8,101
edits
sona pona:Notability: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(Start draft, added notability standard and strategies to talk about sitelen pona glyphs) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 6:
Current standards include:
* Features that are not in standard use may still be notable—of historical significance, memetic in the community, circulated through many completionist resources, etc.—but must be marked and described as nonstandard. They should also explain what the standard style does instead and why.
* Additions to existing systems require a higher level of notability than new systems.
* Articles should not give {{w|Project:Undue weight|undue weight}} to significantly less notable topics. For example, see {{sect|Project:Word articles#Related words}}.
Line 12 ⟶ 13:
==Word articles==
{{Main|Project
{{Needs work|
===
There is little data on
On the one hand, these glyphs should not be given undue weight. On the other, readers may already be disproportionately familiar with them from font repertoires, dictionaries (such as {{tok|[[Linku]]}}), and even personal experimentation with fonts. They could easily assume that such a glyph is in common usage, and that the wiki article is merely incomplete if the glyph is absent.
The current consensus is that these sorts of nonstandard and proposed glyphs may be included, but:
* They should not be stated outright to be "the" glyph for a certain word.
A proposed {{tp|[[sitelen pona]]}} glyph for word is ... in order that it could be used in the writing system In practice, it is unknown whether the glyph sees significant use. ▼
* As such, they should not show up in the infobox. (This may happen automatically; an in-template solution is to be developed.)
<syntaxhighlight lang="html+handlebars">
==={{tp|sitelen pona}}===
▲
</syntaxhighlight>
{{Project}}
| |||