This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 900 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Since I can't respond to the deletion message directly, and the talk page is gone:
02:17, 28 December 2017 Fastily talk contribs deleted page Worldlang (Expired PROD, concern was: title of article is a bogus nonce-word per talk)
Worldlang is clearly not a nonce word, let alone bogus; like several other coinages in -lang, it is in regular use among language construction enthusiasts (conlangers), especially the auxlang/IAL community – it's also covered over at Wiktionary, where it is not marked as a nonce word. A web search using the terms "worldlang" "conlang" or "worldlang" "auxlang" pulls up discussions on Reddit and specialised mailing lists and web forums, and for instance this glossary. Whether this (technical/jargon) term deserves an article of its own on Wikipedia is a separate issue (it's a term limited to a hobbyist community, not used in a professional community, but that's not the decisive criterion, coverage in RS is; hence we have articles about fanfic terms, for example), and my comment isn't intended to weigh on that question, but the rationale given above is clearly nonsense and bogus itself. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 13:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Apparently linguists now understand that Esperanto and other international auxiliary languages are not languages but parasitic systems based on real languages: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C09jMAH6X18&feature=youtu.be&t=1231 at 20'30" and 22'30". -- Espoo ( talk) 11:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
@ Pstudier: Why did you unlink Mario Pei just after linking him? He has an article and is certainly prominent enough to deserve it. Thnidu ( talk) 07:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I was having computer problems, and thought it better just to revert rather than risk messing things up. Go ahead and link if you wish. Paul Studier ( talk) 22:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I found my problem. The instance of Mario Pei that I linked was hidden inside a reference and not visible in the main part of the article. Now fixed. Paul Studier ( talk) 22:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't think having the current Countries_with_English_as_Official_Language.png map on the LEDE is a good idea, I couldn't find the source data that was used to create it, and the map doesn't explains what the difference between unofficial vs not official is. Uwsi ( talk) 05:10, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 900 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Since I can't respond to the deletion message directly, and the talk page is gone:
02:17, 28 December 2017 Fastily talk contribs deleted page Worldlang (Expired PROD, concern was: title of article is a bogus nonce-word per talk)
Worldlang is clearly not a nonce word, let alone bogus; like several other coinages in -lang, it is in regular use among language construction enthusiasts (conlangers), especially the auxlang/IAL community – it's also covered over at Wiktionary, where it is not marked as a nonce word. A web search using the terms "worldlang" "conlang" or "worldlang" "auxlang" pulls up discussions on Reddit and specialised mailing lists and web forums, and for instance this glossary. Whether this (technical/jargon) term deserves an article of its own on Wikipedia is a separate issue (it's a term limited to a hobbyist community, not used in a professional community, but that's not the decisive criterion, coverage in RS is; hence we have articles about fanfic terms, for example), and my comment isn't intended to weigh on that question, but the rationale given above is clearly nonsense and bogus itself. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 13:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Apparently linguists now understand that Esperanto and other international auxiliary languages are not languages but parasitic systems based on real languages: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C09jMAH6X18&feature=youtu.be&t=1231 at 20'30" and 22'30". -- Espoo ( talk) 11:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
@ Pstudier: Why did you unlink Mario Pei just after linking him? He has an article and is certainly prominent enough to deserve it. Thnidu ( talk) 07:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I was having computer problems, and thought it better just to revert rather than risk messing things up. Go ahead and link if you wish. Paul Studier ( talk) 22:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I found my problem. The instance of Mario Pei that I linked was hidden inside a reference and not visible in the main part of the article. Now fixed. Paul Studier ( talk) 22:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't think having the current Countries_with_English_as_Official_Language.png map on the LEDE is a good idea, I couldn't find the source data that was used to create it, and the map doesn't explains what the difference between unofficial vs not official is. Uwsi ( talk) 05:10, 8 November 2022 (UTC)