Incubator:Requests for starting a test

If you are unsure whether your language is valid to be hosted here or have its own subdomain, you can ask here for advice.

Instructions   [view]

• Be sure you have a user account here at Incubator.
• How to request? Just say which language and which project (Wikipedia, Wiktionary, ...) and give a link to a Wikipedia article or another webpage with some information.
  • We need this to know the ISO 639 language code. If you already know it, you can of course say it.
  • If that language doesn't already have an existing wiki in another Wikimedia project, say also what "Main Page" means in that language.
• add a new request
• And then? Someone will say whether you are allowed to start a test, and if so, he will give a link where you need to start your test.
  • People who are either administrator and/or familiar with Incubator/LangCom policies may handle requests.

Current requests

• /Archive

Please use the link in the instructions above to add a new request.

Kichwa Wikipedia

• Proposed project: Wikipedia
• Language: Kichwa (also called Quichua)
• ISO code: qu-ec (according to the model Lower Saxon of the Netherlands with its Wikipedia). SIL does not support Unified Kichwa and has rejected requests for an own code. At openoffice.org, the code is qu_EC.
• It is officially recognised in Ecuador. See dictionary on a governmental web site or the Kichwa menu on the web site of the National Assembly.
• Main Page: Wp/qu-ec/Kapak panka
• Other Wikimedia Project: none
• Wikimedia Project in a macrolanguage this language is part of: Quechua Wikipedia
• Proposed Wikimedia project: http://qu-ec.wikipedia.org/
• There is a discussion at the Quechua Wikipedia, whether there should be allowed articles in any Quechua variety or only in Southern Quechua.
• There is a need for Kichwa speakers who have Kichwa as first, second or third language to have their own Wikipedia which is not the same as the Southern Quechua Wikipedia. The differences between Southern Quechua and Kichwa can compared to the differences between Swedish and Danish. See the discussion at the Quechua Wikipedia which makes it clear.
• See also Incubator:AN#Wp/qu-ec

-- AlimanRuna 21:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

As I was part of the discussion on the quechua wikipedia leading to this proposal, I bring a couple of additional elements :

* regarding the official status of kichwa, also see Art. 2 in the Preamble of the Constitution of Ecuador, saying that Spanish is the official language of Ecuador ; Spanish, Kichwa and Shuar are official languages for intercultural communication.

* Unified kichwa is not recognized by the SIL but regroups several dialects that do have an ISO 639-3 code ([1], from Quichua, Calderón Highland to Quichua, Tena Lowland in the table). According to the SIL numbers, these dialects make up a total between 1 and 2 millions of speakers. --Sylvain2803 10:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The policy is quite strict about ISO 639 codes. In a month, the Language Committee has a meeting in Berlin where we will probably discuss this issue. Is it OK if this is postponed until then? SPQRobin 16:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

@AlimanRuna: Btw, coincidentally, it seems that you live in Berlin, so if you want, maybe you could come to the event (Langcom meeting as part of mw:Berlin Hackathon 2011). SPQRobin 17:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, originally I am from Berlin, but at the moment I'm working elsewhere and I cannot be there next month.

How was it possible to create the code nds-nl if the policy is "quite" strict about ISO 639 codes?

I think a temporary solution can be to use the code for the most numerous regional variety, "Chimborazo Quichua" [qug] (ca. 1 million speakers, the second most numerous being "Imbabura Quichua" [qvi] with some 300.000), on the other hand, it controdicts the concept of Unified Kichwa which is used in official documents and schools in Ecuador. The regional codes are OK to refer to folk tales recorded in a specific region or to Bible translations made by SIL / Wycliffe translators to make the gospel as understandable as possible to an illiterate Kichwa-speaking population in a specific region speaking and understanding just its own regiolect. But if we use such a regional code for Unified Kichwa, this will become a problem because one variety will be treated as "main variety" and, even worse, there will be no more possibility to create a real regional wikipedia in this specific regional variety in the future. This would be as if the code for an English dialect, let's say Cockney, had been used to start the English Wikipedia. As Unified Kichwa (Shukyachishka Kichwa) is the official standard used for all regiolects of the "qu" macrolanguage in Ecuador, imo qu-ec will be the best solution.

If it is necessary to wait until the Berlin meeting, I think we can start the test wiki either with the Chimborazo code [qug], which will be changed later, or with a non-existing code as [qic], which should be changed to qu-ec.wikipedia.org as well. As long as it is a test wiki, I think it can be managed this way, but when it is changed to a real wikipedia, it should get the qu-ec code, as it has been done with the Dutch Lower Saxon Wikipedia [nds-nl].

So I shall be so free to open two pages, and you can delete the one which you think is wrong:

Chimborazo Kichwa: Wp/qug

• Main Page: Wp/qug/Kapak panka

Shukyachishka Kichwa: Wp/qic

• Main Page: Wp/qic/Kapak panka -- Well, User:Sylvain2803 has made the decision for qug. Let's go on ... :-) -- AlimanRuna 18:46, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I hope you will find a good solution for Kichwa at your Berlin meeting. Thank you for everything in advance.

-- AlimanRuna 20:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

The "nds-nl" Wikipedia exists because it was created before the current policy was introduced. I know that that is not fair, but that is how it is. Anyway, I am sure the Kichwa Wikipedia will be allowed because, as you say, it has an official standard in Ecuador. The problem is only that we adhere to SIL standards, so we will need to come up with a solution that fits in our policy, or we need to change our policy. I think the proposed code "qu-ec" may be a good idea. As temporary solution, it doesn't really matter, you can use a valid ISO 639 code, like qug. Regards, SPQRobin 00:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I hope very much qu-ec will be possible. I think it needn't be a common rule but can be added to the existing rules for exceptional cases: If there is evidence for a common literary language (as in this case), a special code is created as it was done for nds-nl.

Here is one more link to an important discussion on Kichwa at openoffice.org (from September 2009):

http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ctype=xml&id=99972

Best regards -- AlimanRuna 20:29, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

My recommendation is that the community apply for an IETF language subtag "kichwa" and that the wiki be named http://qu-kichwa.wikipedia.org. Evertype 13:16, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

That could be an acceptable solution. On the other hand, it is quite long. Would it be possible to just use the code que, the ISO-2 code for the Quechua macrolanguage? For Southern Quechua the shorter ISO-1 "qu" is used, which would mean for Kichwa:

http://que.wikipedia.org/

qu for Southern Quechua (Bolivia and Southern Peru) and

que for Kichwa (Ecuador, Southern Colombia, Northern Peru) --?

-- AlimanRuna 13:57, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

That's not a possible solution, since those codes are formally equivalent and identical. Evertype 14:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

What about using ki, or qui? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.173.195.9 (discussion • contribs) 20:01, 28 May 2011.

Impossible, qui is for en:Quileute language, and ki for en:Gikuyu language --MF-W {a, b} 19:05, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

So, did you request the IETF tag 'kichwa'? Because, as far as I can see, that is the most important thing that prevents the creation of a Kichwa Wikipedia. And maybe it could be a good idea to request a tag for the current qu.wikipedia, e.g. 'qhichwa'. The current qu.wikipedia won't be renamed, but it would be used for the MediaWiki locale. (Btw, I did not found a form where to request an IETF tag...) SPQRobin 21:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, yes I just requested it today, if you're interested in the way to request subtags you might have a look at This page, the two links on top of the page - essentially the first one - have all the relevant information and a submission template with examples. --Awkiku 10:09, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

First reactions from IETF, two who have answered the proposal definitely prefer qu-ec than qu-kichwa. I am citing one sentence from each answer

* "I'm not sure that registering a subtag is necessary if the region code 'EC' already covers the particular need. Wikimedia's allergy to region codes could be considered perverse because, if taken to its logical extreme, it would require the registration of many more variant subtags to represent specific regional, official, or standardized forms that would otherwise be well identified by and associated with a given region. Greater diversity of tags that mean the same thing is actually a bad thing because it gives rise to interoperability problems."

* "I would also like to ask why "qu-EC" is not sufficient."

So, I would need some details on the grounds on which it has been decided that country-codes should be avoided in order to be able to defend my case. Regarding my own opinion I must say I am rather convinced by the first of these answers, as for the case of a new spelling convention that is taught in the national education system the location of people able to read/write this variant will follow national borders (even though the dialects do not). The same dialect is taught with a distinct spelling when one crosses the border as mentioned in Ethnologue. --Awkiku 16:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I would also prefer using a national subcode qu-ec as the varieties intended to be included into the Kichwa Wikipedia are exactly the Quechua [qu] varieties (or "languages") spoken on the territory of Ecuador, nothing more or less. I could also live with a subcode qu-kichwa, but I don't know why it should be necessary. I think the worst thing is that a Kichwa Wikipedia is not created because two institutions - or actually three - where speakers of Kichwa have no voice at all - Wikimedia, IETF and SIL International as the institution that does not recognize Unified Kichwa as language - are not willing to agree on a valid code for Kichwa. Once more: The best would be to have a language code for Unified Quichua like qwi (qwi has not been assigned to a language yet, but SIL International has refused such a code for Kichwa), second best a country code like qu-ec and third best a regional subcode like qu-kichwa, but the worst is the present situation without any valid code for the whole language, so that a local ISO language code (qug) is being used. So I ask Wikimedia for a clear answer: Will qu-ec be accepted or not? If not, please give a clear reason so IETF has a reason to create the subcode qu-kichwa. Otherwise I would like to ask them to create qu-ec, which they would obviously do. -- AlimanRuna 14:46, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

To be clear, qu-ec is not a code that can be created, it is a combination of a language code (qu) with a country code (EC). I received a mail from Awkiku, and responded to it with Michael Everson in CC (who recommended to apply for "kichwa"). I do agree that communication here is not so efficient, because there is the Language committee, SIL, IETF, and here.. Also, Michael Everson pointed out there is no SIL code request to be found for Kichwa (see here). Did you formally request a code? Another question from me, why don't the Kichwa varieties outside of Ecuador use the Unified Kichwa? It would make a lot of things easier, as far as I can see. SPQRobin 15:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

No, as far as I know, no one of the active users of the Kichwa test wiki requested a code at SIL, but another request from programmers of the Kichwa spellchecker at openoffice did so, and the request was rejected by SIL saying that it is just a new orthography but no language.

I am citing from http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ctype=xml&id=99972 :

2009-03-06 18:10:00

Hi the Kichwa academy is located in Ambato [...]. However, Shukllachishka Kichwa (unified Kichwa) is a new ortography for all the Quichua dialects in Ecuador. There are plans for making Kichwa an official language, and a unified orthography is needed. So I wrote to SIL.org to open a new language identifier for the Unified Kichwa, but the answer was no: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/criteria2.html says quite clearly that new orthographies are not given new codes. In total, since 1) it seemed incorrect to assign the unified Kichwa to only one of the dialects and 2) Kichwa is [probably] becoming an official language for Ecuador, I assumed qu_EC would be the most accurate description. qu for "a Quechua dialect", EC for Ecuador. If we have to choose one specific dialect, I assume "qxl" would be closest due to the fact that it is the dialect spoken around Ambato, where the Kichwa academy is located. However, as stated above, the unified Kichwa is not pure Salasaca Quichua, but a unification. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambato compared to http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=EC and http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=que (gigahz, openoffice.org)

