CZ Talk:Core Articles/Social Sciences: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>John Stephenson m (ling) |
imported>Joshua M. Jensen (response to John) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
What do you think? Individual languages that I added I did so because they are widely spoken (e.g. Bengali and Javanese). [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 08:16, 27 October 2007 (CDT) | What do you think? Individual languages that I added I did so because they are widely spoken (e.g. Bengali and Javanese). [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 08:16, 27 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
:Yeah, I added the language families using size as a criterion (i.e., number of languages in family), but I agree that a lot of them should go. Good call. I'm really glad that we've got a full list now! [[User:Joshua M. Jensen|Joshua M. Jensen]] 09:37, 27 October 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 09:37, 27 October 2007
Which to boot out? (Linguistics)
As you can see, as of 27th October there are 5 too many in the linguistics lists. Which should be rejected? I think that individual languages and language families are less important, unless for some reason they are notable. I propose removing:
- Austro-Asiatic languages (1)
- Austronesian languages (1)
- Niger-Congo languages (1)
- Nilo-Saharan languages (1)
- Trans-New Guinea languages (1)
What do you think? Individual languages that I added I did so because they are widely spoken (e.g. Bengali and Javanese). John Stephenson 08:16, 27 October 2007 (CDT)
- Yeah, I added the language families using size as a criterion (i.e., number of languages in family), but I agree that a lot of them should go. Good call. I'm really glad that we've got a full list now! Joshua M. Jensen 09:37, 27 October 2007 (CDT)