Incubator:Requests for deletions/Archive/2025

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current discussion page.

Wp/bmr

The creator marked all 3 pages as "speedy deletion" with just "by author", but not handled for several weeks, and don't see if they match any of the speedy deletion rationales. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 21:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 21:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/gju/भारत and Wp/gju/बिल्ली

In wrong language, both are written in Hindi instead of Gujari, was marked speedy deletion by someone else but not handled for near one month. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I support the deletion of the project as per the request. --ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 07:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wb/dng

A Spam, Vandalism project created by an IPv6 LTA, was marked speedy deletion by someone else but not handled for near one month. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I support the deletion of the project as per the request. -- ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 06:33, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wn/lvk and Wn/rue

Projects with no meanful contents, was marked speedy deletion by someone else but not handled for near one month. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I also don't see the reason to keep this projects. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wq/mnw

Has only a spammed main page full of ugly emojis. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support No useful information. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 18:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/bdk

Looks like a vandalism or a joke. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 18:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete has only 200 speakers, and as an Unwritten [Qaax] language, I have no hope for good contributors. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Templates of non-exist projects

31.142.54.216 19:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I support the deletion of these templates. Maintaining templates for non-existent projects serves no practical purpose and only adds unnecessary clutter. -- ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 05:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete them, too bogus to be useful even initialized by speakers in the near future, maybe categories of non-existing ones e.g. Category:Wn/myv should also be considered. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion. Таёжный лес (talk) 10:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 05:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 05:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wy/frp/Reçua (Main page)

The text is possibly written in Arpitan, but looks like a vandalism. This Wikivoyage was created by anonymous user (link on his/her page here: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:(Anonymous)) whose user page was deleted and who made no claims he/she know Arpitan.Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 14:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 13:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 13:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Wp/dtp, Wp/btm

dtp.wikipedia is launched 8 months ago, btm.wikipedia 7 months ago, since then many other Wikipedias launched. Are there any pages not imported to those Wikipedias? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Sotiale. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 03:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It is in progress after review. --Sotiale (talk) 14:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 06:51, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wt/che

Vandalism 31.142.38.73 10:18, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not the vandalism, just another code for Wt/ce. Таёжный лес (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. Redirect to Wt/ce was created. Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 04:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 04:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wt/ett

Ancient language. The request has been rejected. Pages in this wiki aren't written in Etruscan 188.58.56.64 10:53, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Fully agree with the nominee. Таёжный лес (talk) 17:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 04:07, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 04:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/tmr and Wy/tmr

Extinct language. The request has been rejected. 176.220.158.28 08:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This is not a valid reason for deletion. Wikis on dead languages exist in Incubator. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 11:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Incubator Plus, then delete Per rejected RFL, while this language is used for Torah/Talmud study in modern times, but there is really no current new work in the language, with the exception of some religious writings. As currently LPP disallow any kinds of Ancient, Extinct and Historical languages, I don't see any way tmr.wikipedia.org could be opened. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. millions of Jews use this language when studying the Talmud and other Jewish books. It is also not accurate that there are no new works in this language - a large number of Jewish book writers choose to do so in a combination of Hebrew and Aramaic. שמש מרפא (talk) 00:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@שמש מרפא If you think that RFL is rejected wrongly, you can submit 2nd request. That said, tmr is an Extinct language, it's already extinct since 1200 CE, 825 years till now. As for "in a combination of Hebrew and Aramaic", if this is true, the correct way is one of Hebrew Wikipedia, Wp/aii (for Assyrian Neo-Aramaic) or Wp/cld (for Chaldean Neo-Aramaic), they are living languages. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on how you define "extinct language". It is not used in everyday speech, but it is definitely used when writing a certain genre of books. There are new books being printed literally on a daily basis in this language. This is Talmudic Aramaic, so the dialects of Aramaic you mentioned are not relevant to this matte , and they are practically completely different languages.שמש מרפא (talk) 00:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@שמש מרפא "There are new books being printed literally on a daily basis in this language." Indeed, but eventually, LPP doesn't allow new wikis (except Wikisources, however they are not testing here, but Multilingual Wikisource) in Extinct languages to be created, for record, a Meta-Wiki RFC about re-allowing these non-living languages is also rejected by langcom. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aramaic is a language that still lives in thousands of seminaries where Talmud is studied, as well as among Jewish scholars, there is no reason to delete it.

I use Google Translate, sorry. אייל (talk) 06:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@אייל If this is the real case, then I recommend you to submit a SIL change request to change its Language Status to Living (See on how to do so), otherwise, even you submitted a Meta language request, it will only be rejected again, and your contents are still unable to keep here. That said, being an Ancient, an Extinct and/or a Historical language is already enough a valid reason for RFD, as currently LPP barred non-Wikisource wikis in such languages. Don't tell me Latin, Sanskrit or else, they are grandfathered things before LPP effective. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

However, there are Wikipedias in Ancient Greek and Montenegrin in the Incubator, which were rejected. Why should this project be deleted? --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 11:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danvintius Bookix For Ancient Greek, I'm planning for a migration too: Talk:Wp/grc/Κυρία_Δέλτος#Consider_a_new_website_for_serving_these_contents?, where you also commented there. And for Montenegrin, its 5th RFL isn't rejected yet, it's still open, so if you think Montenegrin shall be eligible, you can share your opinion on that RFL. And how both cases are related to this? Your example provided under Wp/sro already gave me an idea that you really don't know how to find a good "example", you say that "example" is not absurd, where objected by the followers. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:04, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the sequence. You can plan anything. If there is an Ancient Greek Wikipedia in the Incubator, why not this one (Montenegrin will be rejected). As for personal attacks, keep them to yourself. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 13:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danvintius Bookix: That's not "personal attack", rather, that's the fact, if Ancient Greek is rejected for several times despite many users support it, then I don't see why you and אייל are opposing this one, which just rejected once without anybody's support, isn't this panorama too bogus to be senseful, useful and kindful? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have an opinion different from yours (does this seem wrong to you?). Are you asking why this is so, or will you still provide some arguments? --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 14:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danvintius Bookix Wikipedia isn't the only way to have a wiki in a certain language, especially if and when a language is defined by policy that not suitable for having it. If all of your ideas are just to have a wiki in tmr language, why not try Incubator Plus instead? Why that wiki must be a Wikipedia? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We were talking about something else. We were talking about the existence of a wiki project in the Incubator. I think that there were no compelling reasons for removing this project from the Incubator. The creation of Wikipedia in this language is discussed elsewhere. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 14:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danvintius Bookix There are already reasons: it violates m:LPP as being an extinct language, its contents are not contributed by actual speakers, and there are good 3rd platforms to host them better. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Once again: we are not at Meta and we are not at RFL. Regarding third platforms: if a decision is made to remove them, it is up to the community to decide and I am ready to provide assistance and support. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 10:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@שמש מרפא While you are right that there are writers who use a combination of Aramaic and Hebrew, there are many others who write purely in Aramaic. And not just in a religious or Talmud context, but there are even thriller and fantasy books which use Aramaic like the book חרשתא by Judith Kagan. So this language is very much alive! Cheder pik (talk) 20:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Below are several reasons why this project should be preserved and supported:

A Living Cultural and Liturgical Language: Jewish Babylonian Aramaic is not merely a historical language but a living, vibrant part of daily life for millions of Orthodox Jews worldwide. It is the primary language of the Babylonian Talmud, studied daily in communities across the globe. In yeshivas (Jewish religious schools), students use this language actively, integrating it into spoken communication, religious discourse, and cultural traditions.
Linguistic and Liturgical Use: JBA holds a central role in liturgical practices and prayers, for example in Kaddish, a significant Jewish prayer recited in synagogues globally.
Community of Native and Fluent Speakers: There is a native-speaking community of Jewish Aramaic speakers from Kurdistan, known as the Nash Didan. This community has historically spoken a variety of Jewish Aramaic, and while their vernacular is distinct from Babylonian Aramaic, it is part of the same rich linguistic tradition. Preserving a project in JBA supports the documentation and continuation of Aramaic language heritage broadly.
Contemporary Cultural Usage: JBA also holds a place in modern culture. For example, it has been used in films such as The Passion of the Christ, featured in comedy shows, like here, and here, and serves as the language for numerous songs, like this, and this, or this. Additionally, there is a vibrant social media presence, including a humorous Facebook page (סטטוסים בארמית) and a dedicated Facebook discussion group for enthusiasts and speakers of Babylonian Aramaic.
Cultural and Historical Significance: JBA was a lingua franca for Jewish communities in the Middle East and beyond for over a millennium. It is the primary language of the Babylonian Talmud, one of the foundational texts of Jewish law and culture, studied extensively by scholars and students worldwide to this day.
Academic and Research Relevance: JBA remains a core subject of study. It is studied in universities across the globe, including prestigious institutions specializing in Judaic Studies, Semitics, and Ancient Languages. Universities and scholars rely on accessible resources for research and education. A Wikipedia in this language aligns with Wikimedia’s mission to make knowledge freely available.
Community Interest and Contributions: The existence of active contributors and a growing body of content shows there is a community of interested users willing to invest time and effort into building the project. This reflects a real demand for resources in JBA. Many similar projects have thrived once they gained visibility and support.
Usage in Hebrew and Other Languages: Many words commonly used in modern Hebrew are directly borrowed from Aramaic (for instance אבא, קופסא, דוגמא, etc.), while countless others are derived from Aramaic roots. This influence extends beyond Hebrew into other languages as well (like marhaba in Arabic). Preserving JBA is also essential for understanding these connections and the linguistic evolution it shaped. Additionally, JBA present in culture through the names of businesses and institutions. For example, the name of Assuta Hospital in Ashdod is Aramaic. Many other enterprises, organizations, and products use Aramaic names (see this article).
Precedents for Historical Language Projects: There are already established Wikipedias in languages with similar historical and academic uses, such as Latin, Old English, and Classical Chinese. JBA deserves the same recognition and support as it occupies a similar position in the history of world literature and linguistics.
Alignment with Wikimedia’s Mission: Wikimedia’s commitment to linguistic diversity and the documentation of human knowledge is at the heart of this project. Allowing it to continue fosters the preservation of an important linguistic heritage, enriches educational content, and encourages engagement with one of the world’s most historically significant languages.

Eliahu21 (talk) 22:02, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eliahu21 All of your rationales were also referred by Ancient Greek supporters via 4th request, but finally, rejected. Unless if one day LPP itself changed, the situation is here, that Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted. So why don't you agree to move this into an Incubator Plus site? Nobody wants to delete without backups unless for blatant spams. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Greek, being a direct ancestral variant of Modern Greek, which already has its own Wikipedia, does not represent a separate cultural or linguistic community, but rather a historical stage of the same language continuum.

On the other hand, Jewish Aramaic has no Wikipedia representation in any form. denying a Wikipedia to JBA would mean that an entire cultural, religious, and linguistic tradition remains without a dedicated repository of free, user-generated knowledge on Wikimedia platforms.

Moreover, unlike Ancient Greek, JBA is not only used ceremonially but as a practical communicational language. This is mainly because it is the main language in halakhic literature. Unlike Ancient Greek, which is primarily studied for historical insight, JBA’s study often directly informs modern-day decision-making and religious observance, not just academic curiosity. This makes it daily relevant for every practicing Jew.

You can walk into a yeshiva and see students having a lively debate about Aramaic concepts like ברי ושמא or חזקת מרא קמא.

JBA is also widely used in the Israeli legal system. This makes its usage closer to a living cultural practice rather than a ceremonial tradition.