As far as I know, the relations between the Kichwa organization ECUARUNARI and the indigenous umbrella organization of Ecuador CONAIE on the one side and The Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) on the other side have been historically burdened. Note that ECUARUNARI wanted the SIL to be expelled out of Ecuador (e.g. Marc Becker 2008). This conflict seems to be an obstacle for development to date. Private institutions supported by SIL and new Bible editions still use Spanish-based orthographies in regional Kichwa/Quichua varieties in Ecuador whereas governmental institutions, schools with intercultural bilingual education as well as the indigenous organizations mentioned above exclusively use Unified Kichwa. So it does not seem very likely that Kichwa institutions have asked for SIL language codes. In order not to interfere in this conflict it seems better to use a subcode of the qu macrolanguage. As Wikimedia does not want a country subcode like qu-ec, I think it will be qu-kichwa. -- AlimanRuna 20:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I want to add something concerning Kichwa orthography in Ecuador and Peru: Whereas in SIL publications in Ecuadorian Quichua variaties Spanish-based orthographies are used (see also Radio HCJB web site), for Pastaza Kichwa on the Peruvian side of the border exactly the same orthography as of Unified Kichwa is used (though there are some phonological and grammatical differences). See SIL Pastaza Kichwa - Spanish (or "Inka-Spanish") dictionary. -- AlimanRuna 12:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, just to inform that I am still in the process of discussing with IETF, some people on the list do not understand the position of Wikimedia foundation as mentioned above, others understand that it may be a way to avoid the proliferation of en-ca, en-au and others with no linguistic base. In any case an intervention on this list to explain the position of the Foundation would be appreciated. So far, there seems to be no terminant opposition to a potential qu-kichwa variant tag. I totally agree with AlimanRuna about the context between SIL and non-evengelist indigenous organisations in Ecuador (also see [2]: on 16 basic revendications of w:en:CONAIE for their first national uprising there was the expulsion of SIL)--Awkiku 09:36, 10 June 2011 (UTC).

Just about the question "Another question from me, why don't the Kichwa varieties outside of Ecuador use the Unified Kichwa? It would make a lot of things easier, as far as I can see. ", my only source for that is the Ethnologue link I copied above. If this is the case, this could be explained by the political context between both countries in the area : using Ecuadorian official material in bilingual education on the Peruvian side would probably not be seen favorably by the Peruvian govt as it would be a step backward on their sovereighnty on the area. I don't know if the bilingual education in Perú is done, where it is done and if it is done according to one or several unified quechua languages, maybe AlimanRuna knows more on that. --Awkiku 09:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Kichwa is also taught in some schools in Peru, see also two examples ([3] [4]) from the Department of Loreto where it is mentioned as Kichwa (in the same orthography as Unified Kichwa, not "Quichua" or "Quechua"). In Peru, the consonants k, w are used everywhere, but there is a conflict whether e and o appearing near [q] be considered allophones of i and u or not. When a unfied Quechua alphabet was introduced in Peru in the 1970s under the rule of en:Juan Velasco Alvarado, in Southern Quechua still 5 vowels were used, but for Kichwa (Runashimi of Northern Peru) and 'itrwa (Nunashimi / Wankashimi of Junín) there was obviously no need for e and o. For this reason, the orthography of Peruvian Kichwa has been quite clear for decades, and it is practically identical to Unified Kichwa orthography - with the exception that there is no h - similar to Amazonian Kichwa of Ecuador, so "big, great" is not hatun but atun, "toad" is not hampatu but ampatu (spoken "ambatu"). Allophonic b, d, g after m and n might still be used in some Peruvian schools, but I have seen it on the web site of Sarayaku, Ecuador as well. In Unified Kichwa, it is "(h)ampatu, manka, tanta" instead of "(j)ambatu, manga, tanda".

Of course, Ecuadorian text books are not used in Peru, but do they use text books from the USA in schools in the United Kingdom? I don't think so. The orthography, however, is almost the same. -- AlimanRuna 13:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Quite interesting, thanks ! The orthography you describe seems to be used by SIL too, from the dictionary of Peruvian Pastaza kichwa you mentioned. --Awkiku 15:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Since no formal request is made yet (only contact via mail), Michael Everson answered with this: My feedback on this is to ask them to formally request a full-fledged language tag for ISO 639. Apparently this has NOT been done. They need to do that ASAP. You mentioned the code would not be accepted due to bad relations between SIL and Kichwa/Ecuador instititions, but maybe they would consider this more easily since you are not from Ecuador (as far as I know). The disadvantage is that the next code change round is in May 2012 probably, but we can always contact them and try to speed it up (at least a yes or no would be useful). Also, I think it's best to ask the code for II-B, so that it would be a code for an existing classification and does not add to or replace existing codes/classification. SPQRobin 18:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, personnally I do not really wish to make this request partly because I will have no time to follow-up with the long and painful discussion (I will soon be in Ecuador for a long time with reduced access to internet), and also because I personnally think SIL policy and conflicts with indigenous organisations disqualifies them on the topic. The Unified Kichwa has been elaborated partly by the Catholic university of Quito, which also has a heavy background with SIL (Poco después de que en la Universidad Católica de Quito se estableciese el primer departamento de antropología en el Ecuador, a principios de los años setenta, éste se puso a la ofensiva en contra del SIL., see this book chapter) and as mentioned by AlimanRuna SIL goes own promoting other variants in their publications in Ecuador. Religious competition between catholics and evangelists within the indigenous communities is a very dense context in Ecuador (see book chapter above). --Awkiku 10:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

And I just want to have this Kichwa Wikipedia opened. Wikimedia should not make itself dependent on SIL policy but support wiki projects also in endangered minority languages, especially if there is real potential as it is in the case of Kichwa. Why isn't it possible just to open a Wikipedia with the code+subcode qu.kichwa, as there is clear evidence that the language exists and has even some official recognition. Which code we use is not important, but the creation of the Kichwa Wikipedia and maybe other wiki projects. Actually I don't understand what official application forms we have to fill in. -- AlimanRuna 15:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Just to precise that the discussion with IETF is ongoing and constructive and nobody there has said no (nor yes) so far. Maybe at the end they decide to have a qu-kichwa subtag and then this part of the problem would be solved. Let's first see what goes out of there, having two processes at the same time (one with IETF and one with SIL) would be highly confusing. --Awkiku 15:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you, AlimanRuna, but there are members of the Language Committee who strictly say "no code = no project". I joined the LangCom for easier communication between Incubator and the LangCom, so often I just follow existing policy (how unfair or inefficient it may be). By the way, there is no hurry needed. Keep in mind that you are one of the most recent languages that have entered the Incubator (so it would be very quickly if the Kichwa Wikipedia would be approved this month or next month), and that native speakers are needed anyway for approval. Besides, being in Incubator is equally valid as having an own subdomain, although the (default) interface and prefixes are probably hindering. SPQRobin 17:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Since IETF has rejected a subcode saying there has been no request for a full iso code to SIL, I have sent a request for the macrolanguage "Kichwa / Quechua II-B" within the macrolanguage "Quechua" (qu/que) AND a request for a individual SIL code for "Kichwa / Unified Kichwa" (TWO requests) to the "ISO 639-3 Registration Authority" of SIL, which is, according to its web site, "the only one authorized by ISO". -- AlimanRuna 06:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, let's hope we have a response soon so we can move forward with this. SPQRobin 00:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you have news perhaps? We haven't noticed a request for an ISO code. SPQRobin 20:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Ancash Quechua Wikipedia

• Proposed project: Wikipedia
• Language: Ancash Quechua
• Temporary ISO code: qxn (used by SIL for Northern Conchucos Ancash Quechua)
• Proposed ISO code: qu-ancash (according to the model Lower Saxon of the Netherlands with its Wikipedia).
• It is officially recognised as regional variaty of Quechua in Peru. See Dictionary "Yachakuqkunapa Shimi Qullqa - Anqash Qichwa Shimichaw" (pdf, 8,62 MB)] on an official site of the Peruvian Ministry of Education.
• Temporary Main Page: Wp/qxn/Qapaq panqa
• Other Wikimedia Project: none
• Wikimedia Project in a related language within the macrolanguage Quechua this language is part of: Southern Quechua Wikipedia
• Proposed Wikimedia project: http://qu-ancash.wikipedia.org/
• There is an Ancash Quechua speaker at the Southern Quechua Wikipedia who has created pages. For speakers of Southern Quechua, these pages are hard to understand. As in the case of Kichwa, there should be an own Ancash Quechua Wikipedia.
• There is a need for speakers of Ancash Quechua to have their own Wikipedia which is not the same as the Southern Quechua Wikipedia. The differences between Southern Quechua and Ancash Quechua can compared to the differences between French and Portuguese.

