Hoi,
Please explain what purpose it will serve.

Hoi,
So you are fine having people work using a method that does not provide a
benefit for no good reason? When we can agree on the proposal that is on
the table, the work done in this restricted way will be of no use. That is
a travesty.
Thanks,

GerardM

There is no point in accepting an inferior method when another, a better
way is being considered. As I indicated this method does not bring any
benefits to the table.
Thanks,

Gerard

Hoi,
I fail to see what the benefit will be of this. I have put a proposal to
the language committee that will make the efforts useful and usable. I am
awaiting their response.

The problem is happening in Wikidata

Hoi,
There is a big difference between mono-lingual texts and the use in labels
and descriptions. The latter needs support in translatewiki.net as well.
The criteria for that are much more stringent.
Thanks,

GerardM

Given the abuse, you make no argument that is acceptable. That and you are
wrong.
Thanks,

GerardM

A code is a must have.

The language may be written in two scripts however, use what is standard and standard use is Cyrillic given what Jon Harald mentioned.
Thanks,

GerardM

This is a language to be written in its original script. Clearly entitled to be used in Wikidata.
Thanks,

GerardM

Yes,
I know these are fine.
Thanks,

Yes,
I know and consequently they are fine.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
When we go the way of allowing for languages that are not accepted in any
standard, we could use -x- However, it removes any possibility to question
the validity and the inclusion of anything used by such a code. So I
strongly urge us to refrain from non standard entries.
Thanks,

GerardM

One of the comitments of the Wikimedia Foundation is that we will comply with standards. Vladimir fails to understand that the fact that "Chinese" has been transcribed in hieroglyphs has no bearing on standards. First, Chinese is probably to be understood as Mandarin, the script is probably to be understood as Simplified. A circus trick does not make an argument.

Hoi Alexiev,
What you just did is a personal attack. It does not make an argument go
away. It does not help your point of view.

Hoi,
You say it in your reply. The English word is Cadiz and the Spanish word is
Cádiz. There is no Phoenician in Latin script.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
It would still be a word used in the rest of the text. Transliteration
differs depending on the language not on the script conversion.
Thanks,

GerardM

No problem having a monolingual code for tlb Tobelo https://www.ethnologue.com/15/show_language/tlb/

No, it is is phn-Latn when it is used for use by Phoenicians.
Transliteration is different even within a script there are differences
depending for what language it is transliterated.
Thanks,

GerardM

What have iso codes with Commons categorisation to do? ie a non-issue as far as I am concerned

Hoi,
When you transliterate a name of a language typically it is transliterated
for a specific language. It is not that language.even when you know that
the original is transliterated for a specific language.
Thanks

GerardM

Hoi, according to the Wikipedia article there is one script; the Chakma script (Cakm). Eastern Nagari and Ajhapath are two orthographies using the same script? How are they related to the two peoples indicated to speak the language and in what orthography is the curriculum mentioned. IMHO that could be be the default and does not necessarily need an indication of the orthography.

Hoi,
The code phn is reserved for the Phoenician language. However, it is not
written in the Latin script. Consequently the question why it should be
accepted in the Latin script is real. What is the point?
Thanks,

GerardM

en-US is perfectly legitimate. The stuff about Alsatian is not.

Given that the codes should adhere to standards, what is the basis for these codes?

Hoi,
When I want to be pedantic (but factually correct) the code should be
el-CY. The standard for ISO-3166 has the codes in upper case. When there is
a need to distinguish Greek from Cyprus, yes, el-CY would be fine.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
In the past we have been where we are now with Wikidata and new language
codes with new Wikipedias. The result was mayhem, and everything was just
as the "community" decided. The result is the many Wikipedias that have
no community. As a result the Language Committee took the place of "the
community"and from that moment new Wikipedias do conform to standards.

Hoi,
I understand the purpose of Phoenician in Phoenician. Having it in the
Latin script makes no sense to me at all
GerardM

Hoi,
Do I understand that in addition to traditional and simplified we now are
to have content different by country ?
Thanks,

GerardM

I do not understand the issue. Why do they want this ? What service does this provide?

Hoi,
Artificial languages are not what we support by default. I am not in favour
for these particular cult languages. I will ask the language committee if
they see it any different.The fact that Tolkien wrote some poems is in
itself not enough.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Is there a purpose for these languages. My feeling is that as these languages are incomplete as languages there is little that they will add.
Thanks,

GerardM

There is imho no problem, an individual language..
https://www.ethnologue.com/subgroups/zenati
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
There is no problem with this language. It is not a macro language. Go with it.. PS it does use the Phoenician script.. Maybe that needs inclusion in the language tools but that is no prerequisite.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The language committee is responsible for the use of the codes used. As it is, multiple members have indicated that it is wrong to add these codes. Please desist.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I understand how this could work for the dictionary part of Wikidata. I
understand how it could work for labels and aliases. Why do you think this
will work for descriptions?
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
In principle the language committee has given permission for monolingual
texts. This is NOT given for labels, descriptions and aliases. That
requires involvement of native speakers. It requires an agreement of the
language committee.

Hoi,
That is an invalid reason to add a language to Wikidata.. Wikidata is not a
stamp collection.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I do object to calling them dialects. They have a language code and as far
as standards are concerned they are languages.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The defenitions are in the standard. The standard is the ISO639-3.
Thanks,

GerardM

Please motivate.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
What I find is totally unreadable.
Thanks,

GerardM

Because it is not one but multiple languages.

it is still a macro language and therefore not usable to identify a text

I think that we should stop with these stamp collections there is no argument why we want to do this, we have seen that the meaning given often differs substantially from what the standard is. It makes more sense to study the effect of the introduction of Wiktionary content.

Hoi,
The Alsatian issues precedes the language policy and as such it is a "fait
accompli". We have to live with it. A similar situation will no longer come
into being because it will not be approved.
Thanks,

GerardM

No mn-Mong is a combination of the language and the script. mn is a ISO-639-1 code

Hoi,
The consideration has been only is it a valid code. The question asked is a
different one. What is the point to all these codes that probably do not
bring anything to Wikidata.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I asked in the past why codes were added. In principle, we could include
them all but there is no clarity why codes are proposed. As a consequence I
lost interest.

Did you try to add it using the language code?
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I know very well what this is about. As a member of the language committee
I made the arrangements for other languages then the codes accepted for
localisation to be accepted for monolingual texts. You can ask Lydia if you
do not believe this.

Hoi,
the specific problem is that there is clear and uncontroversial consensus
to transition nrm to nrf, and the actual execution is only blocked by
technical issues. Issues that are only pushed forward because it is not
deemed to be relevant enough.

Hoi,
Yes. There is a system in codes. When you have a subset that is not
associated with the superset, you destroy the credibility of the language
codes.

Hoi,
Because they are a subset of nrf.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The issue is that the proposed code is a subset. The main item is
problematic and therefore this code is problematic.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Saying no when it is appropriate is constructive.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The code NRM is used incorrectly .. as you know.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I think that hbo is quite ambiguous.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I am active in both Wikidata and in the Language committee.. There are more
people in there who have a valid opinion.

Hoi,
As mentioned elsewhere and not only by me, it is not.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
No you get it backward. At this time for this language we (WMF) identify
incorrectly. We should not make the mess even bigger.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Given that there is a Wikipedia with the wrong code, it is not possible
imho to do justice to the language. WMF has never had a reason to sort it
out, now it has. Adding codes is not appropriate under these circumstances.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
In this case I think the language committee wants to be involved. This is
one of the longstanding issues we face and we do not want to muddle the
waters even more. So in this case it is not ok to move forward imho.
Thanks,

GerardM

Ok

Hoi,
When you want a technical point, the code is a combination of two parts, to
standards. It is fr, the ISO 639 -1 code for Francais, the French language
and CA, the ISO 3166-2 code for Canada. Both should be spelled correctly so
the code should be fr-CA
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
What is meant by the cn and hk? It probably has nothing to do with a script
.. a script has four characters. Consequently this is not about script in
the definition.
Thanks,