Also, the community engaging with JBA is larger, more active, and more globally dispersed than any comparable Ancient Greek-speaking community. Eliahu21 (talk) 20:41, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eliahu21 If you think describing tmr is an "extinct language" by SIL isn't correct, then you can submit a 2nd request as appeal, that said, before the 1st request rejection, I was also pinging some active contributors of Wp/tmr, but whether you believe or not, they all didn't comment, just faced-to-faced the rejection decision. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226 I do think that describing JBA as an extinct language is not correct, and I intend to follow your suggestion.

Is it required to first submit a SIL change status request (which I still don't fully understand how it's done), before submitting 2nd RFL?

Also, from what I understand, before submitting RFL the community needs to complete the translation of the interface. This means that assuming this RFD is rejected, the community still have some completions to make before submitting 2nd RFL.

I also believe that not everyone are receiving emails when being pinged. I will leave some users a message on their personal talk page, hopefully some more people will join this discussion. Eliahu21 (talk) 14:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eliahu21 There's no need to do anything before "submitting RFL", in some cases, however, by no submitting RFLs, a language even can't seek for enabling translatewiki.net i18n functions due to lack of content supports. What is required via interface is that before a RFL been approved, the community needs to complete the translation of the interface, one of requirements to consider approving a RFL, not a requirement to submit. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:11, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also for "Is it required to first submit a SIL change status request (which I still don't fully understand how it's done), before submitting 2nd RFL?" By strictly, it depends on SIL's language type field, if SIL already defined your language as Living, then you don't need to do anything on it. But for tmr, this is really not the case, so it's likely that you should do so, otherwise even you just created a Meta-Wiki RFL right now, you will only see it's rejected some months later (even got many supporters during RFL open, just see Ancient Greek 4 as example). To do so, a. read Submitting Change Requests page to see what you'll need to provide for your change request, for your case, it would be 1.3. Change non-normative information such as *language Type*, b. Visit their Google form and fill in the required informations, include e.g. references to support your change request claims, c. make sure your e-mail address is working since your submission, and at least until results by Maintenance Agency (MA), they may send e-mails to your address at any time. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226 Thank you so much for the informative guide 🙏 Eliahu21 (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And, for 9th point "Precedents for Historical Language Projects", I would cite this to object you: , it says:

The period of Erasmus, More and Newton is before the date the Wikimedia language policy was enacted.

...

How languages are used is not relevant to the WMF language policy nor its language committee...That is the scope of a Wikipedia and it is of a higher order than what the

language policy or committee is there for.

Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. Although I very mildly support deletion, I can also see some valid arguments for keeping. I really don't have a strong opinion about this, and I'm biased, both as a Language committee member, and as a Jewish Israeli Hebrew speaker. I will comment about a few things, however, just for the record.

Everyone agrees that the language is frequently used to study Jewish religious books by many people. It is also definitely used to write some new religious books, often mixed with Hebrew. A more curious question is this: Is it used to write other things outside Wikimedia sites? I kind of heard that it is, but I've never actually seen them. If they exist, then it is definitely legitimate.

If it is not, but serious people want to try to use it to write about other things in a way that will help the many thousands of Yeshiva students learn those things, then it is kind of legitimate, too. All those Yeshiva students also know some other modern language, like Hebrew, English, Yiddish, French, etc., and they can consume Wikipedia in those languages, but perhaps doing it in Aramaic will be more... conducive for learning for some of them? I don't know, and I'm not strongly opposed to letting people experiment with this, as long as the experiment is done in good faith.

The fact that the language is ancient and extinct is, by itself, a good reason for deletion. Ancient Greek, for example, is still here, because there's a lot of content there, and no one invested the effort into moving it elsewhere, but it should be deleted eventually. But the social status of this variety of Aramaic is not quite the same as the social status of Ancient Greek.

The language of the Nash Didan, which was mentioned in this discussion, is in the Aramaic family, but it's very different from tmr. It's a small and endangered, but nevertheless living language, and if someone can write this language and wants to develop a Wikipedia in it, it's definitely eligible, although it will be challenging in practice for other reasons. In any case, it's not really related to the discussion about tmr.

These are my 2 agorot. Administrators shouldn't make decisions based just on this contribution by me. Other community members and Language committee are welcome to chime in. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Amire80 For the Nash Didan, if it's really "very different from tmr. It's a small and endangered, but nevertheless living language", then "I'm afraid" of the "I'm afraid", it would just be a new language which previously didn't have language code(s) ever, and in that case, starting any projects using tmr language code would be tricky wrong (like the jat case above, which jat is assigned as "Jakati", Ethnologue consider it as Inku in Afghanistan, but contributors added contents in "Jatki" (which doesn't have a code) using this code). This new language should seek for requesting a new code via the Google form I mentioned above, but even to do so, then how to name it? Just Nash Didan as language name?

There are two Aramaic languages which are defined as living languages by SIL, allow me to repeat here please, Assyrian Neo-Aramaic (aii) and Chaldean Neo-Aramaic (cld), so how about merging tmr projects into Wp/aii? Or move to Wp/cld? Shouldn't either ways be less controversial if their wishes are just having a Wikipedia? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aramaic is not one language, but a family of many languages that are significantly different: different vocabulary, different grammar, different writing systems, different times, and different cultures. Of course, there are some similarities between them, too, but there are more than enough differences that justify separate language codes and separate wikis.

The language of the Nash Didan has a code, trg.

aii and cld are perhaps similar or even identical to each other. AFAIK, there is some activity in aii, and no one tried any activity in cld, so it's not an issue. In any case, they are definitely different from tmr.

aii and trg are different from each other, but they are both living and each of them is eligible for Wikipedia.

tmr is different from both aii and trg. The last request for a Wikipedia in it was rejected. A new one can be made, but I prefer if other Language committee members decide about it if it happens.

(Perhaps I should also mention that in theory, there could be a Wikisource in tmr, but in practice, a lot of content in this language is already included in the Hebrew Wikisource because books are usually not written exclusively in tmr, but in a mix of tmr and Hebrew, and they are part of the same culture, so a separate Wikisource in tmr is probably not needed. Going even further, a Wikisource in Classical Aramaic would probably be very useful, but it would have to be established by someone who knows the language well. It would probably use code arc, syc, or aii. But that, too, is a completely separate discussion.) Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:57, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The language spoken by the Nash Didan community, known as Jewish Neo-Aramaic, is a direct descendant of JBA. This is because the Nash Didan are direct descendants of the Jewish Babylonian diaspora.

The Nash Didan community’s language and cultural heritage represent a modern continuation and evolution of JBA. While JBA has been preserved in its classical form, the dialect spoken by the Nash Didan are descendant branch that developed from the same cultural and linguistic roots.

In this way, JBA serves as the classical, literary form, while Jewish Neo-Aramaic functions as its modern living form. This is why Jewish Neo-Aramaic is also called Targum (see here).

Although Jewish Neo-Aramaic, has evolved over centuries and includes some borrowed words from Persian or Kurdish, it remains remarkably similar to JBA. As a fluent JBA speaker, I can personally attest to the fact that almost all the Aramaic words in Nash Didan are comprehensible to me. This highlights that Jewish Neo-Aramaic is rather a modern, slightly adapted form of JBA.

While, of course, the Nash Didan community is welcome to create a Wikipedia in their own dialect if they wish, a Wikipedia in JBA still directly supports their linguistic and cultural heritage. Eliahu21 (talk) 22:59, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, how about rename this project to Wp/trg? Will that way be uncontroversial too? Otherwise as said, even you created a RFL for tmr project right now, you will only see it been rejected some months later, it won't be eligible, approved and created, really won't. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226, I asked you many times: You are not in the Language committee, so please don't tell people what the Language committee will decide. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 00:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Project has been rejected by LangCom. Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 04:26, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iohanen, I find this decision quite surprising and unfortunate. It's true that the request on Meta was rejected (long ago), but there's nevertheless a certain degree of separation between the requests there and the existence of the content here. Whether this separation is good a bad is a separate discussion, but currently, it exists. And here on the Incubator, there was clearly no consensus to just delete this content outright—there was some support, but also some opposition. I recommend restoring it. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Amire80: I do think it is unfortunate, but as the policy states, having been rejected by LangCom is a reason to be deleted (and I was also careful to check for a second request, which didn't exist). Another factor is that the language is extinct.

If we are to restore it, would it ever be approved, considering that the language is extinct? I can't think of a reason to say it would. This languages serves its purpose, as stated by some members, to study the Talmud and the Jewish faith in general, so how could a Wikimedia project be benefitial for it (ignoring the fact that it is extinct)? Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 14:09, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is, we can restore it if need be, but is it really that useful? Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 14:15, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my "Neutral" response, I listed several possible scenarios in which it can be useful despite being mostly extinct. I say "mostly" because it is used for some modern original writing, and my impression is that it is more alive in this regard than Latin or Ancient Greek are, for example. However, because this is only an impression and because I can't provide more solid references to back it up, and also because I have some cultural connection to it myself, and hence I have a conceivable conflict of interest, I prefer if other Language committee members weighed in on whether it would ever be approved. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would be very helpful to have a third-party LangCom opinion ;) I myself am a supporter of having Ancient or Extinct language wikis, but this is purely because I'm interested in them, so it is merely because of a feeling attached to it. I can also see, and agree, why their creation was prohibited in the first place. There isn't a native community that would actually benefit of having the knowledge in the language, and I think this is the case for tmr, where it would (most probably, I'm guessing here) be used by Hebrew-speakers (or other languages spoken by the Jewish people, as you said in your neutral responde) who have access to the Hebrew (or other) wiki! Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 21:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iohanen As a native Jewish Babylonian Aramaic speaker, allow me to say, that this project is extremely helpful! Not only for the many thousands of orthodox Jews and Yeshiva student that this can help them understand the language deeper, but also to the numerous people who study this language in universities or by themselves as well! People are desperate for contents in JBA such as Wikipedia. I can send you lots of examples via your email if you want.

Also, this language is NOT extinct! Please read the arguments made above (which I doubt you even took the time to read), before taking hasty actions. Cheder pik (talk) 18:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, the only problem with the language is the fact it is extinct. I'm not responsible for determining if it is extinct or not, on Incubator, we base ourselves on the academical determination of it: ISO 639-3, 639-1, Glottolog, etc. Both SIL's ISO 639-3 and Glottolog consider it an extinct language, and if you truly are a native speaker (which I highly doubt), you should instead make them consider it Living, not us. After doing so, you should restart the project (and I'm very open to restoring the old pages), make a new Meta request for a new language and then it'll probably be approved. Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Like Amire80 previously said, a member of LangCom himself, the fact that this project is most helpful for so many people makes it eligible for getting a Wikipedia. And this point has been made clear throughout this discussion (which I still urge you to read) Cheder pik (talk) 20:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, although tmr is incorrectly defined by SIL as extinct, there are another Jewish Aramaic dialects derived from tmr, like lsd and trg which are indisputably living, and were also represented by this project (see discussion above). You should have considered them as well! Cheder pik (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is better idea to move to Incubator Plus 178.240.128.233 21:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As per the I:Deletion policy: "Remember that this has nothing directly to do with the decision of the language committee (langcom).". Also, Amire80 clearly stated "I prefer if other Language committee members weighed in on whether it would ever be approved.". The languages derived from tmr should have their own projects, since they have their own ISO 639-3 code. Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iohanen For record, one user who oppose above submitted a RFL: m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Jewish Babylonian Aramaic 2. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Iohanen,

I hope you are open for a reconsideration of the deletion. While I understand the concern that TMR is classified as an extinct language by SIL, I would like to present substantial evidence (in addition to those mentioned above) that it is, in fact, actively used and remains culturally significant.

