Jump to content

Incubator:Requests for deletions/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Incubator

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


I am writing with regard to the Wp/ruq project of the Incubator, and its corresponding localizations of MediaWiki.

Megleno-Romanian (ISO-639 code: ruq) is a dialect of the Romanian language, whose linguistic characteristics situate it in between Daco-Romanian and Aromanian. Linguists such as Ov. Densusianu, S. Pușcariu, Th. Capidan. A. Procopovici, A. Philippide, D. Onciul, G. Ivănescu, Al. Rosetti, I. Coteanu, Matilda Caragiu-Marioțeanu, N. Saramandu, etc. have treated this matter, opinions varying from Ov. Densusianu's, stating that Megleno-Romanian is a Daco-Romanian subdialect, to that of Al. Philippide, who considers it as being a subdialect of Aromanian. (ATANASOV, pp. 14-15).

First discovered, scientifically speaking, by German linguist Gustav Weigand, in the late 19th century, the Megleno-Romanian idiom has been described by G. Weigand's, Wlacho-Meglen, eine ethnographisch-philologische Untersuchung, 1892; P. Papahagi, Megleno-românii, studiu etnografico-filologic. Partea I: Introducere, descrierea călătoriei, ocupațiile locuitorilor, texte. Partea II: Texte și glosar, București, 1902; idem, Românii din Meglen, București, 1909; Th. Capidan, Meglenoromânii, București (I: Istoria și graiul lor, 1925; II: Literatura populară la meglenoromânii, 1928; III, Dicționar meglenoromân), 1935, and only more recently, by Petar Atanasov's Meglenoromâna astăzi [Megleno-Romanian today], Editura Academiei Române, 2002. I have used the latter as a reference throughout this request.

Being a bit reticent of the project really being written in Megleno-Romanian, I have exported the pages belonging to category Wp/ruq and converted them to Latin script for better readability; the result I have uploaded here.

The language used is clearly not Megleno-Romanian, and it appears to me that it is a more or less consistent conlang, with parts being in Romanian and, apparently, broken French or Esperanto.

For example, the use of "l-" as a definite article proclitic (ie. "lVikipedia" — "the Wikipedia", "lŽu" — "the day", etc.) is alien to the Eastern Romance languages. Megleno-Romanian masculine or neuter nouns ending in a consonant (in Ľumniță, Cupă, Oșiń, Birislăv and Lunḑiń the speech), accented -a and -e, -o (everywhere), in their singular indefinite form, end in -u (or -ul), with the exception of the Țărnăreca speech, where the article is -lu (due to Aromanian influence) -- I am giving here a few examples: țap → țapu, țapul (in Țărnăreca) țaplu (buck); scand → scandu(l) (chair). (ATANASOV, p. 209)

Among all of the content here, on Incubator, and the localization done at translatewiki.net, I am afraid I was not able to identify one single phrase in the language - it is both the vocabulary and the morphology that are very different of those of Megleno-Romanian.

It is showing respect to the actual speakers of the idiom, not many left today unfortunately, and the responsibility we have when serving localizations to the MediaWiki end-users that I am thinking of, when I am asking you what I believe to be the only appropriate action, and that is the deletion of both the Wikipedia project and the localization entries.

D'AroemenenZullenNiVergaan (talk) 00:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --MF-W {a, b} 00:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All pages under Wy/zh

voy:zh: runs good. So...--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yap. Scheduled already, though still today some missing pages were found. --MF-W {a, b} 11:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is now all deleted. --MF-W {a, b} 00:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a valid language? Wp/lpl is already deleted.--GZWDer (talk) 09:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it needs to be deleted. User:Chabi1, do you want an XML file with the content? (Or create it yourself before I delete the pages?) --MF-W {a, b} 22:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please, that would be very kind of you. I created it waiting for the code to be approved but I think it's going to take a while. Sorry about that. I would like to ask you. Don't you move this kind of wikis into wikia or any other place? --Chabi1 (talk) 23:40, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:MF-Warburg Probably it can be moved to Incubator Plus.--GZWDer (talk) 03:03, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That would be perfect. --Chabi1 (talk) 07:30, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we can do that; we used to do that more often in the past, but Incubator Plus is nowadays mostly unused. I'll proceed with it. --MF-W {a, b} 19:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wait there's a code request: [1]. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's now rejected, see official CR comment. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:33, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a sufficiently unique language. See m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Filipino.--GZWDer (talk) 16:10, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. There is no indication on that page that LangCom is in agreement with you about that. The stated reason for rejection is: "This proposal has been closed as part of a reform of the request process." --OWTB (talk) 15:07, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense, already at voy:zh:. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:30, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --MF-W {a, b} 14:18, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thousands of new articles being copied from Japanese Wikitravel without using the actual import feature. An admin should followup my message to the user at User talk:Tmwets#Importing from Wikitravel. - dcljr (talk) 02:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? - dcljr (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Special:Contributions/Tmwets would need to be deleted unless everything is properly imported. For example, Special:Permalink/2597225 (January 2015) is effectively identical to [2] (February 2014). Whym (talk) 06:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Massive copyvios, without proper attribution. All the pages added by Tmwets should be deleted, using Special:Nuke/Tmwets. --Kanjy (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your claims seem to be correct. Please note that Special:Nuke doesn't work anymore because his pages already disappeared from the recent changes. I will compile a list for deletion by bot tomorrow. --MF-W {a, b} 19:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MF-W, I thank you many many thanks for your time and effort in advance. I'm sorry it be too late to utilise the nuke tool to save your time. --09:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC) — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kanjy (discussioncontribs).[reply]
As a new test-admin, I'm going to delete them. --Kanjy (talk) 02:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm terribly sorry I flooded the RC badly with deletion log entries. I've deleted a mere 500 pages so far, some by delete.py, some by hand. And about 5,500 pages are to be deleted. May I go on? Or any other way, for example, to get my bot granted both test-admin and bot flags temporarily, or ...? --Kanjy (talk) 11:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a list, simply put it on User:MF-Warburg/todel and my bot will take care of it. Thanks for doing this so far; I wanted to do it but was prevented from creating a list of pages by other things. --MF-W {a, b} 19:34, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@MF-W: could you take the list, please. The test-admins cannot edit protected pages. The reason would be [[I:RFD]]: copied improperly from Wikitravel by [[Special:contribs/Tmwets|Tmwets]], or some such. Thank you. --Kanjy (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I forgot that the page was so protected. I started the bot. --MF-W {a, b} 13:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's finally done :) --MF-W {a, b} 18:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, all. - dcljr (talk) 19:52, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all, too. In addition, the user Tmwets replaced the existing articles here, as follows, with the text from the Wikitravel articles. Such revisions should be, not only reverted, but also deleted.

Using the RevisionDelete tool, admins can delete/undelete (1) the revision text, (2) the edit summary, and/or (3) the editor's username/IP address. In this case, only (1) the revision text should be deleted. Unfortunately, test-admins are permitted only to observe the deleted revisions, not to delete/undelete the revisions. Anyway, thanks again. --Kanjy (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done as well. --MF-W {a, b} 00:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! All the copyvios by Tmwets have been deleted. --Kanjy (talk) 02:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All five subpages of this project. (Yesterday I added deletion tag on its main page.) I don't know exact sources or which translation tools were used to create this content, but clearly ones who set up these pages are not native speakers nor have sufficient language skills. I think we'll better do without these pages as language used on these pages is highly erroneous. There's not much to correct, these news need to be rewritten. 07:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --MF-W {a, b} 00:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hin is the ISO code for Hindi which is an existing project, is a duplicate project in Incubator really necessary? I think wp/hin should either be deleted or redirected to the Hindi Wikipedia. Abrahamic Faiths (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete page. 2001:41D0:1008:88F:BCE1:3EFD:D470:8498 17:42, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But why? --MF-W {a, b} 21:58, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those tests have a valid language code. Even though it is very unlikely those projects will be approved, they are usually allowed to develop a test on the incubator wiki. --OWTB (talk) 11:10, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. No valid reason. --OWTB (talk) 11:03, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

.mul projects have all be rejected at Meta (e.g. m:Wiktionary_multilingual, m:Wikinews_multilingual, m:Wikibooks_Multilingual). All that exists here is a test page from about eight years ago which includes a nonsense food language. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:54, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rejection is not a valid reason to delete a test wiki per se though. --OWTB (talk) 11:07, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Opened projects

Wy/fa, Wp/mai, Wp/lrc, Wp/gom, Wp/azb, Wp/ady.

