Please enable Tunica for translation
under reconsideration
I'm trying to start translating text for a Tunica-language wikipedia. Here is the required info about the language:
- ISO 639-3 language code: tun
- Language name: Tunica – Yoroni (tun)
- Left-to-right language
Thanks.
I checked Wikipedia and ethnologue and they both say it's a basically dead language with no fluent speakers. This makes me doubt how are you able to translate MediaWiki which contains many technical terms to this language. Is there a standard orthography? We are having troubles with other languages here where there is no standard orthography and then translators are fighting with each other about correct spelling.
I completely understand your skepticism. The language is being revitalized, much like Manx or Cornish have been. There is a standard orthography, a textbook, children's books, and other materials. Information can be found at the University of Hawaii's Catalogue of Endangered Languages (elcat). The revitalization project, of which the Tunica-Biloxi tribe itself is the main driver, continues to gain momentum, and we have several editors up to the task, with over 50 years of combined experience with the language. We're eager to get started on translating.
Thanks so much for your help.
Bumping again. We're busy writing articles in the language on the Tunica incubator wiki. It would be nice to translate the Wikipedia messages that will need to go with it at the same time.
Being a dead language is a reason for automatic rejection of the request. Have you checked with the m:LangCom that they really consider this language eligible?
Dead languages should be rejected. It's quite fortunate, then, that this language isn't dead. If you're opposed to allowing translation of revitalized languages, please make that clear. I'll check with the language committee to see whether they share your indifference.
I'll let you know what they say. Thanks for your reply.
Rejected. Heritage language of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Marksville, Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana. There is no benefit in creating this as a UI language. Please focus your efforts on digitizing the language corpus, etc.
There is a great benefit to creating this as a UI language for the students who are learning it. I appreciate the suggestion to focus on "digitizing the corpus, etc." but that has already been done. The comment seems to imply that the language has no current speakers. The page from which the heritage language quote is pulled clearly shows that this is not the case.
Why has Cornish, which also has a small number of L2 speakers and no L1 speakers, been granted not only translatewiki permission but also its own wikipedia page, while Tunica can't even get past this step? If there is a lower limit to the number of L2 speakers that must exist in order for a wikipedia UI to be beneficial, or something else that differentiates Tunica from Cornish, please advise.
I realize that the service offered here isn't vital to the continued revitalization of the Tunica language (nor was it vital to Cornish), but it would be helpful, and it's disappointing that a single sentence in contradiction of everything that's been updated more recently can scuttle approval. If you require more proof that people speak and use this language, I'd be more than happy to provide it. There are people who want to learn in this language, as there are people who want to learn in Cornish. There is no one who speaks Cornish who doesn't also speak English, but this does not mean it wasn't beneficial to create a Cornish Wikipedia. In the same vein, it is indeed beneficial to allow for the creation of a Tunica Wikipedia.
I hope you reconsider your rejection. Additionally, I hope that, as the wheels of bureaucracy gradually turn and more updates are made on the sites of various gatekeepers of language status, it will hopefully become harder for people to find outdated information on the Tunica language that they can use to inappropriately justify rejection of a spoken language for translation.
@Plandu: There may be a good news for you, that the SIL change request 2017-015 is adopted. That request is to change the type from Extinct to Living.
@Nike and Siebrand: Should we reconsider this thread because of this request?
@Liuxinyu970226, Nike, and Siebrand: I would support revisiting this decision. I would be much obliged if the admins would consider enabling Tunica for translation.
Niklas asked for my opinion. I am not opposed to adding it. Does it add any significant maintenance overhead?
The Language committee is usually flexible when it comes to translatewiki, because it's not really part of Wikimedia. It's stricter about eligibility and approval of going out the Incubator, so I'm not saying anything about that here, as I'm really not sure what the outcome will be. But since we're mentioning the Incubator here, and since User:StevenJ81 has been so amazingly helpful lately with cleaning up old requests at Meta: Steven, can you please check whether it can be eligible?
Also, just out of curiosity: User:Plandu, can I take a look at some digitized texts? Can they be made available for Wikisource? (It's mostly a matter of license.)