Hello Chamdarae, thanks for your message last night. I have finally voted to oppose the creation of a Wikipedia in Murcian. I think this is consistent with my comments. I have been having a look at some of the past discussions about new Wikipedia versions, and there have been similar cases where the proposal was rejected. I am not very keen on the idea that there should be a Wikipedia for every Italian or German dialect, which some people seem to be promoting at present. The fact is that such Wikipedias will end up being the private area of one or two individuals trying to promote a certain written standard that most people they claim to represent cannot read or even understand. The case for Murcian is extremely weak. Catalan, Basque and Galician (which the Portuguese generally regard as a variety of their language) are officially recognised as languages in Spain. Asturian (or Asturleonese) and Aragonese have some local recognition and are regarded as separate languages by many people. In Catalonia, there is also Aranese, which is regarded as a dialect of Occitan. Wikipedia already has versions in those six languages as well as Spanish. I don't think any more Spanish languages should have their own Wikipedia, to be honest. --AngelRiesgo 09:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Hola, las wikipedias gallega y catalanas están siendo atacadas, y no conseguimos paralo--Rocastelo 18:54, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Hello, I signed as a member for the Murcian Wikipedia. I do not understand the reason why some people here have doubts about the members of this project. I'm a native speaker of Murcian, and I strongly claim for the creation of a Wikipedia in my language. Many people like me will work in this project, please, do not doubt it! --Alquerias Llibre 21:16, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Nds-nl 2Edit

Hi Chamdarae... thanks for your message... yeah it was kind of long but doesn't matter I'm used to pages of writing from Node. But anyway... I'll shortly reply to some of your points:

  1. Many think it's a seperate language. - On internet it's most of the time "advertised" as toal or sproak (language), most people see it as a dialect, they probably won't know either it falls under Low Saxon but under Dutch. Veluws is definately a dialect it a mix of Low Franconian and Low Saxon, when you go more eastwards it gets a more Low Saxon feel.
  1. Many linguists consider them to be separate languages based on Ethnologue. - I don't think it's a good idea to even have that many wikipedia's based on dialects instead of a language. They have seperate ISO codes, but most dialects on Ethnologue have an ISO code, so based on that I don't think anyone can tell if it's a language or not.
  2. They have official recognition under the Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. - Yes Low Saxon does, the others like Stellingwarfs, Veluws, Grunnings are dialects of it.
  3. They have ISO 639-3 codes - very important for creating new wikis! ("nds-nl" isn't really an ISO code) - It's not a real ISO code, no, nds is, but it was taken by Plattdüütsch (not very logical, because the current nds is only for North and East German as they even mentioned on their main page). The -nl is added because it's Dutch-based orthography, you mentioned that it shouldn't be divided by border, but the reality is that the languages are mostly divided by border, East-Frisian is still understandable but that is because it's close to the Dutch border the further you move away the harder it is to understand especially if that person doesn't have any knowlegde of German.

I know you're worried that a Veluws-Sallands wikipedia might not be successful, but I think it will be. I mainly work on the Cornish wikipedia. A Veluws wikipedia will get off to a better start than the Cornish wiki, because you already have native speakers to contribute, and many other supporters who will try to help. If you translate lots of articles from nds:, nl:, li:, af: and de: I think it could grow quickly.

The problem is that Veluws doesn't have very many speakers - don't know how many Cornish has - but I think it has less natives because most people have gone over to Dutch, mostly elderly people speak it nowadays... don't want to be the only one ending up editing the wiki hahaha.

Hope I explained it clearly, because I'm tired haha. Houje! (.vel for "bye") Servien 20:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for your support at:



Dear Chamdarae, why there is no progress in Banyumasan Wikipedia? who can solving Banyumasan ISO-Code problem? Slamet Serayu 07:25, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Wrong page?Edit

Hi Chamdarae. You left a message to User:Porjidlo in his/her user page. You can repeat your message on his/her user talk page, so that he/she can see more easily. --M/ 19:21, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Oops.... I had that page open too! --Chamdarae 19:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)


Should totally be an admin there. I don't expect there will be any opposition to that. You've been doing some fine work lately yourself; rock on! Sj 10:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Japanese, Mongolian, Eskimo and KoreanEdit

Japanese, Mongolian, Eskimo and Korean are closely related, so they shoud be grupped--Nxx 22:32, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Please have a look at any WP's articles about those languages. No such connectionclose relation has been firmly established. --Wikipediatrician
You're not right.--Nxx 08:10, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Look at this: [1]
There is Korean-Japanese language family.--Nxx 19:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, they _may_ be distantly related (Korean and Japanese at least), but certainly not closely related. And the evidence is not conclusive, as Wikipediatrician said. They shouldn't really be grouped together here. --Chamdarae 18:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Code for Latgalian languageEdit

> About the codes, 'bat' is the official code for 'Baltic (Other)' (see here). You should add a code for Latgalian, such as 'bat-ltg', as Zordsdavini suggested. This is the way that is recommended on the page for new requests, and it has been used for Voro (fiu-vro) and Aromanian (roa-rup).
Thanks; I did not know that new language/dialect codes can be formed from ISO 639-2 language-group codes. So far it seems to be a matter of dispute, if Latgalian is a dialect or a separate language. (Latgalian seems to be an Ausbausprache standardized in the 18th century by Jesuit priests on the basis of regional dialects of Catholic regions in Latvia; after the breakup of Soviet Union it is experiencing some revival as a regional language.) BTW, can we still keep the Test-wp/ltg subdirectory in our test Wiki of Latgalian, or is it necessary to move to Test-wp/bat-ltg? I just hope that nobody else claims the ltg directory under test Wiki.

> Hopefully in the future Latgalian and Samogitian will have their own ISO codes
Do you know anything about the process of getting an ISO code (e.g. an ISO/DIS 639/3)? Is the process reasonably fast? Just for the purpose of keeping the URLs unchanged, would it be all right, if we just wait until there is some ISO code for Latgalian (or if it is somehow settled that Latgalian is a dialect of either Latvian or of Baltic Languages as a whole)? And stay in meta Test-wiki section meanwhile.

Thanks for the information regarding ISO 639-2! Having 50 documents would be an easy criterion, since that many books in Latgalian are published by Latgales kulturas centra izdevnieciba in Rezekne in a couple of years; probably an easiest way would be to send the samples to the Library of Congress or something like that. Latgalian language in a way is a transitional dialect to Lithuanian (esp. phonetics and many common words); nevertheless, its written form has been made to conform to Latvian much more closely. In early 1920ies there was an organized effort by Catholic priests (who were also printing quite many books in Latgalian) to "prove" that the language just a version of Latvian, in order to promote Catholicism as a major religion in Latvia and convert many Latvians in other parts of Latvia. They had considerable successs, but in modern times much of the pressure to prove anything like that is gone.

We'll probably need to follow your advice and suggest the bat-ltg domain name for Wikipedia - and I'll discuss it in a Latgalian cultural organization to make it a collective decision (examples of Vori and Samogitian domains look convincing). Since there are not yet any Latgalian Wikipedia contributors besides me, we still have to wait. Next thing would be educating people (e.g. Latgalian students) about using and editing Wikipedia. Kalvis 07:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Code for Ripuarian/Kölsch Wikipedia.Edit

From [2]

  • Mir han nix anders wi ksh för de Momänt, dat eß winnichstens enne SIL-Code, dä Aandrach dä en de ISO 639-2 opzenämme leuf zig Apprill un es noh nit änntshiide. Dat grp leuf zig Oktoober, weed allso noch beß näx Joohr Aujußß odder länger bruche, beß_e dorsj_eß wänn_t immer ejaal lang dooert. Beß dohin künne_mer met grp no_nix aanfange. Dröm ben ish do_für, wi ijj_op Meta jeschrivven hann, dat mer jez met ksh aanfange, un wem_mer grp hann, dat dozo_ze_nemme odder ze tuushe. -- Purodha Blissenbach 12. Dez 2005 21:01 (CET)

In English:

  • We have nothing else but ksh at present. At least this is a SIL-Code. There is a Request to have ksh (Kölsch) added to ISO 639-2 having been made in April 2005 for the 1st time. It has not yet been decided upon by the authority. The code grp (Germanic Ripuarian, Ripuarian Franconian) has bewen requested too, but a final dicisioin ist not to be expected before August, 2006. Thus my personal proposal to use ksh for the time being and add (or switch to) grp later, should it be assigned at all. -- Purodha Blissenbach 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Remark: Kölsch is one of several dozen Ripuarian languages, the only one SIL has in their Ethnologue which shall become ISO 639-3. Linguashere has few additional ones. Though there are quite some differences in words, grammar, speech patterns, and intonation, almost all Ripuarian languages are pretty comprehensible to almost all Ripuarian speakers, even more if written. Kölsch varieties account for probably ¼ to 1/3 of the Ripuarian speakers. Kölsch ist the only widely known Ripuarian Language, the word "Ripuarian" is used by Scholars, but virtually unknown in general public.

Romany WikipediaEdit

Hi Chamdarae!

I noticed your interest in Romany Wikipedia (Test phase). Now it's ready to launch and I made some updates in the discussion page. See if you have some comments.

아직도 살아있어요?Edit

방금 전에 한국어위키백과에서 봤는데 소수민족언어에 관심이 있는 것과 한국어, 일본어 등 관심이 있는 점이 저랑 비슷하네요. 근데 15일부터 아무것도 안 올렸으니까 혹시나 아직도 살이있는지 궁금하네요. 저는 한국어 위키만 빼고는 사용자이름이 똑같애요. 한국어판에서만 데이빛이라는 이름을 써요. Mithridates 06:27, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

아직도 살아 있는데 이제 위키백과에 올리지 않습니다. --Chamdarae 18:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Hi

Thank you for your support for South Azerbaijani wiki. BayBak--Baybak 04:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Feature to edit summaries - questionEdit

Hello Chamdarae-

I noticed your name on the history page of Feature to edit summaries. I'm very new to Meta (probably shouldn't be here), and can't understand from that article if there actually is a way for me to edit an edit summary once I've uploaded the revision. Can you tell me if there is?

Thanks. --Eric --EHM02667 18:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I got your message, Chamdarae. Thanks for getting back to me! --Eric EHM02667 22:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)