Comments on: Egypt: Egyptian Dialect Wikipedia

By: Mahmoud Kefaya Punk

Mahmoud Kefaya Punk — Tue, 25 May 2010 00:22:08 +0000

Thanks for modern science. Thanks for logic & reasoning. Thanks for sanity. Thanks for neutrality. Thanks for GerardM.
The problem with supporters of enforcing Arabic language is that they are driven by religious ideologies, such as Arabic language is a sacred language & it’s the most eloquent language in existence, because it was the language in which Koran was written in… (Fanatic & illogical claims)
It’s explicitly clear that whenever you read about opposition to use the truly spoken languages of the allegedly Arab League nations, that their reason not to use spoken languages is that they are not the languages of Koran!
Not only that, they exclude & call for violence to what they oppose. They even call for vandalism against Egyptian Wikipedia. I saw it in blogs & groups.
Arabists/Islamists are blinded because they refuse to think logically. They refuse the fact that Arabic language is a dead language. They fail to understand what is a language actually!
Who is the extremist here? The ones who want to practice their primitive right to practice writing in their own language, or the ones who want to force a dead language, always related to Koran & Islam by forces of discriminating laws & “takfir”.
The state of what is called “Spoken Arabic” is not any different from what is called “Vulgar Latin”.
The reason for naming the spoken languages of Arab League states as “varieties of Arabic” is political & because the people there were raised to believe their spoken languages as pejorative accents of the glorious & eloquent Arabic language of the Koran.
I’m really amazed by the ones who call themselves as tolerant or moderate Muslims, when in fact they very fanatic & lack reason.
A note worthy note: Arabic Wikipedia is under the seige of Islamic extremists.

By: GerardM

GerardM — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:32:59 +0000

Hoi, the rule for a new Wikipedia is that the language has to be recognised by the ISO-639-3. When enough people speak that language and when sufficient people ask for a project in a recognised language, it is deemed eligible. Egyptian Arabic is recognised as such.

American, Australian etc English is not recognised as a separate language and as such they are not eligible for a new Wikipedia.

The rules for new Wikipedias are simple and published. They are implemented with the full agreement of a committee of Wikipedians and experts.
Thanks,
GerardM

By: Laith Kra7as

Laith Kra7as — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:43:31 +0000

Just to be fair, in this case there should be British, American, Mandarin, Cantonese, Iraqi and Brazilian Wikis.

By: fay

fay — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:56:43 +0000

remove that thing from the web .i will boycott wikipedia if this is continue

By: Mohamed Ahmed

Mohamed Ahmed — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:06:22 +0000

Facts sraight, the User who proposed this wiki said “Egyptian Slang” himself. It is original Reseach. Because the ISO page say it is Spoken. Wirting using Latin Alphabet is Original Research. And, now they are inventing words on this wiki.

By: GerardM

GerardM — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:13:48 +0000

It is the ISO or International Standards Organisation that recognised Egyptian Arabic as a language.

This is not the first project where people make an effort to standardise a language. This is not considered original research. Original research is associated with the content of articles.

Please get your facts straight.
Thanks,
GerardM

By: Mohamed Ahmed

Mohamed Ahmed — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 02:45:33 +0000

Hello; I am an Egyptian, I am against this version of Wikipedia, becuase it violates the priciples and the rules of Wikipedia. Egyptian Arabic is only spoken, most of the Egyptians recognize it as a dialect. There is a golden rule in all versions of Wikipedia, it is to avoid Original Research. But, we find that in this Wiki, alot of Original Research is being made. Now there is a proposal for a Wikitionary to “Standarize” the “language” as the supporters say. I wonder: Can we “standarize” a “language” on a wiki?!! I guess not. I won’t forget to say, that the supporters hold a view on Egyptian Arabic, they call it “Modern Egyptian Language” They didn’t try to rename it as they want on the English Wikipedia where Egyptian Aranbic is a variety of the Arabic language. The Policy of Wikimedia regaridng the creation of new language project states that Wikipedia is not for developing new language entities.

By: GerardM

GerardM — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:04:41 +0000

Hoi,
The language policy of the WMF is quite simple. A language is a language when it is recognised as such by the ISO. Egyptian Arabic, North Levantine Arabic et al are. When people request a project and they create an incubator project, do the localisation at Betawiki, they can have their own project.

The Egyptian Arabic effort has proven itself as a good effort worthy of its own project. When you compare this with the request for a Lebanese Wikipedia, you will find that the language is known as North Levantine Arabic. According to the text at Ethnologue there are more people in Syria who speak the language then in Lebanon AND there were no people actively supporting this proposal. Now only requests from people who actively support a project are taken further.

