Hello, can you tell me what's your username on twn or what are the pages where the discussion/conflict you mentioned happened? Nemo 05:54, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Here's a proposal that langcom think needs some serious discussion. Please read the discussion on the linked Meta page.
Currently the reasons that against the request:
- No separate ISO 639-3 language code
- It is proposed that this can be handled with a script converter, per (for example) the linked Phabricator task that you filed.
- One respondent objected to such a project taking manpower away from other Chinese-language projects.
But there are also support reasons that:
- Extremely widely used, and much on-line work in Chinese happens in Pinyin, not in ideographic characters.
- Proponents state (he cannot confirm) that there are many people who are "illiterate" in Chinese, not having mastered 3000 characters, who can potentially contribute to such a project. If so, that is closer to the ideal of creating projects that "anyone can edit".
- StevenJ81, the clerk of langcom, noted that several other Chinese projects use Romanized Chinese. (All the min-nan projects are exclusively in Romanized language—see Wikipedia here; Min Dong Wikipedia has pages in both scripts.)
If this project is deemed eligible, then he said that this should not be coded with "cmn". (the project can let it stay that way in Incubator for now, or give it a q-code.) Test has 250 mainspace pages, and has been active periodically. Last period of substantial activity was during summer 2017.
Please read these evidences carefully and comment your concerns in that request page, thank you. --22.214.171.124 01:50, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Pinging you again because the langcom currently think that the test running on Incubator (under the ISO 639-3 code for Mandarin) has about 250 pages. One member said that there are arguments on both sides. Can you please please and please look again at that and provide some input? --126.96.36.199 07:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC)