Talk:Levantine Arabic

message: Hello @A455bcd9! 
First of all, thank you for everything you did to help make this article a featured article. I truly appreciate all your efforts, and it is a very well-written piece!
Meanwhile, I need to say that I disagree with your decision to revert my last edits, so would like to have a discussion, if possible. My argument is: 
* Meta can be considered a reliable source for the information that was included in the subsection: The text says that the project is determined to be eligible by the Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee. Even if you consider the dynamic page to be unreliable (since it can be vandalized) I can link to that particular edit or the static page as a reference, which cannot be altered, and is a perfectly reliable source for the statement being made WP:RAP. Also we can add the language committee's mailing list discussions, which would provide an additional reliable sourcing. The mailing list is open to the public.
Overall, I believe the content has encyclopedic value since the Wikimedia Foundation is a notable entity and the LC is representing the WMF here. I would appreciate it if you could reconsider. @FunLater: Curious about your opinion on this matter as well, if you have time. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 08:37, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Verifiability is not a problem here, but a Wikipedia edition is rarely if ever significant enough to discuss in the article about a language. Nardog (talk) 09:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Nardog Indeed. We can only add content backed by reliable sources. So if for instance a reputable newspaper talks about the efforts around creating a Levantine Wikipedia, then we could mention it and it would be very interesting. But we don't have that. Unfortunately. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 09:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed what? I just said verifiability isn't a problem here. We could totally discuss the Wikipedia without a reliable source, as far as is allowed by WP:ABOUTSELF. I just don't find it pertinent to the subject, and that's a matter within editorial discretion. Nardog (talk) 10:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Nardog We cannot use Wikimedia projects as a source per WP:CIRCULAR. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 10:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "An exception is allowed when Wikipedia itself is being discussed in the article." Nardog (talk) 11:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, sorry. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 11:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

text: I think verifiability-wise the section is/was okay, but the wiki is unfortunately not (yet) significant enough to warrant its own section. FunLater (talk) 11:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Even Scots' article doesn't mention its wiki version, despite The Incident. FunLater (talk) 11:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. Nardog (talk) 11:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Levantine Arabic Wikipedia as a section 

message: Is there a reason to not add the Turkish alphabet to the infobox? FunLater (talk) 23:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's necessary. We have "Latin script", which encompasses all Latin-based alphabets, including the Turkish alphabet. Similarly, Levantine speakers (esp. in Lebanon) might use the French é or French based-spellings (ch instead of sh for instance) but we  don't list "French alphabet" in "Writing system". a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 11:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, cool. :) FunLater (talk) 11:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Levantine speakers in Turkey use the Latin-based Turkish alphabet."  

message: While the source only says "Arabian", other sources referencing the same group refer to it as "North Arabian" to avoid ambiguity with Old and Modern South Arabian. Listing it as merely "Arabian" only creates ambiguity. Arctic Circle System (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The source says Arabian, so we write Arabian. Unless we have a better reliable source for the whole classification tree? (and not just for "Arabian", we don't do a patchwork of RS). a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 08:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent reversion of change from "Arabian" to "North Arabian"