1. Usage in Literature

Apart from Torah books published daily, there are modern thriller and fantasy books written in TMR, such as the novel חרשתא.

Example of modern prose: Link
Example of poetry: Link

2. Usage in Film

TMR is used in major films, including Hollywood productions and Jewish Orthodox films:

The Passion of the Christ
The Order
Stigmata
The Vatican Tapes
Jewish Orthodox films such as:
- ישר דרך
- אבא תחנא
- Further references: IMDB Aramaic Films

3. Usage in Comedy and Media

TMR appears in popular Israeli media and satire:

אוירא דצה"ל משביזא
היהודים באים - חידון ארמית
כל מאי דעבידת
מנלן אהלן
חיא בסרטא

4. Usage in Music and Theatre

Numerous songs in TMR are released regularly.
As a translator, I frequently receive requests for TMR translations for theatrical performances.

5. Usage as a Secret Language

During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the Orthodox community in Israel used TMR as a secret language to conduct religious gatherings unnoticed by authorities.

Documentation and photos: Link
Additional reference: Link

6. Presence in Israeli Culture and Legal System

The IDF has a unit named איפכא מסתברא based on an Aramaic phrase. There are many others.
Legal phrases in TMR remain in use: Article on Aramaic in Israeli Law

7. Integration into Modern Hebrew and Other Languages

Many modern Hebrew words are borrowed from TMR: List in Hebrew Wiktionary

I have submitted a second RFL for TMR, and I also plan to request a status change from SIL to classify it as a living language. However, such administrative processes take time.

Given this, I respectfully urge you to restore the Jewish Babylonian Aramaic Wikipedia and grant an extension until SIL makes its decision and LangCom reviews the new request.

Please give the TMR-speaking community another chance to prove its eligibility and value.

In summary, there is no written policy stating that the approval of a new Wikipedia language is based solely on SIL definitions. As you previously said, the decision ultimately lies with LangCom members. I urge you to recognize the difference between TMR and languages such as Latin or Ancient Greek and to consider the unique importance and invaluable contribution of a TMR Wikipedia project. Eliahu21 (talk) 22:38, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll restore the articles, since you guys made another request for a new language. I'm going to do it as soon as I can use my PC (probably some 12h after this comment). There's no need to provide me reasoning for its living status.

I hope you can change its status with SIL, best regards, Iohanen (Garcez) (talk) 03:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/tmr has been restored. I'll consider this discussion resolved. — Garcez (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very much appreciated. Thank you 🙏 Eliahu21 (talk) 19:19, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wt/pal

Ancient language. Pages aren't written in Pahlavi language. 188.58.59.123 13:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do support the deletion, although what makes you think that pages are not in pahlavi? As far as i can tell they are in pahlavi. 5.183.29.95 11:34, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Garcez (talk) 16:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 16:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wt/roa-tara and Wy/be-tarask

Invalid codes 31.142.28.134 16:37, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Wt/roa-tara was deleted. Wy/be-tarask exists under special circumstances and wasn't deleted. — Garcez (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 16:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Non-deleted pages of created wikis

178.247.189.103 10:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly

Done. I'm not able to delete MediaWiki pages, so maybe @Sotiale or @Syunsyunminmin could delete it? — Garcez (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Rest was deleted. Syunsyunminmin (talk) 02:34, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also Special:PrefixIndex/Help talk:Wt/ckb 31.143.95.183 12:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin (talk) 02:34, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wy/war, Wt/hil, Wy/pag, Wy/ilo, Wt/ilp, Wy/cbk-zam...

Please review Wy/war, Wt/hil... as multiple empty pages have been created by a user—requesting deletion or replacement with a “To be created” template. --ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 20:23, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Garcez (talk) 04:40, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 04:40, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/gib

Looks like a joke. The wiki creator claims that wp/gib written in Gibberish language. But gibberish is NOT a language. Let's delete this test project. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 18:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete Just spam, someone stole Gibanawa language code as their own fandom. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:31, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Garcez (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 03:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/gml

Historical language. The project has only main page 31.143.85.148 15:55, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion. Таёжный лес (talk) 09:57, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 10:41, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 10:41, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Non-deleted pages of created wikis 2

I propose to delete pages from Special:PrefixIndex/Help talk:Wt/ckb, as suggested 31.143.95.183. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 09:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the 1 page there. --MF-W {a, b} 09:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 10:15, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you also delete here: https://incubator.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Template+talk%3Awy%2Fid&namespace=0 https://incubator.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Wp%2Fmos&namespace=14 https://incubator.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Wp%2Fkge&namespace=14 https://incubator.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Wp%2Fann&namespace=14#/search https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?namespace=14&prefix=Wp%2Ftdd https://incubator.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Wt%2Ftcy&namespace=14 https://incubator.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Wt%2Fmad&namespace=14? Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 19:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sorry i dont understand, how i should delete? Saad Dargan (talk) 08:44, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither me nor you can do it. Only administrators can delete pages. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 11:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The rest will be deleted in due course. --MF-W {a, b} 10:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 10:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Pages of Wt/fil

Filipino Wiktionary has been deleted 176.89.3.13 12:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Garcez (talk) 15:10, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 15:10, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/chg

Extinct language. It has only main page. 31.142.17.39 17:37, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion. Таёжный лес (talk) 09:57, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Garcez (talk) 15:05, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 15:05, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/na

This incubator project is empty now that all the pages that could not be verified to be in Nauruan have been deleted. -Yupik (talk) 12:55, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --MF-W {a, b} 09:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MF-Warburg, Ehh what Yupik asked here is requesting Wp/na infopage itself be also deleted, right? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:02, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The info page is not to be deleted, it informs about why the test-wiki content was deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 17:21, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 09:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Wp/oge

This has already been rejected because it's a historical language.
SIL still classifies it as historical and Ethnologue doesn't even have a page for it.
Due to this, it seems like a somewhat safe bet to say that this should be migrated to Incubator Plus, due to the Language proposal policy. Kxeon (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Move to Incubator Plus. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 06:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to the Incubator Plus. It has useful content. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ping User:Ooswesthoesbes for possible Incubator Plus action. --MF-W {a, b} 11:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:MF-Warburg: This one was smaller, so done (). You can go ahead and delete it. --OWTB (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 12:05, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 12:05, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Wq/mul

This has been rejected before and just like the Wp/mul, it's also rejected in other wikis also in here 76.121.149.140 16:02, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on. Please see also. m:Wikidata/Development/Wikiquote and m:Structured Wikiquote that I do not know how they are going on. To delete it, we have to export the contents to language-specific Wikiquotes.--Jusjih (talk) 01:56, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's already Wikiquote in other languages but a multilingual language Wikipedia was rejected before. The same thing applies that happened before at multilingual language Wiktionary, multilingual language Wikibooks, and the multilingual language Wikinews 76.121.149.140 03:40, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikiquote_Multilingual, it says it's been rejected 76.121.149.140 03:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now ready to delete all 16 pages in the main namespace while exported to Chinese Wikiquote with non-Chinese quotes noted in ISO 639 codes there. Category:Wq/mul and the templates] may also be deleted while no value to export to Chinese Wikiquote. Other namespaces have nothing.--Jusjih (talk) 17:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 16:05, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 16:05, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/omp

I would like to propose the deletion of Wp/omp (Ancient Meitei Wikipedia) because Wp/mni (Manipuri Wikipedia) has already been approved. The Wp/omp project has been inactive since May 2021. It seems that the "omp" content can be accommodated in Wt/mni, and the resources may be a better fit for Wikisource. I would like to hear more opinions from the community on this proposal. --ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 11:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Migrate to Incubator Plus, then delete Nothing else to say, as a historical language, it violates LPP. If contributors want, they can just contribute mniwiki. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can be deleted or merged 🐲 Lu ^{ꯋꯥ ꯍꯥꯏꯐꯝ (talk)} 15:36, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Incubator Plus, test project has many articles. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 11:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Migrate then delete per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this should be deleted, is anyone still able to migrate pages to Incubator Plus? If not, I'm happy to delete without that. --MF-W {a, b} 12:36, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, you're not an Admin on Incubator Plus 2.0? Kxeon (talk) 04:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not. --MF-W {a, b} 09:51, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weird. Kxeon (talk) 02:30, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Ooswesthoesbes, do you want to do a migration? --MF-W {a, b} 11:50, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it will have to wait until after the weekend. --OWTB (talk) 11:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@User:MF-Warburg: This one is also Done. You can go ahead and delete it here :) --OWTB (talk) 10:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget to import Template:Wp/omp/ꯃꯂꯨ ꯑꯣꯏꯄ ꯂꯃꯥꯏ/styles.css (and, if there's no alternative, Module:Wp/omp/ConvertDigit too) Kxeon (talk) 18:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Importing "Template:Wp/omp/ꯃꯂꯨ ꯑꯣꯏꯄ ꯂꯃꯥꯏ/styles.css" gives the failure that it doesn't recognize "sanitized css". --OWTB (talk) 06:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You (or someone else with crat rights on the wiki) needs to enable TemplateStyles via https://incubator.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:ManageWiki/extensions Pppery (talk) 03:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. Should be fixed now :) --OWTB (talk) 11:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to everyone who helped, the project is being deleted now. --MF-W {a, b} 13:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 13:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Wp/ayl

This is Libyan Arabic. Seemingly, this should be merged into Incubator Plus.
„The language must be sufficiently unique that it could not coexist on a more general wiki. In most cases, this excludes regional dialects and different written forms of the same language.“ -Language Proposal Policy § Requisites for eligibility Criterion 3 Kxeon (talk) 18:26, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any evidence will be? This has a language ISO code. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 16:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Trentman and Sonia Shiri - The Mutual Intelligibility of Arabic Dialects: Implications for the Language Classroom, and also Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Libyan Arabic. Please tell me if that's insufficient. Kxeon (talk) 15:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The publication does not say that the Libyan dialect (or very little) does not differ from the standard Arabic. There are already Wikipedias in Egyptian and Moroccan dialects. There was also no evidence in the discussion on the Meta, and the request itself was closed due to the lack of active participants. Thus, there are no arguments in favor of closing the test project - Keep. --Danvintius Bookix (talk) 10:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I didn't check Q97393767 (Moroccan Arabic Wikipedia) on Wikidata. Q2374285 (Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia) also got in in 2008, after the LPP was enacted.

A very reasonable argument could be made saying that if Moroccan Arabic and Egyptian Arabic were allowed, by that logic, Libyan Arabic should be too. Really should have thought of those two. Whoops.

Considering what happened over there; I'm not expecting anybody to jump in any time soon. Some say it's a dialect. Some say it's a separate language entirely. Some say it's harder to understand, some say it's actually mutually intelligible. Had I done more research than what I went into, I may not have even made his request. So, now I'm Neutral, and due to the existence of the Moroccan and Egyptian Arabic Wikipedias, slightly leaning towards keep? Still unsure about it though, on whether or not this should be allowed or not. Kxeon (talk) 00:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Per nom, for the record, there are too much of membership language codes of the macro-Arabic (ar) which created their test projects, two of em are nowadays launched for years and some got their RFL eligible. Needs linguistics from this area to provide suggestions. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Libyan dialect is really unique, yes Tunisian is similar to it but there are still major differences. Libyan has taken tons of loanwords from Italian which makes it unique, Wikipedia even has a word list for them. You can't restrict millions from reading Wikipedia in their own dialect. Best iraqi (talk) 15:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by Kxeon (talk) 21:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC) Forgot about the other Arabic dialects getting Wikipedias too. I voted neutral when the source that I went off of turned out to not explicitly say Libyan Arabic isn't too different from Modern Standard Arabic. Should have closed this down the second this was shown to me.[reply]

Plus, someone else also came in and said Libyan Arabic is extremely different.
But instead of closing it, I left it here and let it go stale, waiting for a discussion that may already be dead to be revived.
Unfortunately, it was not revived. So... yeah. If other information is found then this may come back but for now, resolved.
Basically, other Arabic Wikipedias exist of the same type; so in this case Libyan Arabic should be fine.