The policy is really explicit about accepting certain arguments for or against a request. Political and religious argument are not acceptable. This means that the notion of a unified Arabic world is not relevant and certainly not when weighed against the recognition of separate languages by ISO.

The notion that it splits up the Arabic Wikipedia community is not a valid argument either because who can determine for someone else what to work on. The ability of people from different languages to understand each other has also not been a real issue in the past. Neapolitan and Catalan people understand each other really well probably much better then an Iraqi and a Moroccan.

When people consider this as a move against their religion, they fail to see that it is every one’s right to work on the Wikipedia they feel most comfortable with. If for religious reasons people object to something like the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia, they show a lack of respect for the views of those who either do not share their interpretation of religion, their religion or value their mother tongue as a language separate from Arabic.

The freedom of expression is a fundamental human right. So you are quite welcome not to appreciate the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia, but you are not free to effectively deny this project its existence.
Thanks,
GerardM

By: Tarek Amr

Tarek Amr — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:53:28 +0000

Gharbeia, I’ve tried to make it clearer now in order to reflect what you meant more.

By: Ahmad Gharbeia

Ahmad Gharbeia — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 23:19:33 +0000

I have some reservations on the translation; with all respect, Tarek.

- I didn’t single out Coptic Nationalists as the supporters. In fact I specifically mentioned “Egyptian Nationalists, and Coptic Nationalists who differ from the first only in being Christians” I really see no difference.

- I was referring to “Arab-ism” as a term which has cultural, linguistic, political, and ethnological aspects to it, that are confused by many of us, and is indeed intriguing.

- I was not referring to “Egypt and its role as a nation”, but was rather tackling “the concept of Egypt as state”

Should we blame this on the fact that I was commenting in my native Cairene Accent all the way? ;P I think this should have been noted as well, as it is significant.

By: Ahmed H. Melege

Ahmed H. Melege — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 20:27:28 +0000

انا معترض عن اللهجة من الاول، ونفس الحال مع معظم المصريين.
انا اعتراضى عن طريقتك فى التعليق عن الرأي..

(يا حمير بكل لغات العالم في عامية وفي فصحى…) انظر ماذا كتبت

By: Somar

Somar — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:27:27 +0000

Ahmed..Can u tell me Respect for what ???

أحمد لو وجدت هذه اللغة بمنتدى معين …والله ما كنت أزعل…
بس وكيبيديا موسوعة …(يعني مواضيعها لازم تكون موثقة) ..مومجلة شعبية أو مسلسل ولا فلم…
بتمنى تكون قرأت تعليمات الكتابة في وكيبيديا مصري…

//فيه شوية صغيرة من المقالات فى ويكيبيديا مصرى منها نسخ بالأبجديه اللاتينى لأن كان فيه اقتراح من سنة 1948 لكتابه المصرى بحروف الابجديه اللاتينية//

تصور أنو كتبنا العلمية تنكتب بلغات عامية محكية…
هلق في حدا سأل أنو كيف وكيبيديا بتقبل …والله هون المهزلة

رح أضرب مثل …بأمريكا في شي اسمو لغة الشات طبعاً هيي انكليزي مع اختصارات كثيرة…وتستخدم بشكل واسع جدا في المحادثات الشعبية … بس مستحيل أي أحد يتجرأ يكتب مقالة علمية باستخدام تلك اللغة …

يعني أنا مع المصريين يعتزو بوطنهم ولهجتهم … بس على الأقل يسموها لهجة وليست لغة
أنا بتمنى من الجميع أن يرى خطورة التسمية …
تصور ماذا سيحدث لو أن كل اللهجات الموجودة سميت لغات …

بصراحة الموضوع خطير جدا

By: Ahmed H. Melege

Ahmed H. Melege — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:27:38 +0000

Somar, If you can’t show some respect, then you aren’t eligible to comment here. I don’t know why have your comment been approved !

By: …My heart’s in Accra » links for 2008-12-09

…My heart’s in Accra » links for 2008-12-09 — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:03:42 +0000

[...] Global Voices Online Egypt: Egyptian Dialect Wikipedia A group of Wikipedians has launched a wikipedia in Egyptian arabic, a split from the classical arabic edition that's been developed for some years on Wikipedia. Global Voices rounds up reactions. A few feel like it's easier to write in Egyptian arabic, while the majority seem to feel this is an anti-Islamist political statement, or simply a bad idea that will go nowhere. (tags: language translation arabic wikipedia blogs globalvoices) [...]

By: Iman

Iman — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:37:08 +0000

According to that weblog, there must be several Egyptian languages. As far as I know, there are many stylistic, grammatical and morophological differences between the dialects of Upper Egypt, Lower Egypt, and Sinai. Can these ‘differences’ turn them into separate languages???