Hausa in the United States

And that was unsourced, so I have removed it. What you are building is nonsense.

Koavf (d) (en-N/en-US, es-2/es-US, de-1, pt-1)19:15, 15 July 2019

Why don't you go to EN.WP to contest these assertions ? Establish the consensus there, it will be more acceptable than trying to define it here, where the community is much smaller. I just use the most prevalent and significant consensus. If you succeed in WP.EN (and get consensus there), then no problem to remove it here. Note that my inclusion did NOT include any criteria of "large". This category just establishes a link for an attested usage (which really exists, with many Afro-Americans with Chadic origins, even in countries that are dominantly English-speaking like Nigeria, and with American descendants of these countries that want to restore the right to use their origin language in US, as a significant part of their culture). So what I did really makes sense (just like for Amerindian languages, which may still not have "official" status but are locally recognized, and where these languages are obviously languages of the US and almost nowhere else: think about Cherokee or Navajo for example: where would you expect to find them if not as "languages of the US").

Note: if ever your recent edit in EN.WP is reverted (you made them after this talk), and EN.WP disagrees with your edits, the link will have to be restored on this wiki. Note that even Google makes pages in Hausa for users in US, because it is significant enough. This wiki accepts languages spoken by lots of minorities and intends to support these languages accurately to allow their development in wikis and applications delivered in countries where these languages are still minorities. This wiki and Wikimedia respect these minorities, wherever they live and where they have a significant organization. Some of these languages are spoken only by a few thousands people, but Hausa speakers in US are largely over this threshold (and their number is growing: they already outweight the speakers of almost all Amerindian languages). The same is true for Russian, Hindi, Arabic, Pashto, Japanese, Vietnamese, Thai, Portuguese, and Chinese in US, with lots of publications, and even public advertizing and public displays in these languages, and with various public programs to support their development in local communities, and job positions in public offices (including the US Army) offered for American speakers of these "important" languages.

Note that I did not add them as "Official" languages (whose category for US strictly includes de jure no languages at federal level, not even English, but contains languages that have official or majority de facto status in at least one state, and so includes English, Spanish and French (which are used in the formal legislation founding the US federation in in the constitution of several states or organized dependencies); and I wonder if it should not include Alemanic for the Amish community, and a few Amerindian languages like Cree, Navajo, Cherokee, or some Siouan languages, for the officially existing Amerindian reserves and territories, and Hawaiian of course.)

Note that for languages that are official only in some parts of the US, we can include them as "languages of the US", but can have subcategories in US where they are "official". There are already some categories for some parts of several countries (including dependencies, or non-internationally recognized countries territories like Taiwan). We already have now a full list of the 192 UN members (all other subnational or supranational regions are separated).

Verdy p (talk)20:41, 15 July 2019

Easily over a hundred languages are spoken in the United States: no one would characterize them as being languages of the United States, since they did not originate here, have no legal status, and only a small percentage of the population speak them. I'm sure that *someone* speaks Greek in Russia: is Greek a "language of Russia"?

I see no value in creating Category:Official languages of North Dakota: this project doesn't need anything as granular as that. Saying that Nakota is an official language of the United States is sufficient.

You've also created sheer nonsense like Category:Official languages of Antarctica. Please get some consensus for all of these changes.

Koavf (d) (en-N/en-US, es-2/es-US, de-1, pt-1)21:31, 15 July 2019

Antarctica is there for completeness (but as a special territory) because of ISO 3166-1 (and links using it) but its official languages exist: these are the 4 official languages of the international treaty. Beside that, there's no "local" language listed, only these 4 "official" ones. You may think it is not needed, but as I progress in sorting languages and making various link wort correctly, those early categories get progressively populated and get more significant with what we can discover as already being used or needed. I don't want to leave read links or create too many exceptions in the generic templates that can be used to populate them (these exceptions create additional maintenance costs, I want to reduce that cost to the minimum so that most things can be infered and automated accurately, without creating new errors or miscategorizations).

I've not "changed" things like what you state, all this are created by me directly (including the category for US that now you want to challenge, and that I never "changed" from another user contribution, it did not exist before me).

So only you for now is attempting to do "changes" from what I created, and you did not try to get any consensus at least with me before. But these categories were welcome by many users (and even approved by other admins on this wiki).

But Hawaii and Alaska could have their own category (even if they are integrated states), just like Puerto Rico and other organized territories (because of their specific local legislation which have various exceptions to the US federal laws).

Verdy p (talk)21:54, 15 July 2019

There are no language of Antarctica because there is no population of Antarctica. Nothing links to that category other than this thread.

Gujarati is not a language of the United States. I notice you conveniently ignored my question.

Koavf (d) (en-N/en-US, es-2/es-US, de-1, pt-1)22:35, 15 July 2019
 

I've not "ignored" your question, I only marked it as "read" (which is a huge difference). If I had ignored it, I would have not replied to it.

Also "Official" does not mean that there's a "permanent" population.

In fact there's a population, except it is not permanent, and it works under official mandate from an international organization which DOES have the 4 official languages (so official documents produced for that area are in these 4 languages, which are also the working languages used by the various missions when communicating together). In specific stations however any other language may be used, but these will vary across seasons. These are languages used privately by each station crew member with their relevant national authority or authorized scientific mission and we cannot track them. Whatever they do will however need to be reported to the official Atlantic Organization in one of the 4 languages.

Verdy p (talk)22:43, 15 July 2019

You ignored me:

I'm sure that *someone* speaks Greek in Russia: is Greek a "language of Russia"?

Koavf (d) (en-N/en-US, es-2/es-US, de-1, pt-1)23:26, 15 July 2019

But Russia recognizes many languages in its local regions (many are sourced in EN.WP). Your question about Greek in Russia is unrelated to this topic.

I've not checked but may be they exist. (for example German or Yiddish are officially recognized in some parts of Russia, just like are various Central Asian languages). Russia is definitely not a country where a single language is official (such situation is rare in fact... except France where only French is recognized, even if there are also "regional languages" with limited cultural-only support (or just for international relations), and many other minority languages not recognized at all (e.g. Arabic, Vietnamese, Chinese or English).

What matters is not that "someone" speaks a language somewhere, but if there is a significant majority or granted official or national status (for classing in "Category:Official languages of X"), or a *recognized* minority (for listing in "Category:Languages of X", which already contains the "Category:Official languages of X" subcategory).

I did not decided this rule, it was already effective before and documented (this started by the languages of India, which has hundreds languages, and also Pakistan and Bangladesh, whose classification was started in this wiki years ago, and never contested, but never terminated as there were various missing languages that this wiki already supports).

I just reapplied the same existing rule consistantly for other locations. The same rule is also used in Wikipedia for designing its infoboxes for pages about languages (and the consensus comes from it, I've not changed it at all).

Once good criteria used by Wikipedia for including "recognized minority language" in a country, is the fact this country operates or finances directly (by law or for most of its working budget) a regulator or academy or terminology agency for that language for its use in that country, and asks to that agency to give advisory (generally for the redaction of administrative documents, laws or in official education programs), or that it finances programs on public broadcasting in that country (if we apply this to France, then English, Spanish, Arabic and German become "languages of France", because of the "France24" (4 languages: fr,en,es,ar) and ARTE (bilingual: fr, de) public channels on TV; ARTE being a bit special as it is a public cooperation between France and Germany, but they are still not "official languages of France").

If such regulator/academy/agency also cooperates internationally with similar regulators/academies/agencies for the same language used in other countries or international organizations, it gives a stronger sign that this language must be included.

Verdy p (talk)23:32, 15 July 2019

"if there is a significant majority or granted official or national status... or a *recognized* minority"

Hausa in the United States is not. Gujarati is not (it's 0.124% of the population). Greek is not. Etc. Stop adding these categories.

"I did not decided this rule, it was already effective before and documented"

Source?

And any system that *doesn't* include Brezhong as a language of France is obviously mistaken.

Koavf (d) (en-N/en-US, es-2/es-US, de-1, pt-1)00:30, 16 July 2019

Correction: Brezhoneg (this one language of MY native region in France, but that unfortunately learned only superficially, due to lack of support in schools, even in Britanny, today it's still difficult to find places in bilingual Breton-French schools in Britanny, due to limited public support, even from the region or department and total lack of support by the state, and due to small number of professors; it is just a bit easier in Western Britanny; the situation is worse for Gallo the native oïl language in Eastern Britanny, which is incorrectly classified as being a "French" dialect, when it is in fact somewhere betwen Angevin, Poitevin and Noouorman and as far from standard French as can be Picard or Wallon that are also two of my other native languages spoken in my family in Northern France, Belgium and the Nertherlands; other languages in my very near family are Dutch and Limburgish but I don't understand them vocally, I can only read them and write them a bit with lots of faults; I'm better in German, that I learned at school, along with Classic Latin, some Greek, and some Spanish, or with Genovese Italian that I have used when working in Northern Italy). Breton is a really complex language (notably because of its numerous mutations of words, typical of Celtic languages, but also because of its dialectal diversity which did not help improving its support in education between different parts of the Britanny region)

I have no intent to forget it as a language of France (in fact it is already listed in Portal:Fr in the see also section at bottom, along with a few other languages), but here also it won't be an "official language".

The rules were documented in this wiki since years for languages of India (in its category) and it was NEVER contested for years.

They were discussed since long in EN.WP as well. We may rediscuss them here, but you canot deny that this was never discussed and that this was a frequent subject of talks in EN.WP for including some languages or not. The design of its infoboxes, the fact that it lists "minority languages" and makes many attempts to source them is evidently the result of a long consensus, and I don't want to renew it with another consensus discussed just by a pair of users (you and me). I prefer to avoid such conflicts by using what was patiently built on EN.WP.

Verdy p (talk)00:38, 16 July 2019

"The rules were documented in this wiki since years for languages of India (in its category) and it was NEVER contested for years. "

Again: Source please?

Nowhere on Wikipedia does it say that Hausa is a language of the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Languages_of_the_United_States

Koavf (d) (en-N/en-US, es-2/es-US, de-1, pt-1)01:39, 16 July 2019

There's been some cleanup recently, but there are still some tracks left, starting in 2011.

https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Category%3AIndia&type=revision&diff=3374142&oldid=3374093

There were also mentions in archived pages for India. The three categories for India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are here since extremely long. There were also (non working) attempts to do that for other languages in China. Multiple portals have tried to link them without coherence. In some cases these links were done in talk pages. This has long been a desire (with multiple evidences) to unify that, and multiple users on this wiki have thanked me for finding such solution (including several admins of this wiki, and the main admin that has checked every day what I did and thanked me once; I had several thanks from translators of several "minor" but official languages used in Central Europe or in South Asia, including in India which have difficulties to manage their many languages).

Sorting languages correctly is also important for this wiki to see how much they are distinguished, and it may also be used to justify the addition of their support. It can also help contributors to avoid confusing these languages and mixing translations. A minimal organization is needed when only the organization by mere language codes (not always very clear) often creates a confusion (not all users can understand the classification and names used in English, we've seen multiple errors in the past in various Wikimedia projects because of these confusions (and some of them are still not corrected years after they were signaled).

Verdy p (talk)01:43, 16 July 2019