Wp/crn, wp/ham, Wp/han, Wp/hma

The projects look like a joke. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support The langugaes are the joke and the languages are never created and some the pages are having 1 pages. LiamRobinos123 (talk) 14:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello this is the creator, yes those are joke wikipedias and they have never existed. Isthisthing (talk) 17:40, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also why is wn/twd in a proposal of deletion? Isthisthing (talk) 17:58, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the proposal to delete wn/twd. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! Isthisthing (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pages created by Isthisthing were deleted. Please stop these nonsense edits, or you will be blocked. --MF-W {a, b} 12:44, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

didnt need to delete the tweants ones. Isthisthing (talk) 02:14, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are already available on nds-nlwiki afaik: nds-nl:Kategorie:Tweants artikel. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:55, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:55, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/zsm

So far, a request for creating a separate Malay Wikipedia using Jawi scripts (m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Standard Malay (Jawi), designed Arabic script for Malay peninsula & archipelago) has rejected recently, under those discussions, a script converter should be developed if needed in regard to respond Brunei Darussalam where they treat Jawi as co-official scripts. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:48, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support It is better to add script converter to Malay Wikipedia and remove Wp/zsm. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 08:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/alr

This is for the Alutor language, spoken by fewer than 200 people in the far east of Russia. It has never had any content except a boilerplate main page. Theoretically, it is eligible for a Wikipedia, but if serious people who know it come, they should start it from scratch. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:08, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support like for Wp/kpy. Таёжный лес (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

deleted Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:27, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:27, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/aoa

This is for the Angolar Creole language.

It can be eligible, but there's no actual content in this Incubator except two invalid redirect pages (I've just proposed them for speedy deletion). Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:21, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/eve

This page was re-created by @Migueldesouzasoalsnhhsbh: some weeks ago after last deletion, but that user didn't else contributed anything here, due to very low number of speakers (eventually, they are all older adults, by counting both L1+L2 speakers), I don't have any hopes on real contributors from them. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems already deleted. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:26, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/aqc

This is for the Archi language. It appears to have a lot of pages, but in fact, virtually all of them were created by @Languages309, who doesn't know the language, and who has a history of contributing in languages they don't know.

Most of the articles are stubs about colors or numbers. Some of them look long and substantial, like the ones about oceans or continents, but on closer inspection, it becomes obvious that they are actually not really written by someone who knows Archi, but copied word after word from a dictionary, with some glaring translation mistakes that could only happen if someone was translating from English through Russian and mistranslated a word from English into Russian.

Such things may be done out of good intentions to develop a language, but actually, they only cause damage. If someone who actually knows the language reads it, it will look like nonsense, and they won't want to contribute to it. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:42, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 02:43, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 02:43, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/ruo

Project contains only six articles, each of which contains only the title or title with a translation into another language. The main page contains only one sentence in Istro-Romanian. Таёжный лес (talk) 17:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral That rejected RFL was wrongly claiming "Morlakian", where Istro Romanian has 1,400 speakers (of which 300 of them are L1 speakers), contact hrwiki users first? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:40, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep so what. What are the benefits of deleting this? There's 0. Leave the project, and if one day an Istro-Romanian speaker comes, even if it's in 2040, they'll have a project to work on. Maybe they would not know otherwise how to create an Incubator project or that they can in the first place. We already missed a chance to attract an Istro-Romanian speaker because no Incubator existed (they never responded to my comment just one month and a half later ). Why'd you want that number to be any higher?

By the way, I wasn't even warned of this deletion request by the nominator. It had to be another user 3 days later. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And what are the benefits of wasting server space now? When they come they can easily re-create the project. 5.183.29.95 11:33, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha. Not ever has an editor cared about "wasting server space". This is the problem of the wealthy Wikimedia foundation, not yours. Tell me, how does it affect your experience as a reader and/or editor that this project exists in its currently very basic state? It is obvious that a newcomer user will not know how to create an Incubator project. If I or any other don't find them in time to guide them, we just lost another potential native speaker editor. All so that we could save server space on the free, volunteer website. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 17:54, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It seems to me that there are native users of this language community within Wikimedia who try to contribute to the wrong project. However, they are unable to find Wikimedia Incubator. I can relate to this, as some of my community members often write Sylheti in neighboring language projects, and their contributions get reverted (for example: edit and revert/removal) because it’s the wrong language (for neighboring language project). They are unaware that they can contribute to the incubator. --ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, this language belongs to Croatia, a European Union member state, where looks like most "active contributors" are editing hrwiki, only some finger-countable number of editors join Incubator. Now, contact who about the situation? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done — Garcez (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/bzj

Even though this project has longer texts, they all appear to be written by people who have not declared in the Babel boxes that they know the language at all. These same two contributors (three: one appears to be using two different accounts) have contributed to many incubator projects for creoles and pidgins, so those projects will have to be assessed as well later on. Like with the Scots Wikipedia debacle, creoles and pidgins are their own languages, not just bastardized versions of other languages and I fear that this is what is going on here. - Yupik (talk) 11:30, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yupik And, what to do with its RFL that verified as eligible? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:22, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The texts were all corrected by Silvaana Udz,who is a native speaker, member of the Nashanal Kriol Kongsl and also a University professor who has dedicated her life to Bileez Kriol. I understand the concern, given the sad example of Scots Wikipedia, but I made sure the texts were correct. They were even announced by Silvaana herself on the Kriol website Weh Wi Ga Fi Seh Caro de Segeda (talk) 08:44, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Caro de Segeda Are you able to ask Silvaana Udz to register an account here and join contributions in this project? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:06, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose She is a professor at the University of Belize, in addition to being involved in many other endeavors. I have written to her, but I am not sure when she will be able to reply, as she seems quite busy at the moment. Regarding Yupik’s comment, I don’t see an issue with collaborating on different projects. As far as I know, there is no limit to how many projects one can participate in, and it is also not mandatory to list the languages you speak on your user page. For this reason, your argument does not seem particularly convincing, and comes across more as unnecessary criticism of the work being done on that project. Caro de Segeda (talk) 07:30, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Once a native speaker or one who can speak it sees that it exists at least here, maybe they will want to contribute. By having it here we are giving them some visibility, what is crucially important for these languages, and may be a decisive factor for someone to contribute.Andrijko Z. (talk) 01:09, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep However in this very case, Caro de Segeda above explained a helper which is native speaker, so this project at least meets policy, and as the RFL is eligible, why can't we give this user a chance? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:47, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am Silvaana Udz, native speaker of Kriol and I assisted with the creation and translation of these pages. I support keeping up this very valuable resource, especially as our (team from the National Kriol Council of Belize)second edition of the Kriol-English dictionary is now published and available free online. 191.97.83.79 23:51, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@191.97.83.79: I guess you're discussing bzj one, so I merged your section into here. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:00, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Caro de Segeda and Silvaana Udz: thank you for clarifying the situation and my sincerest apologies for having put it up for deletion. I hope to see the council expanding this Wikipedia version in the future! I would like to withdraw my request for deletion for this incubator project. - Yupik (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, one thing that we have been doing for Skolt Saami is adding labels, descriptions, and aliases to Wikidata items in Skolt, since no one has time to write Wikipedia articles (everyone in the community who could is already extremely overworked). These have started to show in search engine results and we hope that the Finnish organizations and institutions that link to Wikidata or use Wikidata will start using the Skolt versions too since they already use them in its sister language Northern Saami. - Yupik (talk) 15:00, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected. As the comments here explain, it seems that most of it is indeed Belizian Creole. — Garcez (talk) 20:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 20:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/ese

Empty project, not a single page. - Yupik (talk) 11:31, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete no contents created for several decades. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it used to have contents in a wrong language, and then it was deleted. --OWTB (talk) 11:35, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ooswesthoesbes You mean Incubator:Requests for deletions/Archive/3#Wp/ese? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:18, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. --OWTB (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Garcez (talk) 20:47, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 20:47, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/hit

Hittite is an extinct language spoken in the bronze-age in Mesopotamia. This language should be rejected because it will be very hard to translate stuff into Hittite of an ancient language. Super Wiki Action Bros (talk) 01:48, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is already deleted for 8 years, isn't that, Or are you requesting for undeletion? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. No need to engage further with this troll/language hijacker. --MF-W {a, b} 13:52, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: — Garcez (talk) 20:57, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/neg

This is for the Negidal language, spoken by several hundreds of people in the far east of Russia. It has never had any content except a boilerplate main page. Theoretically, it is eligible for a Wikipedia, but if serious people who know it come, they should start it from scratch. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might be related to the Even case previously discussed, since Ethnologue confirms only 22 speakers, and based on current Russia's international situation (being sanctioned, cut-off from many trade and society communications, etc.), I don't against deletion due to very hard to touch them. But shouldn't Wt/neg be also discussed here? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:30, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, there is a serious problem that Negidal Wikipedia has no articles for reading, editing and discussing, except for a main page written in Russian, rather than Negidal, just like Amir mentioned above. Thus, this project can be regarded as a failure.

Secondly, it is also significant that as Liuxinyu970226 pointed out above, the international environment surrounding Russia nowadays is complex and turbulent, which is not conducive to the implementation of this project. Also, as we can see, even without the current situation, it would be difficult to reach the Amgun River basin where the Negidal speakers live, due to the population and geographical reasons. The Russian Censuses of 2002, 2010 and 2020 all showed that the population of Negidals did not exceed 600, and even fewer people could speak it.

Moreover, according to The endangered state of Negidal: A field report by Brigitte Pakendorf and Natalia Aralova, the Negidal language is expected to extinct within the next decade or two. This is when both native speakers and potential speakers are taken into account. Language vitality of Negidal given by Ethnologue is endangered.

Besides, the Cyrillic writing of Negidar shows slight variations among different authors and publishings.

