Incubator:Requests for deletions/ja

This is an unofficial translation of Incubator policy.
Remember that it can be largely outdated.

このページでは、テストWikiの削除依頼や、incubator本体に関連するページの削除依頼を行うためのページを紹介し、削除依頼の方法を解説しています。特定のテストwikiの単体のページの削除について議論する場合は、そのテストwikiの編集者(特に試験版管理者)が最も活発に活動しているノートページ(テストwikiの井戸端ページなど)を利用して議論してください。即時削除されるべきページには、{{delete}}タグをはり付け、適切な理由を示してください。

インキュベーターのページを削除する理由は、以下のようなものがあります:

  • 即時削除依頼(荒らし、不要な修正、接頭辞の変換など)
  • 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.

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 a deletion of a test language. You may only propose a deletion of a test language which does not have a proposal on Meta or is rejected by the langcom.
    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.
  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.

RequestsEdit

Wp/enmEdit

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. 46.208.10.44 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. --46.208.10.44 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 enm.wikipedia.org, 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 sco.wiki, 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)[]

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)[]
Comment It looks like @BlueWhale35 was contributing some pages on both tests. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:49, 29 April 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)[]

Wp/sjnEdit

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)[]

Wp/zapEdit

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)[]

Category:Incubator:Test wikis/open-but-rejectedEdit

Why they have to reopen such rejected Meta projects? My request is to delete them all. They were rejected by Meta due to stale,rejected,and closed. --— The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.247.35.203 (discussioncontribs) 2021-10-13 03:53.

I suggest to keep all for the time being, because there may have different reasons mixed here, some of them may be reconsidered in the future. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Any language with a valid ISO-code can have a test on Incubator, whether rejected for whatever reason on Meta. It's just as simple as that. --OWTB (talk) 20:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Wb/fil/sinigang na hitoEdit

Probably could be exported to Tagalog Wikibooks, since the contents are entirely in Tagalog. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:27, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]

I think it might be best to simply delete it, as the page does not seem to have any contents beside a broken table. --OWTB (talk) 20:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Done. --MF-W {a, b} 08:17, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Wp/aieEdit

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)[]

wp/ctgEdit

This wiki is unactive, in Chittagonian really wroten 2 articles, in main page in Chittagonian only quarter. Page wp/ctg/tuhin write in latin script and very small. Are we need this project? 103.6.198.192 13:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]