Index of past and present discussions
- Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2011/May#Low_German (decision to use the header Low German, not Low Saxon, for nds)
- Template talk:drt (RFDO discussion of the Dutch Low Saxon varieties drt, gos and twd)
- Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2012/March#Status_of_Low_German_varieties (discussion of the various Low German varieties; expressions of support for the merger of all Dutch varieties under one code, the merger of all German varieties under another, and the retention of Plautdietsch)
- Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2012/November#Translations_into_Low_German_dialects (decision to deprecate the subvariety codes: pdt was unchanged; wep was merged into nds; act, drt, gos, twd, sdz, stl, vel were merged into nds-nl)
- User talk:-sche/Archive/Low German#nds-de (discussion of what to call the lects and whether or not to use nds-de)
- Wiktionary talk:About Low German#RFM_discussion_of_nds.2C_nds-de.2C_nds-nl (permalink to WT:RFM) (decision to deprecate the code nds and the header Low German, following all previous discssions)
- User talk:-sche#Low_German_and_User:Joachim_Mos and User talk:-sche#nds.wiktionary
- User talk:Metaknowledge#Code_nds_at_English_Wiktionary
- User talk:Hippietrail#nds_doesn.27t_run
- Thread:User talk:CodeCat/German words from Low German (for a change of pace, this is a discussion of the separation of modern Low German from Middle Low German)
- Discussion may also take place on the talk pages of the lects' "About" pages:
- Wiktionary talk:About Low German
- Wiktionary talk:About German Low German
- Wiktionary talk:About Dutch Low Saxon (currently a redlink)
- Wiktionary talk:About Plautdietsch (currently a redlink)
- The issue of frs and stq is intertwined:
- Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2012/March#frs_and_stq
- Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/January#Saterlandic_and_East_Frisian_again
Given my ambivalence about the Fula lects, my support for merging the Yiddish dialects and my opposition to merging Scots with English, I feel I should state my feelings about Low German in greater detail.
Dutch Low German and German Low German are as distinct as English and Scots, due to their separate development and the pull Dutch has exerted on DLG and the different pull German has exerted on GLG. Therefore, a split into DLG and GLG is justified and allows the messy situation to have some order.
Naturally, a DLG/GLG split also introduces complications, just as the split of English from Scots results in complications and messes (Category:Scottish English contains many things which might, upon closer inspection, only be Scots).
If there were more Low German speakers on this project, and a majority favoured a merge of the German and Dutch dialects, I would hold my nose, close my eyes and think of flowers; I would not oppose it. As it is, however, the only people who've shown an interest in the matter are CodeCat (who speaks Dutch), Liliana (who speaks German), and me (I also speak German).
As I see it, there are two cogent ways to encode Low German: (1) have entries for German Low German (nds-de) and Dutch Low Saxon (nds-nl), as is the status quo and as I favour, or (2) conflate GLG and DLS under one header, nds.
It is worth noting that the status quo ante was not cogent: it was (3) to use nds for GLG and DLS while duplicating DLS terms in ==Dutch Low Saxon== /
Several other options exist but are so unsound that I doubt they could ever gain traction here at all. These include: (4) giving each subdialect, e.g. Sallands, its own L2, which CodeCat correctly observed would be more foolish than splitting Serbo-Croatian (yet which was the status quo ante ante), (5) conflating not only GLG and DLS but also Plautdietsch, as nds.Wikt does.