All these projects are already at their own sites, so they are useless for the Incubator and only interfere with Special pages navigation. --Ghiutun 08:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wy/fa done. Doing the rest. --MF-W {a, b} 00:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done except Wp/gom (because of the confusion about the different scripts) and Wp/ady (very recently created). --MF-W {a, b} 23:48, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that's better. I guess Wp/gom will be deleted manually, right? --Ghiutun 12:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually in the meantime I found out someone imported the Latin-script pages of Wp/gom into gomwiki after all, so I am going to delete the whole test. --MF-W {a, b} 16:52, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The project is in constructed language (at least using invalid ISO code) and was run by indefinitely blocked user. See also this. --Ghiutun 06:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support for deletion --Raki 06:37, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I insist. The vandalism is still going on. --Ghiutun 13:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! You are definitely right about the vandalism still going on because the Erina language is a hoax! Ern is really a made-up language code that isn't valid!
Support Same reason. 【粵語文學大使殘陽孤侠粵維辭典起錨! 04:33, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Seems already done by Ooswesthoesbes and Katxis. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:42, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-existing ISO codes

ISO 639-3 "dtc" does not exist, and both Demotic Greek and Demotic Egyptian are not having a code yet, even a requested code. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that these are per above:

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done --MF-W {a, b} 12:28, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support for deletion. Reason: language does not exist at all. -- 04:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This code is retired now. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:05, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done I left some information behind for now, though. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:12, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support for deletion reason: all are using invalid iso codes in the form of zh-xxxx and its better to use the unhyphenated codes instead--CasetteTapeMaster (talk) 19:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Can't you move or merge them to use the correct codes? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The three zh-classical ones are Done Waiting for a response from a test-admin on the fourth. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No response. Moved remaining pages of Yue test to Wq/yue. Done StevenJ81 (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pages in Wp/kas

it is iunk please delete it -- 00:11, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you say that? StevenJ81 (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
dupe of Wp/ks -- 00:58, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Are there Devanagari pages in Wp/ks? StevenJ81 (talk) 01:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
the wp/kas pages have no use -- 01:08, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not done (blocked IP, possible sock of blocked user) StevenJ81 (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated at Category:Users:By language:bho. Redundant category -- 00:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done (see above) StevenJ81 (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support for deletion reason: multilingual Wiktionary is impossible and the English Wiktionary already exists --CasetteTapeMaster (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not done As one can see here, it is not English-only. You see English, as that is probably the language you've set in your preferences. --OWTB (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OWTB: The project has effectively been dormant for four years. (There were no edits in '13, '14 or '15. There were three edits this year, of which two were to the page Wt/mul itself—one by me.) I'm OK with saying the equivalent of w:WP:NOTPAPER, and therefore not deleting. But nothing much is really happening now. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
On further digging: This project was rejected by the LC back in March 2010, nearly seven years ago. (Other multilingual projects were rejected around the same time.) In 2011, it was noted (in an edit of the rootpage) that the project was not moved to Wikia. Not much has been done on the project since then, as noted above. So this test is in limbo.
  • Normally, a rejected project should be deleted. But this wasn't, and there's still a relatively large number of pages present.
  • The LC rejection did invite people on this test (and Wn/mul) to propose (on Meta) a change in the rules to allow this project to go forward. That makes this rejection different from some.
It seems to me we ought to do something about this. In particular, we should either
  • Go ahead and delete. (Personal note: I'm not comfortable exporting to an XML, and I don't want the XML to live on my computer. I'd rather someone else handle that.)
  • Decide there is value to allowing this test to remain here. Then let's mark it as "open" (as an exception to the rules), invite people to contribute, and see what happens.
I'd appreciate everyone else's thoughts on this. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seventeen pages marked for speedy deletion from Wp/nch

On April 27, (talk | contribs) marked seventeen pages from Wp/nch for deletion, citing as reason in each case "wrong language, melayu hoax". If I am supposed to know what the "melayu hoax" is, I'm afraid I don't. However, more to the point, there are complications to this deletion requests:

  • The IP address was blocked for two hours the day before, and indeffed on that day, by User:Katxis, who was a test-admin at that point.
  • The IP address block was globally blocked for five years on August 4. I do not know whether that is a related issue. (I lifted the local block today on the grounds that we don't usually indef IP addresses.)
  • I would normally have gone to Nahuatl Wikipedia (nah:) to get help on this. But the by-far-most-active administrator there is User:Akapochtli. But User:Marrovi has been one of the editors on many of these seventeen pages (if not most), and the two of them are locked in a dispute at m:Requests for comment/Global ban for user Marrovi. So there's a COI involved there.

Anyone have any ideas? StevenJ81 (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very weird. I never heard of a melayu hoax either. The pages content (the same sentence all the time & infobox) doesn't look very Malay to me, more like one would expect from Nahuatl. But that is just a very uninformed opinion.
The pages were all previously marked for deletion by Special:Contributions/, also blocked. The 93 IP is blocked as a part of an open proxy range as well. In doubt, I'd say we simply keep the pages. --MF-W {a, b} 12:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. I'll do that. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What I promised to do is Done. Pages were not deleted and were restored. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:16, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wt/lpl (Second time)

Support for deletion reason: invalid iso code and doing a sil search for lpl results in nothing --CasetteTapeMaster (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Although this is requested by a blocked user, Support because iso639-3:lpl really does not exist, and a 2014 code request (using ldt) had also rejected, therefore this project should continue at Incubator plus. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not done Cannot do this right now per the rules above, because there is a request pending at Meta.
That having been, said, I'm thinking, MW-F, that because there is not a valid ISO code—and because the request for an ISO code was rejected again in 2015 (under ldt),
  • Langcom should close the request on Meta.
  • This test (which seems to contain plenty of legitimate content) should be moved to Incubator Plus (or anywhere else its members might prefer). StevenJ81 (talk) 17:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from Incubator:Administrators' noticeboard

With respect to ongoing cleanup activities: I am starting to go through test wikis according to criteria by which they should not generally exist here. Starting with the category of test wikis whose requests at Meta have been outright rejected:

At this point, there are 14 tests in this category:

  • 8 are empty (Wp/jpn-classical, Wp/mul, Wb/mul, Wn/mul, Wp/pt-br, Wp/ru-lat, Wp/surzh, and Wp/vi-nom)
    • Technically, the request for Wp/vi-nom was closed without formal rejection during the policy changeover. But seeing that the project is empty and inactive, I see no harm in just leaving the status as |status=rejected.
  • 2 tests contain only what I would call a trivial amount of content: Wq/mul and Wp/zza. Question: Is it worth archiving the content, or shall we just delete it?
    • Technically, Wq/mul was never rejected, because there was not a request at Meta. But as all the other mul projects were explicitly rejected, I took license to describe this test as rejected, too.
    • Zza is, of course, the macrolanguage incorporating diq and kiu
  • There are three tests for Baybayin Tagalog (Wp/tgl, Wt/tgl and Wq/tgl).
    • I have requested feedback from someone at Tagalog Wikipedia who was involved in the deletion discussions at the time as to whether there was anything worth keeping in these projects. The Wikipedia test has about 25 pages, along with a couple of templates and a couple of categories. It seems to me that Tagalog Wikipedia could handle these the way that Ladino Wikipedia handles Latin-script and Hebrew-script parallels. But if I don't hear back soon, I guess we should just archive into an XML file and be done. The Wt and Wq projects contain only a trivial amount of content, but I suppose just to be kind we could turn those little bits of content into separate categories within Wp/tgl before we turn it into an XML; that way, it would all be present. Question: Is everyone ok with that?
  • The one project of these fourteen with a substantial amount of content is Multilingual Wiktionary, with about 200 pages and many supporting templates and categories.
    • As with all of the mul projects, this was rejected, and proponents were invited at the time of the rejection to make a case at Meta to change the rules. It does not appear this went anywhere.
    • Of course, there is now OmegaWiki, and in fact an open proposal for WMF to bring OmegaWiki into the fold.
    • There has been no serious work on this test in about five years, but it's hard for me to know if that's because it got templated as closed-due-to-invalid-code, or whether people just went elsewhere, and would come back, given a chance.
    • To me, the status quo makes no sense at all. Either let's delete this, or let's make an exception, mark it "open", and see if people come back. Question: Do we delete and archive to XML, or allow this to stay, change its status back to "open", and see what happens?

When we're done with this, I'll move on to the category of tests with status "closed due to invalid code". StevenJ81 (talk) 16:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1) Delete. 2) I am. 3) I think it should be deleted (all this is of course, strictly speaking, properly to be discussed at I:RFD). Most of the people involved back then were Incubator admins and users also active on other test-wikis. If they (we...) didn't "care" anymore, it doesn't have a real use to keep the pages around. And everything can be restored, if needed. --MF-W {a, b} 12:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy to move this to RFD. In guess I was looking for policy guidance first. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
At this point moved to RFD. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Next steps
  • I plan to delete the small amount of content on Wp/zza right away. That test was marked closed by User:MF-Warburg about four years ago after a rejection at the Language Committee. The very small amount of content in that wiki was added much later. zza is a macrolanguage, and both of its constituent languages have Wikipedias.
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 18:11, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Proto-Indo-European Wikipedia (Wp/ine)