For these reasons, it is feasible to delete the Negidal Wikipedia. However, In my opinion, it is possible to keep the situation of the Negidal Wiktionary, which contains some Negidal words and Russian translations. Thus, I don't agree with deleting Negidal Wikitionary, maybe we can merge it into other existing projects, either on the incubator or in Wiktionary with a proper domain.--MiiCii (talk) 08:13, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the whole "political situation" thing: why do you think that new wikipedias in languages of Russia would be affected by the sanctions or whatever else? There is nothing military in Siberia and as long as Wikipedia is not banned in Russia altogether there isn't really a reason to believe that the project would suffer. 46.32.69.30 22:53, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support like for previously discussed Siberian projects. Таёжный лес (talk) 19:28, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as discussed above, MiiCii can't speak this language, which is already enough for deletion, this user should better invite at least one real Negidal speaker to register an account here for legal keeping, otherwise it's better to delete such wrongly described cultures. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:43, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 13:35, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 13:35, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wn/shn

Ditto for this non-Wikipedia project, also launched in the last year. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:10, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:41, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 14:41, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/aro

As far as I can ascertain, one native speaker (self-declared) who is also a native speaker of French to boot. Ter Saami -like pages, although there are longer pages too, which are written in Spanish. Longer pages written in "aro" are written by an editor without any competence in the language. - Yupik (talk) 11:41, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and already deleted the page in Spanish. In general, I don't believe the situation is that bad that it requires deletion. --OWTB (talk) 11:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Empty articles may be deleted, but the project should be kept. Once a native speaker or one who can speak it sees that it exists at least here, maybe they will want to contribute. By having it here we are giving them some visibility, what is crucially important for these languages, and may be a decisive factor for someone to contribute.Andrijko Z. (talk) 01:10, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral 110 speakers look like far from establishing a community to contribute. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever a community there is - it exists. Meaningful contribution should stay and be visible. Andrijko Z. (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yupik Will you trust Andrijko Z. above, and give this user a chance to populate such a community by withdrawing your DRs? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:21, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. Many of these pages are created by what we refer to as serial language hijackers who are not working with the actual language community. As I said above in the /Wp/loz discussion: We have already seen multiple projects that the actual community won't touch since they wouldn't be starting from scratch but first have to clean up the mess left behind by people who don't know the language or who falsely claimed to know the language. That is why we delete these types of projects. - Yupik (talk) 14:49, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But actually, unless Andrijko Z. is really able to find one of the 110 speakers to participate, there looks like no benefits for keeping such wrong cultures, we are not UNESCO, so we don't need "Meaningful contribution"s from non-speakers. So far, Delete. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are getting personal. Please keep the conversation respectful and discussion healthy. The level of toxicity from your side to me is too high. I don't appreciate it. Andrijko Z. (talk) 00:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. That's not personal, that's the policy, that non-speakers shouldn't contribute a project unless for some really and rarely necessay cases, and even in those cases, be agreed with real speakers. Generally, non-speakers should also better avoid "technical contributions" unless in the very unlikely cases, under WMF office actions. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:11, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "unless Andrijko Z. is really able to find one of the 110 speakers to participate", it's personal since you mention my name and sarcastically call me for action. You could reformulate your thought on another way without touching my personality in order to stay respectful. Thank you. Andrijko Z. (talk) 00:15, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. It's the fact that you are violating the policy, not me, nor others, so your personality has to be touched. I recommend you to absorb such goodwill criticizes instead of yelling others to not touch you, thanks a lot. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recommendations. Andrijko Z. (talk) 00:31, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep the comment which you then removed here for the record. Andrijko Z. (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly recommend you to remove this, just this, link as it may only lead unnecessary edit wars. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:32, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia remembers every move. @MF-Warburg could you please interfere? Thank you. Andrijko Z. (talk) 00:34, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if I yelled you. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:37, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. Anyway, there is Incubator, not Wikipedia, so I don't know why are you referring "Wikipedia remembers every move." Since most of Wikipedians don't familiar with Incubator without enough searching. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:22, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Liuxinyu970226, User:Andrijko Z., I see you are having similar discussions about whether some projects should be deleted in multiple sections of this page. I'd ask you both to refrain from repeating the same exchange of arguments multiple times. - Liuxinyu970226, you have been warned multiple times about your communication style already and this is yet another instance of you bothering others in a passive-aggressive style and using strawman arguments. Please consider this your final warning. --MF-W {a, b} 12:16, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll fully refrain from touching that user by now. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not just about your communication with one user. -- MF-W {a, b} 06:55, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 22:26, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 22:26, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Wp/ann, Wp/iba and Wp/nr

They were launched as official Wikipedias in the last year, and since then several new Wikipedias are also approved and launched, not sure whether there are still contents yet to be exported to those sites. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:06, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will be deleted in due time. --MF-W {a, b} 22:26, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 22:26, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Wp/enf

One of the plenty non-speakers created Siberian wikis (see #Wp/oac, #Wt/oac, #Wp/dlg, #Wp/kim, #Wp/eve,_Wt/eve,_Wb/eve cases).

All 200 articles doesn't contain any encyclopedical info, only one-sentence pages about:

months ("X — first/second/third/... month of the year")
animals ("X — animal" (or fishes)
birds ("X — bird")
games ("X — board game")
cities ("X — Y-ian city")
Wikipedias ("X Wikipedia — Wikipedia")
days of the week ("X — day of the week")
countries ("X — Y-an country. X' capital — Z.")
continents ("X — континент^{non-adapted Russian coinage}", even Oceania)
flags ("X' лобтучи — лобтучи, X' символ^{non-adapted Russian coinage})
numbers ("X — число^{non-adapted Russian coinage}")
letters ("X — кириллица'^{non-adapted Russian coinage} буква^{non-adapted Russian coinage}")
transport ("X — транспорт^{non-adapted Russian coinage}")

or without any text, except for name of article and English-Russian translations.

Some of the words used in the wiki don't even exist in Enets: word "ногомяч" used for footbal, which is a humorous-pseudopuristic Russian term. None of the interface was ever translated, main page is half-English half-Russian. (except from name, which is literally "main" or "head"). 2012's RFL was rejected. Таёжный лес (talk) 14:12, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No objection to reopen it if real speakers come.

Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 22:13, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 22:13, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Wt/kea

Could you delete these 2 pages:

https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/kea/internacional https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/kea/portugu%C3%AAs

Both words were added with wrong spelling and then they were correctly added here: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/kea/internasional https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/kea/purtug%C3%AAs ~2025-41645-88 (talk) 14:54, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --MF-W {a, b} 16:21, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: 🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 22:26, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wy/id, Wp/knc, Wp/tdd, Wq/gor, wp/tig, wt/tcy, wp/mos, Wp/rsk

I propose to remove those wikiprojects from Incubator because they were imported and created a long time ago. Пан Хаунд 2 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1, they are launched for 3+ months, and since then some other wikis also got approved. Wp/rsk & Wp/mos look like ditto. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wp/mos and wq/gor had been deleted . Ninja✮Strikers ^«☎» 15:09, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 11:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Wp/loz

Similar to the Ter Saami case: 16 pages, 13 of which have a photo and nothing else. Front page is English and one sentence appearing to be in loz, but not written by anyone with a self-declared skill level above 2. All pages created by people who are not native speakers of the language or who belong to the community. - Yupik (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily agree that having picture only articles requires deletion. Instead, it requires expansion. --OWTB (talk) 11:34, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have already seen multiple projects that the actual community won't touch since they wouldn't be starting from scratch but first have to clean up the mess left behind by people who don't know the language or who falsely claimed to know the language. That is why we delete these types of projects. - Yupik (talk) 14:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Once a native speaker or one who can speak it sees that it exists at least here, maybe they will want to contribute. By having it here we are giving them some visibility, what is crucially important for these languages, and may be a decisive factor for someone to contribute.Andrijko Z. (talk) 01:07, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even though has 725,000 speakers, there are no evidences Andrijko Z. or other participants are too, so it's better to delete such wrong cultures, better to invite such speakers before "keeping". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 11:42, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 11:42, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Wp/mkw

Wp/mkw has only a boilerplate Main Page in French, and two more pages that were written by a user who probably doesn't know the language, and that have practically no content: Wp/mkw/Amelika and Wp/mkw/Afelika. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 16:57, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this was created by @DaveZ123 5 years ago, do this user still have interests in this language in two African states? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only created the Main Page but not the stubs Wp/mkw/Amelika and Wp/mkw/Afelika. My opinion is the same as that of User:Andrijko_Z.: Empty articles or picture-only articles with no sentence may be deleted so you can delete those two pages if you wish; but the project Main Page should be kept. Most of the urban inhabitants in the DRC have a passable knowledge of French. There are currently 180,420 articles on Wikimedia Incubator so keeping just the Main Page of that language is not too much to ask. The Main Page contains instructions on how to create a page. Once a native speaker or one who can speak it sees that it exists at least here, maybe they will want to contribute. By having it here we are giving them some visibility, which is crucially important for these languages, and may be a decisive factor for someone to contribute. Take for example this page. Today it has now become this. Wp/mkw is spoken by 17 million first language speakers so there is no need to delete the Main Page as was done on Wp/sxu.--DaveZ123 (talk) 10:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, the main page is not supposed to be in French, even if many people who know this language also know French. It's supposed to be in Kituba. And the policy is that it's supposed to be written by people who know Kituba. Do you know Kituba, @DaveZ123? Or do you know anyone who does?

I agree that visibility for all languages would be a good idea, but creating pages for arbitrary languages is not the right way to achieve it. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have not contacted any Kituba speakers at present as this is not the language I am currently prioritizing on. If you want to delete the whole Wp/mkw, I am not going to object to it. While you are at it, perhaps you can look into Wp/kim/Main_Page? --DaveZ123 (talk) 04:14, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's indeed a different case from Upper Saxon (sxu), as sxu is only considered as a regional dialect of German and furthermore, German Wikipedia already allowed Upper Saxon contents. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:44, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 11:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 11:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Wp/kim

Practically all the content there was created by @Kys-yaponiya, whose user page says that their level of knowledge in this language is kim-0.

The language is small, but eligible (at least if you ask me). However, content is supposed to be created by people who know the language. If someone who knows the language comes and wants to create it, I will welcome it. Till then, the current content doesn't help it. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 03:58, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, first of all I don't understand Tofa language. I contribute because I love the Tofa language and culture, but I often make grammatical and spelling mistakes in Tofa. I actually have the same opinion. think that it would be better for someone who truly understands Tofa to contribute. Kys-yaponiya (talk) 11:42, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tend to support deletion, due to only contributed by non-speakers. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:47, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Contribution without knowledge is not very good, especially with such articles. Recognizing all the Kys-yaponiya's efforts (only 1 article existed before he arrived), also tend to support deletion. Таёжный лес (talk) 22:57, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 11:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 11:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Wp/oac, Wt/oac

Dubious quality:

Contains nothing but template-created Russian-written main page and an article about that language awkwardly written mostly by Russian words.
Written in Russian except article's headers "Орочи кэсэни", word кэсэни in the translations section and article's names. Not wanting to underestimate the efforts of @MiCii, I have to admit that the content of the Oroch Wiktionary isn't Oroch by its language.

See #Wp/neg, #Wp/alr, #Wp/dlg, #Wp/kpy, #Wp/eve,_Wt/eve,_Wb/eve cases. Таёжный лес (talk) 21:57, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For record, that user name is @MiiCii, neg and alr are discussing above, dlg is re-incubating by (under Jon Gua's claim) real speaker Sauit and RFL is eligible, kpy is deleted, Wp/eve itself is recently re-created by a new user who didn't continue contributing, I asked for some details. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:31, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Due to account problems, I can't view Ethnologue's language status field anymore, per Ethnologue for Low-Income Countries, this is nowadays granted per requests, but the bottom-right purple icon for such requests can't work for me. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In this page, @Liuxinyu970226 created a List of "test wikis" of Tungusic languages. The table concisely and intuitively reflects the projects in Tungusic languages in Wikimedia Incubator. The current status of test projects is listed below:

1. Wp/eve (Even Wikipedia): No page.

2. Wp/evn (Evenki Wikipedia): 32 pages, including Main pages and Templates. At least 3 of them were pointed out by an user as being in wrong language or being empty.

3. Wp/neg (Negidal Wikipedia): Main page only, which is written in Russian, rather than in Negidal. The test project has been nominated for deletion.

4. Wp/orh (Oroqen Wikipedia): Main page and an entry awkwardly written only. It is necessary to consider deleting this test project.

5. Wp/ude (Udege Wikipedia): Main page and an entry only.

6. Wp/juc (Jurchen Wikipedia): Deleted, redirected to Wp/mnc.

7. Wp/mnc (Manchu Wikipedia): 2,762 pages, including Main pages and Templates.

8. Wp/sjo (Xibe Wikipedia): 35 pages, without considering 8 Templates.

9. Wp/gld (Nanai Wikipedia): 63 pages, including Main pages and Templates.

10. Wp/oaa (Orok Wikipedia): 59 pages, including Main pages and Templates, most of them are empty or with very little contents. It is necessary to consider deleting this test project.

11. Wp/ulc (Ulch Wikipedia): Main page, 2 templates and an entry with little contents only. It is necessary to consider deleting this test project.

12. Wt/eve (Even Wiktionary): Deleted.

13. Wt/evn (Evenki Wiktionary): 24 pages, with titles in Cyrillic and unofficial Latin, including Main pages and Templates. There is no unified script for the Evenki language in China, so it is necessary to consider deleting Latin entries.

14. Wt/neg (Negidal Wiktionary): 119 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Some words in this test Wiktionary only have Negidal spelling, without translations in Russian, English or other languages, so these entries can be deleted.

15. Wt/orh (Oroqen Wiktionary): 19 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Most of the entries are numerals in Oroqen.

16. Wt/oac (Oroch Wiktionary): 98 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Only some of the entries have Russian translations. The test project has been nominated for deletion.

17. Wt/ude (Udege Wiktionary): 110 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Only some of the entries have Russian translations.

18. Wt/mnc (Manchu Wiktionary): 21,532 pages. More than 18,600 entries of the Enlarged and Revised Dictionary of Manchu Words (御製增訂清文鑑) and the Pentaglot Dictionary (御製五體清文鑑) have been entered and created. The contents include Manchu and Latin transliterations, which is being proofread.

19. Wt/gld (Nanai Wiktionary): 111 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Only some of the entries have Russian translations. Nanai is a cross-border language, most of the entries in this Test Wiktionary are in Cyrilic.

20. Wt/oaa (Orok Wiktionary): 142 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Only some of the entries have Russian translations.

21. Wt/ulc (Ulch Wiktionary): 134 pages, including Main pages and Templates. Only some of the entries have Russian translations.

22. Wb/mnc (Manchu Wikibooks): 31 pages, including Main pages and Templates. The vast majority of entries are related to the Analects, which is in Mandarin original and Manchu translation.

Except Wb/mnc mentioned above, Wikibooks in other Tungusic languages do not exist.

23. Wq/mnc (Manchu Wikiquote): Main page and an entry containing Nurhaci's quotations only. It will need to be improved later. MiiCii (talk) 05:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Against deletion. Andrijko Z. (talk) 18:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. Why? Are you able to speak Oroch? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:45, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My ability to speak it or not is not decisive to my opinion. It should be preserved as well as any other project. That's it. Andrijko Z. (talk) 00:46, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. No, that's really decisive to you, as Incubator requires test projects be contributed by speakers. See Help:Manual#Step_1:_Requirements: Contribute only in languages that you actually know. Don't write pages by using machine translation, or by copying words from other articles in that language or from dictionaries or textbooks, and so on. If you don't know a language and you want to help it develop, make edits in pages in that language only if you are working directly with people who know that language, but cannot make those edits themselves. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:12, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the tone of your conversation with me and I will not respond to this, but I reserve my right to stand against this nomination because I welcome any efforts made for preserving any contribution on any language. Andrijko Z. (talk) 01:53, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not tone, although that's also not policy and/or guideline, that's the requirement for every test projects, as there's an unwritten rule that, if you can't speak one language, then you should avoid contributing in that language. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is the tone. It's also a good practice to use "one" if you address some issue but are willing to give it as an example, say instead of saying "if you can't speak one language, then you should avoid contributing in that language" it sounds more politely if you say "if ONE can't speak one language, then ONE should avoid contributing in that language". It helps people understand that one doesn't argue with them personally, but makes an example or explains someone's experience. Hope it helps. It them doesn't sound like a "tone". Andrijko Z. (talk) 02:04, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. I don't think my usage of "you" have any problems, since a project can't be retained without human supports, "if one can't speak one language", however, is the sencence that really give nothing useful, as it didn't define the true meaning of "one", it may be randomly understood by e.g. "If Barack Obama can't speak Ukrainian, then Obama should avoid contributing in Ukrainian, but this didn't say Bongbong Marcos, so Marcos can contribute even don't know". Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:14, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or are you arguing that that requirement should be modified to be "Contribute only in languages that one actually know. Don't write pages by using machine translation, or by copying words from other articles in that language or from dictionaries or textbooks, and so on. If one don't know a language and one want to help it develop, make edits in pages in that language only if one are working directly with people who know that language, but cannot make those edits themselves."? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:15, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you used a quotation, please use quotation marks that everyone can understand that it was a quotation and doesn't take it personally. Hope it helps. Andrijko Z. (talk) 02:18, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay: ""Contribute only in languages that one actually know. Don't write pages by using machine translation, or by copying words from other articles in that language or from dictionaries or textbooks, and so on. If one don't know a language and one want to help it develop, make edits in pages in that language only if one are working directly with people who know that language, but cannot make those edits themselves."", do I need more "..."s? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:21, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, it's perfect now. Andrijko Z. (talk) 02:23, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrijko Z. What I mean is that the "..." is already having quote functions, no need to double, triple, quatary... use it. That's not '...' which may be misleaded by citing source codes, or quoting some else texts within quoted sentences. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Andrijko Z. (talk) 02:32, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 00:50, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 00:50, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Wp/jra

A lot of pages that the IP address created while they have no knowledge about the Jarai language are very short, where most of them are only one word and image and some have sentences like "[subject/page name] kơ a [object/article related to the page]". – Higashizakura (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Quality likely to be non-existent since the same IP address has edited many incubator projects in a lot of non-related languages. Typical language hijacker behaviour. - Yupik (talk) 13:33, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 00:46, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. MF-W {a, b} 00:46, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Wp/grc

I used to be an administrator of the ancient greek wiki and looking back on it, it's just a mess. Most articles are so deficient linguistically, that it's an affront to the language for them to even exist. Most people that have written articles, including myself, were and are not skilled enough in the language to write properly. The prose is a syntactic mess that reflects modern greek, english, or any other manner of writing ancient greek except itself. I am close to finishing a classics degree, I know what I am talking about, this wiki makes me cringe. I would need too much time to invest to fix all the bad grammar, vocabulary and syntax present, and even if I had the time - which I don't - it's honestly better to start all over again. Do a service to ancient greek and remove this wiki from the incubator PastelKos (talk) 09:47, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What led you to this change of mind? --MF-W {a, b} 12:44, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Before this section submitted here, I've discussed this matter at the talk page. So far, as the 5th rejection rationale said, Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted, maybe it's the time to migrate to Incubator Plus, like Wp/enm, Wp/goh, etc. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with migrating to Incubator Plus! As for articles being written in bad Greek, whether on the present or a potential new wiki, I don't think that's really an issue- this is a small hobbyist community so "Bad" Greek > no Greek. Besides, there are so many examples of bad Greek being used throughout the ancient and medieval world by both native and non-native speakers alike. Holding ourselves to perfect Attic/Koine Greek is certainly a noble goal, but it would probably discourage more people from contributing. Debosneed (talk) 09:41, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Debosneed @PastelKos @Liuxinyu970226 @MF-Warburg Συμφωνώ με την πολιτική πως κακά ελληνικά > καθόλου ελληνικά. BILL1 (talk) 14:45, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, οὐκ ἔστι οὕτω κακόν. The Ancient Greek Wikipedia is pretty good, as long as you’re searching for something that has anything to do with mythology, cities, countries, languages, Christianity or cultural topics.

There are some influences from modern Greek, but the worst part about that is the lack of accentuation that is so crucial in the ancient language — and the neologisms are also questionable when they’re derived from modern versions of the language.

Plus, the Orthodox churches still speak Ancient Greek for administrative and official purposes, and some use ΛΟΓΟΣ or Ἀθήναζε.

However, migration is still better than deletion. But it is still too early for that. Reputa qui sis (talk) 16:11, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree: It's pretty clear that this should probably not be deleted entirely. Hopefully unlike kl.wiki, it doesn't have too much of a chance of polluting the language with a horribly corrupted version of the language; and as a consequence having the possibility to even kill the language. If it does, which, what I just said would be a VERY extreme case, then fine. But surely that shouldn't be. Kxeon (talk) 22:26, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've just now found out that ~~they~~ someone already tried moving onto Incubator Plus. And its remenants are still there. Kxeon (talk) 18:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...but is that a blessing or a curse; considering there's already something there? Kxeon (talk) 23:43, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information! As far as I understand, what you've found is a copy created in 2008 by a certain LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs, who unfortunately has been inactive for many years, so he cannot provide us with more information.

Apparently, he believed that the Ancient Greek Wikipedia project would have been deleted from the Incubator, so he created that copy. However, soon someone informed him that the project in the Incubator would not have been deleted, so the copy became useless (and soon also obsolete); nonetheless, for some reason it was kept there.

In my opinion, this duplication of the project generates some confusion, but my impression is that the copy was not developed after being created (contrary to the Ancient Greek Wikipedia in the Incubator). Just to be sure, is there a way to consult the list of the Ancient Greek articles in Incubator Plus, or to check the editing history?

In conclusion, I think there should be just one project. At the moment, there is no reason to move it away from the Incubator (I don't think that the GRC encyclopedia would get more visibility on Incubator Plus). Only if the LangCom for some reason decided to delete it, then it would have to be transferred on another website, like Incubator Plus. Anaxicrates (talk) 00:40, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Just to be sure, is there a way to consult the list of the Ancient Greek Articles in Incubator Plus"

There are two of them:

One on Fandom (Incubator Plus)
and the other on Miraheze (Incubator Plus 2.0) [I moved the main page to "Wp/grc/Κυρία Δέλτος" and made a {{test wiki}} template on the page of "Wp/grc". When doing this I made a mistake by moving everything in "Wp/grc" to "Wp/grc/Κυρία Δέλτος", but that has been fixed now.]

"or to check the editing history?"

As for the editing history of the Incubator Plus's Wp/grc, I have no idea how to access that for Wp/grc specifically. Kxeon (talk) 20:51, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Yes, they are old copies, and no apparent development has been done upon them since 2008. Anaxicrates (talk) 01:31, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose.

Dear @PastelKos:

Please don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. What you’re proposing is, in my view, counterproductive. Should we really delete many valuable efforts just because someone who didn’t fully understand the language wrote articles like this?

Yes, many articles in the Ancient Greek Incubator are imperfect. But that is true of every Wikipedia project in its early stages. That's what the Incubator is made for. And here, the difficulty is orders of magnitude higher: we are working with a language with complex historical variation, no native intuition, and over two millennia of shifting conventions. Mistakes are inevitable – but that does not mean we destroy the foundations and walk away.

More importantly, the Ancient Greek Wikipedia Incubator has real cultural and educational value. Ancient Greek was used continuously for well over two thousand years as a medium of literature, science, philosophy and theology. It remains a key to understanding the foundations of Western civilization. Today, it is studied across the world by students, scholars, and autodidacts.

A functioning Wikipedia in Ancient Greek is not just a novelty – it’s a living exercise in language acquisition, composition, and philological practice. It allows learners to apply their knowledge in real-world contexts, and to engage creatively with a language that, although not spoken natively, continues to live in classrooms, books, liturgies, and the minds of those who study and practice it.

You mention the poor quality of some pages – and we agree. But rather than deleting them, we’ve chosen the more constructive path: to revise and improve. We’ve begun implementing a template system to flag articles that need correction, and a growing team of competent contributors is steadily working through them.

Your reappearance after a triennial silence to propose mass deletion – without first offering to help fix the problems – feels, frankly, abrupt. If you wish to contribute, we would gladly welcome your expertise. You could suggest standards, identify articles needing revision, or join the effort directly.

