| C933103 added a comment. |
@Popolon According to my understanding assuming they are correct understanding, using Arabic as analogy, what you propose would be like making different monolingual value for "Libyan Modern Standard Arabic", "Egyptian Modern Standard Arabic", "Tunisian Modern Standard Arabic". Yes, Libyan/Egyptian/Tunisian Arabic are all different and could be considered as different languages, however there are only one single literary standard here. Surely, there are different phonetic literary standard that more closely reflect individual languages, like the Cyrillic alphabet being used to spell different Mongolic languages, which would warrant the establishment of wiki in each of their individual languages, however there are only one Classical Mongolian Script just like there are only one Modern Standard Arabic. You can say mvf is closest to Classical Mongolian in the same way as Egyptian Arabic being closest to the standard of Modern Standard Arabic, however they are not equal.
Cc: Badaa, ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, thiemowmde, Liuxinyu970226, Lydia_Pintscher, GerardM, Aklapper, Zppix, Popolon, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Mbch331
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