This project has been rejected three times at the Language Committee. It seems to be an active community, so it should probably be moved to Incubator Plus at Wikia. StevenJ81 (talk) 00:12, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Community notified at Talk:Wp/ine/Pr̥mom Pā̆g̑inom. StevenJ81 (talk) 04:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please move our PIE wiki to Incubator Plus before deletion. We do not want to have our work wasted. AA (talk) 09:24, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@MF-Warburg: Can you help this community get set up for the move? In particular:
  • Can we accomplish the move solely by page prefixes, or does the community need to make sure that every page contains the category Category:Wp/ine? (If the latter, is having a subcategory sufficient, as long as the subcategory is in fact included itself within the main category?)
  • Is there anything else the community needs to do to get the test project ready for export?
  • Can you help with the import on the other side?
Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:42, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Move can be done solely by Category:Wp/ine category, using page prefix as crosscheck for the following namespaces: Main, except talk, Template, except talk, in Wp/ine namespace. It is the most secure way. Go ahead. For being 100% sure I added missing Category:Wp/ine, so it can be used for crosschecking of the sitemove procedure. AA (talk) 14:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was asking MF-W a technical question. But are you telling me that all main and template pages in the test are now included in the category Category:Wp/ine? That's very helpful. I'd encourage you to put your Talk:, Template talk:, Category: and Category talk: pages in as well. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:03, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I categorized and salvaged all talks related to PIE wiki in Category:Wp/ine. I hope begin of sitemoving can occur now. AA (talk) 15:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. I'm waiting to hear from MF-Warburg, who has more mastery of the technical details than I do. Additionally, RfDs have to stay open for ten days. So in the meantime, you can continue to work here; just remember to make sure any new pages carry Category:Wp/ine. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When exporting a test, I usually take all pages with the prefix. So it's not that important to have all pages in a certain category. --MF-W {a, b} 22:46, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When sitemove to Incubator Plus will be performed? AA (talk) 12:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion needs to stay open here until 15 January (rules here). After that, we'll start working on the site-move. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:13, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As a Linguistics major myself, I really have reservations about this. We know too little about the Proto-Indo-European language/variant. A Proto-Indo-European Wiktionary might be more helpful than a Proto-Indo-European Wikipedia. 【粵語文學大使殘陽孤侠粵維辭典起錨! 17:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Cedric tsan cantonais, what do you have reservations about? Keeping it? Having it? Deleting it?
  • Personally, I can't tell if the contents of this project are really more in the way of an encyclopedia or more in the way of a dictionary. @AKIA AYAK, can you please elaborate a bit?
  • That said, a project like this is really pretty far outside the scope of the WMF's goals. If you look at m:LPP, you'll see the following:
4. The proposal has a sufficient number of living native speakers to form a viable community and audience (Wikisource wikis are allowed in languages with no native speakers, although these should be on a wiki for the modern form of the language if possible).
  • If the proposal is for an artificial language such as Esperanto, it must have a reasonable degree of recognition as determined by discussion (this requirement is being discussed by the language committee).
  • Accordingly, most ancient languages that are still active around here either existed before that policy went into place or have something else that justifies them. (Latin is always a unique case, anyway. Don't look to start drawing conclusions and analogies from it.)
In particular, the Langcom has explicitly rejected a proposal for a project in this language three times. So I think we have to see this project as being outside the scope of what WMF wishes to offer. Accordingly, moving a project like this—or even a PIE Wiktionary—to Incubator Plus makes sense. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Content of this site is more like an encyclopedia, there are articles about various things. AA (talk) 09:59, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Today is 15 January, let's move PIE wiki to Incubator Plus today. AA (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Doing...  @MF-Warburg, SPQRobin, if you would be so kind? StevenJ81 (talk) 14:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I imported the pages to Incubator Plus and deleted them here. --MF-W {a, b} 08:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. For the best part, Proto-Indo-European will remain pure and undefiled by lovecraftization, e.g. Y and J instead of J and DZ. AA (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hunnic Wikipedia (Wp/xhc)

Rejected at the Language Committee. Has little content. StevenJ81 (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Community notified at Talk:Wp/xhc/Main Page. StevenJ81 (talk) 04:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Err, isn't m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Hunnic 2 existing? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right; I missed that. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
That said, this is clearly an invalid RFL and should be ignored. Aside from the fact that it was opened just two months after the previous one closed:
  • CasetteTapeMaster is indeffed here at Incubator for persistent vandalism.
  • is almost certainly a sock of CasetteTapeMaster (who was blocked on Meta during the period that 173 contributed).
  • Utkuhutlulum, who wrote the unsigned post at the bottom, (a) is an account that was used exactly once cross-wiki—for that post, and (b) described himself/herself as a "native speaker" (sic) of a language that has been extinct for 1500 years, and isn't even very well characterized! StevenJ81 (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway I Support deletion! --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 00:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For information: Items already empty
RfD: Wp/amz

This test has about twenty pages in it. But it has a number of problems:

  • amz is not a proper language code for any Berber/Amazigh language
  • Langcom has rejected this project in favor of some others
  • There are five other Wikipedia test projects in Berber/Amazigh languages here. One (Wp/ber) has been rejected, and Langcom is thinking two others should be combined. But the disposition of all the others (including the rejected one) is really something requiring some coordination and discussion at Langcom.
  • This test, on the other hand, can easily be deleted. I will cross-post this RfD within each test community:

Request to members of all Berber/Amazigh test communities: Please determine if any of these pages is written in your language and would be worth keeping. If so, please feel free to move any/all into your respective tests.

StevenJ81 (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing...  @MF-Warburg: Is there a bot that can delete this test? (Going forward, why don't we install mw:Extension:DeleteBatch here?) StevenJ81 (talk) 15:33, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You can enable the gadget "A tool that adds a special page for mass deleting of pages" and Special:MassDelete what you want. --MF-W {a, b} 19:23, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:51, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 20:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
RfD: Wy/mo

Same reasoning as above. There are two pages here which seem like pretty nice pages. But I think we can safely delete them, and restore them if ro:voy: ever wants to start adding Cyrillic-script pages. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. --MF-W {a, b} 06:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 15:26, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
RfD: Wp/qz

See User talk:Aibek.abdir. I have inquired on kk: as to whether there was any interest in importing these pages and I never got a response. This should probably be archived first. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done XML archive uploaded. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:48, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23 pages of Kashmiri in Devanagari. Presumably redundant to:

For the record, it is apparently not feasible to run an automatic script converter of the type used on Serbo-Croatian or Kazakh Wikipedia. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per discussion with an administrator of Kashmiri projects (see at m:User talk:Satdeep Gill#Kashmiri_Wikipedia), these can be deleted. I will try to get to this soon. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vulgar Latin: One page only, invalid ISO 639–3 code, rejected by Langcom on 29 January 2017. @Guillermo2149, Katxis: You're the only ones who contributed here. I suggest if you're really interested you take this over to Incubator Plus. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although this code belongs to Tamanaku, an extinct language of Venezuela, the 6 pages within the test wiki are in fact in some version of Tamazight. So, again, we ask anyone in the Tamazight communities here to look at these pages, and move anything worthwhile into your test projects. After ten days, these pages will be deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So-called "Wikispecies Greek"

  1. Wikispecies is just a single multilingual project site, therefore any new languages edition of Wikispecies pages should keep creating on the same https://species.wikimedia.org;
  2. The only contributor of these pages, afaik, is User:Ρητά και παροιμίες. And then, per Meta-Wiki SRCU, it's confirmed that this "user" is a sockpuppet of User:Νικόλας Παπαποστόλου, see also Special:CentralAuth/Νικόλας Παπαποστόλου and Special:CentralAuth/Ρητά και παροιμίες;
  3. Finally, There's FULLY NO Consensus to split Wikispecies to "one domain per one language" cases.

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:39, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Speedy-deleted as "out of scope". StevenJ81 (talk) 14:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This test was long-ago rejected by LangCom on technical grounds.

More recently, because zza is a macrolanguage, Wp/zza was closed in favor of projects in the component languages, Wp/kiu and Wp/diq. This test has only two pages, and can easily be closed in favor of Wt/kiu and Wt/diq. StevenJ81 (talk) 23:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to delete my own user page (User:Smaug the Golden) and also my old user page (User:SMAUG). SMAUG is my old user name. --Smaug the Golden (talk - contributions - logs) 07:21, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 12:06, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous pages in Incubator namespace

I have found several pages in Incubator namespace that do not belong there. I have tried to contact people in individual projects, and in a couple of cases they have moved pages to their proper locations in test projects. However, I want to give the community one last chance to identify and move any of these pages before I delete them:

This will get the customary ten days to run. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:00, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for undeletion: Wp/ckt/Main Page

To be honest, is there any fair reasons that we can delete the main page of a test-wiki, and do nothing for other pages? Not created by a native speaker? Just created by a spambot/spam IP address? Still having English/Russian contents that not translated? Vandalized by a dozen of anonymous users? Kindly for any reasons we could ask the native speakers of that language instead of just a deletion. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:58, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MF-Warburg: You deleted. Do we know if any of the content here is properly in this language? There are somewhere around 100 mainspace pages in that test. Also, the page you deleted actually dated all the way back to 2007, so I'm a little surprised that you would delete it based on vandalism.
On the other hand, Liuxinyu970226, the last contribution to Incubator by anyone claiming level-1 or better knowledge of this language was two years ago. If you can find native speakers anywhere around Wikimedia, by all means invite them here to contribute. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why I deleted it. Certainly no vandalism in it. Restored. --MF-W {a, b} 15:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected by LangCom in January. This is a collective code consisting of multiple languages, and in any event the "test" consists of one page only. There have been no edits here, except for one clerking edit by me, since 2013. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 01:43, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This proposal was long ago rejected by LangCom on technical grounds. And given the recent rejection of Wikipedia Quenya, it is highly doubtful this test will ever go anywhere. There is a main page plus three others here, all created on a single day by a user who only appeared here (or anywhere else in the Wikimedia projects) over two days in January 2016. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 01:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected by LangCom. Project has not been active recently, and was created by a user subsequently blocked as a sock. Frainc-comtou is generally considered a dialect of Arpitan, anyway. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I support the deletion. But, just for the record, Frainc-Comtou is not a dialect of Arpitan, it's a langue d'oïl: "Linguists divide the Romance languages of France, and especially of Medieval France, into three geographical subgroups: Langues d'oïl and occitan [...] and Franco-Provençal (Arpitan), which is considered transitional." --MF-W {a, b} 21:41, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I defer to your knowledge, but Glottolog lists it as a dialect of Arpitan. StevenJ81 (talk) 02:06, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, weird. Maybe we should add that contradiction to the enwiki article. --MF-W {a, b} 16:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. Look, if Franco-Provençal is transitional between langues d'oïl and langues d'oc (and geographically that makes sense), then who's to say exactly where any of the lines ought to be drawn? It's probably more of a continuum than a discrete jump, anyway. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@MF-Warburg: I added a footnote there. It's not a heavily sourced page in any case. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, probably we found a not very important scholarly dispute here. --MF-W {a, b} 20:26, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Archived and deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 04:23, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid language code. Rejected by LangCom. Principal contributor no longer interested, and Lingwa de Planeta resources are available elsewhere. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Archived and deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 04:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sympathetic to the idea of having a project to support the preservation of the Dime language of Ethiopia. Yet I don't really see it happening:

  • According to the article in English Wikipedia, this language does not have a writing system.
  • The four pages currently in main space are in English. Two are identical—description of the Dime language. One is a main page placeholder. One is effectively a template.

Under these circumstances, I'm not really sure it does any good to leave this content in place. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete The only contributor (except users who added categories, such as you and Ooswesthoesbes) is already globally locked, so losing those pages are not bad. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:57, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 15:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/kxk and its pages

Text is literally unreadable because it is supposed to be in Zayein Karen but it is not. Second, the text is in gibberish and is becoming problematic as the creator of the cipher totally forgot about why he decided to put it there. Lastly, No one even knows how and why the gibberish got there and even how to read or decipher it so it must be deleted. -- 02:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support speedy delete as nonsense -- 03:01, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know this? --MF-W {a, b} 13:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No one can read it. The original creator went away. -- 18:19, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Text seems to be incomprehensible. -- 18:19, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Text is still unreadable after 9 years. -- 19:12, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do you speak Karen? --OWTB (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict with OWTB) I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusions,, and I appreciate your bringing this test to our attention. Still, the way you made this request is emblematic of certain problems you had when editing under your username:
  • You don't say how you know the text is not in Zayein Karen.
  • You say it's gibberish ... unreadable ... no one can read it. (No one? How do you know that?) Do you speak the language? Then ...
  • "The creator of the cipher totally forgot about why he decided to put it there" ... vs. "no one even knows how and why [it] got there". How do you know any of this unless you were one of the people involved? In fact, the only way the two statements you made would not be totally contradictory would be if you were the creator. Were you?
Now, then: If you want to make a good case for this, try the following:
  • Zayein Karen is written in Burmese script, while the pages in this test are all in Chinese script.
  • Not only have there been no substantive contributions to this test in the last five years, but no substantive contributor to this test (named account or IP) has made any edits in the Incubator whatsoever in the last five years.
The first point by itself might be enough to warrant deletion. The second point would not be enough by itself—we do not delete tests solely due to inactivity—but it's good supporting evidence for the request.
Conclusion—and I'd like the input of MF-Warburg and OWTB, too: Let's let this RfD run the requisite ten days. If there are no objections, we will then delete. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support "囗貝斷本㤘斤會曲贝か惡斨斄月指攵忄よ心一彈忆斦わお戇し〇斄㤘心一會㤘貝よ彈贝惡本" is not how Zayein Karen is written because no knows how to pronounce this Chinese script mess. -- 20:43, 8 June 2017 (UTC) Support Zayein Karen is not written in Japanese characters. -- 20:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Several page names such as "Wp/kxk/一指㤘一心㤘月貝指よ本 breakup" and "Wp/kxk/本彈 reboot" got a spammy character. If it turns out we made a mistake, the pages can easily be restored. To me, the strange pages/page names and the fact that a wrong script is used is enough for this to be deleted. --OWTB (talk) 11:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wt/uby (Ubykh Wiktionary) and Wp/uby (Ubykh Wikipedia)

This could well have been the creation of one of our LTA's. In any case, the language is extinct, and according to the English Wikipedia article,

Writing systems for the Ubykh language have been proposed, but there has never been a standard written form.reference omitted

So I don't see how we can possibly have even a test project here. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:01, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wp/uby seems ditto. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. Added to request, which will run for another ten days from now. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:14, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Deleted and exported to a single .xml file, in case someone wants to make use of it. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:33, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Probably no reason to have a seperation of Category:Incubator:Test wikis/code/history. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:57, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: Empty category anyway. I'm on your side, but the one reason I could potentially think of is that the "Test wikis/code" series includes info pages containing {{code-disambig}} and its daughter templates—in other words, situations where there really aren't tests here. In theory, we could reserve this category for situations where there is an actual test present. Since the category is empty and has not been maintained, I agree with you, but let's see if anyone else has a comment here. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:33, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 23:08, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plibonigito Wikipedia

See Wp/plb. This consists of two pages using langcode plb, which actually belongs to a different language entirely. This appears to me to be a hoax (and I could QD), but I'd like to give people a chance to comment. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion That user, which is using Cyrillic as user name, is clearly not from Vanuatu. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. The test was being written in a language which seems to be an "improvement for Esperanto". As such, it lacks an ISO code, active community and tradition. --OWTB (talk) 11:43, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Western Yugur Wikipedia (Wp/ybe)

I have no doubt that the language is a real one. But per the page Wp/ybe/Turkic based Western Yugur alphabet, it's not clear to me that this is an accepted writing system for the language, so I'm not sure whether this test should stay. I would appreciate opinions from the community. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to find any information about which script is used to write this language, if at all. This "non officiel script created in order to write Western Yugur language on Wikipedia" at least is claimed to be based on the works of some linguists. Maybe user:Elteriş would like to explain why he chose it. --MF-W {a, b} 00:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have had a question out to him for a while at User talk:Elteriş#Wp/ybe. But maybe he'll answer here. StevenJ81 (talk) 03:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, move to wikia no linguistic literatures say that ybe can use Turkish alphabets. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think a deletion is too harsh. The English wiki page clearly shows that there is a writing system which includes several letters, such as "ś". Smaller languages often lack a clearly defined spelling and should be left to develop their own spelling. Even projects with multiple spellings can work out just fine. Take a look at the Limburgish wikipedia, which uses over 175 different spellings and works just fine. Contents should be viewed on language validy and content validy. Spellings issues can always be resolved later on. --OWTB (talk) 11:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@OWTB: I understand the idea that spelling is not necessarily uniform. I work on Judeo-Spanish Wikipedia, and we support a minimum of four lad-latn spelling conventions, plus a lad-hebr one. So that's not my issue.
My concern is that I think WMF doesn't especially want us to be the place where written forms of spoken languages are created. And that's what it appeared to me was happening here.
  • I didn't interpret the English Wikipedia article the way you did. I saw several "letters" in the section on phonology, but not much of anything in the section on writing systems, except perhaps for use of the Old Uyghur alphabet at some point in the past. This seems like more of a spoken language than a written language, though it also seems that there has been some writing in the past.
So maybe @MF-Warburg can comment on this, or ask LangCom what it thinks. Is this really "creating" a writing system for a spoken language? Or should we simply treat this as one of many possible competing writing systems that may be emerging to support this language, and we should leave it alone?
In any event, there's not much content here, and the original creator has not responded to questions any of us has asked. (I don't think there's really much of anything to send to Wikia if we delete this here.) StevenJ81 (talk) 15:25, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are many languages that have no defined/official writing system (anymore) and that are just spoken. Languages like these should be given the opportunity to develop. By sending them to Wikia, we are not going to help them; nor do we help ourselves with it. Most "dialects" in Europe lack(ed) a spelling, and people just contributed to their respective wikis by writing the way they thought to be appropriate. Some wikis developed their own spelling this way; others didn't. In my opinion, there is no valid reason to delete a (test) wiki when the reason is "they put structure in the way they want to write"/created their own spelling. --OWTB (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@OWTB: Again, this is not about "creating spelling". This is about creating a whole writing system. There doesn't seem to be any evidence that this Turkic based Western Yugur alphabet has really been used before. The author of the page even implies that s/he created it himself/herself—albeit with reasonable underpinnings. And see en:Yugur#Language: The native speaker group consists of about 4,600 people in North Central China, and there is no evidence that this script is being used anywhere there.
I do understand what you're saying. Maybe there is no harm in leaving this here. It's a long way away from being evaluated for approval as a project, after all. But suppose we get that far, and some language expert that LangCom brings in says, "What is that? Nobody ever wrote this language in a Turkic Latin script." So this is where I'm having a hard time. But I'm really willing to let this sit open for a while; I'd like to hear what Elteriş has to say. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Deferred Deferred to (at least) 23 September 2017: It is clear that there is no consensus to delete for now. I intend to keep this discussion here for a while longer in the hope that User:Elteriş will see it and respond. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not done No consensus to delete. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a live language, request was rejected: m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Middle English 3--GZWDer (talk) 14:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are several projects here that are similar. The rules on Incubator are less restrictive than the rules for project approval: in general, any legitimate project that correctly uses a legitimate language code can remain here. There are a few exceptions, but this project and others like it (Wp/orv and Wp/goh, just to name two) do not fall under those exceptions. So I see no reason to delete this test. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:44, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I would ask @Qmwne235, Gray Porpoise, Cbrown1023, Katxis, Varlaam:@Sgman1991, Crochet.david, X Parasite~incubatorwiki, Malhonen: the most "were active" users for suggestion. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:55, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this Wikipedia hasn't been edited for long. If it was decided that it should be closed, I don't oppose as it has been left abandoned. --Katxis (talk) 22:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So I would vote delete, move to Wikia now. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:46, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not done At this point, there is no policy reason to delete this test, and plenty of justification to leave it alone:
  • See m:CPP#Proposing. When talking about independent projects, neither inactivity nor failure to meet current LPP is sufficient reason to delete a project. That's just as true, or more so, in the case of a test here.
    In general, the current attitude is that as long as something legitimate exists, we should keep it, because it makes it that much easier to reactivate in the future.
  • Many of the early project closures happened because spambots were plaguing those projects. I don't see that as having been a problem, either in general or in this test.
  • Language Committee appears to be softening its stance some with respect to Wikipedias in historical languages with an established written form. I could potentially see enm falling into that category.
    As I said above, there are several projects here in a similar position. As long as the content is real and not spam, there is no reason any of them shouldn't stay here. (See next point.)
  • The overall rule here is that tests with legitimate content and legitimate language codes are allowed to stay. There are really only a couple of exceptions to that:
    • Certain constructed languages that WMF and Language Committee have decided won't be included here. (These are mostly languages created in fictional works, e.g., Klingon and the Tolkien languages.)
    • Projects using codes that are duplicates of current tests or projects (e.g., a project that would use eng instead of en)
    • Projects of historical languages that have poorly attested written forms. WMF is not interested in being a laboratory for creating new written forms of extinct languages. (It's a violation of WP:NOR, in a certain respect.)
    • Except where grandfathered, collective codes are not legitimate language codes for this purpose. Macrolanguage codes may or may not be considered legitimate language codes, though many of these in any event are also grandfathered. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dormant. Use [3] is good enough. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:04, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: This is analogous to the cleanup you've been doing over on Meta, right? StevenJ81 (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:15, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 19:32, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Created by an IP user which still don't create any articles of it. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:45, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done That's eligible for QD as "empty test project", so in the future you can simply tag a page like that with {{delete}}. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Created by an anonymous user one week ago, no articles created after portal creation. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 01:02, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Language is extinct. Requested by creator. (See User talk:Jehtao.) StevenJ81 (talk) 17:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per UNESCO's [4] the last native speaker was died in 1980s. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This should wait for consensus of other people and not immediate deletion as project has 7 pages. -- 19:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ The only one contributor is @Jehtao: where replied on his talk page, isn't that? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:01, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Archived and deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:29, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Created for months. Are there any things not transfered to the normal project? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:44, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. But it makes sense to have one non-deleted created project in order to easier check how those pages behave. --MF-W {a, b} 10:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not done As MF-W said, we do (occasionally) get asked how things get handled during a move. So we try to keep one such project around. We also won't delete any exported project for a minimum of one month, just to give people a chance to check and make sure things were done correctly. So when the new wikis for Wp/lfn and Wp/inh are created and the test projects exported—as you know, that's underway—we'll do the following:

Request on Meta was deleted last year as frivolous. I do not know whether it really was or not, but the single page in the test project was created on a single day over four years ago, and the test has not been added to since then.

  • It is not clear that Blissymbols can be used here to create a project without violating intellectual property (see Blissymbols on enwiki).

It is true that as a general rule, any test with a legitimate language code can stay here. But there is some latitude to delete projects for constructed languages when they are actively rejected (or the equivalent) at Meta and LangCom sees no possibility of future approval. StevenJ81 (talk) 23:00, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Away with it. --MF-W {a, b} 10:05, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that Blissymbols Unicode proposal proposed for 20 years, but still under "Proposals in Initial and Exploratory Stage" status, so unless if there's Kiseki from Unicode Technical Committee that they re-start reviewing of this proposal, it's needless for me to keep materials of this language existing on Wikimedia wikis. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done Test (single page) was deleted. No archive created; if anyone ever needs the one page that was created, the page Wp/zbl/Main Page can be undeleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The last edit of this navigating page (except from me), Special:Diff/3979029, is happened 11 months ago, and after that no articles created, the Category:Wp/mdl has one template, {{Wp/mdl/NUMBEROFARTICLES}} (which we all know the propose is to count the max number of main namespace pages), but as no articles created here, this template serves nothing (a.k.a will always be 0). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:21, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: There are a couple of other pages within Template: space. What are they? StevenJ81 (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. Those templates were created with the intention of creating a project in en:Mandailing language, and have duplicates in the true Mandailing project (Wp/btm). StevenJ81 (talk) 18:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done All content with that prefix has been deleted. (No archive was made, because all content exists elsewhere.) Info page was retained with a note. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:37, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This test is coded to a collective code, which makes it ineligible for a project under current rules. In reality, one of our contributors determined that this project is written in Taqbaylit (Kabiye), which already has an approved Wikipedia at kab:. (See User talk:Brahim-essaidi#Wp/ber.) Only one page from the Wp/ber test project did not have a duplicate in kabwiki, and I copied that page over with attribution.

People working on other Amazigh/Berber tests are welcome to copy any information they have an interest in keeping over to other tests, provided they do that with attribution. And I'll keep this open for at least two weeks to give everyone a chance to do so who may want to do so. Afterwards, this test should be deleted and archived. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Deleted and archived. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:23, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are two pages Wp/avl/Main Page and Wp/avl/あ which are using Japanese scripts (clearly wrong), on the other hand, iso639-3:avl is Eastern Egyptian Bedawi Arabic, which is just a small community based Arabic variet, maybe there should have benefit to add avl words to Wikidata as Monolingual language values, but for the creation of Wikimedia project, meh... --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Meets Incubator speedy deletion criterion ("Wrong language"). StevenJ81 (talk) 21:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Has no subpages, probably a troll. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

scm is an invalid code --
Agreed. --OWTB (talk) 08:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done Had been created by LTA. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from I:CP

Abandoned shortlived hobbyist attempt to start wikipedia in a dead language (w:Sudovian language) wor whiich there is even no viable dictionary. Its main page:


I do not know the ropes here, please arrange the deletion. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:13, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

End of move StevenJ81 (talk) 14:28, 28 March 2018 (UTC) [reply]
As there is no request at meta and it seems like a hobbyist attempt, I propose to export it to Incubator Plus. --OWTB (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to contact the IP creator. If that person appears and has an interest in moving it to Incubator Plus, well and good. If not, I will probably delete and archive. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I imported the test to Incubator Plus. If there are no further objections, I believe it can be deleted here. --OWTB (talk) 14:17, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 21:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wp/voj above, invalid ISO code, and should be resolved locally. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:10, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done I deleted it before any real contents was added. --OWTB (talk) 14:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the old Dutch-based spelling for Indonesian. The ISO code is invalid. --OWTB (talk) 08:58, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WF was also created the own ISO code. In outside Wikipedia, ISO code of Malay websites was "my" but ISO code for Malay Wikipedia was "ms". For example: http://sinarharian.com.my/terkini

And then it was not new linguistic entities, it was ever used for Indonesian society before 1965 and was remained had many users for this spelling system. It was also added knowledge for Indonesian language from past. --Glorious Engine (talk) 00:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Glorious Engine: Unfortunatelly and sadly, I can't see any entries that about "wf", there are only two ISO 639-1 codes that started from w: wa for Walloon and wo for Wolof. You say that "ISO code of Malay websites was "my"", [citation needed]. In general, please do not contribute here if you can't find the correct ISO 639 code, please do not use make up codes. If you really think that there has benefit to save this project, please request ISO code first (follow SIL document on it). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:47, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Um ... just to stop the argument about what codes are correct:
  • .my is the top-level domain code for Malaysia, consistent with its ISO 3166 code.
  • On the other hand, ms is the ISO 639–1 code for the Malay macrolanguage, while my is the ISO 639–1 code for Burmese (Myanmar).
Our codes here reflect ISO 639 (language) codes, not ISO 3166 (geographic) codes. It is unfortunate that those two are not consistent with each other. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:44, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Glorious Engine: Have you asked the community at Indonesian Wikipedia whether it would be amenable to some kind of conversion script? The language, after all, hasn't changed, only its orthography. So that would be the appropriate approach. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:52, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, on their Village Pump and also one of Indonesian scholar contributor in English Wikipedia. This Incubator was openly for correction from other persons, too. --Glorious Engine (talk) 22:19, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like idwiki is interested in the idea. Have a look at m:Wikipedias in multiple writing systems—this is usually more about languages that can be written in more than one alphabet, but the idea is similar. Calling @Amire80: Where can Glorious Engine go for help on this? StevenJ81 (talk) 22:43, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@MF-W: Same question to you: Will you agree this to be the second be-tarask:-like project or not? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How many about Simple English Wikipedia and English Wikipedia --Glorious Engine (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Simple English Wikipedia and Belarusian Taraskievica Wikipedia are problematic examples that shouldn't be used as precedents.
"voj" is not registered as an ISO 639 language code and will not be eligible. You cannot invent your own ISO language codes—only ISO can do it.
"my" is the code for the country of Malaysia. "ms" is a the code for the Malay language (in Wikipedia it's used for Malaysian). As a language code, "my" is used for Burmese (Myanmar), and the language code for the country of Burma (Myanmar) is "mm". "my" is not the only code that is confusing: for example, "uk" as a country code is United Kingdom, but as a language code "uk" is Ukrainian. Countries and languages are distinct things, so country codes and language codes are also distinct things.
If there is demand for this orthography, it makes more sense to examine the possibility of creating a conversion engine. I tried to read the discussion in the Indonesian Wikipedia, to which StevenJ81 has linked, using Google Translate, and I see that somebody already suggested it. Very unfortunately, I don't know Indonesian (I'd really love to), but from the little that I do know about this language, it's probably possible to create a conversion engine for it.
I think that the most similar is Portuguese, although it was implemented as a gadget on the Wikipedia. It will be much better to implement it in MediaWiki code, as it was done for Serbian, Chinese, etc.
Somebody who knows the Indonesian language and the PHP programming language should take a look at this. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 07:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226: I don't think anyone is going to let this be another be-tarask. That wouldn't be approved itself today. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:43, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done Archived to an .xml file, then test deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually a test in Romanized Pashto. Two parallel requests for such a test were just rejected by LangCom. The appropriate way to handle a test like this is to try to create a script converter for the existing Pashto Wikipedia project. Additionally, this project has had no content added in five years. I propose archiving and deleting this test. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:32, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --OWTB (talk) 12:18, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you Steven sir, because its not dialect also:-) Khan (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done Archived and deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The creator of this portal page doesn't continue creating contents of it, and I can't see any reason that creating a Wikibooks using macrolanguage code that has very big number of member language codes do have any benefits on helping anything. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:21, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see if he answers. Chances are that I won't actually delete the page, but will simply remove {{Test wiki}} and encourage people who land on the page to create a test in a constituent language. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:14, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Handled as indicated. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This page, along with its subpages (and two redirects to these pages), constitutes a test project in a language with no ISO 639 code. It should therefore be deleted. Both Hydriz and I have tried to contact the creator about this, but have received no responses. (Creator could do something like this in Wikia's Incubator Plus if s/he has a real interest in creating this.) StevenJ81 (talk) 16:34, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support stale personal project without code. --
I agree. If a test is rejected from the main space, that does not mean one can simply create it in his user pages. We can ask him whether he wants it imported to incubator plus. With no reaction, it should be simply deleted. --OWTB (talk) 08:51, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hydriz: Could you please post a message on his talk page in Chinese, asking him whether he wants it moved to Incubator Plus? If we hear nothing within a week, the pages will be deleted. --OWTB (talk) 08:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...or, alternatively, if he would just like us to email an .xml file. It won't be so big. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but he can also create that himself :) --OWTB (talk) 13:42, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(If he knows how.) StevenJ81 (talk) 14:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done These pages have been deleted. If the creator contacts me by email—and the creator is the only user that edited any of the pages in question—I am willing to send him/her an archive file (XML file, 43 kb) that can be used at Incubator Plus or anywhere else that is compliant with CC BY-SA 3.0. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Created by an IP user that still don't create any contents. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:46, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done (You can mark pages like this with {{delete}} instead.) StevenJ81 (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All pages in Wp/aki

