![]() | Constructed languages Project‑class | ||||||
|
The main pages of this project discuss how to decide which conlangs are worthy to be mentioned in Wikipedia. After the vote on rules, I am certain there will be some conlangs left, so it is time to think about how to present the survivors. A conlang, no matter how complete, isn't a natural language, so it ought to be presented differently, especially as conlangs as part of fictional works often are very incomplete (to the degree that guessing on grammar and pronuniciation becomes a goal in itself, see Sindarin as compared to Quenya).
I suggest a template/infobox with the following fields (order to be debated later, this is just a listing):
I'm sure there are more, but this is a place to start. -- Kaleissin 14:29:00, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
There is now a Wikiportal about conlangs. Just thought I'd give everyone a heads up. — {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 17:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
I have done some work on updating {{ language}} recently. It now has some options that are designed to make it suitable for use for constructed languages. I have updated the ne design on the articles on a number of conlangs (see Esperanto, Interlingua, Ido or Quenya for examples). The colour coding for conlangs is black with white text. There are no plans to allow different types of conlangas to be differentiated by different colours. This is because the template deals with all languages, and there has to be a limit to the number of colours we use ( English and Kurdish are both the same shade of green for example). I would hope that more conlangs feel free to make use of the template. Please give me feedback and suggestions about it. In the case of international auxiliary languages, there is often a regulatory body for the language, but no state where it is an official language. Currently, calling {{{agency}}} also displays a field for official language (because this is most often the case for natural languages). I would like to know what might be a better use for this official status field for conlangs. -- Gareth Hughes 12:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
![]() | Constructed languages Project‑class | ||||||
|
The main pages of this project discuss how to decide which conlangs are worthy to be mentioned in Wikipedia. After the vote on rules, I am certain there will be some conlangs left, so it is time to think about how to present the survivors. A conlang, no matter how complete, isn't a natural language, so it ought to be presented differently, especially as conlangs as part of fictional works often are very incomplete (to the degree that guessing on grammar and pronuniciation becomes a goal in itself, see Sindarin as compared to Quenya).
I suggest a template/infobox with the following fields (order to be debated later, this is just a listing):
I'm sure there are more, but this is a place to start. -- Kaleissin 14:29:00, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
There is now a Wikiportal about conlangs. Just thought I'd give everyone a heads up. — {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 17:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
I have done some work on updating {{ language}} recently. It now has some options that are designed to make it suitable for use for constructed languages. I have updated the ne design on the articles on a number of conlangs (see Esperanto, Interlingua, Ido or Quenya for examples). The colour coding for conlangs is black with white text. There are no plans to allow different types of conlangas to be differentiated by different colours. This is because the template deals with all languages, and there has to be a limit to the number of colours we use ( English and Kurdish are both the same shade of green for example). I would hope that more conlangs feel free to make use of the template. Please give me feedback and suggestions about it. In the case of international auxiliary languages, there is often a regulatory body for the language, but no state where it is an official language. Currently, calling {{{agency}}} also displays a field for official language (because this is most often the case for natural languages). I would like to know what might be a better use for this official status field for conlangs. -- Gareth Hughes 12:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)