Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Ligurian

< Requests for new languages

Ligurian Wikipedia

edit
submitted verification final decision
  This proposal has been approved.
The Board of Trustees and language committee have deemed that there is sufficient grounds and community to create the new language project.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

The requested project was created at lij: at an indeterminate date. Note that this request was approved before the implementation of the standardised Language proposal policy, and should not be used as a model for future requests. Shanel 19:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal summary
  • Language details: Ligurian (ligure, lij ISO 639-3)
  • Editing community: Node (P), clamengh
    List your user name if you're interested in editing the wiki. Add "N" next to your
    name if you are a native speaker of this language.
  • Relevant pages:
  • External links:
  • [1]
  • [2]
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.
  • Relevant infos:
    • App. number of speakers: 2 million
    • Location(s) spoken: Ligurian region of Italy, whole nation of Monaco, and in the town of Bonifacio in Corsica
    • Closely related languages, if any: Tabarchino, the language of the island of San Pietro and part of the island of Sant'Antioco, is said to be a Ligurian dialect. Also related to Lombard, Venet, Piedmontese, and Emilian.
  • Comments: There are already at least 15 Ligurian-speaking Wikipedians.
  • Requested as a part of Wikiproject Fratellanza. Venet, Piedmontese, Emilian, Neapolitan, and Griko Salentino might be requested in the near future.
Support --pippudoz - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 02:30, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support --clamengh (again below, it counts once.)
Support --Sabine 03:25, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Arbeo 16:46, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harvzsf 18:03, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support --Jorgengb 22:02, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support -- Skafa 21:53, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
strongly oppose I want to point out that none of the above users speaks ligurian or is ligurian mother tongue.. --Frieda 09:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A reply I am afraid that this is an irrelevant objection: I will try to find native speakers, even if Ligurian is not my mother tongue. I do not see why a Ligurian Wikipedia should not be created.--clamengh 19:56, 17/11/2005 (UTC); I have written some mails requiring consensus to the organizations above. --clamengh 20:58, 17 November 2005 UTC
The reason it is on this page is because it needs native speaker support, but there is otherwise consensus. Thus, it is is pointless to object on the basis of no native speakers; are you opposed to this wiki even if native speakers indicate their willingness to work on it? Tuf-Kat 20:05, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose to this wiki and to Wikiproject Fratellanza too, because you know nothing about italian language and its dialect. An example: even though SIL, ISO and someone else states that Lombard is a language, I, living in Lombardia!, know very well that Lombard doesn't exist; we've Milanese in Milan, Bresciano in Brescia and so on, but not a unique language. So please stop with this nonsense projects! Frieda 10:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Chamdarae 20:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. App. number of speakers: 2 million. This is just the number of people living in liguria, not the number of speakers. The same trick has been used for lombard. Sil and ISO codes usually refer in this cases to a group of dialects, the result is usually a wiki where people fight (probably endlessly) on which dialect they should use, or, as it's happening on lmo.wikipedia, they will "invent" a grammar for a langage, probably without having some competence in linguistics. --Snowdog 10:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support 1. I happen to be one of the promoters of the Lombard Wikipedia, and I happen to be a linguist. 2. I agree with you that the number of 'speakers' given by Ethnologue is unreliable. They just give the number of inhabitants in the historically Lombard-speaking areas (of Switzerland and Italy). I guess it is the same for Ligurian. This is the reason why I have put '???' as 'number of speakers' in what I have written on the subject. For Lombard there have been surveys both in Switzerland and Italy. The Swiss surveys provide interesting information about the number of speakers, why the Italian ones do not say anything. The just make a distinction between 'Italian' and 'dialect', so that a speaker of e.g. Venetian or Neapolitan living in Milan would be undiscernible from a speaker of Lombard in those statistics. Well, that's the Italian way to do sociolinguistics... :-(--Jorgengb 17:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. --native - Franco Bampi (N) 9:17, 22 November 2005 I'm a Native and strongly support this proposal
Strong Support. -- native - Paolo R. (N) 23 November 2005 I'm a Native and support this proposal.
Strong Support. --native - Filippo Noceti (N) November 23 2005. I'm Ligurian, I'm genoese, I want a ze.wikipedia.org "Zeneize" is my language, it isn't a dialect, it's considered as a dialect only to mantain a people subjected to another like its language is subjected as a dialect to another language.
This is a request for Ligurian wikipedia, not Genoese wikipedia --Snowdog 23:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: as stated before, we have a lot of "dialects" in a radius of few kilometers. Every italian dialect project, excluding some exceptions like en:Arbëreshë and other "closed and well defined" languages, it's a nonsense. --Baruneju 23:35, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Insist with strong Support. --clamenghSometimes Italian people do not realize that they shouldn't use English as if it were Italian, since what they say could sound a little bit unrespectful. I would like to point out that the scientific community generally accepts that Ligurian is not an Italian dialect (nor is Lombard, of course): see e.g. G.Hull: The linguistic unity of Northern Italy and Rhaetia. Objections based upon the distinction language/dialect are definitively irrelevant. Indeed, a not standardised language comes to be eventually fragmented into several dialects. The term 'dialect' in English has a 'neutral' meaning, i.e. approxiamately 'variety'. A fragmented tongue is e.g. Occitan, and to a much lesser extent, Catalan. The situation of Ligurian is very close to the one of Occitan, by a soci-linguistic point of view. Finally, I am afraid that those who talk about 'nonsense' are looking somewhre else. --clamengh 27/11/05 UTC