This test is supposed to be written in a Papuan language. However, with the exception of the pages Wp/aki/Amerikaso, Wp/aki/Amerikanoe, all the pages are written in English. Some pages like Wp/aki/Cargon Nanotubs and Wp/aki/lk structural and roofing solutions are clear vandalism/spam. I highly doubt the genuinity of the Amerika- pages, as they are IP contribs and "-noe" en "-so" look remarkably close to "north" and "south". As such, I propose to delete the entire test. --OWTB (talk) 09:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted a few pages that were clearly vandalism/spam. Many of the other pages seem to be copy-pastes from English. Let's see if someone comes over the next ten days to defend any of the content here. Thanks for finding this. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:22, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I took the liberty of deleting the Archimedes Plutonium page, as it lacked the necessary notability on en.wp. So it was probably just pasted there to circumvent the notability criterium. "Ahmed Khan Bhurgri" was personal promotion. --OWTB (talk) 14:14, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support The content should be in Aiome and the English and unknown language pages are already stale.
Support deletion but keep the Wp/aki infopage, redo the templates and start the articles from scratch in Aiome since this language is still in vigorous use. Even though this language has less than 1,000 native speakers, all generations have proficiency.
@ Please do not multiple vote, thx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:13, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@ You are assuming that we have people here who could actually start this from scratch. If someone shows up who really speaks the language and can do this, we'd be happy to do what you request. But otherwise, on the assumption that perhaps nothing here is really written in Aiome, we'd be better off deleting everything and letting someone start over.
Alternatively, I think I've gotten everything currently in the test down to the work of two contributors: User:Matycarlota, the original creator, and an IP user from Chile who is presumably the same person (since Matycarlota described himself/herself as Chilean on enwiki and Commons user pages). Either we assume that all of what is left is valid (and leave it alone), or we assume that none of it is valid and get rid of all of it. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will add: neither the named user nor the IP has a single edit on any WMF project later than 2014. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:34, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it were genuine contents, which I highly doubt, it is so stubby it can't really be considered contents. --OWTB (talk) 08:30, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:59, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pages within Wp/gos and Wp/frs

Each of these projects has a single, trivial placeholder of a main page. LangCom has decided that contributions in these languages should be made at Low German Wikipedia and/or Dutch Low Saxon Wikipedia. Accordingly, I would delete all content except the infopages, and on the infopages encourage people to contribute on those projects. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mild support. While I agree that the languages are not sufficiently unique to most of their national Low Saxon siblings, I understand the desire for their own projects as this is an identity question and they got the ISO codes. As Low Saxon spans a huge area, not all dialects are actually entirely mutually intelligible (especially spoken), but this is more of a LangCom thing than an Incubator thing. The reason I mildly support deletion is that there has not been shown any real interest in creating such tests, as well as that this will only lead to copying contents and doing double work. --OWTB (talk) 08:34, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 13:56, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The user who created this portal page, @Kabulistani:, still haven't created any contents here. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:00, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As was stated on the Meta request page, creator of this test intended it as a place to recreate an extinct language. That is outside of policy. Accordingly, this test should be moved to Incubator Plus or to some other location. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should we also propose Wp/pox for deletion? That seems also like a playground of @Phillipm0703:. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Let's hold off for the moment. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:49, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, move to Wikia. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Phillipm0703: Don't you have an opinion about this? (I also pinged on his talk page. I will give him over the weekend to comment before closing.) StevenJ81 (talk) 17:23, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still believe that this project can work. The problem is that there are no projects comparable to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I still have not found any people who want to speak the language. I hope the project will only be postponed and not deleted Phillipm0703 (talk) 19:13, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We were actually proposing deleting the Wiktionary right now, though I can't say that Wikipedia doesn't have similar issues. If you conducted these projects on Incubator Plus on Wikia, you would be bound by fewer rules. In my mind, the biggest downside to having the projects somewhere else is that people might not be able find you as easily. But at the moment, both of these projects are really one-man shows in every respect, and you could develop them anywhere.
So in the spirit of "postponed, not deleted", I'm going to make a suggestion here: Let us export both of these projects to Incubator Plus. Work on them there to your heart's content. Try to recruit people to work with you and have an interest in the project. If at some point in the future, there is some real evidence that you are having success in reviving the language—and by that, I mean not only online, but out in the real world—then I (or whoever my successors are)—would be happy to welcome you and the project back here. But at the moment, what you are doing is the revival of a dead language. Protecting and strengthening "almost dead" languages is very much in scope here, but reviving "actually dead" languages is not. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:58, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it might even be better idea to request a separate wiki on Miraheze instead. The functionalities and skin there are almost identical to Wikimedia, unlike Wikia which has made some awful decisions recently... --OWTB (talk) 08:31, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, as they said, we can do it. --Phillipm0703 (talk) 20:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ooswesthoesbes, Phillipm0703: OWTB, can you help Phillip get his projects over there? Also, I'm thinking under the circumstances that we might want to add Miraheze to the Interwiki map. What do you think? StevenJ81 (talk) 15:05, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am personally not very well aware of how Miraheze works. I believe User:-revi is an administrator there, so he might be able to help you. --OWTB (talk) 08:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do you need one wiki for everything or wiki per language/project or like it? (I am going to fly in real short time so response will be delayed.) — regards, Revi 12:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When everyone finishes discussing, I will create .xml archives. I imagine I will create two archives (one for each project), and then upload them into the File: namespace (at least for a time). Someone will want to edit the .xml files manually to strip out prefixes before loading them into Miraheze.
@-revi: Are the terms on Miraheze consistent enough with what happens here that (a) it's permissible to export there and (b) it would be appropriate to suggest adding them to the Interwiki map? (I understand response will be delayed.) StevenJ81 (talk) 13:15, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdent) 1. Export/Import welcome. We don't have arbitrary limit on both operations, except import have some technical limit, as you may know. 2. I have COI so I have no idea, if wikia is there, it might not be a bad idea to do so too. — regards, Revi 09:18, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@-revi: Re:COI: I didn't ask for a recommendation, I only asked the factual question of whether the terms of the site there are consistent with ours. I gather they are. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:03, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh BTW, Miraheze has an activity (edit) requirement (because miraheze isn't rich compared to Wikia or WMF) and does not keep wikis with no edits unless asked otherwise. You'd better have one wiki with the exemption applied. — regards, Revi 16:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea to make one wiki for all rejected languages (also, because we can simply keep the prefixes, which makes importing way easier). I propose moving our alliance with Incubator Plus to an alliance with Miraheze if the wiki is created. I am willing to help managing the project, as I've always done for Incubator Plus, until the new skin made editing/reviewing a pain in the ass... --OWTB (talk) 08:14, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ooswesthoesbes, -revi, Phillipm0703: I think where we stand on all of this is as follows:
  1.  Doing...  In principle, we are agreed to move Wp/pox and Wt/pox to ... somewhere, probably Miraheze. We're going to hold off on that temporarily, because ...
  2. It looks like we want to try to move the Incubator Plus (or its equivalent) to Miraheze, for a whole variety of reasons. To that end:
    • Please formally make that proposal at I:Community portal, so everyone can comment. We shouldn't discuss that further here.
    • In the meanwhile, OWTB, since I doubt there will be objections. I'd recommend starting to set up that wiki at Miraheze. (I think you're going to have to ask any active communities at Incubator Plus if they want to move, and I wouldn't touch anything that has moved to Wikia but taken its own subdomain there. In any event, I'm not going to touch any of that.)
  3. I will recommend on Meta that we add Miraheze to the Interwiki map.
Once things are set up on Miraheze, we can move the pox projects there. Does this sound right? StevenJ81 (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OWTB, just tell me the subdomain name (*.miraheze.org) and I'll create it with your account (assuming you control same username there) as a crat. — regards, Revi 14:11, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Do we all agree on the simple variant incubator.miraheze.org or does it need something extra to differentiate from this Incubator? --OWTB (talk) 15:08, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As a working name, I'm inclined to use something different from "Incubator" or "Incubator Plus", just so people are clear as to where we are (or aren't) pointing them. ("New Incubator Plus"? "Hatchery"?) Whether the subdomain then ought to be incubator.miraheze.org or workingname.miraheze.org is up to you guys.
PS, OWTB: With your kind permission, I asked Revi elsewhere to make me a sysop (not a 'crat), so I could help some, too. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:50, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I made you sysop on the wiki, so it should be good to go now :) I think incubator.miraheze.org is simple and efficient. We can come up with a differentiating name later. --OWTB (talk) 16:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments added in September 2018
  • Aren't wiktionaries in dead languages (unlike wikipedias) possible to be opened as Wikimedia projects in a future? I thought the Incubator Plus is for "semi-hoaxed" languages (or there will be some new Incubator Plus?). -- 15:10, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Not per se. It also includes dialects/languages without an ISO code, alternative orthographies, and not-well documented historic/extinct revived languages. As this case falls under the last category, it can be hosted on Incubator Plus. --OWTB (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to answer so late. Where is my Wiktionary now? I've searched Incubator Plus, but here's nothing. --Phillipm0703 (talk) 18:31, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For the moment, still here. StevenJ81 (talk) 02:26, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid language code, that user didn't try any trials to get valid code. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done (speedy). Looks like his own project, maybe. See en:Draft:Tung Language. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to delete the entire test. It consists solely of one page in English and is unlikely to be edited soon. --OWTB (talk) 13:58, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Currently there's plan to create Wikimedia project contents in Narom, see m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Narom. I will ask Wikimedia Indonesia and Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia to find more Narom people to add contents on these Narom test projects. -- 01:48, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is no problem, but the current contents isn't written in Narom. Please contribute in Narom instead of English. --OWTB (talk) 08:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not done I'm gong to leave this be for now. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note, w:nrm: is not in Narom language. -- 15:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We're well aware of that. We're prepared to create a space here for a test Wikipedia in Narom (using a temporary language code), as soon as a registered user who is reasonably competent in the language requests it. Moving the Normand Wikipedia elsewhere (nrf.wikipedia.org) is in the pipeline at phabricator, but it's not the easiest thing in the world to accomplish. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:23, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like mistitled, Module:Wy/no/WikidataParameter exists. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:12, 1 October 2018 (UTC) Pinging author @WikiJunkie: --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Just for future reference, if the correctly prefixed page exists and is identical, the incorrectly prefixed page is eligible for "speedy deletion" using {{delete}}. Just put the explanation on the template. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:45, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • LangCom has rejected the request to create this test.
  • It was reported to LangCom that most of what is in the test is Pinyin transcription of pages in Chinese Wikipedia. Unless each of those transcriptions carries an attribution notice, either within an edit summary or on the corresponding talk page, the transcriptions constitute copyright violations and need to be deleted anyway.

