From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Linguistics / Theoretical Linguistics  (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Theoretical Linguistics Task Force.

Article needs citation improvements[edit]

This article needs citation improvements, throughout the page.

I removed some unsourced info added by an IP, at DIFF.


Cirt (talk) 00:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I see some was vandalism, but the unsourced info should not have been added back in, without citations. I've removed it, and fixed the vandalism, diff. — Cirt (talk) 03:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Unsourced content was added back in, again, here diff. This article should be trimmed of all unsourced content, and replaced with appropriately cited material. — Cirt (talk) 04:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Original research problems[edit]

Tagged with original research problems, as the majority of this article is wholly unsourced, and therefore violates WP:NOR.


Cirt (talk) 03:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Unsourced section tags were removed[edit]

Diff, unsourced section tags were removed.

This article has multiple subsections that have zero (0) sources whatsoever.

I added {{unsourcedsect}} tags to those sections.

Those tags were removed inappropriately.


Cirt (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Note on unsourced content in article[edit]

NOTE: I won't be removing this material another time, or tagging this article anymore. But the article as it stands is in pretty poor shape with some determined individual who keeps adding back in completely unsourced content. — Cirt (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

It's not hard to find sources for the first section - after all, it was basically an annotated list of articles. The views of different schools is a much more difficult proposition. I have tried to find some sort of survey article or book that summarizes these theories, without success. As for pronominals, I'm a little skeptical that the term is used very much. I am going to change the tagging accordingly. RockMagnetist (talk) 00:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


I have searched for uses of the term "pronominal" and can't find any that match the discussion in Pronoun#Pronominals. If none can be found, this section should be removed. RockMagnetist (talk) 00:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)