- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- This has gone way off topic. See summary below. Let's restart the discussion at Second Discussion below and stay on topic, which is actually a pretty narrow one. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Waargh! This must likely to be a challenge of the entire Wikimedia Movements. I wonder if there are peoples willing to contribute it. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
The people speaking Narom surely have the right to start a Wikipedia, but only if there is a native user base, enough activity, and significant contents. None of those are there, so this proposal looks like it's just out of protest. Therefore, I oppose this, unless a native speaker turns up. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 10:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Ooswesthoesbes: This shouldn't be the reason that you oppose, we have a number of unmaintained tests, even the Middle English one.
- To the best of my knowledge, the reasons why they still can't contribute are documented at incubator:Wp/nrm:
|IMPORTANT INFORMATION For the potential Narom users:|
Unfortunately, it is not currently technically possible to start creating Narom Wikipedia here, when anyone is attempting to create pages (visit Wp/nrm/(somepage) and attach "?action=edit" after URL), they get a surprising message:
This wiki already exists. You can find this page on [/wiki/Main Page wiki/Main Page]. If the wiki was recently created, please wait a few hours or days until all content is imported.
WHY? This is because the Norman Wikipedia exists at this location and the database name nrmwiki is reserved for that wiki, then any attemps to create subpages that have prefix "Wp/nrm/" will trigger codes from WikimediaIncubator.class.php (Ctrl+F search "wminc-error-wiki-exists" to find trigger conditions).
If I want to create Narom Wikipedia right now, then where to go? Don't worry. You can ask one of our Incubator administrators on Incubator:Administrators' noticeboard and we will create a special, temporary language code for you to use.
How about creating other Narom Wikimedia Projects? You can just find one of them below, those are no longer assigned to Norman.
Waiting for how many years to unlock creating of "Wp/nrm/" pages? You can read discussions in this gerrit patch if you're interested in it.
So there have to be a serial of problems that at least @Reedy, Krenair, JCrespo (WMF), and Chasemp:... face-to-face. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- @220.127.116.11 and Liuxinyu970226: Do you want to start creating content now? If so, please contact me on my Incubator talk page, and I will set something up for you. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu: I do not oppose the creation of a test project (as that can easily be circumvented by simply using a different set of letters which aren't in use), I oppose the fact that there is no indication that native speakers are able/willing to contribute. The proposal written above looks like nationalistic inspired anti-French sentiments instead. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 11:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
@Ooswesthoesbes: when the IP user(s) above talk about the language, they said they encountered this error when they're trying to translate messages, and they also used expressions like saying it's the language that "we the Narom people from Sarawak, Malaysia speak and write", thus it do appears like there are native speaker interest in developing the project (or at least they claimed so). C933103 (talk) 06:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, reading it back that seems to be the case. The way it was written wasn't all too clear (due to the quality of the English), so I revoke that statement. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 09:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
This has gotten way off topic. So I feel I need to put a stop to this, summarize a few points, and get us to refocus on the topic we should be discussing here.
- There is no neo-colonial (or any other) conspiracy against Narom here. Langcode nrm was used within Wikipedia for Norman before the ISO 639–3 standard even existed. The main page of Norman Wikipedia dates to April 2006. ISO 639–3 standard was published in February 2007. nrm is not a code within ISO 639–2, so it's not a code that pre-dated the Norman Wikipedia. To make a long story short, it's one of a few unfortunate conflicts we have that still date to the relatively early days of the Wikimedia movement.
- There seem to be great technical difficulties in untangling conflicts like this. Frankly, I do not understand why. But there have been phabricator items open on these things for a while. I suggest that if people have a specific complaint about the lack of progress on this front, they contact the system developers. But remember that many of them are volunteers, too, and there may be some very good reasons why this has not been their highest priority technical problem.
- Issues about code changes are not under Wikimedia's jurisdiction. If you want the language code nrm deprecated, you need to discuss that with SIL International, which is the standards organization that manages ISO 639–3. Don't discuss that issue here.
- Discuss Wikidata-related issues on Wikidata, not here. On Wikidata, Norman has different codes for the ISO 639-3 code (nrf) and the Wikimedia language code (nrm). Presumably, they have a way to address situations where those codes are different.
- Discuss translatewiki.net-related items on translatewiki.net, not here. While Portal:Nrf and Portal:Nrm both exist there, MediaWiki translations to Norman are coded to nrm. That undoubtedly needs to be fixed. That said, in the short run, there is no reason that a temporary code couldn't be used there as well as on Incubator to support a Narom Wikipedia test project.