Oh, cool, let's start a linguistic flame! I hope you can forgive me if I stroke your first vote, but I'm sure that you're allowed to vote only once.
Exclamation mark means: 8 votes pro but only 3 by native speakers.
Have a look to latest native speaker vote:

  • I'm Ligurian, cool he's a Ligurian mother tongue
  • I'm genoese, he's from Genoa.. uhm, why does we need this clarification?
  • I want a ze.wikipedia.org, there's something wrong in this assertion
  • "Zeneize" is my language", ohhhhhhhhhhh! This is the point. He's from Genoa so he speaks Zeneize not Ligurian. How can this happen? It's impossible. You told me that every ligurian inhabitant speaks Ligurian.

A last note: if you find some irony it's not bad use of English.

Frieda 15:06, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • A reply : well, I am afraid I can't forgive you. I am sorry. Your behaviour (and your supposed irony, which in fact I did not find: I found something else, indeed) recalls the political climate of some decades ago in your country. As to me, this is a farewell.
  • Oppose - Imho the fact that even if we have huge amounts of it.wikipedians living in "lombard" area, nobody is really interested in taking actively part in lmo.wiki is a clear sign that these wikis in "languages" formed by a lot of dialects are not considered interesting by native people. I am native "milanese" and my husband is native "genovese" we both know that a couple of km distance change the accent, the pronunciation, the sense of a lot of words and often the comprehension of what has been said. Sorry but imho this is only dispersion of resources which would be better used on other projects. --Civvi 15:31, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • A reply: The Italian wikipedia is not necessarily a 'better' project than the Ligurian or Lombard one. Or, even, one could think the vice versa to hold.--clamengh 17:26 28/11/05 UTC
  • Strong support -- although I am not a native speaker. Reading what has been written on this page reminds me of different issues connected to what has been called 'language death' and 'language suicide'. The community of speakers grows to think that what they are speaking (or what they have been speaking, or maybe their parents used to speak) is a 'lesser' language, something not worth preserving or caring about. Especially in the case where there is a more powerful group of speakers of another language (with higher prestige) interested in letting them think so, i.e. that what they speak is indeed a lesser language, something not worth caring about, or even something that might preclude them from the social and economic benefits they could attain by switching to the language of the larger, more powerful community -- in other words, something to get rid of as soon as possible. This has happened as is still happening for many languages. Sometimes this tendency has been inverted. Sometimes this happens in time, sometimes when it is too late. Just think of what the situation was like for the Sami languages some 50 years ago or more. 1. Ligurian may be an aggregation of different varieties (linguists prefer nowadays to use the neutral term "(language) variety", since it is not easy to define univocally what is a language and what is a dialect (someone has said that "a language is a dialect with an army and a navy"; a more modern and technological version is "a language is a dialect with an army, a navy and a system for speech synthesis & recognition"). The answer to the question "Which of these should be used when defining a kind of koiné?" is not an easy one, but if there is a prestigious variety as Genoese this might be the one to be chosen -- possibly with some modifications. 2. Ethnologue does contain errors (as is the case when Ticinese is described as a "Lombard dialect spoken in Italy"), but nevertheless it is de facto becoming more and more an authoritative source that many serious scholars (not only linguists) refer to. The language codes defined by Ethnologue are to be implemented in the ISO 639-3 standard, and the code for Ligurian is LIJ. --Jorgengb 16:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support