-- AlimanRuna 19:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for informing. The code will probably also be an issue, just like the Kichwa Wikipedia. I informed Michael Everson and Gerard Meijssen about this test Wikipedia. SPQRobin 20:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Simple French Wikipedia

• Project: Wp
• ISO code: None (simple-fr invented)
  • Reason why I think it should be accepted: LangCom has discussed simple languages and this meets the criteria in place.
• Main Page: Page d'Accueil

I think that simple french should be accepted because its like simple english but french. There are so many people that has L2 french (simple french) and extensive works in simple french.
Ebe123 (^{Talkabout it}|_contribs) 15:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Simple projects should start as a namespace on the respective wiki. Once the community thinks it should become a separate project, it can request its own wiki. I do not want to have an Incubator full of inactive simple projects. SPQRobin 22:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for Myanmar Wikisource

• Proposed project: wikisource
• Language: Burmese language
• ISO code: my
• Main Page: Ws/my/ဗဟိုစာမျက်နှာ

Lionslayer 06:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Please see this. For Wikisources, please use the oldwikisource: wiki. --MF-W {a, b} 14:08, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for Chuvash Wiktionary

• Proposed project: Wiktionary
• Language: Chuvash
• ISO code: cv
• Main page: Wt/cv/Тĕп страница

I don't think it's controversial. No problem to contribute to it. SPQRobin 23:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for Venetian Wiktionary

• Proposed project: wiktionary
• Language: Venetian
• ISO code: vec
• Main page: Wt/vec/Pajina prinsipałe
• Other Wikimedia project: Venetian Wikipedia, Venetian Wikisource

--GatoSelvadego 13:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure, there is no problem. You can start this project. SPQRobin 13:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Prekmurian Wikipedia

• Proposed project: Wikipedia
• Dialect: Prekmurje dialect
• Macrolanguage: Slovenian language
• Proposed ISO code: pkm (ISO request pending with this code; according to Doncsecz, it will be granted by the end of the year; see: http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2011-139&lang=pkm)
• Main Page: Začétna strán (wp/pkm/Začétna strán)
• Other Wikimedia Project: none
• Proposed Wikimedia project: http://pkm.wikipedia.org/
• Doncsecz asked me to assist in creating the project, but with no valid ISO code, I am unsure about whether it will be okay or not to start it here. What is your opinion? - Xbspiro 13:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I say go for it! The code will be created soon so why wait? Ebe123 (^{Talkabout it}|_contribs) 19:17, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't see this so unambiguously, but if the code can really be expected to be approved, I'd say the test can be started. See above the sections about Kichwa Wikipedia, where the situation is more complicated than just a pending code, and which is now a test project nevertheless. --MF-W {a, b} 19:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The situation is quite different. Kichwa covers various existing codes, while Prekmurian does not. I'd prefer this project not to be started yet and instead wait for ISO approval, unless you are really sure it will be approved. SPQRobin 19:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The ISO request had been rejected in February. Amqui (talk) 05:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Old Saxon Wikipedia

• Proposed project: Wikipedia
• Language: Old Saxon (Sahsisk)
• ISO code: osx
• Main page: Wp/osx/Hōƀidsīda
• There is enough material on the net (grammars, dictionaries, etc.) to study it. It's like Old English about the material, and like Old English it should be accepted (in my opinion).
• Other Wikimedia projects: none

-- Italian Norman 18:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

You can contribute to it, but please keep in mind that it will be up to the Langcom to decide if an Old Saxon Wikipedia would be created in the long term - a Wikisource should be preferred. However, it will not be discussed on this page. --MF-W {a, b} 21:40, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for Spanish Wikivoyage

• Proposed project: Wikivoyage
• Language: Spanish
• ISO code: es
• Main page: Wy/es

--Ralgis^WM-CR 17:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The test already exists :) --MF-W {a, b} 17:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Talmudic Aramaic Wikipedia

• Proposed project: Wikipedia
• Language: w:Talmudic Aramaic (ארמיא דתלמודא בבלאה)
• ISO code: tmr
• Main page: wp/tmr/דף עיקר
• Other Wikimedia projects: none

Ypnypn (talk) 01:46, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, as the language is extinct, probably a Wikisource is more advisable and more likely to get approved than a Wikipedia.