But we reject the idea that imperfection justifies destruction. If anything, it’s all the more reason to persist: not for some unreachable standard of perfection, but for the sake of continuity, collaboration, and the preservation of a language whose value has not faded with time.

Thank you. Anaxicrates (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose.

I register my strenuous opposition to the proposal for the deletion of the Ancient Greek Wikipedia Incubator. The suggestion that this project should be terminated is, in my view, a significant error predicated on a misunderstanding of both the historical nature of the Greek language and the fundamental purpose of the Wikimedia Incubator itself. 

By way of introduction, I am a lecturer in linguistics with a specialization in historical and ancient languages. While my direct focus is not Attic or Koine Greek, I am thoroughly versed in the language, its history, and its structure, and I am an active contributor to this incubator project.

The critiques levelled against the incubator—citing inconsistencies in grammar, syntax, and style—are not without merit. Such issues are present. However, to present these as grounds for deletion is to mistake developmental challenges for fatal flaws. The very purpose of the Incubator is to provide a space where such projects can be "arranged, written, tested, and proven worthy," as the official documentation states. It is an environment designed to identify and rectify these exact inconsistencies through collaborative effort. The solution to these problems is not deletion, but rather the continued and active recruitment of knowledgeable contributors, a process which is currently underway. 

More fundamentally, the demand for linguistic perfection misunderstands the sociolinguistic history of Ancient Greek. For the vast majority of its existence as a language of international importance, from the Hellenistic period through the Roman Empire and beyond, Koine Greek functioned as a lingua franca. It was a language of administration, philosophy, religion, and commerce for millions of people whose native tongues were other languages. The number of proficient second- and third-language speakers vastly outnumbered the native-speaking population. Consequently, Ancient Greek has always existed in a state that accommodated variation and non-native usage.

To hold the incubator to a standard that rarely existed in practice is ahistorical. This dynamic of a standard language being upheld by non-native speakers is not a historical relic; it is a common and essential feature of many of the world's most important languages, a principle reflected in the contributor bases of many extant Wikipedia projects. 

Consider Latin, which for over a millennium following the collapse of Rome served as the exclusive language of scholarship, diplomacy, and science in Europe. Its entire literary and administrative corpus was produced by non-native speakers, making it the ultimate historical precedent for a learned language sustained by an educated community. Similarly, Modern Standard Arabic functions as the universal, formal language of the Arab world—used in literature, news, and politics—yet it has virtually no native speakers; individuals speak regional vernaculars like Egyptian or Levantine as their first language and learn MSA as the formal standard. 

The pattern continues with modern global languages. French, spoken by 320 million people, depends heavily on its majority of second-language speakers, with the language's vitality and global reach, particularly in Africa, stemming from its role as a lingua franca. English, the very language of this discussion, demonstrates this principle most dramatically, with nearly three times as many L2 speakers (over 1.1 billion) as L1 speakers (approximately 380 million); indeed, the English Wikipedia itself stands as a testament to the power of a global non-native community. Likewise, Swahili, serving as a major lingua franca across the African Great Lakes region, has far more L2 speakers (over 150 million) than native speakers. 

Therefore, to suggest the Ancient Greek incubator should be imperilled because its contributors, being non-native, necessarily produce errors would establish a perilous standard. For each language cited, non-native contributors are essential. It is a linguistic universal that all second-language production contains systematic deviations from native-speaker norms. To treat this inevitability not as a natural process but as a critical failure would be to unjustly deny a vibrant intellectual community its place within the Wikimedia ecosystem.

To delete the Ancient Greek incubator on the basis of the critiques raised would set a damaging and illogical precedent. It would penalize a project for exhibiting the exact developmental characteristics that the Incubator was designed to foster. It would apply a standard of linguistic purity that is historically unfounded and would, if applied consistently, call into question the validity of Wikipedias for many of the world's most significant languages. 

The correct course of action is not deletion, but active and constructive support. Rather than moving for deletion, community efforts should be directed toward suggesting improvements, contributing expertise, and actively recruiting more specialists to the project. The focus must be on fostering the community of classicists, linguists, and philologists working to bring this historically vital language into the Wikimedia fold, not on dismantling their work before it has had the opportunity to adapt, evolve, and mature.

Please see this rebuttal also in Ancient Greek for further testament to the continued relevance of both the language and the project.

Thank you, James Qcomplex5 (talk) 20:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. If if edition of Wikipedia can't be created, useful and interesting articles shouldn't be deleted. Although I would support migration to Wikisource. Evelino Ucelo (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion hidden. Please don't continue the discussion about eligibility here. --MF-W {a, b} 19:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC) [reply]

@Anaxicrates & Qcomplex5 Whether you both inputed so many texts, the policy is still unchanged, that only Wikisource allow such non-living languages, and non of other Wikimedia projects should allow them in any circumstances. That also said, the reason why Coptic is however marked eligible is what I even can't understand. This is again confirmed on m:Requests for new languages/Wiktionary Ancient Greek. So far, if you both don't oppose me from doing so, I'd love to also list Wt/grc for a migration discussion. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:10, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale for this removal is based on the assertion that "only Wikisource allow such non-living languages," a view derived from a single clause in the Language Proposal Policy.

While I acknowledge the existence of this clause, I contend that applying it as a rigid, absolute ban is a fundamental misreading of Wikimedia's policies, which, when viewed holistically, have consistently made exceptions for classical languages of significant cultural and literary importance. The proposal for removal is inconsistent with long-standing, established community practice.

1. The Precedent of Existing Projects: The De Facto Policy

The most compelling evidence against this narrow interpretation is the existence of numerous, successful Wikimedia projects in other ancient and classical languages. The "Wikisource-only" rule has been demonstrably and repeatedly set aside.

Consider the following active projects:

Furthermore, there are active Wiktionaries in both Latin and Sanskrit. To argue that Ancient Greek is uniquely ineligible is to ignore the overwhelming precedent set by these projects. The question is not whether the rules allow for an ancient language project, but rather why Ancient Greek should be uniquely excluded from the same privilege afforded to Latin, Sanskrit, and others.

2. The Principle of "Substantial Body of Literature" is Embedded in Policy

The Wikimedia community has always recognized that a language's value is not solely determined by the number of its native speakers. The principle of recognizing a language based on its literary heritage is already embedded within the Language Proposal Policy itself.

The policy uses "an extensive body of works" as a core criterion for establishing a language's fundamental legitimacy. To repeatedly apply this principle and then disregard that same quality when deciding on eligibility for a project like Wiktionary or Wikipedia creates an illogical inconsistency. Given that Ancient Greek, with its foundational and colossal body of literature, meets this criterion more profoundly than almost any other language, its exclusion is particularly disjointed. This inconsistency is further highlighted by, as stated by yourself, the continued approval of the Coptic Wikipedia. It is a demonstrably discriminatory application of policy to grant eligibility to one project based on a flexible, community-focused consensus, whilst applying the contrary, literalist interpretation to deny the Ancient Greek project.

3. Community Consensus and Formal Debate Support This Interpretation

This is not a novel interpretation. The Wikimedia community has formally and extensively debated this very issue. The Requests for comment/Start allowing ancient languages page on Meta-Wiki documents a strong consensus that a distinction must be made for "Classical languages" due to their "long and continuing traditions of second-language, non-native production" and immense "cultural significance."

These discussions reveal that what truly matters for a project's viability is not a "native speaker community," but an active user and contributor community—a condition which Ancient Greek clearly possesses.

Conclusion

The proposal to remove the Ancient Greek incubator rests on a flawed, literalist reading of a single policy clause that is contradicted by:

Overwhelming historical precedent across numerous successful projects.
Internal logical consistency with other principles within the same policy.
Documented community consensus from formal policy discussions.

To deny Ancient Greek a place here would be to create an arbitrary and inexplicable exception for one of the most foundational languages of world civilization. The existing incubator has a dedicated community ready to build a valuable resource that aligns perfectly with Wikimedia's mission. We therefore urge the community to affirm these precedents, reject this removal proposal, and support the continued development of the Ancient Greek incubator.

Qcomplex5 (talk) 09:11, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5

Regarding "The Precedent of Existing Projects: The De Facto Policy", All of your examples given are created BEFORE the establishment of the language committee, and can't reflect the current situation, under current situation, they are barred for creation, and once anyone of them are nominated for closure, then believe me, they will not be rejected for closure and not allowed for re-opening. A simple word for describing them is just grandfathered, and has been confirmed more than dozens of times per years.
Regarding "The Principle of "Substantial Body of Literature" is Embedded in Policy", I've carefully searched all the source codes of that policy, around all historical editions and amendments, I couldn't see any mention of "Substantial" and "Literature", "Body" currently happened twice - there must be an extensive body of works in that language and so that nobody is excluded from participating if they do not understand the English-language user interface, "of" is commonly seen but the only thing related with our topic discussed here is just a deny thing - even in the absence of native, living speakers of those languages, so which page were you finding where you have seen the "Substantial Body of Literature"?
Regarding "Community Consensus and Formal Debate Support This Interpretation", just see the rejection rationale of the RFC you mentioned: No consensus has been found; the RFC has been radically changed a few times inbetween, to no avail. Anyway, I would rather not love to discuss that RFC since its creator, Gifnk dlm 2020, was later been confirmed as a sockpuppeter, means that such supporters, even really existing, are therefore and thereafter problemic by themselves.

Hence, your "conclusion" is therefore and thereafter null and void.

Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:08, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And to someone who wanna keep just based on "support the continued development of the Ancient Greek incubator", Wikimedia isn't a lonely wood bridge for wikis, we have many other opinions, Fandom, ABXY, wiki.gg, Miraheze, Weird Gloop, etc. Many other hosting platforms are also available, and Wikimedia isn't by itself imperfect either, as there are questions that whether Wikinews is suitable as so or not. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:40, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ongoing discussion. Your argument to disqualify the Ancient Greek Incubator is fundamentally flawed on two distinct levels: first, it fails on procedural grounds, as it relies on an invalid retroactive application of policy. Second, it fails on substantive grounds, as your interpretation of precedent, policy principles, and community consensus is incorrect.

1. The Policy is Not Retroactive

The entire case against the incubator rests on a rule that did not exist when the project was created. This is a fatal procedural flaw

The Factual Timeline:

Mid-2007: The Ancient Greek Incubator is created.

The Governing Policy at that Time: The official policy in effect was the 2007 Language Proposal Policy (the GerardM-Pathoschild policy draft).

This historical version confirms there were no restrictions on ancient languages and no "Wikisource-only" rule. The project was created in full compliance with the rules.

2009: The restrictive "Wikisource-only" clause was added to the policy in 2009.

The Logical Conclusion: Attempting to apply a 2009 rule to a project created in 2007 is a retroactive action. The project's eligibility to exist is therefore grandfathered, according to your own argument. To allow a community to spend over a decade building a project, only to disqualify them with a later rule, moves the goalposts in a way that is profoundly inequitable and undermines the purpose of the Incubator.

2. “Grandfathering”, Literary Corpus, the RFC

Furthermore, besides the fatal procedural flaw of retroactivity, your specific points about precedent and policy interpretation do not hold up.

