Talk:Logooli language

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Languages Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 4 April 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logoli language → Logooli language – More common spelling, matching the standard orthography of the language (called "Lulogooli" with the language prefix, as in Joseph Olindo Ndanyi's work Amang'ana go lulimi lwo Lulogooli). On Google Books, "Logoli language" gets ~66 results, whereas "Logooli language" gets ~708 results. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:30, 4 April 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:37, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question I see that Logooli is more common than Logoli, but looking at the titles in the bibliography at glottolog, there appears to be another, seemingly more common, variant – Llogo(o)ri. Is that less appropriate for a title? – Uanfala (talk) 08:49, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you say that it is seemingly more common? Searches of the kind I described above with Google Books indicates that it is considerably less common than either the current name or the name I suggest we move it to. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not challening the google books results, I was just observing that Llogo(o)ri was more common among the titles in the bibliography at glottolog (visible when you scroll down at http://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/logo1258), and I was wondering why that is. Any ideas? – Uanfala (talk) 11:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, but most of the resources with that spelling are by a single person. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:06, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.