or else I will move foreward as taking this closure proposal and reasons as an act of racism against the Chechen people and language, and most importantly, Islam. --Girdi 13:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
A note to Bogorm: The comment in Spanish in the previous closure discussion was not made by an "impartial Spanish-speaking user", but by a well-known Wikipedian, who made many useful edits in the Hebrew Wikipedia, but was also blocked several times for socking and other trollish fun making and eventually announced his retirement. He was unusually curious about the Chechen people, but maybe it was just one of his jokes.
A note to Girdi: Please cool down and stop accusing other Wikimedians of racism. Right now. If you go and improve articles in the Chechen Wikipedia instead of arguing here, no-one will want to close it. --Amir E. Aharoni 22:07, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I want to, and I appreciate your opposition to this closure proposal, but I just am so busy with university. I much rather get a degree than sacrafice it for Wikipedia, but Chechen Wikipedia is a huge project of mine that I definitely do not neglect. I am trying to cool down ... --Girdi 00:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
"Chechen Wikipedia is a huge project of mine" - a Wikipedia which is a single user's project turns out to be forsooth dubitable - even the Gothic Wikipedia had 2 zealous editors in its beginning and look how many they are now (I am not involved, I am a novice in the language)! And the Chechen language is not extinct, why did you fail to involve editors - in the Russian Federation there is a free access to Wikipedia unlike PRC and hitherto you are the main editor and no native speaker of the language?! If I opened a Manchu Wikipedia just because of sheer predilection for the language, but noone from the exiguous number of native speakers (or people studying it - they are too scarce in number) became involved in the project (they would at least have a stringent reason - restricted Internet access in the PRC, and Chechens are not at all exiguous in number), then I would eventually have failed and the closure would be imminent! Bogorm 21:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Support only bot activites--Jaro.p 16:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Against closing

