Revision as of 10:28, 23 August 2024 edit Mathglot (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 83,659 edits →‎break: Admins have nothing to do with it. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 10:57, 23 August 2024 edit undo يوسف قناوة (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 1,119 edits rmv irrelevant request Tags: Reverted 2017 wikitext editor Next edit →
Line 167: ::::The term "integrate" is what is used in the English translation of the constitution. I don't see how "concretize" (which you seem to think is a better translation) changes anything to what I said. ::::{{tq\|This notion of official (at all costs) is not a prerequisite for the infobox which clearly specifies « native language [...] official/defacto language(s)»\|q=yes}} Tamazight is not a de facto language. [[User:M.Bitton\|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton\|talk]]) 22:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC) :::::Which (official?) English version are you referring to for the constitution? The term concretization is more progressive, because it can be partially concretized while integration is a yes/no (binary) notion. When you say "Tamazight is not a de facto language." what are you basing this on? Tamazight is recognized as a single language with several variants (exct the same case of Arabic with several registers).▼ :This matter would be best addressed by the intervention of Wikipedia administrators, who are responsible for enforcing Wikipedia's policies and are better equipped to make impartial judgments, free from bias and subjective POV-pushing. [[User:يوسف قناوة\|يوسف قناوة]] ([[User talk:يوسف قناوة\|talk]]) 01:27, 23 August 2024 (UTC) :::::You didn't answer my question? Is the publication of the constitution in Tamazight the work of the Algerian state, therefore official, or the work of activists? De facto, the name in Tamazight exists (ministry, APS agency, constitution translated by an official body, etc.) yes or no? I am not asking for judgements (not standardized enough, not disseminated enough, etc.). [[User:Monsieur Patillo\|Monsieur Patillo]] ([[User talk:Monsieur Patillo\|talk]]) 10:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)▼ ▲::Which (official?) English version are you referring to for the constitution? The term concretization is more progressive, because it can be partially concretized while integration is a yes/no (binary) notion. When you say "Tamazight is not a de facto language." what are you basing this on? Tamazight is recognized as a single language with several variants (exct the same case of Arabic with several registers). ▲::You didn't answer my question? Is the publication of the constitution in Tamazight the work of the Algerian state, therefore official, or the work of activists? De facto, the name in Tamazight exists (ministry, APS agency, constitution translated by an official body, etc.) yes or no? I am not asking for judgements (not standardized enough, not disseminated enough, etc.). [[User:Monsieur Patillo\|Monsieur Patillo]] ([[User talk:Monsieur Patillo\|talk]]) 10:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC) :: [[User:يوسف قناوة\|يوسف قناوة]], this matter will not be addressed by the intervention of Wikipedia administrators, who will never step in on a content issue like this one. You will be waiting forever, if you wait for that to happen, because that is not their role. If you have further questions about the role of admins, you can read [[WP:ADMIN]] or ask at the [[Wikipedia:Help desk]] (or at my Talk page) but please don't ask here as it is off topic. Hope this helps, [[User:Mathglot\|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot\|talk]]) 10:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC) == Noting four similar discussions about French usage at other Algeria-related articles ==

Talk:Algeria: Difference between revisions