Cirt 21:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I thought you might be interested in my proposal for democratic reform of wikimedia governance structures 188.8.131.52
My own questionEdit
Hi. I want to remove my own question which i added here. I think that was the right place to ask and the page you mentioned is mostly for requests. Please do not undo. ok?--Companionship 10:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Appalachian English as it stands, is well-known within the US and it's known that "outsiders" have difficulty comprehending it, but it has no formal "recognition" due to the idea of "There is only one English". (I'm actually shocked that Scots has recognition, while Wikipedia easily has a dozen varieties of the German-Dutch continuum).
Now as far as ISO goes, in order to have a Wikipedia in Appalachian, would we need to approach SIL and obtain this code? Or would Wikimedia simply consider Appalachian to fall within en and then just create something like en-app? Wōdenhelm 10:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks for the stuff on X-raysEdit
I apologize if some of my sentences are not totally nuanced, but I weakly speak English (I think you would be as embarrassed as me if you were to express yourself with nuances in French).
Just tell me, objectively, if the Kotava project is unworthy to appear in Wikipedia, if all the work done for months by a significant group of contributors deserves such silence?
And since you are interested in Esperanto, look at this simple table* that I try to keep up to date, comparing the various constructed languages in Wikipedia: Kotava comes in second or third place (after Esperanto far ahead of course ) in terms of dynamism and created content.
/* bu (avk word) = page