Knowledge (XXG):Conlangs/Straw poll

359:

going to be the organization of the language itself, which is definitely not an unbiased source. In addition, the number of speakers is irrelevant anyway. There are many many natural languages in existence that are definitely notable but which have no more surviving speakers. Besides, constructed languages are generally written in academia and it's very frequent that, although nobody speaks the language, it influenced other post-dated languages or created new schools of thought. Just because nobody speaks it currently does not mean it had a big influence, hence making it notable and worthy of inclusion in Knowledge (XXG). --

61: 31: 1074:. quantity enough to be able to see its relations (differences and commonalities) with other languages. And i fully disagree with Cyde Weys: no, binary currents do not make a language, just as pulling strings 1x (for hello) or 2x (for my) or 3x (for name) or 4x (for is) or 5x (for ActiveSelective) etc... etc... does not make a language! -- 1021:. I think finding a language with a very small lexicon would in itself be extremely notable, especially if that language was able to express the entire range of ideas that it takes English tens of thousands of words to do. Hell, at the most basic level computer languages only have a lexicon of two but they're still notable. -- 821:

fail many clearly notable real life natural languages. Also, it's very biased against alien languages that may be totally different from what we're used to. Granted, we haven't run into any aliens (yet?), but there are interesting scifi languages that don't adhere to our biased human views of what a language should be. --

4219:), to the notability of the conculture it's associated with, etc. This criterion would apply only when the main article about the author or the medium is getting too long, so that spinning off their minor conlangs as separate articles is justified; having several stubby articles about closely related items is undesirable. 88:

Since no one is likely to argue that a language with a million speakers is not notable, "oppose" is not an option here. Therefore, please specify how many speakers can warrant inclusion of the language on its own (MAJOR), and how many speakers can warrant inclusion of the language in combination with

4171:). Pressure has been put on SIL to correct a number of shortcomings in its codes, but we're not yet sure what they'll do with this bunch of conlangs. That's the background to the codes, and it's all rather confused. Therefore, I cannot really see this becoming a major criterion in the near future. -- 843:

A 'sufficiently large' vocabulary means one that's large enough to carry on normal conversations. Also include in your opinion what a 'sufficiently large' vocabulary is; if approved, the average (rounded to two significant figures) will be used to determine what 'sufficiently large' for our purposes

555:

While this is certainly an important factor in deciding whether the language is worthwhile learning, I don’t think we should blindly include an article on a languages just because it is “complete”. For example, it is pretty easy to take a set of basic words, make up translations for them, decide on

2085:

oral in nature ... I say "were" because they're mostly dead to us now. But I can conceive of a constructed language being very notable without there being a way to write it down. Of course, writing an article on it might be difficult ... maybe just relegate it to Spoken Knowledge (XXG) only? :-/

820:

The guidelines given are very biased to specific types of languages, i.e. if a difference is denoted between quoted speech and direct speech. You know what? It'd be very interesting to make a language that didn't have such a distinction. The guidelines given are very "civilized"-biased and would

384:

I agree with Zocky. The estimates for Esperanto, Interlingua, and Ido are the sheerest guesstimates. An inclusion criterion should be something concrete. Maximum number of conference attendees would work. Still, there are historically significant conlangs (Novial, Idiom Neutral) that have never had

2155:

23:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC). This would seem logical, after all Knowledge (XXG) is intended as a reference for people interested in a subject. So a conlang that is widely known and attracts media attention (er... Klingon?) shouldn't necessarily need academic references. However, the requirement

4342:

Now that we have determined which of the nine criteria can be counted as major criteria, as minor criteria or shouldn't be counted at all, we must establish under which conditions a conlang warrants its own article. Since a MAJOR CRITERION is defined as a criterion that justifies inclusion on its

2663:

Excluding Knowledge (XXG) and clones. First, we perform a simple google search for the name of the language; when that search also points to pages that are completely unrelated, we should google for "CONLANG NAME" + "AUTHOR'S SURNAME"; if the search result is dominated by wikipedia and clones, we

358:

I don't think the number of speakers should have anything to do with determining a language's notability. First of all, there's no good way to get these figures. For the smaller constructed languages the only people who are going to have any sort of information on how many speak the language is

569:

I will agree that it should be a minor consideration to the extent that languages that are complete generally had more time put into them than those that aren't, and thus are of somewhat more notability. I think this criteria should be used primarily to differentiate between legitimate academic

3672:

Yes. But there should clearly be a relationship between the notability of the medium and that of the language. A conlang that plays a central role in a not-too-well-known work of fiction would merit inclusion, a conlang that plays a minor role in an extremely-famous work of fiction too.

2190:

by Joe Blow, NYU art student, is in all likelihood not worth an article. Same goes for conlangs -- Esperanto, Klingon, Tolkien's languages, Volapuk, yes. Brithenig, maybe. But I wouldn't write an article about the Romance conlang I created in 11th grade -- it would be utterly pointless.

85:, either now or in the past. Keep in mind that it is pretty hard to get reliable data about the number of speakers of a language; even the creator of a language himself probably won't be able to tell precisely. Besides, it's hard to establish the actual proficiency of a speaker. 2334:

is the most extensive resource about constructed languages available on the Internet. One of its features is a Top-200 of most popular conlangs. Note that this subcriterion can be gamed by the creator(s) of the language, although it would require some considerable effort.

2823:. Who would seriously be trying to "game the system" with the only purpose to have his conlang qualify for inclusion in WP? BTW, the average Bored Teenager wouldn't even be able to initiate such a discussion or participate in it, so what are we talking about anyway? -- 1340:, making it very non-unique, but it is definitely notable. Hell, it made Today's Featured Article! My votes for "yes" for the following means of determining uniqueness, such as "an extreme grammar or vocabulary", reflect this same type of "positive criterion". -- 1285:"if an artificial language has some particularly remarkable features that make it stand out between others" is exactly the same as stating that "if an artificial language is notable". Indeed, the requirement is a bit pointless to have in addition to notability. -- 2344:

As long as the language has a complete grammar, morphology, lexicon, phonology, and list of phonetic sounds. Then this counts as "minor" support (there are a lot of non-notable languages on that list, but it does count. Top ten counts more, of course)

2022:

Yes, a major criterion. However, now that anyone can self-publish his own conlang with extreme ease, we need to restrict this criterion. I'd like conlangs to have books written in or about them, or to have attracted attention in academic publications. —

2177:

I would think this the single most important criterion when dealing with conlangs. One has to consider conlangs in general as works of art, as auxiliary languages are rather pointless to invent. Put it this way -- you'd obviously have an article about

332:

Having few or no speakers would not exclude a langauge from being notable. (Hypothetically, a constructed language could be of academic significance in terms of philosophy of language, linguistics, or the like without having any fluent speakers.)

848:

It sounds like the average you're planning on taking is the mean. Please don't; that's arbitrary and is screwed up by voters at the extremes. (What if someone voted "a billion"?) Take the median instead, because this is a perfect example of where

1866:

Please specify first whether you think publication should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all. If you think ISBN numbers, sales figures and the like should be a factor too, please make note of that in a comment.

2860:

for the sole purpose of stealing other players' passwords on established MMORPGs. Inventing a hoax language and exploiting weak inclusion guidelines is considerably simpler. Constructed languages appeal to an overlapping demographic.

1882:

09:18, September 8, 2005 (UTC) If books have been written in or about the language and fit Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria for being a notable book, it adds to the language's notability. (IIRC sales figures play a role in that criterion) -

1378:

09:14, September 8, 2005 (UTC) A lot of conlang creators create a fancy script or odd/extreme grammar to make their language look good, but it says more about their artistic views than about the notability of the language itself. -

1862:

The fourth criterion for notability is the question: has it been published? Or, more precisely, have books been written about or in the language, have articles been written about it in the popular or scientific press, etc.?

474:

Yes. Languages exist for communication. A language should be sufficiently developed that it could be of use, unless some other very significant factor (such as use in a successful work of fiction) creates an exception.

922:

1500 words unless the language is clearly domain specific. It doesn't matter how the words have been created. The exception being a language with clear notability (e.g. A lot of Tolkein's stuff didn't have 1500 words)

241:

5000. But other aspects of notability might overcome a failure to meet this threshhold. I'd use this as a "kill" criterion if the language isn't otherwise notable (for its creator, its place in conlang history, etc.). |

1263:

The following factors have been proposed that can make a language unique: an extreme grammar or vocabulary; a unique script; plausible historical derivation from another language; achieving challenging artistic goals.

652:

Completeness is easy (but fuzzy) to figure out by a linguist, the two rules are: One, it has to be functional, every basic construction must be considered (comparison, conditions, facts, hipotesis, the list

1331:

Isn't unique just another way of saying notable? I'll rate this a positive minor criterion - if a language is unique that does help it in terms of notability but not being unique shouldn't hurt it. Hell,

628:

No. Absolutely not. It is easy to come up with a full grammar, phonology, phonetics, and lexicon - you just need to keep it simple. I am a professional academic in the field of comparative linguistics.--

2440:

That list is far too inclusive - there are "personal" conlangs on there ranked well into the top 50, some of which don't even appear to be actively spoken or supported. It's not a useful criterion. |

3217:

With the proviso that there's enough that can be said about the language to turn it into a decent-sized article. Otherwise, it's better to include it in the article about the inspired conlang. --

2664:

should google for "CONLANG NAME" (+ "AUTHOR'S SURNAME") "-wikipedia". Searching for "CONLANG NAME" + "language" should be avoided, the search would neglect texts in other languages than English.

982:

Unimportant if the grammar and number of speakers criteria are met (in my view anyway), otherwise should be at least 5,000 unless there is some independent source of notability (e.g. Tolkein). -

3080:, with the proviso that it is sustained interest (newspapers and news programmes can sometimes struggle to fill all the space - stories on eccentrics released on a slow news day may result) 2000:

Clearly a major criterion if restricted to published in rather than published about. Languages are for communication, if they have never been used for that purpose they are not languages--

2454:

As far as I am concerned, there are other important criteria for notability than just being actively spoken or supported. Artistic languages are rarely meant to be spoken by anybody. --

1005:

No. Several notable languages, e.g. Tolkein's, have minimal amounts of words. What about "the first ever language to be discovered with only 10 words". It would certainly be notable,

445:

Completeness can be measured by using three criteria: lexicon size, a complete grammar, and a substantial number of texts written in the language to prove its expressive capability.

1982:

Absolutely a major criterion. And I'm opposed against making any more subtile distinctions regarding ISBN numbers, vanity press, sales figures and the like. Published = published. --

2081:

It's entirely possible to develop a constructed language that is entirely oral in nature, thus nothing about it is published. There are a large variety of natural languages that

560:, you have a brand new complete constructed language. To merit an encyclopedia article, however, I think your language needs to have some additional interesting properties. — 2728:

500 would do. If there are reasons to be suspicious about these 500 (if, say, 90% of it are self-spreading sites like Knowledge (XXG) and DMOZ), the number can be raised. --

1322:

Historical plausibility holds weight. If someone constructed a syncretic version of Icelandic and Aleut based on the hypothesis of Vikings settling Canada I'd be impressed.

4211:

The eighth, and last, criterion for possible inclusion is whether a constructed language can owe its significance to the overall importance of its creator (for example,

1260:. In other words, if an artificial language has some particularly remarkable features that make it stand out between others, can that fact contribute to its notability? 648:

The second question is: how is "completeness" established? If you have voted SUPPORT, please specify which of the following conditions must be fulfilled to qualify.

3469:

I'll say. Isn't that what we're trying to do know, figure out how to determnie whether a conlang has established notability outside of the conlanger community? --

992: 774: 494: 174: 1460:. In my view, this says more about the quality of a conlang, but not much about notability. A truly high-standard language would quality for other reasons, too. 161:. Any higher figure would be pointless, since only four or five languages would exceed this figure, and they would qualify for inclusion for other reasons, too. 3414:

Agreed with Requiem. A conlang that no one outside the conlang world knows is simply not notable. This is a great way to thin the stand of conlang articles. |

66:

This straw poll, formerly designated "Votes", has been closed to discourage voting as a means of reaching consensus. Please DO NOT VOTE, and discuss on the

3525:

Definitely. Such an example also helps to understand the genre and the conlanging, even if the genre itself only contains 2 or 3 maybe-maybenot-conlangs.

313:

500. Any language with more than 500 speakers represents a notable community. However this isn't a critical criterion as per L33tminion in Oppose below.

2920: 92:

Note that only a few artificial languages have a number of speakers higher than 100, and no more than three have a number of speakers higher than 1000.

45:

Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the

2914:

Damn hard to count (and what the heck is an extended discussion? We've got to find a definition for that one first, before using it as an argument.

893:

real-world vocabulary in superset languages (if you create an artificial slang to a natural language, the lexicon of this language is not included).