- As far as behavior of certain registered and IP users here goes, just stop acting like children:
- We don't need multilingual translations of things on this page. This discussion is being conducted in English. If people think it needs to be conducted in another language, say so. But don't start throwing out unnecessary blocks of translation that just lengthen the page to no useful purpose.
- That said, everyone needs to treat everyone else respectfully here. I am going to start to be aggressive about reverting uncivil behavior.
Given the above, the subsequent discussion must have a very limited focus. Let me stipulate a few parameters here:
- In principle, Narom is certainly an eligible language to have Wikimedia projects. And any project other than Wikipedia can even be conducted in Incubator under the language code nrm. The question here is strictly what to do about a Wikipedia project.
- In the short run, in the absence of a resolution of the technical difficulties associated with making nrm available to this project, we will have to use a temporary code. Most of the range of q-- codes are available "for local use", so we will use one of those.
- Because doing that—and because then using that code as a basis to start collecting interface translations at translatewiki.net—is a non-standard, somewhat complex process, I am looking to make sure there is a community of people interested in creating this project. Let me emphasize: we are not looking for people who say that "in principle, we think there should be a Narom Wikipedia". We are looking for people who actually intend to create content for a Narom Wikipedia test.
- The reason I have requested that registered users be involved is that we need to be able to have a sense that such interest is real, not fleeting or disruptive. Ideally, I would have registered users who are associated with Wikimedia Indonesia and/or Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia, and can speak for them, to affirm this interest.
- If I get a sense that there is really a community that wants to start creating content, I will be very happy to assign a code—and to ask translatewiki.net to do so, as well. (@Amire80: for information.) So far, it really only looked to me as if people were arguing for the sake of principle, not because they really want to create content.
The "Second Discussion" below is therefore limited to the following question: Who are the users (and preferably Wikimedia affiliates) who actually intend to create content? Please identify yourselves. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Is there any technical difficulty that would prevent the creation of a nrm incubator given that the other language that's currently using the nrm code does not have an incubator project? C933103 (talk) 08:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @C933103: "...and the database name nrmwiki is reserved for that wiki..." --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:49, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- When the database name is reserved, the Incubator extension expressly prohibits creating or editing pages with that prefix. The only two things you can do with such pages is (i) leave them alone or (ii) delete them. (And if you delete them, you can't then restore them.)
- However, starting a project with a temporary code on Incubator is a very flexible solution. Understanding that we are a very long way away at this point from the possibility of an independent Narom Wikipedia, either of the following would be very easy to do:
- If Norman(d) Wikipedia is ever moved to nrf.wikipedia, such that nrm.wikipedia becomes available again, it will be very easy to move a test project from Wp/q-- to Wp/nrm.
- If that never happens, and Narom Wikipedia becomes approvable otherwise, the test at Wp/q-- can be put to any possible subdomain you want (like, for example, narom.wikipedia.org).
- So don't worry about that part. Just find people who are competent at writing in Narom to create content. That's the real question here. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- Actually, it seems like the original statement in the proposal was talking about interface translation. Will it also be easy to assign a q-code for them to do interface translation and then move it around? How would it interact with http accept language header that users might have specified? C933103 (talk) 02:40, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- If the problem is just "where to create the test wiki"? Yes I already found the answer.
- If the problem is just requesting i18n for this language, let's follow that gerrit patch.
- But now there's still the most hard-to-define question that: If one day this can be approved, what will happen during "Create Narom Wikipedia" task(s)? Currently the workflow of wiki-creating tasks are afaik:
- Add xxx.(project name).org to DNS and Apache (if not added)
- Add XXX language support to MediaWiki software (if not added, and if that has enough twn activities)
- Prepare and check storage layer for xxxwiki
- Localize core/Gadget/Scribunto/ProofreadPage namespaces to XXX
- Localize core special page names to XXX
- Add xxxwiki to WikimediaMessages/RESTBase/Pywikibot/wikistats
- Run populateSitesTable.php on xxxwiki so Wikidata and Parsoid supports are added
- Non of steps above can avoid a sane-builded database, you must always make sure you're creating it with a "no doubt" name, because, as @JCrespo (WMF): said in phab:T83609#1310355 and phab:T21986#1287684, the renaming method do require exporting-and-importing of dumps, reload on all our clusters (codfw, eqiad, eqsin, esams, ulsfo). Then you have to re-populate the names in e.g. CentralAuth, server puppets, dblists; and as *all the user permissions lost, you have to re-assign the sysops, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, ... etc. one-per-one on-wiki)*, and someone who first re-visit that wiki must have to patrol nearly all existed diffs as soon as possible, as they will reset as having red exclamation marks !
