Talk:Closing projects policy/Archives/2015
 | Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2015, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index. |
Proposed amendment: fixed legth of discussions
Currently the proposal says:
During a period of at least several weeks, the proposal is public to the community for comments and recommendations.
I do not like such indetermined concepts in a policy. There should be a minimum and a maximum of time where the proposal is opened, and after that time, the LangCom can bring it for internal discussion. Otherwise, we're leaving discussions opened virtually forever, which is not how a proposal should work. I am sure that we can find a reasonable timespan to the level of this important requests. Minimum of one month, maximum of two months for discussion looks reasonable for me. Thanks. -- MarcoAurelio 02:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Tightening up policy
What is the policy on w:designed languages? It can be argued that many languages, such as w:kurdish, have only had an established standardized language after a consultation with the experts. Other languages, such as w:slovak, developed because of the solidarity of speakers within a group of dialects. Kurdish and slovak are relatively new "languages", in that kurdish never had a body of literature until the 1900s, while Slovak developed a body of literature in the 1800s.
We don't have encyclopedias on w:klingon because no language community actively uses it.96.52.0.249 00:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)