Open main menu

Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Swati Wikipedia

< Proposals for closing projects

The result of the following proposal for closing a WMF project is to KEEP the project. Please, do not modify this page.

Discussion closed (reason: see below) Result: KEEP --MF-Warburg(de) 08:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we should close this discussion now. The wiki has 48 articles and is passably active, so I think this proposal is lapsed now. MF-Warburg(de) 14:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)



In the SiSwati Wikipedia are only 2 articles (ss:Special:Allpages) and there's often spam. Active users don't seem to exist and when I noticed the wiki some days ago, it was full of spam. On RfP I asked for temporary adminship and deleted many, many pages. There are only two pages in the main space now, ss:Otobango and ss:Luphiko lwemSebenti wetiLwimi taVelonkhe. Maybe these pages could be put to incubator, but the wikipedia should be closed anyway. --MF-Warburg 13:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Update: There are 14 pages now, but incubator is still better. MF-Warburg(de) 12:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Support closingEdit

#Pro --MF-Warburg 13:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)MF-Warburg(de) 15:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

  1. Pro Per nomination. --Johannes Rohr 14:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
    Pro This Wikipedia is 3+ years old and has had its chance; no activity + no articles → no wikipedia. --A. B. (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

#Pro Many of the Incubator Wikipedias such as Crimean Tatar, Lower Sorbian, Ottoman Turkish, Karelian, Latgalian, Hakka, Kinaray, Hanja etc have plenty activity. Swati Wikipedia on the other hand is occassionally dumped with spam and has Zero native contributors at all. --Philip J 10:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC) Changed my mind. --Philip J 22:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  1. Pro Indeed, seems like useful only to spammers... --Roosa (Talk) 20:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
    Pro Hopeful Incubator Wikipedias such as Lower Sorbian Wikipedia are obstructed by <self-censored> conditions. Many regular Wikipedias like that one should be deleted. That two articles (Is anybody sure that there are in Swati language?) should be moved to incubator. ---Dezidor 23:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Pro, There seems to be little (if any) constructive work coming from this wiki, over 3 years activity has given it plenty of time to develop. Ryan Postethwaite 09:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. Pro seems better to sent it back to Incubator, for a while. There is no community apparently. --Aphaia 23:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. Pro per nom --Thogo (talk) 11:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. Pro per nom. It can always be re-created if a sufficient community develops. - Tangotango 04:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  6. Support -- Andre (talk) 21:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC) Move to incubator.

Oppose closingEdit

  1. Oppose Debería existir una opción de abstención para opinar sin voto. Puede que la opción de la incubadora sea suficiente, al menos temporalmente; la desaparición me parece excesivo. A veces es más importante la calidad que la cantidad, la existencia de este proyecto le da valor a la enciclopedia multilingue.Jatrobat 15:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
    Could you please write in English? I also saw that you created some English pages there. I deleted them. --MF-Warburg 16:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
    Meta is international, there is no reason anyone should be required to write in English. In the interest of multilingualism I shall translate.
    "There should be an option to abstain to express one's opinion without a vote. The incubator option could be sufficient, at the very least temporary; the closure appears excessive to me. Sometimes quality is more important than quanitity, the existance of this project gives value to the multilingual encyclopedia."
    (--> not in english, not at all, specially the sustantial information. Please, review de link "Swati - English Dictionary" erased before delete a page in a language that i think you do not Know. Thanks). I write better in spanish, sorry. What i want to say is important, i believe, and i have to tell us that as the best i can. Excuse me. For you, in resume, i oppose to the close.
    Sin censurar al colega que propone la supresión, pero desde el espíritu de la crítica constructiva, quisiera dar mi opinión, aunque sea a título personal. He consultado la Wikipedia:ss en suazi y he visto sucintamente la labor desarrollada. El trabajo de limpieza es encomiable y necesario; no obstante he visto que se eliminan páginas con nombre en suazi, entradas válidas, con el criterio de:
    • Texto en inglés.
    • No hay texto en siSwati.
    • Sólo contiene imágenes.
    Puede que sean causas válidas, pero discrepo. Igual que la labor del administrador es esforzada, también quienes han construido ese conjunto de páginas lo han hecho laboriosamente. Y me explico, si me permitís el símil, es mucho más difícil construir en el campo partiendo de cero, que edificar cuando ya se ha urbanizado el terreno. Los colaboradores que han realizado ese trabajo permiten facilitar la realización de una enciclopedia, pues se crean esbozos de artículos que se ubican, enlazan en este complejo plurilingue, se referencian y se ilustran, sólo a falta de la actuación de los miembros de esa comunidad.
    Los colaboradores no pueden hacer más que conformar esta arquitectura, seguro que muchos con la mejor de las intenciones, a menos que aprendan esa lengua. Pero su acción permitirá a personas de esa cultura beneficiarse del proyecto Wikipedia: de una enciclopedia, de la que quizá carezcan en su idioma en papel, de acceso universal, que les conecte con una información sólida en otros proyectos Wiki.
    Si de algo sirve el enciclopedismo esto es para conocer la realidad que nos circunda y para que ese conocimiento llegue a todos. Ignorar las circunstancias que pueden rodear a los legítimos miembros de esta comunidad y que, probablemente, limitan su participación más activa, sería un grave descuido por nuestra parte y una traición al espíritu que anima esta gran iniciativa de la Wikimedia Foundation.--Jatrobat 23:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
    Oppose It's important that wikipedia will extend itself with more languages. There are only 2 pages on ss.wiki, of course, but... with swati home page, it's always the possibility for somebody to write in these language —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.16.155.53 (talk) --Johannes Rohr 10:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC) stricken out, because of the sudden surge in IP voting on this page. --Johannes Rohr 09:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
    This possibility also exists in the incubator wiki. --Thogo (talk)
    Also FYI, Most of the speakers of Siswati do not have access to the computer or internet, hence this possibility is quite small.
  2. Oppose --Node ue 12:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose--Ffaarr 07:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose-- The project is active. I don't see vandalism. The content seems appropriate and increasing. --Coppertwig 14:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
    Oppose- --202.45.119.39 01:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
    Oppose- This wiki is increasing up to 10+ pages. --58.178.189.233 11:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
    Oppose- This wiki is still active. --58.178.139.132 06:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
    stroke out IP votes without particularly compelling arguments. Looks like sockpuppetry.--Johannes Rohr 09:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
    5.Oppose-- 26 articles by now. This wiki is not dead, please don't delete it—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.17.247.115 (talk) --Jatrobat 15:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
    stroke out yet another IP vote. Please stop that. It does not help anyone. If you have arguments, present them. But adding another pseudo vote every day helps absolutely nothing. This is not an election but a discussion process which should have an outcome based on fact and not on vote count. --Johannes Rohr 17:23, 24 June 2007 (UT
    About these 5 "stroke out" and the arguments exposed to do it: Is it a civic behaviour? (noNPOV).--Jatrobat 06:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
    I have difficulties understanding what you are trying to say. However, for obvious reasons, IPs are not allowed to vote anywhere in Wikipedia/WMF projects. Do I have to explain? --Johannes Rohr 07:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose given recent activity. --A. B. (talk) 23:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose Every language have chance. Recent activity. JAn Dudík 15:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose Now there's little activity and some content, give it a chance. This closure-request put a bit pressure on it so it finally got a little active. --Ooswesthoesbes 15:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

NeutralEdit

  1. Comment Comment MF-Warburg(de) 15:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

General discussionEdit

Swati Wikipedia is now active - may we please close this request? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.178.193.100 (talk)

I don't see real activity. User:Jatrobat has created a number of uniform list-only articles. I checked yesterday and none of the articles had any running text. I suspect that Jatrobat does not really speak SiSwati. While his approach might be fine for a dictionary, it doesn't seem to be feasible for an encyclopaedia. --Johannes Rohr 10:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Right. He doesn't speak SiSwati. On his user page he has the babel box Bantfu ss-0, which indicates someone doesn't speak swati. MF-Warburg(de) 10:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I speak swati. --58.178.193.100 12:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
You are Jatrobat? MF-Warburg(de) 14:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Everyone can see the volume of work, everyone can see the articles (now seven) too, moreover everyone can compare with other versions through interwikis (do you propose delet all versions of them?, because someone in ss: are the best). It is a nonsense refuse an evidence. If you don't want to see activity, that´s your problem. In the other hand, you are right, there is no activity: none of the supporters (ten, today) do nothing to develop the project, only vote (except sysop activity).
Another issue. I have "Bantfu ss-0", thanks i created this Babel template, before there is no one similar in all Wikiprojects. The question is that you don't have this template, why?. If you speak swati, please improve what you consider bad articles, so WF define to develop wikipedia (to make what you can, another one will improve your work). If you don't speak, please a bit of consideration to "working persons" (i thought such is a community).Jatrobat 15:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
While I appreciate your commitment, I completely fail to understand how you intend to write encyclopaedic articles in a language, which, according to your own statement, you do not to speak ("ss-0"). Bother to explain? --Johannes Rohr 17:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
There is 10 pages in this wiki. --58.178.160.163 10:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
This doesn't answer Johannes' question. MF-Warburg(de) 12:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree absolutely with you that absence of ss-N is a handicap. Perhaps time gives them. Sure, you, me, all in Wikipedia, will be happy that day. Meanwhile we can work developing the project. If exists WP:ss, that people will find a big project to improve, not zero, which suppose to them: attract, encourage, support. In other way, we should have to close those encyclopedias without maternal speakers (esperanto, interlingua, latin), indeed artificial (klingon) and dead languages (ancient greek) too.--Jatrobat 15:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Klingon and Ancient Greek? I struggle to see the educational value in the former and to an extent the latter. No serious encyclopaedia is written in Klingon, in my humble opinion. I agree with your general point, but we have an incubator for potential wikis, and in no way can a 10 page wiki with 2 contributors be considered a reliable and useful educational resource which, to my mind at least, means it should be closed down - for now. --Kingboyk 11:35, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Excuse the delay, i am working under pressure to develop the swati project, that is the worst the wikipedians could to do to another, i don't desire it to anybody, so i expend my time preferently in the project, not in the discussion.
Efectively, Klingon is not the ideal example for an educational objective, for this circumstance i choose it. I thought that mention another one could damage susceptibilities what i believe unnecessary.
I cannot health the blindness of someone, but meanwhile this pressure don't burn me, i am working (too much) to preserve this project (not the others, examples verbi gratia), because it is really an important educational one.
We don't see its transcendende. When i work in it, i am thinking in the students of the schools of a very poor country (25% of adult people have AIDS) and the possibility to open them a gate to the culture. All can collaborate helping, adding a word, an illustration, categorazing, etcetera; where people has nothing, only a sunrise can be a gift.
The spirit that help is the same that a center of orphans from AIDS of that country give us, shown their language to the world free through internet.
In this way we develop in the project a portal that let everyone, swati speaker, enter through it to a world of knowledges spread along all multilingual wikiprojects,
In order to this general idea all is interconected: for visual images towards Commons, interwikis towards all interlanguages relatives, inner links among articles, external links towards interesting webs, references to further readings. Moreover, other projects to swati one, to encourage to help anothers, wikipedians or no, developing our yet small one.
If you compare with other similar projects, in number of articles and users, you can see that often is more developed the swati, but nobody proposed their closures. We have a structure that haven´t most of these: templates, categorized all articles, linked all categories, Commons interwikis,.. such work is not reflected in a simple size of number of articles.
Our outcome, a lot of swati words appears in searchers, like Google, directing to wikipedia pages (if doubt, try to look for). The difference, when you look for a word of your idiom, sure, you find thousands or millions of webs, if you look for words in swati often you obtain less than a hunfred, usually pages not in swati.
Of course you are free to think what you want. But from May 19, when the close was proposed, the changes in the project are of enormous proportions, at the level that has nonsense today the proposition.
Here only it discuss the activity. Not is inactive, we have more than 500 editions, not have ten, we have today 36 articles, not two, there was ten collaboraters; all that stats in only a month, the last month.
Please, help. All are invited to do what everyone can. Thanks.--Jatrobat 18:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)