- To me, is there really having benefits to rename nrmwiki? In fact they don't have any known sysops, and I've looked their Special:recentchanges, they don't have other activities other than global renames and central notices, so how does such a quiet wiki also need to do the "be-x-old to be-tarask"-like rename, just to give a place for another language that the nrm code originally assigned for? To me why can't we do semi-rename instead: First create a nrfwiki as-is, and lock it, then export-and-import dumps of nrmwiki to nrfwiki, and then clear all contents of nrmwiki? By this way we don't need a temporary code on Incubator ever. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:33, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: That is not the subject of this discussion. I asked you to stop discussing the technical points. The purpose of this discussion is only "Is it eligible?", and that depends on only are there people who would create content. The question of where it lives and how we do it is not the subject for this discussion. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- @StevenJ81: Without checking translatewiki.net myself, given discussions being done by now, users have already started translating wiki interface into Narom. So people have already started making contribution to the wiki software that's contributory to establishment of wiki projects in that language. However, that is prevented and reverted by other editors on the site because of this language code problem, and thus editors have been prevented from making contribution necessary to establish wiki project in their own language version. C933103 (talk) 07:53, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Lots of rollbacks, and rules for continued discussionEdit
I just reverted all of 114.*'s comments because they are irrelevant to the current scope of the discussion. (Apologies to User:Prosfilaes, whose response to that was entirely appropriate, but is now also gone. I'll note that I already said the same thing at the end of the original discussion.) Now, then:
- This discussion is now semi-protected. The IP contributors have made their desires clear, but we're not doing that now, and they are not answering the current question(s).
- I don't think anyone is writing Narom translations at translatewiki, as all the nrm translations there are in Norman(d).
- The only question on the table is this: Is there anyone here who is fluent in Narom and wants to create content? Can we please have a yes-or-no answer to that question? StevenJ81 (talk) 04:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Well, the answer of this question isn't simply yes or no, because lack of key informations about many minor-communities South East Asian languages in the pan-APEC area. As listed on English Wikipedia article, there are lists of terms, written materials and audio recordings available on the ScholarSpace academy of University of Hawaii, it's sadly to say, however, that non of the authors' links are working well, clicking any of them can show "No Entries in Index" warning message, so there's no way to contact any listed persons by email in nearly all ways (unless in the very unlikely case if just one of them has ORCID record), you can even not find them via Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Instagram, ... due to the high stricted usage policy of UoH, thus to "contact" them, you or any interests have have and have to visit UoH by plane and car. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Due to verification hard, I would say, that to answer this "only" question, a Malaysian PhD that has enough knowledge in their languages must therefore join this discussion, but the semi-protection seems IMO to be a roadblock of them. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: An IP user can make a comment on the talk page. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Update: I have made one more direct request to Wikimedia Indonesia and Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia to see if anyone knows of people actually interested in working on this project. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
I am going to reject this request without prejudice.
- LangCom's policy is to close new project requests as "rejected–stale" when a request is made on Meta, but no meaningful test project is created on Incubator, Beta Wikiversity or Multilingual Wikisource within a year. In a sense, that's all I'm doing here. I have been trying to find people truly interested in creating content for this project for six months, but have found no takers.
If I'm being harder on this [prospective] language community than we normally would be on a language community of 4,000 speakers, it's only because we have to make some special provisions to make this work, and will have to provide more oversight than usual to take care of the test. At that, I think there are only two ways in which I am being stricter than usual:
- Requiring a registered user to make the request to start the test
- Closing this as "rejected–stale" after six months instead of twelve
And I am doing so strictly because of the extra work (and variance with normal policy) that this test would require.
At the end of the day, I've seen no evidence that there is serious interest in creating content for this project. I've heard people complaining about prejudice (unfairly). I've heard people complaining about French and Normand speakers (unfairly). But without exception, people supporting this proposal have done so because it's right, not because they are proficient Narom speakers/writers wanting to create content. And what I'm not willing to do is to create extra work for myself and for translatewiki.net over an interest in this project that is only theoretical.
- Going forward
- If a registered user approaches me directly and says that s/he wants to start creating content in Narom, then I will create a space in Incubator for her/him, and @Amire80 will do the same at translatewiki.
- Link to my talk page on Meta • Link to my talk page on Incubator
- Ultimately, Narom is (in theory) eligible for projects. That said, a renewed request for a Wikipedia in Narom will be speedy-deleted as an invalid request unless, and until, someone has actually started creating a test project in Incubator.
For LangCom: StevenJ81 (talk) 15:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.