Change 527932 had a related patch set uploaded (by Fomafix; owner: Fomafix):
[operations/dns@master] Add 'egl' as alias for 'eml'

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/527932

Change 527933 had a related patch set uploaded (by Fomafix; owner: Fomafix):
[operations/puppet@production] Add 'egl' as alias for 'eml'

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/527933

Hi,
I am an Emilian speaker and eml Wiki user. the eml code is obsolete according to ISO, but I find it better than using split egl and rgn codes, or even using just egl (very offensive and disrespectful to Romagnol people). Linguists today find Emilian and Romagnol separate languages, when there are other tongues objectively further to each other, but considered dialects of the same language, like Maghreb Arabic and Yemenite Arabic: at times mutually unintelligible but paradoxally considered part of the same language. Emilian and Romagnol have a high rate of mutual intelligibility, and they are almost never mutually unintelligible if not for literally a bunch of words.

Me and the other eml Wiki editors use a particular page layout in which every single page can be eventually translated in each Emilian or Romagnol dialect, without "sacrificing" order and graphical harmony of the page. This pagination method is very helpful to us and for our languages survival: take for example the Neapolitan wiki (nap) and the Tarantine wiki (roa-tara), Tarantine is de facto a dialect of Neapolitan language, but nobody consults that Wiki, instead of the Neapolitan one, which is very lively (if we count how many Neapolitan speakers are there and how much are they interested to read and benefit of their own Wiki). If nap Wiki adopted our layout style and moved Tarantine translations into their pages, maybe the Tarantine pages would be way more read and edited, a deal for Tarantine survival.

In Italy we speak a lot of endangered local languages, Wikipedia is one of our saviors from language extinction. If you split Emilian and Romagnol, the latter risks to endanger itself even more, as rgn "subWiki" is one of the least translated in the eml "superWiki". We, Emilians, and Romagnols too, find very useful a united Wiki, as we can easily help Romagnols in some pages as Emilians and viceversa because, I repeat it, our two languages are VERY VERY mutually intelligible.

Thus, I ask you to not split our two languages just to adapt to the ISO, what benefits do you get from it? Our two languages, so insignificant for you non-speakers, but that mean a lot for us, will be harder to manage in their own new Wikis, as certainly you would split editors and simple users too. Nobody would notice the split, and according to us, eml Wikipedians, it's a useless and dangerous thing to do for our languages as I said before.

The "community that wants to split and rename the Wiki" you were talking about is formed by non Emilian-Romagnols (Dragonòt, Nickanc, Vituzzu, etc...), so whose opinion is worthier?
Then the last discussions about it (excluding this one) are from 2012: 8 years later eml Wiki is still united, but the split threat still impends.

Thanks for reading,

Liviojavi.

In T36217#6386871, @Liviojavi wrote:

Hi,
I am an Emilian speaker and eml Wiki user. the eml code is obsolete according to ISO, but I find it better than using split egl and rgn codes, or even using just egl (very offensive and disrespectful to Romagnol people). Linguists today find Emilian and Romagnol separate languages, when there are other tongues objectively further to each other, but considered dialects of the same language, like Maghreb Arabic and Yemenite Arabic: at times mutually unintelligible but paradoxally considered part of the same language. Emilian and Romagnol have a high rate of mutual intelligibility, and they are almost never mutually unintelligible if not for literally a bunch of words.

Me and the other eml Wiki editors use a particular page layout in which every single page can be eventually translated in each Emilian or Romagnol dialect, without "sacrificing" order and graphical harmony of the page. This pagination method is very helpful to us and for our languages survival: take for example the Neapolitan wiki (nap) and the Tarantine wiki (roa-tara), Tarantine is de facto a dialect of Neapolitan language, but nobody consults that Wiki, instead of the Neapolitan one, which is very lively (if we count how many Neapolitan speakers are there and how much are they interested to read and benefit of their own Wiki). If nap Wiki adopted our layout style and moved Tarantine translations into their pages, maybe the Tarantine pages would be way more read and edited, a deal for Tarantine survival.

In Italy we speak a lot of endangered local languages, Wikipedia is one of our saviors from language extinction. If you split Emilian and Romagnol, the latter risks to endanger itself even more, as rgn "subWiki" is one of the least translated in the eml "superWiki". We, Emilians, and Romagnols too, find very useful a united Wiki, as we can easily help Romagnols in some pages as Emilians and viceversa because, I repeat it, our two languages are VERY VERY mutually intelligible.

Thus, I ask you to not split our two languages just to adapt to the ISO, what benefits do you get from it? Our two languages, so insignificant for you non-speakers, but that mean a lot for us, will be harder to manage in their own new Wikis, as certainly you would split editors and simple users too. Nobody would notice the split, and according to us, eml Wikipedians, it's a useless and dangerous thing to do for our languages as I said before.

The "community that wants to split and rename the Wiki" you were talking about is formed by non Emilian-Romagnols (Dragonòt, Nickanc, Vituzzu, etc...), so whose opinion is worthier?
Then the last discussions about it (excluding this one) are from 2012: 8 years later eml Wiki is still united, but the split threat still impends.

Thanks for reading,

Liviojavi.

It have been stalled for 8 years (now 9), only because it is not technically feasible for WMF to rename Wikipedia without causing tons of trouble. Many older, much more popular requests are being stalled for more than a decade for the same reason. Once those technical problems are ultimately resolved, the renaming will most likely proceed together with others, as using ISO639 codes for languages and not using macrolanguage codes for wiki is an established policy. If it is undesirable, then involved communities need to use processes like Request For Comment to push against such proposed impending move.

Change 527932 merged by Dzahn:

[operations/dns@master] Add 'egl' as alias for 'eml'

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/527932

valid code per https://iso639-3.sil.org/code/egl but not yet in https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:List_of_language_names_ordered_by_code

egl.wikipedia.org has been added to DNS

egl.wikipedia.org is an alias for dyna.wikimedia.org.

Note also that LanguageConverter might be an appropriate solution to allow egl and rgn to co-exist on the same wiki.