Welcome to Wikimedia Incubator!

At the right there are some important links, and here are some tips and info:

If you have any questions, feel free to ask them on Incubator:Community Portal.

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:22, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your instructions. However, some description in the babel templates is not correct, how can I edit it?Bellenion (talk) 14:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
In general, that gets edited at translatewiki.net. What exactly is wrong? StevenJ81 (talk) 15:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply



Wondering if this is another ais language name conflict? SIL says that it's Siraya, but this project is saying Taivoan, and both language articles are marking same ISO 639-3 code fos, I'd love to ask the reasons of that. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@StevenJ81: ^^ --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:23, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Taivoan and Siraya are two different languages spoken by two different Taiwanese indigenous peoples, but are wrongly classified as the same language by ISO. Please find the explanation in Taivoan language or Taivoan people#language, or a paper of Mr. Ren-kuei Paul Li "從文獻資料看台灣平埔族群的語言". This is not the first case that Taiwanese languages are mistakenly classified by ISO without the knowledge of the native people, e.g. I believe @StevenJ81: remembers the case of Sakizaya language that is mistakenly classified as Nataoran language (a dialect of Amis).
The reason behinds all these problems is that the academic studies (especially by those international scholars or organizations) cannot catch up the progress of Taiwan's domestic indigenous studies for decades, which is what I'm not able to solve in near future. And so I will only focus on my writing in Taivoan language, especially in Xiaolin dialect. Whether Siraya learners or speakers understand the contents in Wp/fos or not, that's just beyond my capability.Bellenion (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Well, this is mainly the SIL problem, as they (the staffs of SIL) are Authority of 639-3 which new Wikimedia projects (and perhaps nearly all) should obey. Switch the clock back to Oct 2017, there's a discussion about ais on Ethnologue [1], which suggests to submit requests to SIL, maybe the de facto codes should be retired, and apply new codes for the correct languages are needed, or maybe (for rarely cases) just need to change the reference names, or just just apply an alias, note that in that Ethnologue discussion, the lyh.hsuan (@Corainn: iirc) mentioned that they will submit requests during 2018 series, which is currently on-going. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:14, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I corrected [fos] back to 'Siraya' on WP and removed the [fos] incubator notice from the Taivoan article. Since it's the ISO code, we need to follow the ISO definition -- that's the whole point of having standardized language codes. If we start changing them according to our preferences, then we're doing the equivalent of using common names like 'bluebird' rather than taxonomic nomenclature. [fos] is Siraya. Whether Taivoan is a dialect of Siraya or a distinct language is irrelevant. Assuming it is a distinct language, then it does not have an ISO code, and a submission can be made to ISO to create one (either as a split of [fos] or simply as a new code).

If someone here wants to submit a request to ISO, remember that you need to make a case, not simply state a claim. Not much different than using RS's for a controversial change to WP. 2600:8801:F800:3A30:E08E:D7A3:3824:8A06 02:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

A standarized language code is important, but what if the standard is based on some research done nearly 30 years ago? You'd like to see the case for Wp/ais, wherein ais is for Nataoran language in ISO or SIL, but Wp/ais now claims it as Sakizaya. Also see the discussion. -Bellenion (talk) 12:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
And pardon me, what is the point to remove the [fos] incubator notice from Taivoan language even if it's a dialect of Siraya? Shouldn't the people follow the rule they call their own language? -Bellenion (talk) 12:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Liuxinyu970226, 2600:8801:F800:3A30:E08E:D7A3:3824:8A06: OK. Time for me to jump in here and try get some clarification from everyone.
First, to remind everyone of the situation around Amis/Nataoran/Sakizaya:
  • Nominally, per SIL and ISO 639-3, Sakizaya is a dialect or sublanguage within Nataoran, which in turn is a version of Amis. Officially, "Nataoran" (or as it is now called at SIL, "Nataoran Amis") owns the language code ais, while Sakizaya does not have its own language code.
  • The Sakizaya test community has made a prima facie case that (a) there isn't really a separate version of Amis called Nataoran, and (b) that Sakizaya is a different language entirely.
  • I went to some lengths to make sure that there was either (a) no community of people looking to create a project in "Nataoran", and/or (b) that the Sakizaya community would broaden the project to include such a community if it existed.
  • Since (a) was true, (b) became moot. Additionally, the Sakizaya community is working on a submission to SIL for this year's code request series.
  • Because of all of the above, we allow the commmunity to use Wp/ais to build a Sakizaya test Wikipedia. Understand, though, that until the language code situation is resolved in an unambiguous way, that project absolutely will not be approved as a standalone project, not with the address ais.wikipedia.org and not with any other address.
Now, to the current case. As I understand it,
  • Siraya and Taivoan are both extinct languages of southwestern Taiwan. In both cases, there is an effort underway to revitalize the languages, and some education in the language in schools.
  • Siraya officially owns the ISO 639-3 language code fos. Historically, Taivoan has been considered a dialect or variant of Siraya, and consequently does not have its own language code. More recently, evidence suggests it may be more accurate to consider Taivoan as a separate language, not as a dialect of Siraya.
  • A test is running right now at Wp/fos. This test is in Taivoan, and styles itself as being the Taivoan (test) Wikipedia. There is no content in this test in [non-Taivoan] Siraya.
Before I go further, would someone please tell me if I have characterized the current situation correctly? If I haven't, please correct what I have written. But please, just at this point in the discussion, do not start arguing whether that situation is right or wrong, should be changed, etc. I just want to know: Do I have things correct up to this point? StevenJ81 (talk) 14:09, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@StevenJ81: Yes, what you mentioned is exactly what's happening now to Taivoan and Siraya -- except for a minor thing that Siraya and Taivoan are labelled as "dormant" instead of "extinct" by at least Ethnologue, as there are enough corpora to revive them, and Taivoan people still use (and must use) the language in annual ceremonies. -Bellenion (talk) 14:34, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thank you, Bellenion. Why they say "extinct" in ISO 639-3 and "dormant" in Ethnologue—they publish both—is hard to say. But it doesn't make much of a difference for this purpose. Now, I have a couple of other questions to ask:
  • Does Siraya (that is not Taivoan) actually exist? (I gather from the above that the answer is yes.)
  • Is anyone here actually trying to start creating content in Siraya? Or was the objection that User:2600' made purely a technical or pedantic one?
  • Is anyone preparing an SIL submission for Taivoan as a separate language? (Alternatively, would the Taiwan government possibly be making a broad set of submissions in the 2018 code request series?)
I ask these questions because I'm thinking of solutions along the following lines:
Version 1. If Siraya (that is not Taivoan) doesn't really exist, I can simply let Taivoan stay here, exactly as in the Sakizaya case. If Siraya exists, but nobody is really trying to create content in it, I could potentially just kick the can down the road a bit, and again let Taivoan stay here. The justification in both cases is that at very least, Taivoan (in its identity as a dialect of Siraya) would be entitled to a share of the code fos. And if nobody else is using the code at the moment, I would even have no objection to the community calling itself "Taivoan" instead of "Siraya". As in the case of Sakizaya, though, the project would never be approved as an independent project until the language code situation becomes fully clarified. So this can't be more than a temporary solution.
Version 2. If there is an upcoming submission of Taivoan to SIL, by the rules I can let you keep a separate project here anyway. What I would do is give you a temporary language code in the q-range (which is reserved in the ISO 639-3 system for local use), and then move everything over from its current location. If there are people actually trying to create content in Siraya, this is the best solution, at least in my view. And an SIL submission puts you in position to have a project approved someday.
Version 3. If there is no plan to submit Taivoan to SIL, then in principle Wp/fos has to be shared between Siraya and Taivoan, and if there are people creating content in Siraya, the project probably has to be called "Siraya test Wikipedia" (or maybe "Siraya-Taivoan test Wikipedia"). There are a couple of existing Wikipedias where this actually happens successfully and comfortably. See, for example, Alemannic Wikipedia, which includes content in Swiss German and in other Alemannic varieties from Baden, Alsace and Swabia.
The reason we would have to use Version 3 in this situation is that if you don't take Taivoan to SIL, there is no chance that LangCom will approve an independent Taivoan project. So there is no point to allow a completely independent project here. (Note also that while there is now a pathway to use to get a project approval if there is a BCP 47 tag but no ISO 639-3 code, LangCom is going to want to see an attempt to get an ISO code first before being willing to go there.)
StevenJ81 (talk) 15:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@StevenJ81: To reply to your question:
  • Does Siraya (that is not Taivoan) actually exist?
>> Yes.
  • Is anyone here actually trying to start creating content in Siraya? Or was the objection that User:2600' made purely a technical or pedantic one?
>> I'm not sure who User:2600 is, but I guess it's a technical one as there hasn't been any discussion really based on linguistic nature of the two languages, nor have we seen anything input in Siraya.
  • Is anyone preparing an SIL submission for Taivoan as a separate language?
>> Yes, we've been preparing for an SIL submission for Taivoan as a separate language by this summer while talking with some linguists having knowledge in Taiwanese Austronesian languages at the same time.
Again, I'm not sure if there will be any Siraya user trying to submit for an incubator, but "version 2" seems a more appropriate solution given the current situation. We may find a comparison table in en:Taivoan_language#Linguistic_evidence compiled by me, wherein "Siraya (UM)" and "Siraya (Gospel)" are the dialects taught in Siraya schools right now, and "Taivoan (Tevorangh)" is the one taught in Taivoan community right now -- They differ even in basic numerals from 1 to 10 and will be certainly confusing if in the same incubator. -Bellenion (talk) 16:21, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
OK. That's very helpful. Thank you. Let's see what others' thoughts are about this, given the information you've provided. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Bellenion, StevenJ81: Well, I personally can't agree with "version 2", because as other Wikimedians may more or less know, the Norman peoples were burning with anxiety to have their Wikipedia, which thus they occupied nrm for their propuse, but after some years they suddenly find the coordination problem that nrm isn't Norman, but Narom, then they submitted a request and get nrf, they assume that by this way we can fix the problem in peace, however as what I can't believe that, by recently bumping via m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Narom, that phenomenon *indeed* made angries to some Malaysian users.
So I would image that if the langcom's decision is that, then after some years, when some Siraya-speaking users requesting to create Siraya Wikipedia, "Hey, can I use fos.wikipedia.org?" "I'm sorry but no, because it's named as Taivoan Wikipedia and we can't see any consensus that Taivoan and Siraya can live together on same foswiki." "So where to continue testing?" "Asking StevenJ81 to get temporary code e.g. qfo?"... Which is what I really don't wanna see, since it makes more and more tricky stuffs to DBA maintainers e.g. @Reedy, JCrespo (WMF):.
Anyway, are you actually making SIL requests? Still at the moment, by visiting https://iso639-3.sil.org/code_changes/change_request_index/data, I can't see any ongoing requests that are about any of Taiwanese languages. What's problems regarding submission? Don't know submit to which e-mail address? They refused receiving your requests via some anti-spammer mechanisms?... Let me know what's the actual status of those requests, please, as otherwise (i.e. if this still happen in the last 5 months of this year) I will engage TWN staffs to suspend at least ais and fos localization. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:57, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
OK if your communities' consensus is to change the code assignments, then to the best of my knowledge after reading Submitting ISO 639-3 Change Requests page, here are much more friendly steps:
  1. First you need to download ISO639-3_ChangeRequestForm.doc, open it via Word or WPS;
  2. If there's a warningbox says that editing external files are not safety, click "enable edits"
  3. Filling in the necessary fields, nearly all are required:
    1. Date: Which date you wanna submit it, write which date
    2. Primary person submitting request: The real name of yourself
    3. Affilation: Which company, organization... are you working in? I guess you will fill "Wikimedia Taiwan"?
    4. E-mail address: that should be yours
    5. Names, affilations and email address of additional supporters of this request: Which else are supporting your request submission? List em and mention that how can we contact em
    6. Postal address for primary contact person for this request (in general, email correspondence will be used): probably about your home or your company/organization... HQ, Which street, city, province, country is that located in? Don't "protect privacy" here, as such behavior is one of the reason that your request is rejected by SIL)
    7. Type of change proposed (check one): they have six options, but in your case:
    • a. "Modify reference information for an existing language code element", then move your mouse to the "1. Modify reference information for an existing language code element", there has four options, in your example, if you just need Taivoan as an alias name, select second "Language additional names", (in page 2) fill (b) What new value(s) do you propose: Taivoan, and explain your reasons in "(c) Rationale for change:"
    • b. If you think calling "Siraya" is really wrong behavior, you may probably select "Language reference name; generally this is changed only if it is erroneous; if usage is shifting to a new preferred form, the new form may be added (next box)" (please, only if you have evidences that calling "Siraya" in English is wrong for the language that has code "fos"), doing samething a. saied
    1. If you fully want a separate code for Taivoan, then in "Type of change proposed (check one)" you should select the last one "Create a code element for a previously unidentified language", go to "6. Create a code element for a previously unidentified language" (in page 3), Name of missing language: Taivoan, State the case that this language is not the same as or has not been included within any language that already has an identifier in ISO 639-3: (attention please, you have to discuss the reason of this very carefully via Facebook/Twitter... groups very carefully, and make a stable draft before filling this, many new language codes requests are failed because of this field), then you need to download ISO639-3_NewCodeRequestForm.doc and fill fields of that file (which is what I'm still investigating, that's another challenge)
  1. When completed, save file(s) via just Ctrl+S, then open your e-mail site or software, create a new e-mail, fill receiver as iso639-3-{@}-sil.org, add file(s) as attachments of your e-mail, then click submit.
  2. You have to wait for at least one week (IMHO) before seeing your request published on Change Request Index, and you have to wait for February or March in the next year to see the results (approved? rejected?)