Strong support (N) Sorry, but I am not so young, so maybe I made some technical mistake; nor write I very well in English. I support this project, I am mother tongue of U Portu (Porto Maurizio); I live in Milan, but I plan to come back to Liguria. User: 82.88.51.26. PS: The vote above is mine, but I am not sure I am allowed to cancel it: please count one vote.

Strong support (N) I support this project too. I am 57 years old, I am a native speaker from Camogli (Ge); surprisingly (?) I live in Milan too. I do appreciate 'foreign' supporters to the creation of this wikipedia. (Someone else, instead, seems to have lost his/her self-control). Message to 82.88.51.26: maybe you should choose a 'username' (I suggest for instance 'U_Portu') and a 'password', and then 'login' with that username. You are allowed (theoretically) to cancel anything, but please be careful; Your English is not so bad! I hope you will come back to these pages; please add time and date as below.Cameuggi 30/11/05 15:30 UTC

  • This request was moved to the "native speaker support" subpage because, at the time, there was no opposition and considerable support from non-speakers. Since then, several native speakers have spoke up to support, but a number of people have also voted against. So, I've moved it back to the main page. Tuf-Kat 06:07, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perplexed about movement Well, I am afraid that moving this page from a subsection of 'approved' to 'discussion ongoing' contradicts the following point which I quote from 'Discussion on procedires'
Are users allowed to vote once the request is approved? (support or against)

There is no policy about this at the moment, but a logical answer would be no; once a request is approved it shouldn't be able to be disapproved after voters have had their chance here. Clamengh 5/12/05 20:40 UTC

    • That guideline is inappropriate, I think. This is not a vote, at least in theory -- it's an attempt to come to a consensus. Since there was no consensus, I consider the proposal still open. AFAIC, it will remain open at least until/if the wiki is created, and even then, if the consensus becomes that it should be closed, then it should be closed. Tuf-Kat 06:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • What do we want? Do we want that something which is supported by 14 (or more) Wikipedians is not implemented because three Wikipedians are against it? Are do we want it to happen because a clear majority wants it? Which option would be the fairer one? It's up to us to decide, we are the community! Arbeo 22:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's clearly enough support for it to be approved, IMHO. But the "native speaker support required" page is actually a subpage of this one, and I don't think being listed there necessarily means something has been approved in principle, yet (even if that's what is suggested at the top of this page). Although I think it probably should mean that a language is accepted as suitable, and when native speakers support it, the proposal can be moved directly to the approved page, rather than back here. --Chamdarae 10:43, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I think there will be no problem to find native speakers or persons who have enough knowledges of this language. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 09:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • As to policy, indeed I agree with Arbeo and Chamdarae.Best regards, --Clamengh 8/12/05 10:43 UTC
  • I have moved this page here, since all formal conditions for creation are fulfilled.

Clamengh 8/12/05 15:24 UTC

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Ligurian&oldid=27639019"