Because of these two facts, one of three things needs to happen:

  1. This test will be completely deleted.
  2. Someone will add attribution to every single page in the test. Then the test can be exported to an xml file and moved elsewhere, perhaps to Incubator Plus (old one or new one).
  3. Someone can prove that this test is actually not a transcription of Chinese Wikipedia content. Then the test can be exported to an xml file and moved elsewhere.

StevenJ81 (talk) 22:09, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No need to move to any replacement places. Things like this can be transliterated by LC as per Artoria2e5. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:08, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226: Personally, I agree with that assessment. Still, someone has put some work into this over time. So if someone actually wants to bother adding attribution to everything, and to use it as the basis for an off-Wikimedia Pinyin encyclopedia project, I do not really have the right to tell him/her "no". StevenJ81 (talk) 13:34, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done An archive file was not created. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:26, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These four "test projects" are only having empty main pages, and after my announcement to them, nothing happened ever. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:20, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 15:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Still empty after two weeks of creation. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:21, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 15:21, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the Chinese Pinyin version has been removed, so I also requested to delete the so-called "Chinese Middle" Wikipedia (wp/ltc).

This project simply uses the so-called alphabetic text for spelling. Except for the home page, it is transcribed from Chinese Wikipedia and is not declared. I can mark the relevant content and delete it.

This language is first of all historical language, but more importantly: Chinese has not used all kinds of alphabetic characters from the past to the present, and although Pinyin is used to help students and foreigners learn Chinese, they have not Treat as formal text (except for Dungan).

Since this project is not requested on the meta wiki, I am here to request to remove it. After deleting, you can archive it as an XML file and import it into the new Incubator.

五月雨恋歌 (talk) 02:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A nonsense test project, if lzhwiki think that they allow this, then move to lzhwiki, otherwise there's no benefit to move out elsewhere. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:10, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226, 五月雨恋歌:
  • Please see my comment above. Without attribution, nothing can move anywhere. 五月雨恋歌, if you want it exported to an xml, you'd need to add attributions first. (If you say you're going to do this, I'll give you enough time to do it before deleting the test.)
  • Liuxinyu970226, would you please ask lzhwiki if it has any interest? Thanks.
StevenJ81 (talk) 13:37, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just ping here: @Davidzdh, Itsmine, 丁子君, 夏侯韜: --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The ltc project does not have any relationship with the Literary Chinese Wikipedia, no matter in the view of language profession or wikipedia propose. In my own view, this is NOT suitable to migrate any contents of ltc project to the Literary Chinese Wikipedia. Thanks very much for your understanding!--itsmine (talk) 04:49, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How about moving them to zh-wikiversity? They can be learning materials about "ltc".Davidzdh (talk) 08:44, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but it does not seem like that ltc has any relations with lzh. Also, fundamentally, lzh articles should be written strictly in Chinese characters. --丁子君 (talk) 12:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidzdh: If you think there would be value in having this at zhwikiversity, and if the community agrees, fine. But please make sure first that this is legitimate content and not unattributed transcription from elsewhere. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @StevenJ81:

I looked at it, it should not be sorted out, you can delete it directly (if you need to keep it, only the home page is necessary). The homepage only has its own logo and the paragraph on its right is original (possible):
  • ltc: Huan ngiaang leoi tauh tryng kox hanh ngiox jyi kir paak qua! Njin njin qax pen siaax tek xih jiu tek paak qua xyen sjio. Tryng kox hanh ngiox jyi kir paak qua qeoi qeix io 2016 nen sjiengh danx cet, njio kiim gyongh fiux deu myk 10 phien.
  • zh: 欢迎来到中古汉语维基百科!人人可编写的自由的百科全书。中古汉语维基百科开启于2016年圣诞节,如今共有条目10篇。
  • en: Welcome to Middle Chinese Wikipedia! A free encyclopedia that everyone can write. The Middle Chinese Wikipedia opened in Christmas 2016 and now has 10 articles.
The other entries are from Chinese Wikipedia, such as China, Taiwan, Beijing, Chinese, Coordinated Universal Time and other articles (and are not claimed from Chinese Wikipedia). Below the home page there is a link to the converter that can be converted out. This kind of thing is actually an original research. I don't think this is the value of moving to a new incubation field. In other words, this kind of thing is still enough to play in Fandom (formerly Wikia), so I said that I changed. The idea is to delete it directly, DO NOT export the XML archive.
In addition to replying to the above message from @Davidzdh:, I think the content in the middle is not necessary to be incorporated into the Chinese Wiki Academy. If necessary, I can send a topic there to decide whether to move over there (although I guess it is definitely against).
With this converter, I can write a script that converts a large number of entries without having to verify their correctness: because the contents of these converters are one-to-one. Therefore, it is even more unnecessary to have this version.
I would like to say something that is irrelevant: the most ridiculous thing is that although it is advertised as "Middle Chinese", it is copied directly from Chinese Wikipedia. Shouldn't it be copied from the Classical Chinese Wikipedia?

五月雨恋歌 (talk) 04:01, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That last is certainly an interesting question. I'm no expert on this, but as far as I can tell, "Middle Chinese" covers a period from the end of Old Chinese (and Classical Chinese, at least to the extent it was a transcription of spoken language and not just a semi-separate literary language) to the emergence of Modern Chinese varieties. So while it seems possible that a legitimate project in Middle Chinese could show transitional elements, I'd personally guess a transcription of Classical Chinese would be more logical than a transcription of Modern Chinese. This simply makes me more suspicious of the value of this test; a legitimate test project can make up its own rules however it wants.
Assuming that this RfD is successful, I will probably delete the home page, too. If someone comes back to create a legitimate test in this variety of Chinese—unlikely as that might be—finding and restoring one page, especially one titled "Main Page", won't be so hard. And the logo is saved on Commons, so it will not disappear, either. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:43, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think that according to the middle Chinese used by people at that time (the style is called literature Chinese), the ancient pronunciation will inevitably be used. Instead of reading from middle Chinese in middle Chinese. So I think this test project is not necessary. (← I have said this in my own words)
However, I am currently proposing a proposal at the Chinese Wikiversity. If it is successful, I would like to import this project there. I think the environment there is definitely more welcome than the original research here. After the page on the incubator is deleted, I think it still needs also leave a notice informing them to go to the Chinese Wikiversity to contribute.
As for the logo, stay there. 五月雨恋歌 (talk) 05:16, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support move to zhwiversity.--Cohaf (talk) 07:56, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing...  but we can certainly wait until zhwikiversity decides if it wants the material. Someone please open a discussion there, and come back to us here when a decision is made. @Liuxinyu970226, Hydriz: Would you two please keep an eye on this? Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:30, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@StevenJ81: I have already notified Chinese Wikiversity and wait for comments [5]. --五月雨恋歌 (talk) 02:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MF-Warburg, SPQRobin: Can someone please move this content to zhwikiversity? And can someone please provide guidance as to where it should be put in zhwikiversity? I will leave a notice here if I have a landing page to point to. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@StevenJ81:I have applied for import permission on Meta Wiki (although only one week), and I have already imported the relevant content, and then I will notify you of the deletion after I have organized the relevant content. At the moment, I don't need to import it again. I will talk about it again. Thank you! 五月雨恋歌 (talk) 01:00, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, we can delete this project now as this is moved to zhwikiversity. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@五月雨恋歌: Please let me know when you've finished organizing it all, and give me a central landing page on zhwikipedia for the content. Then I will delete here and leave a link behind. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:28, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@StevenJ81: I have prepared all the relevant content, I split it into two parts according to its content: v:zh:汉字-中古拼音 and v:zh:汉字-中古四拼. It is now ready to delete. The next thing is handed over to us. --五月雨恋歌 (talk) 07:05, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@五月雨恋歌: Thank you. I assume you have all the content from main space and template space that you need. Just one question before I delete: did you also copy over the two talk pages having content (Talk:Wp/ltc and Talk:Wp/ltc/Main Page)? StevenJ81 (talk) 14:36, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I forgot it. But I'm going to use transwiki for import the talk page. --五月雨恋歌 (talk) 12:40, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@五月雨恋歌: OK. Let me know when that's done. Everything else is deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Finally: Done StevenJ81 (talk) 17:05, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why we need Special pages translations as main namespace pages? I don't know how on earth Afrikaans users can't read [6]? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:20, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not done This doesn't hurt anyone. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Title is written in Japanese rather than Slovak, might be a spam. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 17:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Created for over 3 months, anything else to be migrated? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:13, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done The last project to be created always remains in place here until a newer project is created and migrated. From time to time we have people wanting to see how a certain page looks before and after migration, so we always keep one migrated project intact here. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Now done, since we have other newly created projects to serve as models. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The proposal for this test on Meta was recently rejected. (See m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Ottoman Turkish 4.) The reasons for the rejection are detailed as item #1 in the white box in the section "Proposed decisions". Neither I nor anyone else on LangCom can really see those reasons not remaining valid for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, we do not see any likelihood that this test would be ruled "eligible" in the foreseeable future.
    Note: any discussion of that decision will be deleted from this page. Comment on Meta if you would like to challenge it. I only include the brief summary as background for this discussion.
  • Nevertheless, the rules on Incubator are less strict than the rules for independent projects. With few exceptions, any language with a valid ISO 639–3 code can have a project here. In particular, projects in historical languages whose requests have been rejected on Meta often stay here afterwards. I'm aware of at least 14 such projects here, and I'm sure as I continue to clear the backlog at m:Requests for new languages that there will be more in the future. Ordinarily, a test like this one would be allowed to remain indefinitely, though we would also support a community's request to move it elsewhere.
Reasons for proposing deletion

I am not sure now what to do about this test. I have created this proposal to delete the test in order to generate discussion around the issues at hand. The two main issues are as follows:

  1. It has been alleged that this test consists of content from Turkish Wikipedia machine-transliterated into Perso-Arabic script. If that is true, there are two serious problems with the test:
    • The copying from Turkish Wikipedia lacked attribution. A lack of attribution constitutes a copyright violation, even for material copied from Wikipedia, and copyright violations are to be deleted promptly.
    • The test is not really in Ottoman Turkish at all, but rather in modern Turkish, written with Perso-Arabic script. Now, Ethnologue describes "tr-Arab" as "no longer in use". More importantly, though, this test would be deletable because it's entirely in the "wrong language". And presumably if there were a desire for a Wikipedia in "tr-Arab", that could be arranged through a script converter on trwiki.
  2. Even if the preceding point is proved false, there is a serious concern that this project, if approved, would be little more than a content fork from Turkish Wikipedia, which is problematic in a number of other ways. Accordingly, it's best not to risk the possibility of that going forward, so we should delete this test.
Reasons I'm not so sure about (completely) deleting the test
  • Nobody has proved to my satisfaction that this test, in fact, consists of copyright violations. I have requested help in determining this, but have received no substantive responses to my requests at the time of this writing.
    The test has around 2,000 mainspace pages, plus support infrastructure. That's a lot of work, even if much of it has not been recent. In the absence of clear evidence that these pages are copyright violations, I am reluctant to delete that much work outright.
  • Nobody has proved to my satisfaction that this test, in fact, is in modern Turkish, rather than Ottoman Turkish.
    The same analysis would potentially answer this question. But if the test is in modern Turkish, yet not a copyright violation, there would be no problem in archiving the test before deleting it. Then the test could be moved to somewhere like Incubator Plus.
  • If the test is really in Ottoman Turkish, then we would probably encourage its community to move to a place like Incubator Plus, but could not insist.
Potential solutions
  • Outright deletion. If this test consists of copyright violations, it should be deleted. Period.
    Alternatively, if someone were really willing to make the effort, perhaps with the aid of a bot, to add attribution, we could avoid outright deletion. But that's a big job, and I would need to see a commitment from several people, and regular progress, to feel comfortable with such an approach. I'm guessing this won't happen.
  • Deletion after creating an XML archive. This solution is certainly the right one if the test is found to be in modern Turkish, but definitely not a copyright violation. We could also then assist with moving the test to Incubator Plus, if there is an interest.
    This solution also allows us to kick the can down the road a bit if we cannot prove the copyright violation one way or the other. But I'm not sure in this case whether it would be appropriate to post the archive file publicly or not, or whether it would be appropriate to move the test to Incubator Plus.
  • Leave the test in place. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, this test is assumed to be in Ottoman Turkish, and is therefore eligible to stay here.
In conclusion ...

I would appreciate a discussion of these issues, as well as recommendations from the community as to how to proceed. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ebe123, Liuxinyu970226, MF-Warburg: It feels to me as if the solution is going to end up being to create an archive, then to delete the test, but not to post the test publicly in the File: namespace. This way, if we eventually get some proof that these are not copyvios—or that someone trustworthy is willing to go back and do attributions, the work is not lost. At the same time, we're not just leaving it available for anyone to do "whatever" with it.
Now, I have to admit that I don't entirely like the idea of such a file just living on my computer (or MF-W's or anyone else's). There seems to be a way to do something called a "stash" upload to a WMF wiki, where only the uploader has access. Does anyone know how to do that? If I did that, only I would have access, but it would be saved on a WMF server. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@StevenJ81:: It would be easier if we could un/delete by prefix. Remember that the deleted history of deleted pages still exists in the Wiki, just not accessible by non-admins. Therefore, we could just keep a list of all the deleted pages and get a bot to undelete the pages from the list if need be. Ebe123 (Talkabout it|contribs) 17:00, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ebe123: Fair enough. It's a lot faster to delete them (using the MassDelete gadget) than to restore them. But a bot can certainly do it if need be. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:39, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@StevenJ81, Ebe123: I suddenly also find an Ottoman Turkish Wiktionary, should we also make discussions regarding that? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226: It's not so sudden. The last time a page was added to that Wiktionary was 2014. As long as there is no reason to believe that the project is laden with copyvios, there is no reason it can't stay where it is. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ebe123: Is there a bot that exists that undeletes pages? StevenJ81 (talk) 17:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed conclusion

It looks like the consensus here is that I compile a list of page names (in case we ever end up needing to undelete), and then simply mass-delete the test. Any further objections? StevenJ81 (talk) 17:47, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing...  In progress. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 15:45, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The ISO code "spr" is supposed to be for Saparua, an Austronesian language from the Moluccas in Indonesia, but this test is written in a nonsense Slavic-looking language called "Superian." There are only four pages in this test: Wp/spr/Андин кюрь, Wp/spr/Бэларусь, Wp/spr/Испэниэ, and Wp/spr/Приднэстровьэ. DraconicDark (talk) 16:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:13, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per [7], brt points to Bitare which is used in Nigeria and Cameroon, but both pages that created by @Shaunak Chakraborty: are mostly written in Devanagari scripts, I'm not sure how and why this african language can also use Devanagari. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:21, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, but Ethnologue shows it as "not a written language". So I will delete the whole test.
@Shaunak Chakraborty: Please do not make things up. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:04, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:06, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

iso639-3:spr points to an Indonesian language Saparua, which isn't a written language but only for speaking. This page is using Cyrillic which I doubt if Indonesian were used. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:45, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Deleted by MF-W, so I'm self closing this. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:30, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]