  • I've been cruising around the small wikipedias lately and i have to say that the Chechen one is far from being the worst among the weaker Wikipedias. Most of the African Wikipedias and the Zhuang one (za) are far weaker. I don't know the language, but being a linguist i am able to make some educated guesses. There are quite a lot of articles there that appear to have been written by real people. It also doesn't cheat by uploading bot-stubs about years and cities in USA. What's more important, the Chechen language is among the better preserved languages in Russia - there are over a million people that actually speak this language and care about it. --Amir E. Aharoni 14:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I am not even going to dignify myself to an explanation of this. This is just racism from this Polish guy. I have put so much time and hours into this Wikipedia, can I get a few months off and a break whilst I have real life issues? Sorry, forgot, you don't realise that people do have "lives" in the world. --Girdi 11:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Since I am a beaurecrat and the main reason the Chechen Wikipedia is where it is today, I have decided that maybe I am expected to reply here, even with my busy schedule because some pole wants to shut it down, work of many hours of a few people, including native Chechens.
First point, I have done my best to limit bot activity on the Chechen wikipedia due to its size, which angered many bots and caused drama, but I am sure they can cry a river and build a bridge and get over it. You mentioned 5 edits a week? They are mainly to fix and minor issues, annoying bot complaints, your complaint Wozdhehchsj or whatever your name is, and any anti-Chechen pro-Russian vandalism, which is a big problem on the Chechen wikipedia. Maybe you can delete the Russian wikipedia while you are at it? :) I have been really busy, like unbeleivably busy that this is the first time in a long time I have time to write on Wikipedia. So 5 edits a week? Get over it! I am not superhuman! Mind you, it is also Ramadan now, would you spend your Christmas day and Easter day editing on Wikipedia? (Probably, but just a retorical question)
Upkeep? I check it daily to make sure no vandalism or Pro-Russian activity is going on. I make my blocks, I answer my chats (if they dignify an answer). The old logo, yeah, maybe we like the old logo better? And it isn't our fault that there is some problem with the Wiki code that redirects everything to the Russian Wikiprojects. I am sorry, I don't know how to fix it, nor is it a big priority. The main priority at the moment on the CE Wiki is making Articles!
Speaking of articles, did you try taking a look at some fine quality articles? Many articles of those 300 are related to Grammar, Chechen culture, Language, most information actually I added is not on the other wikipedias, especially language articles and names in Chechen for case names and grammatical terminology (like dozhar - case, and tsermetdosh - pronoun). So let me ask, maybe we should burn and destroy encyclopedias from 2006 from companies that went out of business? There is plenty of information there you can't just delete.
Lack of interest? Honestly, what did you smoke today? The Chechen community is finally being restored, and many are getting knowledge that a Chechen wiki does exist. This is also a gret movement in the Chechen internet community, as there are not many websites in Chechen. The Wikipedia might also be used for correct Chechen orthography since spelling is a problem in Chechen.
I have responded to all of your rediculous reasons to close this wiki, actually I consider this vandalism, and this coming from a steward...I am shocked. I can assure you, if you do shut this Wikipedia down, that information which is only on Chechen wikipedia will never be translated because us as a community will halt writing on any Wiki project forever, as this is a bias vote and move by you, especially during Ramadan! Sorry there aren't 20 million Chechens in the world like polish or whatever number.
As you can see I am extremely angry and furious about this. I hope people will take my side like in the last vote (which you have acknowledged and saw it was overwealmingly a vote to remain). This wikipedia will stay InshAllah! Maa'salama - --Girdi 16:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for calling me a racist. Consider this part closed. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 17:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for trying to close an entire project contributed by real people from a real place. I could call you more but I have to respect the Wiki policies. But you have no idea how angry I am right now that I need to just walk away from Wikimedia at the moment. --Girdi 00:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Problem is you could have made your statements in a different fashion, without words of insult and disprespect of others. I will not contribute to this vote any longer, but will thank those who made their point clearly and referring to the project, not some alleged threats that my person is posing. Thank you. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 06:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
See, it worked though, didn't it? :) --Girdi 21:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Your "So 5 edits a week? Get over it! I am not superhuman!" is discrepant from "real people"(real man?, singular?). Ere I decide to support the proposal I would like to ask you whether there is any other active editor (how many?) with, let's say, more than 200 edits in the main space(a confirming link would be appreciated)? As for now, the proposal seems sensible. Bogorm 20:36, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Ignoring this all above, my opinion is that the Chechen Wikipedia is large, almost 400 pages. It has shown some recent activity and there are enough Chechen people living in a developed area to keep the wiki alive, so I oppose. --OosWesThoesBes 05:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
  • (not ignoring the above but calling the involved parties to a constructive and non violent discussion) I am against closure, because it is a valid language, the wikipedia has activity and imho the bots can be flagged and will then no longer disturb the recent changes anymore (I don't see a reason for any need to limit the bots there, they just should be flagged if they are of trusted bot owners and doing good work). --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 21:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I can see you are very opposed to the bot limit and not being so trustworthy. The thing is, Chechen Wikipedia is a big target politically from Russian activists and anti Islamists and the like. If you understood Russian, you could see many reverts from articles like "Chechnya" and such which attacks Chechnya and Chechen language. So as Chechens, you can't be so trustworthy so soon and we need to monitor ALL edits, including bots. If it was up to me, I would have no bots flagged so we can monitor all of their edits (except for Malafaya because he is very trustworthy as a bot programmer). There aren't many happy people seeing activity at the Chechen you can see, it is the 2nd closure proposal too. I am a bit more calm now, but still really angry, but I apologise to the Meta-Wiki rules of personal attacks. --Girdi 21:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I don't understand what You mean by 'I am not trustworthy' or what that even would have to do with my argument against closure. I am not interested in running a bot there, I was just surprised a very 'trustworthy' and good working bot was blocked there infinit, I hope this has no political reasons, but imho it looks bad. I understand that bot edits would have to be monitored from new users, but from very well established and 'trustworthy' users I don't understand. Thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 08:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
You can give the bots flags, and then you can still choose to monitor the bot edits by clicking "show bot edits" in the recent changes. Coppertwig(talk) 01:19, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Valid language which has been having enough activity (maybe not much lately but that does not seem to be the rule). Malafaya 14:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose I see this poposal as pretty near to vandalism. I suggest to dismiss it as a useless attempt to repeat another unsuccessfull attempt, stealing time, etc., and to do likewise for, say, two years at least, when it is raised again. --Purodha Blissenbach 18:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
(to Purodha) Begreifen Sie die Zunahme von 300 Artikeln für zwei Jahre als einen besonders deutlichen Fortschritt? Meines Erachtens ist diese Diskussion unentbehrlich, zumal keine Veränderung im Vergleich zur Lage vor zwei Jahren eingetreten ist (die Diskussion ist nicht von mir hervorgerufen worden). Und weil es da keine sonstigen regelmäßigen Benutzer gibt außer User:Girdi, der sogar der Sprache kaum mächtig ist und der diese Wikipedia für sein Projekt hält (siehe oben) . Und die aktiven Benutzer sind laut der Statistik zwei, obgleich ich den zweiten noch nicht in den Recent Changes erblickt habe (für zwei Jahre - 300 Artikel und 1 aktiver Benutzer). Klingt das nicht beunruhigend? Bogorm 16:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Well put Purodha! :) --Girdi 01:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose there are about 50 wikis in worse shape than Chechen wiki. I see no reason why, with patience, this couldn't be a viable wiki. --MarsRover 20:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Wikipedia Chechen may be prosper, The only thing we need is the time, I disagree with it's closure --Ali 18:00, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose --Holder 12:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose 400 articles? Dovi 18:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose Xqt 10:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose 400 ARTICLES!!!! --Pineapple fez 01:29, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose Scandal !!! Let's save chechen wikipedia -- 02:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


I voted against the closure of Chechen wikipedia in 2006 [1] and contributed with my bot to link this wiki to all other languages for more than a year [2], but after Girdi indef-blocked the bot without giving any reason I have the feeling like Girgi is trying to usurp this wiki. Frankly, I don't understand his attitude. If this wiki becomes a playground for a single person, I would vote for closing it. --Volkov 10:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

(To Volkov) Я боюсь, что она уже превратилась в проект одного пользователя - здесь он называет ее "a huge project of mine".
(to others)I do not understand it either, but by perusing his comments here the "playground for a single person" is becoming incontestably and increasingly ostentatious. I concur completely with Volkov's remarks. One Spanish-speaking user has already expressed doubts that it "would be a miracle if the situation ameliorated" and there are "no normal articles there"(see above) Bogorm 15:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

2010!!! None of the administrators are active, and the wikipedia is still full of separatist paraphernalia. Right now there are only 2 solutions: 1. Remove all the administrative/bureaucratic "powers" from current users and give them to some "normal" Chechen speaking user. 2. Close the project. Wadim 14:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Certainly more users should be involved, but (aside from the bot blocking mentioned above) the lack of participation doesn't seem to be related to any admin actions. SJ+