On "Grandfathering" and the Validity of Precedent: To dismiss active, thriving projects like the Latin and Sanskrit Wikipedias as mere "grandfathered" historical accidents is to miss the point entirely. Their continued existence and support from the Foundation and community represent a continuous, de facto endorsement of their value. Their persistence is not an oversight; it is an ongoing choice that reflects community values, rendering the threat of their closure a non-falsifiable hypothetical. Dismissing them is an attempt to sidestep the inconvenient truth they represent: Wikimedia has always been more pragmatic than a single restrictive clause suggests.
On the Principle of a Language's Literary Corpus: My argument was regarding the principle articulated by the text you yourself found in the policy: "there must be an extensive body of works in that language." The policy already uses the existence of a significant literary corpus as a core metric of a language's legitimacy. The logical inconsistency of using this as a valid criterion in one context, yet completely disregarding it for projects like Wikipedia, remains unaddressed.
On the RFC, Consensus, and the Ad Hominem Fallacy: Your attempt to dismiss the RFC is flawed. In Wikimedia governance, "no consensus" is not a rejection; it is proof that the community is deeply divided and that significant support exists for the position I have articulated. More importantly, dismissing the arguments of the many respected editors who contributed to that RFC because of the later actions of its creator is a textbook ad hominem fallacy. The validity of an argument must be judged on its own merits, not by attacking the character of the person who proposed it.

Conclusion

The case for the Ancient Greek Incubator is overwhelming. It is supported by:

Procedural Fairness: The "Wikisource-only" rule cannot be applied retroactively.
Living Precedent: Thriving classical language projects whose existence is a continuous choice.
Logical Consistency: The policy already recognizes an "extensive body of works" as a sign of legitimacy.
Documented Community Support: A significant portion of the community has long advocated for this position.

A policy is not merely its most restrictive clause; it is its history, its practical application, and the values of its community. Based on all these measures, the Ancient Greek Incubator is a legitimate and valuable project. Qcomplex5 (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5 Please do not take "Conclusion"s by yourself, as I consider such long texts are not from yourself, but rather AI-generated, which in my territory, they may affect copyright violation concerns. Thanks a lot. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright has absolutely no relevance to the validity of any arguments stated above. The concern for any material or text posted to Wikimedia is not that of “did you personally write this?”, but rather “is the text that is contributed appropraitely licensed and compatible with CC BY-SA 4.0?”

I refute your statement and iterate strongly that all arguments above as stated are my own. In contributing them to wikimedia, I also recognize their *defacto* status as licensed and compatible with the aforementioned Creative Commons Attribution license. Regarding your argument of AI generation: any such text, were they presented by any user, would not be considered copyrightable, and as such would require no such CC BY-AA licensing: they would be *ab initio* within the public domain, as considered by such as the U.S. Copyright Office, and perfectly compatible therewith. Your “copyright violation concerns” are, legally and factually, nonsense.

Your response is, infact, no response, and merely a poor rhetorical strategy as a failure to refute such as above arguments validty. You are acting merely to divert from the central issue.

Therefore to return to the actual matter in hand: how do you justify the retroactive application of a 2009 policy to a project created in 2007?

Qcomplex5 (talk) 13:54, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5 Because the arguments you inherented above on policy are not affected by the "fear mongering" by some. At the same time in the later suggestions there is nothing new. For me, there is no reason to revisit the criteria, but I open for opinions on others' criterias. If there are difference does it make which I didn't faced-to-faced, let us know (not only let me know, but also let above users know, let sysops know, ...). Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:01, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria did not exist at the time of the creation of the Ancient Greek incubator project. It therefore cannot be applied after the fact and does not apply to this project. This argument is, in your words, "null and void".

Qcomplex5 (talk) 14:07, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5 What differences do the grc projects (this and Wt/grc) make? The policies are clear, the arguments why have not been refuted are those have been followed over time by the members. It's still to explicitly invalidate any and all arguments

that were used before. No need to take points in looking in older history, as it shows the genesis of the policy, it was accepted by the board of the Wikimedia Foundation, where your grandfathered examples weren't. As you said, they were existing before the policy, and hence before the (establishment of) langcom, outside the remit of them, so my arguments are still valid herebefore and hereafter. All of the above texts (hence must include your two "conclusion"s) are only redressing a potential "unfairness" you seek procedural arguments why modifying the policy is to be considered. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:21, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The project was created in 2007. Then the rule regarding Ancient Languages was created in 2009. You can’t then go and say “we are going to use that rule to delete the project” now. If a rule is created after something has already happened, the rule does not apply to that thing. The existence of the incubator is due to an action in 2007, so it cannot be deleted based on a 2009 rule. It doesn’t matter what else has happened within that project after that. IF you were going to apply that rule (contrary to all norms of law) to the project, it should have been done in 2009. But it’s now being suggested SIXTEEN years later. If you build a house on a hill in 2007, and then create a law in 2009 saying houses can’t be built on that hill, you can’t then knock down that house whether in 2009 or in 20025, the law only applies to prevent NEW houses from being built. So, this rule does NOT apply to this project. It only applies to projects created AFTER 2009.

Qcomplex5 (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5 So? In this case can you please allow me to nominate another grc project, Wt/grc for deletion as it's after 2009? They aren't "no response"s, nor "ad hominem"s, just the fact, real fact. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:42, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is also the concept of the statute of limitation. You cannot prosecute a rule/law, long long after the action/crime has been committed. You've had 12 years to propose and delete the Ancient Greek wiktionary if that was to be done. So, to that I say, it's too late. It should have been done earlier if it were to be done at all.

Qcomplex5 (talk) 15:04, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For "you can’t then knock down that house whether in 2009 or in 20025", very sadly, it can, really can, in some certain countries, so such sentenses don't give any facts but rather, a daydream. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please restrain your totalitarian drive. Thanks. Anaxicrates (talk) 14:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anaxicrates Sorry but what means "totalitarian drive"? I currently don't have my own cars, so nothing to "drive". For record, I may also consider supporting an amendment of such policies to give benefits for your favorite extinct and/or historical languages, however it's still the stuck of upstreams whether such discussions can indeed be initialized or not as per this declined U4C case. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:56, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Drive" in psychology can mean "urge, impulse". If you consider supporting an amendment of the policies in favour of Ancient Greek, that's welcome. As of now, we are working to tidy the Incubator up. When this problem is solved, we will report it to LangCom, and there will be an occasion to express support.

The correct place for a Wikipedia is Wikipedia (and the Incubator, if the project is not yet ripe), not another website. Migration should be considered only as a last resort. Anaxicrates (talk) 15:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation's servers are located in five data centers:

United States: Virginia, Texas, and San Francisco.

EU: Amsterdam and Marseille.

Singapore

In all of which, laws cannot be retroactively applied. Therefore, the principle goes here for the Ancient Language rule within the Language Committee policy. It may be a daydream in "some certain countries", but it is not where the wp/grc data is held, it is statute.

Qcomplex5 (talk) 15:00, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5 For Marseille, it's a part of France, where although prohibited in principle, retroactive law may be passed under certain limits for special situations. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:06, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article 2 of the French Civil Code technically prohibits retroactive laws. The General Council allows exceptions only for tax, financial and national security concerns.

Regardless, are you saying that wp/grc is therefore a "special situation", and is being treated differently to another project?

Qcomplex5 (talk) 15:10, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcomplex5 So are you thinking that I'm supporting deletion? That said, no, I also oppose deletion, but support migrating. Still, WMF isn't the only wiki hosting platform of the world. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, you said "Overwhelming historical precedent across numerous successful projects." could you please explain on 5W1H (What? When? Where? Who? Why? How?) makes such projects (e.g. lawiki) successful? Peoples write there? There are real world readers? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The point being discussed here is NOT whether the Incubator should be authorized to become a Wikipedia now, but whether it must be deleted or not. There is a big difference between the two.

The key facts to be considered are:

The main contributors to this Project agree that revision is a better course than deletion, because the Incubator contains very valuable materials, along with materials to be revised.
Pros and cons must be evaluated: deleting the Ancient Greek Incubator would cause major damage without any benefit. Why should one want to do this?
Policies are not immutable: At least part of LangCom is not contrary in principle to authorizing an Ancient Greek Wikipedia in the future, if there is a sufficient community that ensures the quality of the project. Read e.g.:
- "For me, Latin, Sanskrit and Ancient Greek are the three languages that could possibly support a classical language Wikipedia. We have two of them, and I’m personally concerned about how marginal Ancient Greek is relative to Latin and that we might be releasing a Wikipedia full of bad Ancient Greek." (quote from User:Prosfilaes 20:21, 12 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]
- Indeed, in order to meet Prosfilaes requirements, we are gradually but steadily eliminating from the Incubator any bad Ancient Greek we can find.
To my knowledge, there is no policy stating that a project in the Incubator must be deleted, even in the scenario where such a project is not probable to be soon authorized as a full-fledged Wikipedia under the policy in force at that moment. Some members of LangCom have been also making a distinction between not giving final approval to a Wikipedia and deleting the project in the Incubator.
Furthermore, even if such a policy existed, the Ancient Greek Incubator predates the policy excluding historical languages. The policy should not be retroactively applied.
Finally, the correct place for a Wikipedia is Wikipedia (and the Incubator, if the project is not yet ripe), not another website. Migrating the Incubator to another website wouldn’t benefit this project in any way, and there is no reason to prefer another website to the Incubator of Wikipedia. Migration should only be considered as a last resort.

P.S.: I was not aware of the fact that the support for this RFC was made problematic by this Gifnk dlm 2020 being found as a possible sockpuppeter. Wouldn’t it be necessary to open a new, clean RFC, at this point?

P.P.S.: In my opinion, it is acceptable to delete the Ancient Greek Wictionary, because of its total inactivity and very low quality. Anyway, an Ancient Greek Wictionary in itself would be useful, if properly done, in the same way that a monolingual English dictionary is useful, even if there are good English dictionaries in all the major languages of the world already.

P.P.S.: Yes, classical languages have real world readers, and there are also tools measuring frequentation of any Wikipedia edition. Anaxicrates (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the "Deletion policy" provides that "after 10 days, an administrator will make a decision about deleting the test or not", our community has been long expecting an answer.

As you can see through the RecentChanges tool, in the last months there has been a constant flow of new articles being created and revised, ensuring the growth of the Ancient Greek Wikipedia not just in its numbers but most importantly in its quality.

So – I would like to ask – what is the reason for this delay? Is my understanding of the policy erroneous?

If the actual policy is "after more than 10 days", you might want to make this clearer, in order to leave no room for ambiguity and misunderstandings. Thank you very much for the attention! Yours, Anaxicrates (talk) 17:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anaxicrates The actual policy is, as written several times and confirmed by the rejected Wikipedia and Wiktionary requests: Only Wikisource editions in ancient languages are allowed, and even they are encouraged to be a part of Wikisource in a modern version of that language. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It's a good historical record. Others may be interested in it later.Andrijko Z. (talk) 01:05, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Ancient Greek is, along with Latin, the most studied ancient language nowadays. I am currently learning it, so once a university professor confirms that I master the language, I will start contributing to this Incubator. Hopefully it will become its own Wikipedia edition in the future. I believe in exceptions. If Latin, Old English, Gothic, Sanskrit, and even Church Slavonic have their own Wikipedia editions, I don't see why Ancient Greek can't have one. We can always make exceptions to the rule. On top of all this, there are thousands of people in the world who can read Ancient Greek, so it is the total opposite of a obscure extinct language. --Humberto del Torrejón (talk) 08:39, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. If one participant is disappointed with their contribution, that's no reason to delete the work of others. Demetrius Talpa (talk) 04:38, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mind me, i'm just giving a reminder to MF-Warburg and SPQRobin about this request's existence, just in case they forgot. Kxeon (talk) 19:22, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not done or Kept. There is no policy requiring deletion, and given the active contributor base and ongoing quality improvements, deletion would cause disproportionate harm without clear benefit. Thank you all for participating in this discussion.🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 00:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: 🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 00:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]