Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:51, 5 January 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Esperanto article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 2 months

Criticism of Esperanto was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 April 2016 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esperanto. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Esperanto was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones Date Process Result February 25, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 4, 2005 Peer review Reviewed December 25, 2005 Good article nominee Listed July 1, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted July 3, 2007 Good article reassessment Listed September 4, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted June 16, 2008 Peer review Reviewed Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 26, 2004, July 26, 2005, July 26, 2012, and July 26, 2014. Current status: Delisted good article

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Constructed languages: Esperanto Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed languages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Esperanto task force. This article is an Esperanto core topic. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Languages Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/29/8672371/learn-esperanto-language-duolingo-app-origin-history

List of sources about the number of native speakers

https://denaskuloj.home.blog/2019/03/15/kiom-da-denaskuloj-estas-en-la-tuta-mondo/

Tuxayo (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

The Hungarian 2011 census counted 8397 speakers, of which 7412 don't speak it as a mother tongue (meaning that 985 do). Hegsareta (talk) 04:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

References

1. "1.1.4.2 Population by language knowledge and sex". Hungarian Central Statistical Office. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)

"He" used generically in English

Under Neutrality > Gender:

"As in English, li "he" may be used generically, whereas ŝi "she" is always female."

I'm not sure that this is correct. How can "he" be used generically in English? Perhaps the writer meant to say that the male form of a profession (actor, baron, etc.) can be used generically, while the female form (actress, baroness, etc.) is always female? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.194.218.228 (talk) 07:26, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Traditional English grammars (i.e. those written between the eighteenth century and the mid-twentieth century) preferred he as a pronoun for a person whose gender is unknown or irrelevant. Examples from Misplaced Pages:

— George Washington Cable, Old Creole Days (1879)

—  Article 15, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

— Albert Bleumenthal, New York State Assembly

However, this rule fell out of fashion in the 1960s because it came to be seen as sexist. The most common alternative nowadays is the singular they, but not many of those who reject the singular they would advocate the generic he as an alternative.

I have reworded the text to remove the suggestion that generic he is standard in English. Kahastok talk 10:50, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

On the contrary, I think that many of those who reject the singular they would advocate the generic he as an alternative. The change may have started in the 1960s, but I remember cases of it being used in the 1980s and 1990s. I don't know of its current prevalence, but I think the comparison is important.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Nightic Esperanto

Hello, I have completed the Nightic Esperanto alphabet! Say "egg" on this discussion if you want me to make an article about it! I'm so excited! This poll will close in 7 days. PhoenixSummon (talk) 21:26, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Hen. Misplaced Pages is not for things made up one day. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 21:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok, don't be rude. I just wanted people's opinions.

Ok, the poll is closed. I will postpone the article to 01/23/2020. Thanks for the time, bye! PhoenixSummon (talk) 20:21, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

@PhoenixSummon: LiliCharlie wasn't being rude (unless that's what "hen" was about). They were just telling you that your idea doesn't belong in Misplaced Pages, and pointing you to the page explaining that policy. If you post such an article it will be swiftly deleted. The only way it could belong in Misplaced Pages is if you publish your idea somewhere else and it is picked up and commented on in reliable sources such as newspapers, news reports, dictionaries, academic papers, etc. Then an article could be written about it – but not by you. Someone else would have to write it up. That's another Misplaced Pages rule: basically, someone with an interest in a topic shouldn't write about it. Quoting Misplaced Pages:Independent sources:

Misplaced Pages is not a place to promote things or publish your thoughts, and is not a website for personal communication, a freely licensed media repository, or a censored publication.

--Thnidu (talk) 04:14, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

/ PhoenixSummon (talk) 02:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Can everybody quit being a dingle for no reason? PhoenixSummon (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

not a language according to most linguists

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) 11:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure how a couple of sentences by one linguist who hasn't studied Esperanto supports the claim that "most linguists say Esperanto is not a language". Mutichou (talk) 19:43, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

+1. Myriads of linguists have no doubt that Esperanto is a full-fledged language, and one with far more speakers than, for instance, the average indigenous language of Vanuatu. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 20:48, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't believe anything from youtube, so I guess i shouldn't comment. --Malerooster (talk) 20:54, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

• Delisted good articles
• Old requests for peer review
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class constructed language articles
• Top-importance constructed language articles
• B-Class Esperanto task force articles
• WikiProject constructed language articles
• B-Class language articles
• Top-importance language articles
• WikiProject Languages articles