Disputatio:Lingua Talossana
Delenda?[fontem recensere]
The only source for this language seems to be the Talossan website, which asserts copyright. So we can't develop an article on it. (There may also be a question of notability ...) So I support the proposal to delete. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:21, 5 Maii 2015 (UTC)
- Languages can't be copyrighted, for the same reason facts can't be copyrighted. As for notability, the Talossan language is a very recognized conlang, it exists since 1980, has multiple articles on multiple Wikipedia editions, has more than 28,000 words, has its own official language regulator (Comità per l'Útzil del Glheþ (CÚG)), is supported by some major internationalization platforms (Crowdin, Transifex and Launchpad) and there is even a translation of The Hobbit in the making. Robin0van0der0vliet (disputatio) 17:32, 5 Maii 2015 (UTC)
- Actually there are surprisingly many websites and books (though they seem to be the work of the relatively small community of speakers). I see no harm in keeping the article, if it's going to develop into a real article. If it remains a miniature non-stipula, naturally it will (eventually) get deleted like any other non-stipula. But if there are enough Latin/Talossan bilinguals to produce a good article here, I say "bravo." A. Mahoney (disputatio) 18:43, 5 Maii 2015 (UTC)
- I've marked as non-stipula, which makes the page visible to people who check up on such things: this may prod someone (anyone!) to flesh it out a bit. I'm all in favor of keeping it provided that happens; I don't have time or inclination myself to do that work now, though. The formula shows a list of what the page needs to have, in particular rather more text. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 12:23, 8 Maii 2015 (UTC)
- Actually there are surprisingly many websites and books (though they seem to be the work of the relatively small community of speakers). I see no harm in keeping the article, if it's going to develop into a real article. If it remains a miniature non-stipula, naturally it will (eventually) get deleted like any other non-stipula. But if there are enough Latin/Talossan bilinguals to produce a good article here, I say "bravo." A. Mahoney (disputatio) 18:43, 5 Maii 2015 (UTC)
Nomen[fontem recensere]
Why isn't it lingua Talossana ? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:52, 5 Maii 2015 (UTC)
- I wasn't sure how to Latinize the name of the language. If lingua Talossana is better feel free to move the article. Robin0van0der0vliet (disputatio) 22:22, 5 Maii 2015 (UTC)
Keep[fontem recensere]
OK, there's enough to keep the article, I think. We won't say it's spoken in the Talossan kingdom: we have to write in the real world. We should, instead, say how many people speak it and where they live (e.g.: where their nearest post office is). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:20, 31 Maii 2015 (UTC)