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:38, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Bellenion: Do you know what that user is saying? -- 01:53, 22 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
The dead-line to have a language code request processed in this year is due on 31 Aug, 2018, and so we are still working on the request submission. Thank you for your kind reminder! -Bellenion (talk) 10:57, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Request at Meta-Wiki or not?


I've seen that you're contributing Taivoan Wikipedia, but it hasn't request page, would you please file a request at Meta-Wiki (just click create button on Wp/fos)? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I thought we're still waiting for SIL's approval of the split of Taivoan language from Siraya language and then we can request for a new language Wikipedia Taivoan? BTW, I click create button but it's blank, it this normal? -Bellenion (talk) 16:11, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
I don't know if clicking that button used to bring up a partially populated page or not. Right now it doesn't seem to do so.
(@Liuxinyu970226:) That having been said, I'd personally prefer you not put in the RFL page until after SIL's approval. Thanks. (Liuxinyu: there's never really a problem with not having an RFL, except that it theoretically puts a test here at risk for deletion. But you can rest assured that I will speedy-close any RfD request where an SIL request is in the works.) StevenJ81 (talk) 16:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

It's now time to rename it to Wp/tvx, why not?


The SIL has adopted your (maybe) 2018-088 request, which means that there's a separately new code for your Taivoan tvx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 17:02, 25 January 2019 (UTC) PS: Please just tell me that if there's some *Siraya contents* existing or not, if yes, then those will not be renamed, but a purely new Siraya test Wikipedia will be created by those. If no, then it means that you confirm that all Wp/fox/* pages are Taivoan, and those will be renamed to tvx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 17:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

All the current contents in Wp/fos/* right now are Taivoan. Pls kindly suggest how we can move all of them to Wp/tvx/*. Thank you!--Bellenion (talk) 03:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
It looks like @Liuxinyu970226 has taken care of much of it. I'll let that user finish the job. (Please let me know when everything is complete, so that I know when to get rid of the redirects.) If there are problems, ping me. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
Hmm @StevenJ81: I would need help from your bot to complete migration. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:52, 28 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
OK, Liuxinyu. I doubt I can do it until a bit later this week, but I will do it then. (I spent a lot of time on Sakazaya last week, and I do have a day job.) StevenJ81 (talk) 15:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Community Insights Survey


RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Taivoan Test Wikipedia


Hi. Taiovan is listed as an extinct language. While there is no problem with its content staying here at Incubator, is there a reason I shouldn't reject the request on Meta as against policy? StevenJ81 (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi Steven, where can i see the request on Meta that you mentioned? --Bellenion (talk) 16:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
m:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Taivoan. I appreciate that you didn't create the request, but you seem to be the most reasonable person to ask. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
I'd appreciate much if the request can be approved. Taivoan is a dormant language, not an extinct language, as many efforts have been done by people to revive it (See Ethnologue that labels it as a dormant language, which description is more accurate according to my understanding). But I know the online Taivoan speakers are not enough yet to run a Wikipedia Taivoan, and I tend not to make comment on the request. --Bellenion (talk) 16:56, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
I can't approve the request right now. There are a couple of things getting in the way:
  • It's sometimes annoying that the Ethnologue people and the ISO 639–3 people, both at SIL, sometimes seem like they don't speak to each other. It is true that Ethnologue labels it "dormant", not "extinct". Yet in the SIL ISO 639–3 code table, it's marked as "extinct" and not "living". (Compare Prussian [prg], which is also extinct but under revival, which is marked "dormant" at Ethnologue but "living" in the code table.) Can you point me to some evidence (preferably in English) of the revival efforts?
  • Right now, the test is pretty much a one-person show. You're doing a great job, and the fact that you (and @Liuxinyu970226, a bit) are the only people who have contributed materially would not by itself interfere with getting the request marked "eligible". But given that this request is already borderline (because the language is considered extinct), LangCom will probably not be interested in stretching the point here if they don't see a "community" participating.
What I am inclined to do here is to change the status of the request to "on hold", pending further evidence of the revival effort, and pending further evidence of a wider community to participate in the test project. Usually, I leave projects "on hold" for about a year before revisiting, but that's not even a hard-and-fast rule, and I can leave it that way for a bit longer if necessary.
  • The alternative is that I can reject the request as being against policy, while noting that the project can remain at Incubator under the more liberal rules here. Then, if and when the revival is more robust, and when you get some additional contributors, you can simply create a new request at Meta.
The reason that I recommend the first is that I will probably bring Wp/prg back to LangCom soon, which should give us a better read on this type of project. If LangCom OKs Prussian as "eligible", I can potentially use similar arguments for Taiovan. If LangCom does not OK Prussian, I don't see how they would OK Taivoan, so I won't even ask—and then we'll decide where to go next.
By the way, if you would find it helpful to have administrator tools for your test, I'd invite you to apply to be a test-administrator at I:RFTA. You've shown you're a responsible citizen around here. (You don't need to if you don't want to, and I haven't had many requests from you for page deletions or blocks. But I'm inviting, if you want.) StevenJ81 (talk) 15:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Reminder: Community Insights Survey


RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Reminder: Community Insights Survey


RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

We sent you an e-mail


Hello Bellenion,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply