On 31/03/07, Dmcdevit <
dmcdevit@...> wrote:
> Aside from the sensationalist fallacious logic that getting rid of
> Klingon Wiktionary means we will get rid of every other constructed
> language, even ones with native speakers and literature, has anyone
> offered any reason to keep it?
>
> We're still talking about the fictional language of a race of
> intelligent crustaceans in the 24th century as portrayed in a popular TV
> show, right? I think it should be the responsibility of that project's
> editors (if there are any), now that the Wikipedia is shut down, to now
> take it through the normal procedure for opening new Wiktionaries, as
> this one never did.
For the sake of full disclosure: I have never watched an episode of
Star Trek on TV or any of the films. I have no interest in the
fictional world.
I, for one, object to the closure of projects based on elitist
concerns as to the origin of the language. What matters is the place
of the language in the world now. This language is, crucially,
recognised as a language by the International Standardisation
Organisation
--
Oldak Quill (
oldakquill@...)
_______________________________________________
Wiktionary-l mailing list
Wiktionary-l@...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
