On 10/21/07, Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The deletionist policy of Wikipedia is unfortunate; however, it is
> understandable because server space costs money - real money.
> Wikipedia cannot host *everything*.

Wikipedia is fairly explicit in saying that editors are not to concern
themselves with server costs, but to make policy on principle.

> The problem is not that we have no wiki on our own but rather that
> we have so many.

I would strongly agree with this. I'd like to see something more
centralized (i.e. have one clear The Conlang Wiki), structured (have
pre-defined but customizable formats for encouraging a standardized
and comprehensive language description), and stable (in terms of
backend).

However, I'd also not like to piss off the creators or devotees of the
various existing ones. Perhaps someone could compile a list, call a
meeting of all the ops, and see if consensus can be reached to merge?

This is something I would like to see the LCS be able to sponsor, but
we don't currently have the ability. It's possible that once we get
IRS approval we'll have access to an essentially unlimited amount of
webhosting - if so, I'd like it offered for this among other things.
(Also, thanks to David Durand, we have <http://conlang.org>.)



In regards to Wikipedia, I think that two comments on the current
articles for deletion (go discuss 'em if you care either way:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/K%C4%93len_%282nd_nomination%29>)
basically sum it up:

"When this language becomes notable outside the conlanging community,
then can it have its own article. --Amir E. Aharoni 11:20, 21 October
2007 (UTC)"

"Delete here - no notability outside of its respective community. Once
it gets an article in a notable (i.e. has an article here) newspaper,
magazine, or website, then bring it back. NASCAR Fan24(radio me!)
12:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)"

I strongly disagree with this interpretation of the criteria for
notability, but there are many Wikipedia editors (and administrators)
who do hold this position.

I believe that if we were to make a serious attempt to change this, we
would need to revive the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CONLANG>
policy proposal, establish specific criteria for (primarily)
notability and 'reliable sources', and perhaps start a proposal to
modify the WP:Notability and WP:Reliable Source to better account for
niche and for self-documented topics.

I've made a first pass, by reviving the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CL> project, and starting tagging
with it. Hopefully people will respect the request on the tag and
update <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Constructed_languages/Edit_wars_and_deletions>
so at least we don't keep having articles deleted without even proper
review.

But it's a complicated issue.

- Sai