Incubator:Requests for deletions

This is an official Incubator policy.
This page has been elaborated and approved by the community and its compliance is mandatory for all users. You may edit it, but please discuss major changes on the talk page first.

This page is for nominating test wikis for deletion, or for nominating pages related to the maintenance of the Incubator for deletion. For discussing about the deletion of pages in a specific test wiki, please use the relevant talk pages where the editors of the test wiki are most active in to discuss them (such as the talk page of the test wiki's main page). Pages that should be speedily deleted should be tagged with {{delete}} with a proper reason.

Common reason for deleting pages here on Incubator include:

  • Speedy deletion requests (vandalism, spelling corrections, correcting prefixes etc.)
  • Deletion of a complete test wiki according to the policy's section "Closure or Deletion"
  • If a project is given final approval by the language committee, the test's pages will be imported to the new subdomain wiki. All pages here will be deleted, except the info page.

Deletion policyEdit

Requests for deleting single pagesEdit

  • Pages that may be subject to speedy deletion:
    • In general, the rules for speedy deletion are the same as listed on Meta.
      • One rule for speedy deletion unique to Incubator is that pages in the wrong language — either with a prefix reflecting an invalid ISO 639 language code, or written in a language different from the one in the prefix — can be deleted.
      • Similarly, pages having an incorrect prefix where a copy with a correct prefix also exists are eligible for speedy deletion. Please include a link to the correctly prefixed page on the deletion template.
    • Speedy deletions may be proposed by putting {{delete}} (and a reason) on the pages that should be deleted and will thereby be added to Category:Maintenance:Delete, where an administrator will decide about them. It is not needed to vote on a speedy deletion. If there are doubts, the administrator reviewing the speedy deletion request will ask the proposer. If you have doubts, but are not an administrator, you are also free to add a remark below the {{delete}} template on the page.
      If the reason you give is because the current name is wrong, somehow (grammar, spelling, etc.), administrators normally assume the content has been moved to a different (better) location. It will help the administrators if you include a link to the moved page in your deletion request.
      Consider turning the wrong spelling into a redirect to the right spelling before asking for deletion. (And please note that if the wrong spelling is likely to be a common misspelling, it may be useful to leave the redirect, both here and once your test is in its own subdomain.)
      If you do not turn the wrong spelling into a redirect, please simply add {{delete}} to the top of the page. Do not blank out the rest of the page.
    • Please remember: pages cannot be speedy-deleted as long as other pages link to them. Please modify all incoming links before requesting speedy deletion; otherwise, simply leave the original page as a redirect. (Note: This rule doesn't always apply to incoming links from discussion pages and similar administrative pages, if the discussion is already settled.)
  • In other cases, you may put a request below.

Requests for test deletionsEdit

  1. You can propose the deletion of an entire test-wiki. Common reasons for this can be that langcom has rejected the creation of this wiki as a separate project, or that the test-wiki only contains nonsensical content not written in the language it should be in.
    1. You can vote, but it has just a little bit of influence. Arguments are better.
    2. You can propose moving the test to the Incubator Plus.
  2. After 10 days, an administrator will make a decision about deleting the test or not. For obvious cases, especially when the pages only contain vandalism/spam/test edits, a decision can be made earlier.
  3. If needed, an XML file must be exported (needed means: if the test is not vandalism or nonsense – in general, use common sense).
  4. Remember that this has nothing directly to do with the decision of the language committee (langcom).

Requests for undeletionsEdit

All requests for deleted pages to be restored can be added below, as well.



The Middle English Incubator has been largely abandoned by the project creators, appearing now to be headed by a "CanadianToast", who doesn't claim any level of literacy in the language. It is being completely overrun by "meme" edits and inaccurate language. I couldnt find a single editor who advertises any understanding of the language. The few pages that do exist, are largely inaccurate, minuscule, or irrelevant. 14:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Keep - Instead of complaining and trying to delete the entire project you could just contribute to it. The way you're speaking makes it seem like you are knowledgeable in Middle English and could help fix issues. That is a whole lot better than getting rid of everything so many people have spent time building. It's not that hard to mend 100 articles. I'm a newer learner of Middle English, and I understand that some of my edits may not be accurate but I welcome any and all corrections to my work. This project has been inactive for some time, and myself and a few other editors are doing our best to revive it. --CanadianToast (talk) 19:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Fixing the existing pages isn't practical currently in my opinion, all it takes is a "Frogge / Dogge / Pigge" comedy video going viral again, and you'll immediately have dozens of people making non-serious edits for their own fun. Without fluent moderation to prevent that, it just allows a free-for-all to take place, leading to the Incubator looking extremely unprofessional and unappealing for more fluent users. Barring an extreme change to the method of moderation, I don't see a positive reason for the continued existence of the project, thus my request. -- 22:53, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Just look in the recent changes, most of the changes are not joke edits and those that are get reverted. Btw, you can revert those joke edits yourself if you notice them. Also, you can ask an admin to ban the users who vandalize. Fixing the existing pages is very practical and is happening. Also, Middle English Wikipedia grows by several pages every day and those aren’t joke edits. To conclude, the actual contribution by far outweigh the joke edits. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 07:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Move to Incubator Plus, by simple keeping we only got more and more scowiki-like problems, I see no reason this language will be accepted by langcom, but still useful for non-WMF materials. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226 How would one go about starting a project on Incubator Plus? --CanadianToast (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
And how do you think that this project can be accepted? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:26, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
What do you mean? --CanadianToast (talk) 03:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
@CanadianToast: Per m:LPP:

Ancient or historical languages Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted, because resources in such languages continue to be important to the world, even in the absence of native, living speakers of those languages. Where possible, such languages should be bundled with the modern equivalent Wikisource project (such as Old English with English), though that is not required.

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226: Ah, I see. So it looks like it doesn't have a good chance of being accepted, but despite this I think it should be kept here. There are other projects in similar situations on Incubator and Middle English Wikipedia has been here since at least 2005 if I'm not mistaken. However, I'm not entirely opposed to moving it to Incubator Plus. --CanadianToast (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Afaik, "Incubator Plus" is supposed to work like Incubator, just that it isn't Incubator. --MF-W {a, b} 08:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. --CanadianToast (talk) 17:33, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
That is correct. It has the same prefix system and can draw images from Commons. The only true difference is that it is hosted by Miraheze and not Wikimedia, which allows Wikimedia Plus to host projects that are rejected from here. --OWTB (talk) 09:01, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Keep I agree with CanadinToast, if you know that there are mistakes in our Middle English, why don’t you correct it? Also if you look on the test wiki activity, you can clearly see that on January it has received more attention and much more people have contributed so there’s no any reason to delete it. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 08:33, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
If there’s inaccurate language you can correct it, then ping the user who made the mistake and explain why it’s inaccurate. I’m sure most of the users try to write as accurately as possible. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 08:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Also, @ScriptorHistoriae: told in the proposal page that while he thinks that the proposal is weak, the test wiki is impressive that he think it can be created once we have more than 100 pages. If I’m not mistaken we already have more than that. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
@Gifnk dlm 2020: Wikipedia isn't the only wiki to describe in one language, we have many other opinions. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226:, what do you mean? Also, about the statement that only wikisources can exist in an ancient or historical language, it’s written in Wp/enm:"This test has a valid language code, but note that it is an extinct, historical or ancient language so it will be hard to get a Wikimedia project." Yes, I agree that it’s hard but it’s not impossible so I don’t see why you want to close it. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 07:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
@Gifnk dlm 2020: If you think that there should really have an, you may try to request it at Meta-Wiki, but then what will be happened? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:08, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete or move, whatever. The Language Policy is crystal clear about ancient languages: no new projects are to be created. They seldom get substantial: those few that can write in the language usually abandon their hobby after a few months. This is, of course, a problem with wikis in regional languages too, but these are supported by ideals (language preservation, emancipation, alternative perspectives) that wikis in ancient languages fail to meet. Besides, in its written form, the English language has changed little since the twelfth century. You could say a Middle English Wikipedia already exists. Its similarity to Modern English also means that this project is likely to attract non-expert edits à la, as has already been pointed out above. Steinbach (talk) 11:02, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Middle English Wikipedia is not a new wiki-it was created in 2009. Also, this specific wiki is substantial-just look in the recent edits or press "Check Test Wiki Activity". And also, Middle English is different from Modern English so it’s impossible to say that Modern English Wikipedia is a Middle English Wikipedia. And to all the people who say it attracts joke edits, all wikis attract joke edits so you might as well shut down the Wikimedia Foundation if you are gonna use that sort of logic. Do you know how many joke edits in English Wikipedia survive for several days? Also, it’s written that deleting a test wiki isn’t related to the LangCom. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 06:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
@Gifnk dlm 2020: The third proposal for such an enm.wikipedia was rejected 4 years ago as "An extinct proto-language." I don't see why you have reasons to contest. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:56, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226:, because this test wiki is very active so I think that this rule should change. This test wiki is prospering in the Incubator but if it is moved to incubator plus I think many people would lose interest. Also, if we allow wikis in historical languages, this will prove the point that there are wikis in ALL languages and might encourage speakers of endangered languages to contribute to wikis in those endangered languages. Also, some people might be interested only in editing in historical languages wiki at first, but then spread out and also edit in wikis in modern languages and this will be beneficial for all wikimedia projects. Wikis in historical languages are usually not active not because people don’t want to edit in those languages but because people are not aware of those wikis. If you know people who know Middle English you can tell them about this wiki, and you can also read a bit about the differences between Modern English and Middle English and then contribute by yourself. I recommend you use this Middle English dictionary. (BTW, the message about contributing is not specifically to you but to all the users who read this). -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 08:04, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Keep --PastelKos (talk) 11:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Why? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226:, idk why you expect him to answer if you haven’t pinged him but there are many arguments for keeping it above. Also, I don’t see what you or anyone else can gain from deleting Middle English Wikipedia. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 14:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
I would like to add that people interested in ancient languages can start editing wikis in those ancient languages and then expand to other wikis which will be beneficial to the entire wikimedia foundation. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 09:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Please feel free to do so, by submitting here. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226:, thank you very much for your reply! The reason I haven’t submitted yet is because I’m not sure which way is better: submitting a fourth request with all the arguments why I think there should be wikis in ancient languages or first post a request for comment from an admin requesting to change the policy. Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 12:52, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
If there’s now an open request, doesn’t that mean that this proposal should be closed? -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 08:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: In Incubator:Requests for deletions it’s written that you can only request to delete test wikis that don’t have a proposal or were rejected. This test wiki now has an open proposal so shouldn’t the proposal to delete this test wiki be closed? Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 16:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Because the proposal has been rejected, which nobody is surprised about. I suggest moving this project somewhere else. --MF-W {a, b} 21:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
This is just why I voted "move to Incubator Plus" instead of "delete" above, since this language code isn't suitable for Wikipedia, and the contents look very well. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:28, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment I emailed a Miraheze administrator today to see if they're interested in taking over this test project or not, this will let this project be a domained, though not part of WMF, encyclopedia project. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:13, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment I posted a request for comment at meta to change the policy. If the content really looks very well then using common sense it should be allowed to stay. Despite the fact that I have only left the request today, two people have already left comments expressing their support. Moving those wikis from WMF will cause a migration of users from WMF, however keeping them will cause users interested in ancient languages to join WMF and they might expand their reach to other projects as well. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 19:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
@Prosfilaes, Future Perfect at Sunrise: What's your opinions on their RFC? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
And Gifnk dlm 2020, your RFC has recently got two oppose responses, so I don't know how I can support you, as that said, Good Bye, your works very well, but the WMF is a dead stone for you and me, that WMF won't change anything here. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:17, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep That's the purpose of Incubator after all. Even if scowiki-like problems occur, it's clear that it's under development and not a full-fledged wiki. Unless there is something seriously wrong with the wiki, that is. Leaderboard (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Keep This is an Incubator wiki, not a distinct Wikipedia that's actually got a subdomain. Delete the trash articles, but keep the rest. --Sailor Ceres (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
@Sailor Ceres: thank you very much for your support! Unfortunately currently ancient languages are not eligible for new wikis so some users think that it’s pointless to keep the test wikis. There has been a request to change this policy and it can be found here. If this request is approved then it will be just as yours suggested. The trash articles will be deleted, and the test will be kept. This is not canvassing, just informing. Also, @Leaderboard: thank you very much! It’s a bit weird in my opinion that you wrote neutral in the RfC, your comments look like a support for me😅. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 15:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Gifnk dlm 2020: I see that preparations for exporting the project are now being made. I also see that the strange happenings on the RFC (who even understands what's going on there anymore? …) have caused some panic about the allegedly impending deletion of the Wp/enm pages. I do think that it probably makes sense to delete the test-project if policy stays at not allowing approval of it, but I also wanted to assure you all that we won't delete the pages all of a sudden. If the contributors want to save their work elsewhere, we have always made this possible. --MF-W {a, b} 19:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg:, I see. Thank you very much! I will inform the other users in the discussion page. -Gifnk dlm 2020 If only Middle English Wikipedia could be saved(talk) 20:56, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
I'd prefer delete it because it's useless LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 12:25, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Keep Knowing what Wikipedia is supposed to be, I mean Wikipedia's first and direct duty as a duty to share information. It doesn't matter what language, or in what way. Middle English is a historical language, of high cultural and linguistic significance. A Wikipedia project based on Middle English will allow us to look at Wikipedia not as a collection of conservatives who flinch at every rustle, but as a courageous and progressive community, able to show how knowledge relevant to modern humanity would have been communicated in earlier times. I deeply support this and other experimental language projects. Only a person who knows a certain language is capable of soberly assessing the possibilities of that language in terms of information transmission, and although it is not always possible to convince others of this, we should not give up, but we must fight and defend our point of view and the right to preserve and develop our language divisions. This is the only way we can prove to everyone that the future does not lie in blind conservatism, and that the old rules are not always applicable and objective, they do not always work for the development of Wikipedia and humanity as a whole. If we want to achieve something, we should not be constrained by biased rules, even though they cannot constrain us. If we want to achieve something, we must walk not only off the beaten path, but also on roads without trails. Only through long and difficult experiments, only by overcoming many of the heaviest prejudices has humanity reached the high level of development where it is today. Man created microcontrollers, flew to the moon, photographed other planets in his solar system and looked into the farthest depths of the universe, studied the structure of matter and various natural phenomena. Although we still have a long way to go, and much can still be turned upside down in our scientific understanding, without experimentation and work we will not know or verify anything. I am sure that if every pioneer, scientist, and inventor had someone behind him to forbid experimentation when their research had not reached the middle of nowhere, we would be writing with goose quills on parchment today, and we would only dream of modernity with its blessings and inventions. At least let Middle English be one of those swallows that will lead Wikipedia to prosperity in the future.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
  • "but as a courageous and progressive community" isn't true, see [1], all of their "efforts" are judged by one langcom member as "Thank you for the personal attacks."
  • "Only a person who knows a certain language is capable of soberly assessing the possibilities of that language in terms of information transmission" That's just the concerns to the wiki, one of the writting style of webpages, not strongly about what you're speaking.
  • "This is the only way we can prove to everyone that the future does not lie in blind conservatism" I guess Fandom can also do it. With the current Foundation's review, I would say non of these Ancient, Extinct and/or Historical languages are considered to have a new wiki, that said on m:LPP, The Wikimedia Foundation does not seek to develop new linguistic entities, not Wikipedia.
  • "we should not be constrained by biased rules" Not really true for every one, at least I'd love to do something that do "constrained by biased rules". Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wp/odt, Wt/odt and Wp/dumEdit

Believe me, this hurts! I love the older stages of my native language.

But we can't keep them, per language policy, and for the obvious reason that these projects haven't gained momentum. Old Dutch is very scantily transmitted, you'd have to reconstruct just too many words to even write a lemma about medieval things. It also has far fewer proficient readers than Old English. Middle Dutch does have a rich literature in all genres from religion to accountancy, and (in its written form) is much more different from modern Dutch than Middle English is from modern English, but again, a Wikipedia in it would violate policy and would probably never be succesful. And it, too, might attract nonsense edits. Steinbach (talk) 11:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Weak keep: On a first glance, the quality looks relatively well, so I wouldn't mind keeping them here. In case, the community decides otherwise, I will gladly export it to Incubator Plus as it would be a shame to see what little is there being deleted. --OWTB (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm not commenting on their quality (btw wasn't it you who created both of them years ago). I'm just saying: why keep them here if there is absolutely no chance that they will ever be approved? Steinbach (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
I have only created the main pages to accompany any pre-existing subpages. The reason for not deleting them is that, while there is no chance for a subdomain, they are according to our policy valid, as they have an ISO-code. Deleting good contents is always unnecessary. As I'm more or less neutral to keeping them (and Wt/odt?) here, I am always willing to export them to Incubator Plus. --OWTB (talk) 07:59, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
OWTB, I'd love to also mention Wt/odt in this section as it looks also badly contributed. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:26, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Regareless, delete both, having bad quality articles that are wrongly maintained. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
In case of deletion, please let me know, and I'll transfer them to Incubator Plus. --OWTB (talk) 06:11, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
@Ooswesthoesbes I don't think they need to be exported since they are possibly copyvio pages. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
The Old Dutch (odt) tests don't look like they are copyvio pages though. The Middle Dutch (dum) do look more suspicious. --OWTB (talk) 20:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Just delete them instead LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


Rejected request at Meta. 4 content pages, all added in the last month. I think the editor should be given the chance to save their work before it's deleted since it is an ineligible conlang. -Yupik (talk) 00:23, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

  • Hello! I would expect to receive a justification for the removal of this project. This project is currently developing and has all the prospects for further growth.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 11:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
  • I presented a couple of additional arguments in defense of the project and refuted the arguments made by those not interested in preserving it. Also, I want to separately note that all of these arguments against the project are, by now, outdated. In this regard, I am in favor of reconsidering this decision.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 15:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep for reasons in m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Sindarin 2.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 11:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep for the time being, because a request is created on Meta: m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Sindarin 2. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:45, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't believe in success of the request for creation of the project. None of the Wikimedia projects in a fictional language exist. The possibility of creation of Wikipedias in ancient (natural) languages causes bloody disputes in MetaWiki, Wikipedias in constructed languages - way more useful - look doubtful for many, how we can take seriosly the Sindarin WP. However, I respect your interest. --Wolverène (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
    • Hello Wolverene. I have no objection to your skepticism, nevertheless I argue in the possibility of translating wikipedia both into Sindarin and other constructed languages and into languages of antiquity. Modern technology makes it possible to do such translation in an automated way, provided there is a sufficiently large corpus of texts in the target language. Since the Internet today is a boundless ocean of information, you can find texts in almost any language, as well as reference information, and in some cases qualified specialists. Thus, I was able to form a small text corpus for the neural network. My experiments in terms of training the neural network automatic translation in Sindarin, in turn, also confirm the feasibility of the implementation of this plan. So I am sure that sooner or later, if there are people interested in translating Wikipedia into one language or another, this translation will be done. Please, don't bury something that is almost paved the way for.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 18:39, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
    • Wolverène thank you for your opinion one more time. And, I bring some arguments. Particulary, this:

The approach taken during the work on the wikipedia section on Sindarin is potentially beneficial for the further development of wikipedia as a whole, as it involves some new methods for creating textual content.

If we take Ancient Egyptian as an example, training a neural network on texts from Ancient Egyptian manuscripts would greatly speed up the translation of articles into Ancient Egyptian. Since any language is a system which can be described mathematically, under certain conditions (linguists who know the language of Ancient Egypt and programmers will have to be involved) it is possible to create an algorithmic apparatus which can automatically reconstruct the necessary words and turns of speech for the target language.

Reconstructing the words of an arbitrary language is easily solved by means of a Markov chain algorithm. It is the easiest way to solve it, and quite efficient for cases where only the set of words is known, but the rules of the language are unknown. In the case of Sindarin, and, as I assume, with the ancient Egyptian language, the set of rules of word formation is known. In such a situation, having a set of ready-made rules, it is always possible to write a program that will allow, observing all these rules, to construct words in an arbitrary number and with a given set of characteristics or even meanings.

And so I am sure of the underestimation of the wikipedia project on Sindarin and its importance.

I'm sure no one will have to fight for space for new language sections on Wikipedia after this. If you think I should first establish myself on a project for one of those ancient languages over which there is bitter controversy, show me that project. Although I think I would be more useful and produce a better result if I did the project of translating Wikipedia into a language I know, I'm not afraid of new things.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep because this project have some content. @Wolverène: What is eo:, vo:, lfn:, ia:, ie:?
    • These are Wikipedias in auxlangs. It's different from Sindarin which is an artlang and used for its more narrow purpose. --Wolverène (talk) 08:58, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep there’s a community of speakers. While it’s true that it has a “narrow” purpose next to international auxiliary languages, wikis in Lingua Franca Nova aren’t much more useful than this one. -Gifnk dlm 2020 If only Middle English Wikipedia could be saved(talk) 09:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
    • I think even Simlish may has an IRL community of speakers...
      Just try to use Sindarin to describe such concepts and events as (here are random ones) en:quantum mechanics, en:gamma-ray burst, en:Lutheranism, en:tundra shrew, en:Watergate scandal, en:Cuban Missile Crisis, and so on.
      Curiously enough, but if we had enough linguistic material, we could describe all of this stuff e.g. in any natural aboriginal moribund language, although the formulating would be often much more compicated comparing to definition written in more spread lingua franca. I also believe that these concepts could be even described in several ancient languages, like Latin or Ancient Greek, - although during the eras of ancient languages the terms and concepts of the modern world didn't exist, using scientific data we can at least guess how ancient people might've described the modern things, and it's an interesting experience if performed by professional linguists. Also needless to say about international auxiliary languages. In LFN the specific concepts would probably be described in a same way as natural creole languages do, Kotava has special a priori language methods of implementing new words, Esperanto is as same developed as natural languages.
      Now back to the Sindarin language. It is totally unable to describe things like 'gamma-ray burst' or 'Lutheranism', because the language is spoken by Tolkienesqe Elves who never existed in reality, resp. they never crossed paths with the events of the real world, and Tolkien didn't complete the language enough to make it used especially for the knowledge sharing (surely you know that Wikipedia exists exactly for the knowledge sharing). --Wolverène (talk) 13:07, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
      @Wolverène Sindarin can describe Quantum mechanics, gamma-ray burst, and another concepts and events. Luther, Cuba are proper names. If we want them to be immediately recognizable in the text, we may not translate them into Sindarin. Gamma is the name of a letter of the Greek alphabet, and is absent from the Sindarin script. In Tengwar it corresponds to the Tengva Ungwe, but the reader will not immediately understand what it means. Therefore, we can also transliterate the word "gamma" without change. We have: raeth Ungwe-glîn \ raeth 'amma-glîn, Lutheras, Cuba. If we want to transliterate the name of Cuba, we get Daerhad, and without a clue most readers will not immediately know what it is about and will probably want to keep the word in the original. Quantum mechanics is godanmaenas glinui. Thainad Ventol vi Cuba, Thainad Ventol vi Daerhad. Amlabgaeth vi Ninannon, Amlabgaeth vi Watergate, Amlabgaeth Watergate, and Rhosgarch Rudhorodui. It's simple.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 10:37, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
      @Wolverène When I asked for information about Simlish, I found the following information: this language is based on a large number of natural languages from which it borrows its vocabulary. I did not manage to find the exact rules of Simlish. However, the Simlish language is popular and serves as a language of creative expression for some music groups. Whether it is possible to record and reproduce information about the world around us in this language is an open question. Since the main goal in creating Simlish was to briefly and clearly convey information about the state of the game's characters without spending money on additional localization of their lines, this language is intuitively understandable to the target audience of The Sims game for which it was created. I do not know exactly whether Simlish has enough textual data to be used to train a neural network for automated translation to convey and retain information. However, this language is outside my area of expertise, and I am not in a position to answer for it. Perhaps someday someone will come to translate Wikipedia into Simlish, but let those directly affected be concerned.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 14:16, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
    • P.S. What's for the usage of mathematical algorithms for creating articles in Sindarin, which was proposed by @Calad-ne-dúath, I can imagine a possible result: a story generator-like texts with inclusions of AI generated words in cases when a term in Sindarin is unknown. does it for long, but in English. Assuming that the knowledge sharing purpose will be already relegated to the background and everyone would be agree with it, I'm not sure that definitions modeled like 'Wolf is a red rabbit who rides the yellow trees' will be useful for intellectual pleasure of Tolkien fans.
      For me AI generated texts are even a bigger evil than online translations which devalue the intellectual work of speakers of any language other than English, moreover in an imperfect manner. Technically, AI generated texts in languages with a smaller speaking community (like Sindarin, hell we assume it has a speaking community...) may contain anything, even a complete nonsense, and the enthusiasts will always justify it by smaller known vocabulary. Once I saw AI generated texts in (natural) Veps language, it was a total disaster. Imagine same with Sindarin. --Wolverène (talk) 13:07, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
      @Wolverène, I thank you for your opinion. I understand your concern about this problem very well. No, I do not approve of surrealistic texts in Sindarin that have the "the wolf is a red rabbit" look. Their use can be valuable for training a neural network to translate, but it makes no sense to use such texts for training transformer-class neural networks, unless the goal of such neural networks is knowingly to generate surrealistic texts. Such a neural network would be very interesting to see, but it is a dabble for a couple of evenings. When I do automated text corpus generation, I aim to fill it with sentences formed on the principle of existing texts using Sindarin and natural languages, and, if necessary, manually, or also automatically - using algorithms based on pre-formulated rules - remove lines that do not meet the requirements. Let us imagine that there is a certain dictionary in which each word has many tags. Generating and checking rules use these tags, generating texts that look like what is really possible. For example, a tagged first-person singular verb denoting an action is placed at the beginning of the line, followed by an action verb infinitive, and so on. Subjects, predicate clauses, prepositions, and prearranged turns of speech are all combined in a large number of variants and formed in an arbitrary number. Any phrase, any sentence, and any word can be broken down into its components, set tags, and then use those tags to form words and phrases. Knowing in advance the effect of manipulating the individual elements of a word or phrase, you can also set its meaning, avoiding "bottomless ducks swimming in a square sky". So, I want to say that automation in the formation of a text corpus is a necessary and useful thing, it easily simplifies such a difficult task. But that's if we're talking about automation, which requires the creation of previously nonexistent content. If we want to get existing content ever uploaded to the Internet in some form, this is where python scripts come to our aid, capable of easily loading all texts from a search engine with and without translations, and filtering out repetitive strings. Later, a self-written script can check these texts line by line and output new formulas for automated phrase generation. In short, there are many different subtleties in this business, but it is thanks to them that we are now able to make translation into arbitrary languages possible, even if this task, for individual languages among them, seemed previously unimaginable.--Calad-ne-dúath (talk) 10:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)


This isn't so much an RFD as much as it is a request for comment - Zapotec is a language family with a lot of diversity, and this test Wikipedia gives literally no indication what Zapotec language it's written in. This would be like making a Romance Wikipedia. Can I get clarification here? --Sailor Ceres (talk) 19:02, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

The only contributor ever was User:Zapoteco diiste, whose userpage seems to suggest a specific variant of the language which he used. I suppose it would actually be good to move these pages to a more appropriately specific code (or to delete them as abandoned). --MF-W {a, b} 00:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
My best guess is that the wiki is in Miahuatlán Zapotec, which a Google Search indicates may be what "Zapoteco dieste" refers to, but I'm not entirely certain. --Sailor Ceres (talk) 02:43, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Temporary keep I think we need such discussions on langcom mailing list, the Zapotec is an ISO 639-3 defined macrolanguage, that has too dozens of member language codes pointed to variets of Zapotec, @Sailor Ceres we don't always disallow macrolanguages, as well as we don't always allow them, there should have a major discussion on why we need (or don't need) a new project in this macrolanguage, otherwise we can move this test project to a member code one. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
    I agree with Liuxinyu970226, So keep it instead LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 14:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
    My recently interview would be to move this to Wp/zam, are there anyone who against this? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

  Not done --MF-W {a, b} 23:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


Entirely no contents, just a lot of populated template codes. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

The test is empty, also in the templates. So, there is no reason to delete the boilerplate template. --OWTB (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Even created by global banned/locked LTAs? Suggested by Category:Incubator:Test wikis/status/tocreate that "Please check any new pages listed here to make sure they are not vandalism." But under your opinion, it looks like we are encouraging creation of tocreate info pages without any conditions. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
In my opinion: As long as the information provided by it is correct, there is no reason to delete it. Of course, if one of my colleagues disagrees, they are free to do it anyway. --OWTB (talk) 15:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Even two of them that are about extinct languages Wp/fos and Wp/ten? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Per policy, extinct languages are welcome here nonetheless, providing they've got an ISO-code. --OWTB (talk) 06:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Ooswesthoesbes "Per policy, extinct languages are welcome here nonetheless" Let me point this rule for you:
Ancient or historical languages
Only Wikisource wikis in ancient or historical languages are accepted, because resources in such languages continue to be important to the world, even in the absence of native, living speakers of those languages. Where possible, such languages should be bundled with the modern equivalent Wikisource project (such as Old English with English), though that is not required.
As there are no other "policy pages" ruled against what I cited here, and as Wikisources are incubated at s:mul: instead, I can say that that is wrong, that the extinct languages are not allowed on our Wikimedia Incubator. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
We do have a policy page, here. Per policy, there must be a code and the project should not yet exist. While it could be argued under Projects must match main m:WM:LPP requirements that extinct languages are barred, we have never enforced this. If we want to do so, we should also delete Wp/enm, Wp/grc etc. For which, as far as I see, is no concensus.
The reason why we've never deleted such projects is that we are not the ones to judge. The same applies to constructed languages as well. We are just here to provide the platform for projects to show whether they are viable. LangCom makes the decisions on what passes and what not. --OWTB (talk) 14:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
enm, there's already a discussion section above, this and grc are historical languages, not extinct languages, or just, are we discussing in same channels? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:12, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Note that as you said: "The reason why we've never deleted such projects is that we are not the ones to judge." We never delete such projects, doesn't mean we never delete such portal pages that are not projects, as Wp/aie is a spam page, we should just delete it, either following the archive records, or just by ignore all rules. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:12, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
  • I may probably have a language barrier or lost sight of smth because I don't understand the reason for arguing. The Amara language is not historical/ancient/dead language, it's a moribund language spoken in PNG and the test project suggested to be in the language is completely empty. The 'root page' Wp/aie can be easily deleted, it doesn't even seem that any contributor would be appeared. Somewhat more developed projects were deleted from here without special objections. --Wolverène (talk) 07:08, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

  deleted --MF-W {a, b} 23:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


Very small pages, test main page is a copy from cu:главьна страница, there is a Сѥ ѥстъ мъногоѩꙁꙑчьна отврьста єнкѷклопєдїꙗ · ѭжє къжьдо можєтъ иꙁмѣнꙗти ⁙ Википєдїꙗ пьсана [[||Словѣньскъ ѩꙁꙑкъ|словѣньскꙑимь ѩꙁꙑкомь]] начѧта ѥстъ їоунїꙗ 2006 лѣта Дьньсь Википєдїи 4 члѣни сѫтъ text (no difference from wikipedia), some english text in, unactive wiki. 17:29, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Ok, This is the Wiktionary Old church Slavonic LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 02:42, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Inactivity itself shouldn't be a valid reason for deletion. Some pages aren't that small - Wt/cu/бесада, Wt/cu/бесѣда, Wt/cu/боукꙑ. A little number of English words and copied content could be fixed using a dictionary. --Wolverène (talk) 05:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
    • Fixed. Not sure about the accusative form of "Викиаꙁъбоукъвьникъ" - either unchanged or "Викиаꙁъбоукъвьника". --Wolverène (talk) 06:29, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • KEEP no valid reason to delete was expressed. -Gifnk dlm 2020 Happy New Year 🎄❄️⛄️🎇 (talk) 19:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
    Due to Wp/orv success, I don't think there are no valid reason to delete this test project. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
    I didn’t say there are no valid reasons, I said that no valid reason were epxreseed. Change my mind. Anyways, I understand that Wp/omv was deleted because it was not written from a neautral point of view. -Gifnk dlm 2020 From Middle English Wikipedia 📜📖💻 (talk) 21:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


Wp/dlm Looks like this project has some hybrid contents and prefixes. Some contents are in Dalmatian, while others are in Croatian or Slovenian. It is safely to delete because it has hybrid contents. It needs spelling corrections, either it needs to all in Dalmatian. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by LOLI'mfriggin silly (discussioncontribs) 2021-11-27 02:49.

  • You want to amputate a leg when just a single toe hurts. I looked through all the pages of this Wikipedia, and the only problematic pages are following: Wp/dlm/100articles, Wp/dlm/list (list of most-needed articles and a short dictionary, both written in English, but such pages are not unusual for smaller wikis); Wp/dlm/Alpi Dinaricul, Wp/dlm/Split, Wp/dlm/Dinara (written in Romanian, must be deleted); Wp/dlm/Šibenik, Wp/dlm/Zadar, Wp/dlm/Curuv (written in a mix of Dalmatian and Romanian, should be deleted unless somebody would re-write Romanian fragments); Wp/dlm/Srbia (can be merged with Wp/dlm/Armania); Wp/dlm/Phonology de Dalmatisun (written in English and out of scope, must be deleted); Wp/dlm/Dalmaćia (written in a mix of different languages, must be deleted and Wp/dlm/Dalmazia has to be renamed into the freed Dalmaćia); Wp/dlm/Kategorija:Dalmacija (probably a mistake); Wp/dlm/Tuone Udaina (Italian-language parts can be easily removed); Wp/dlm/Dalmacija (must be deleted as being written in Croatian). Wp/dlm/Main page is not completely in Dalmatian but it's not a big deal for most of wikis here, contributors are awaited. All other pages don't look like obviously badly-written ones, for me they are mostly a product by those who are able to speak the language. "It needs spelling corrections" - it does indeed, it will depend on revitalisation activists if they'll appear here. Not the worst example of an Incubator wiki. --Wolverène (talk) 06:15, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Alright -Wolverène LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 13:29, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Neutral Someone needs to investigate if the contents are fix-able, or just a totally joke. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:54, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
    You what are meme edits? Meme edits are also known joke edits. LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
    Delete It has no native speakers even though language has been revived.LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk) 07:33, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
    It is either revived or has no native speakers, never these two at once. --Wolverène (talk) 11:52, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
    This project needs to be kept at least the end of December, but in Janaury 2022 it has to deleted soon..LOLI'mfriggin silly (talk 02:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
    Also @Wolverène I would point that recent "activities" of this project look so frivolous due to linguistic LTAs e.g. Bosco1122. So not only this one, all the test projects need cleanup because this really holds up many recent approval requests. At least 3 approval requests are refused at the moment due to fake contributions. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

  deleted extinct language (therefore invalid), inactive for years. --MF-W {a, b} 23:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)