Gerard

Hoi,
First there has to be agreement on the use of codes like this in the
language committee.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
For en-US we take it that it is standard English.. We do have en-GB among
others already.
Thanks,

GerardM

It does not make sense to restrict this to mobile.
Thanks,

GerardM

The name is capitalised according to Ethnologue but yes, it is a recognised language.
Thanks,

GerardM

This is NOT necessarily where the language committee gives its ok. It is not a different language.
Thanks,

GerardM

NB This is much more an issue for the developers of Wikipedia than a Wikidata issue. Particularly the inclusion of links to wikilinks does not require attention of the Wikidata team as this data is already present.
Thanks,

GerardM

When links are allowed to Wikidata, it does not follow that everyone HAS to see them. It is something that can be added later. Once red links can be linked to wikidata items, it helps us in gaining better quality for those who want to see it and for those who engage in this practice.

Hoi,
It does have a valid ISO-639-3 code. No problem here. I do not know how it
may become meaningful. It is an open question for several languages.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
This is not a language with an ISO-639-3 code and therefore it should not
be created. This is to do with the nn-hognorsk subtask/
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The Wikipedia article says different. Indeed Ethnologue is leading.. By the
way these others in the article are not dialects. They may be added as well
when there is a need.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Exactly and according to the ISO-638-3 Noongar is a macro dialects and what
you call dialects are languages.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
ISO 639-3 is about languages not dialects. They all have their own
ISO-639-3 code.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The Wikipedia article has it as a macro language and that makes it
problematic.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
You are wrong. We do not accept macro languages for new purposes. Only when
a code is already in use, we let it ride. Reluctantly. The point of this is
that we do not and do not want to end existing projects.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
We do not accept anything new that does not comply with the policy. There
is plenty of old stuff that does not change as per the policy.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Yes, and zh is a language not a macro language. It is about new
recognitions and mn is a macro language. When the language policy were in
effect from the beginning, it would have been eng.wikipedia.org.
Thanks,

GerardM

Please provide the source that backs you up. It has to be the ISO-639-3 as
it is what our policies is based on.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
You are wasting your time searching for a result that is wrong on basic
principles. When a language is not a language why would you want it to be a
language ? Why seek in documents something that is self evident. Something
that is NOT a language should never be accepted as a language.

Hoi,
It is so obvious that is not even in the policy.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
I am a member of the Language Committee of the Wikimedia Foundation. It is
stated policy that we do not accept macro languages. Lydia does read the
comments and she knows of its existence, its policies and for me it is not
personal. Is it for you?
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
That makes no difference. A language needs to fulfill some minimum
requirements and mn is not the code for a language.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Sorry but your only option is wrong on principles. The code mn is for a
language code that will never get recognition from the language committee.
The way to distinguish between scripts is by using the ISO-15934 code and
consequently it should be mn-Mong if your way would be followed.

I am fine with it :) Thanks, GerardM

Hoi,
Having a font has never been a prequisite for support in MediaWiki. It has
been a reason to support the development of a Freely licensed font or to
support talks on the licensing of an existing font.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
The practise of dropping upper case in the ISO-15934 is a MediaWiki
practice that is incorrect. In the grand scheme of things it is only a
minor matter.

Hoi,
mn is the code ISO-639 for the language, Mong is the CLDR code for the
script and CN is a code for the country where it is practices. The correct
LANGUAGE code is either khk or mvf because as a macro language that does
not have an existing project it is not eligible.
Thanks,

GerardM

Wikidata may support over 7000 languages; all the languages that are recognised are allowed.
Thanks,

GerardM

Hoi,
Thanks,

GerardM

This is a living language. No problem
Thanks,

GerardM

non is a ISO 639-3 code therefore permissible by the language policy

The language can be added because the hai code is an ISO-639-3 code. Only languages with an ISO-639-3 code may be enabled according to the language committee. Thanks, GerardM