Talk:International auxiliary language

Worldlang

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)

not languages 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) 11:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

"Linguists now understand" no such thing. Chomsky is one linguist, the one linguist that non-linguists are most likely to have heard of, and his theories and systems are far from being universally accepted in the linguistic community. --Thnidu (talk) 05:05, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Since he claims that linguists agree on this, it is extremely unlikely that only a small number of linguists agree on this. And even in that case, this has to be reported here. --Espoo (talk) 07:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

"Since he claims that linguists agree on this, it is extremely unlikely that only a small number of linguists agree on this." I really don't think you can infer that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.116.63 (talk) 22:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

It probably is all moot and discredited now. Stop. AnotherEditor144 ^{talk contribs} 17:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Mario Pei

@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)

LEDE image

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)