The related Syriac Wikipedia and this request: m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Assyrian Neo Aramaic might be interesting. --MF-W {a, b} 10:43, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The "extinct language" rule seems very unevenly applied, see the Old English Wikipedia, Latin Wikipedia, etc.

And Assyrian Neo Aramaic is completely different from Talmudic Aramaic. Ypnypn (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The Old English and Latin Wikipedias were created before the introduction of the current Language Proposal Policy (ca. 2006). You will be able to create the pages in tmr here, but it won't help much; dead languages won't get approved. --MF-W {a, b} 00:33, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Balochi language (written in an A-extended Latin script) project

Dear admin,

I am working on the Balochi language (written in an A-extended Latin script) project (Wikipedia). I found difficulties to create a domain for this project. For further information regarding the language please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochi_language

Kind regards,

Ahmed Yaqoub

Montenegrin Wikipedia

• Proposed project: Wikipedia
• Language: w:Montenegrin language
• ISO code: NO
• Main page: NO
• Other Wikimedia projects: none

--Аришин Дмитрий (talk) 15:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I explained you (see my talk page). It has no own ISO-code, and it's the main problem.--Leinbach (talk) 15:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for Marathi Wikivoyage

• Proposed project: Wikivoyage
• Language: Marathi
• ISO code: mr
• Main page: Wy/mr

--संतोष दहिवळ (talk) 07:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

There is no problem; you can edit this project. --MF-W {a, b} 14:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for Wikivoyage (in TAGALOG and/or FILIPINO)

• Proposed project: WikiVoyage
• Language: Tagalog and/or Filipino
• ISO code: tl and fil
• Main page Wy/tl and/or Wy/fil

--Merrick Lee ^(talk) 21:35, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Probably Tagalog is better to start with because it already has other Wikimedia projects. Feel free to start the Main Page at Wy/tl/Unang Pahina. Best regards --MF-W {a, b} 19:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I have created head pages (Wy/tl & Wy/fil) for both projects. Filipino project marked as "tocreate". Greetings, --Leinbach (talk) 16:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

We have the "automatic info pages" feature, so it is not strictly necessary to do that (but certainly useful for every project with content, at least) --MF-W {a, b} 19:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Leinbach, I hope you're aware that the Filipino Wikimedia community believes that Tagalog and Filipino are the same language, so it will be unnecessary to have a "Filipino Wikivoyage" as it will simply duplicate the work of the Tagalog one. This is one of the reasons why we don't even have a "Filipino Wikipedia", for example, despite the presence of an Incubator project. --Sky Harbor 00:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I've no idea what Philippine community has decided.

2 MF-Warburg - what's done is done... :) --Leinbach (talk) 05:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Apologies: it seems that I slipped. I should have noted that the Language Committee's decision is that both languages are the same, and this is the position that the community shares. Apologies if I misconstrued anything. :) --Sky Harbor 11:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for Serbian Wikivoyage

• Proposed project: Wikivoyage
• Language: Serbian
• ISO code: sr
• Main page: Wy/sr

--Crnimilos (talk) 09:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

valid project, feel free to edit. Welcome. --MF-W {a, b} 16:04, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for Traditional Chinese Wikivoyage

• Proposed project: Wikivoyage
• Language: Traditional Chinese
• ISO code: zh-hant
• Main page: Wy/zh

Chihonglee (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I can't build the main page cuz when I create the main page, it said:

"You are trying to create page with incorrect title.

The title most probably lacks prefix or is in other way in incorrect format (uppercase letters in prefix, trailing slash etc.).

If you came here from any other page, please, return back and fix the link and then create the correctly named page. If you are attempting to create the page directly, please, create the page with proper name.

If by any chance this is blocking you from creating any page which you think has correct format of title, please, let administrators know." -- Chihonglee (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

You can't create it anyway. Can you add/create your texts in the Chinese Wikivoyage (it's here)? --Leinbach (talk) 07:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

So, do I need to do anything at Wy/zh?, Thank you! Chihonglee (talk) 04:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Try this. --MF-W {a, b} 12:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)