Talk:Kwomtari–Fas languages

Copy error

Regarding the early 'copy error' which it is said has led to the incorrect classification of these languges: has this been published anywhere? If not then it counts as original research and does not belong here. The other statements re Timothy Usher's analysis also appear to be original research. Dougg 08:06, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While quite accurate, and easy to verify, it is indeed original research. The published error, and the error of all who've cited it, must be allowed to stand unchallenged, as far as WP is concerned. In a field where "consensus" means that there is often only one (in some cases now two) published ill-considered opinion to which people pay attention, and one to which people do not, there is no way to get a good coverage of New Guinean language issues without running afoul of WP:NOR and WP:V.Timothy Usher 08:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I hope that it gets published sometime, at which point it can be added to WP. Do you have no plans to do so? Dougg 12:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

The name was changed from "Kwomtari-Baibai languages" to "Kwomtari languages", since this is the term in general use. Ethnologue currently refers to this group of languages as "Kwomtari-Baibai". However, most published research on the languages simply uses the name "Kwomtari" (e.g. Loving and Bass 1964; Laycock 1973, 1975; Baron 1979; Wurm 1983; Ross 2005). The Baibai language also has the fewest speakers of any Kwomtari family language, apart from Pyu. It therefore does not deserve to be listed as a major component of the family in preference to its close relative Fas, which has the most speakers among the Kwomtari languages. MarcusCole12 12:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted to "Kwomtari-Baibai", since "Kwomtari" is an established language family. kwami (talk) 19:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, since "Kwomtari-Baibai" as generally conceived is spurious, probly best to go with "Kwomtari-Fas", which explicitly corrects this. kwami (talk) 20:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that. I never liked the term "Kwomtari-Baibai", which reflects Laycock's rearrangement, but it wasn't worth making a fuss over. MarcusCole12 (talk) 10:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]