Talk:Esperanto

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Esperanto article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24: 60 days

Criticism of Esperanto was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 April 2016 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esperanto. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Esperanto was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 25, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 4, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 25, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
July 1, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
July 3, 2007	Good article reassessment	Listed
September 4, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
June 16, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 26, 2004, July 26, 2005, July 26, 2012, and July 26, 2014.
Current status: Delisted good article

Template:Vital article

Constructed languages: Esperanto B‑class Top‑importance

	Constructed languages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed languages 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.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Esperanto task force.
	This article is an Esperanto core topic.

Languages B‑class Top‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/29/8672371/learn-esperanto-language-duolingo-app-origin-history

References

Nomination of Criticism of Esperanto for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Criticism of Esperanto is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Esperanto until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Reference needed for statement on number of hours

There is a paragraph in section "Education" on the number of hours needed to learn Esperanto:

The Institute of Cybernetic Pedagogy at Paderborn (Germany) has compared the length of study time...

I think this paragraph needs a proper source. In the current version, [66] is cited, but this is not the original source. It cites another publication (Flochon, 2000) which is also not the original source, but refers to something done by the "Institut de pédagogie cybernétique". Actually, such an institute does not exist (anymore?), but there was a department for "Bildungskybernetik", which was part of the "Institut für Kybernetik" in Paderborn. This department was headed by Helmar Frank, a German scientist who studied, amongst others, the advantage of Esperanto for language learning.

It would be great to find the original source of the above statement about the number of hours, otherwise it would be just hearsay. Similar statements also appear in other publications (all giving Helmar Frank as source), sometimes with deviating numbers.

Criticism of Esperanto

I remember this article had a section devoted to things that people have criticized about the language. I now see it disappeared in April 2016. The deletion is justified in a series of edits with messages including "Criticism SECTIONS aren't allowed under Wikipedia". This is the first time I hear of such a thing. There are tons of articles in wikipedia with criticism sections and these sections are VERY important to maintain a neutral point of view. I believe the criticism section should be restored. --Martinkunev (talk) 12:38, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Writing diacritics

the BEST way is to employ: ĥ = x, ĵ = y, ŭ = w and dz = q. I think it should be done as a REFORM in introducing esperanto letters; or at least an INTERNATIONAL alternative to writing esperanto with qwerty based keyboards. Tabascofernandez (talk) 04:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is irrelevant. This article should describe Esperanto as it is actually used, not someone's idea of how it should be reformed. Mutichou (talk) 09:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]