2117:

The fifth proposed criterion for notability is a set of factors that can be grouped under the header "reputation". They deal with questions like:

4467:

enough for to merit inclusion on its own (depends on which criteria is fulfilled and the extent to which and manner in which it is fulfilled). --

164:

5000, as Caerwine says. There are between 100,000 and 3,000,000 speakers of Esperanto, so 5% of the lower figure seems a reasonable guideline. -

4168: 3737:

Please specify first whether you think the oldness of a language should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all.

4547: 4486: 2156:

should be widespread and sustained attention, not the odd 'colour' article that newspapers do on eccentrics now and then to fill the space.

2093: 1799: 1724: 1636: 1516: 1347: 1217: 1028: 828: 577: 366: 67: 46: 3852:

Yes, but they were too busy getting themselves fired as Alexander Graham Bell's first telephone operators to anticipate Knowledge (XXG).

136:

5000. The 5000 interested or affected people threshold has been used for other areas, I see no reason to seek a different level here.

1909:

Yes. Of course, "publish" can include being part of a science fantasy or fantasy story or book published by a major book publisher.

4429: 4253: 4058: 3985: 3802: 3626: 3583:

and are extensively documented. Where verifiable and referenced such articles should be included. (see also the seperate criterion "

3538: 3395: 3351: 3260: 3119: 2975: 2709: 2547: 2355: 2209: 1940: 1837: 1762: 1683: 1563: 1416: 1139: 936: 801: 328:

Have your say here if you don't think number of speakers should be a criterion in determining notability of a constructed language.

117: 4121:

The short list of conlangs on ISO 639-3 appears to have been picked completely randomly. But as a minor criterion, it would do. --

4222:

Please specify whether you think notability by proxy should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all.

4562: 448:

Please specify first whether you think completeness should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all.

3723:, 1950 (post-WWII) was when the personal constructed language really exploded; there are only 78 known conlangs before then. 2134:

Please specify first whether you think reputation should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all.

1267:

Please specify first whether you think uniqueness should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all.

983: 765: 485: 165: 4438: 4262: 4067: 3994: 3811: 3635: 3547: 3404: 3360: 3269: 3128: 2984: 2718: 2605:

09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) No. People often try to create controversy to get attention. It's not the other way around.

2556: 2364: 2218: 1949: 1846: 1771: 1692: 1572: 1425: 1148: 945: 810: 224:

How many speakers are required to warrant inclusion of the language in combination with other criteria? Please specify N.

126: 3144:

Yes, without the proviso made by Average Earthman: in my view, this is making things more complicated than necessary. --

461:

significant factor. It would be easy for me to say I have created a language called "Samian" (not to be confused with

2043: 1582:

My measure for what to exclude is this: what could six bored teenagers foist upon the world during a summer vacation?

996: 778: 498: 420: 178: 1206:. It's conceivable a language could be constructed that is so complex that nothing could be written using it. See 4164: 4039:

Please specify whether you think this should be a major criterion, a minor criterion, or not a criterion at all.

1477:

If you have voted SUPPORT, please specify for each of the following whether it can make a language unique or not.

410: 209:

50 Any Conlang that has a following should be noted, we should make a list of all conlangs and where there from --

4184: 3891: 3374: 3166: 3026: 2649: 2480: 2027: 657:, I just don't know it yet). And two it has to have a productive vocabulary. That is about 500-800 words i guess. 230:

In a sense, having a language that exists without any speakers is itself kind of interesting and thus notable...

4391: 3654:

conlangs are known to millions. A book that barely met Knowledge (XXG)'s minimum for notability - not likely.

2751: 2508: 2271:"Reputation" by itself is a murky concept, but I support the inclusion of some of the criteria listed below. -- 2066: 1472:

Any distinct language must be in some way unique, so this means nothing--BirgitteSB 18:00, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

484:

Absolutely. It's what distinguises a genuine conlang from a collection of random sounds in a sci-fi series. -

394:

The number of speakers shouldn't have a bearing on the notability of a conlang, for the reasons stated above.

201: 3923:

If you voted SUPPORT, would that apply to languages created before 1950 or to languages created before 1900?

4235: 3951: 3751: 3601: 3464: 3200: 3063: 2603: 2147: 1888: 1880: 1384: 1376: 4036:

The seventh criterion is whether the language has an ISO code in any of ISO 639-1, ISO 639-2 or ISO 639-3.

187:

50,000 unless significant on the world stage in some other way (e.g. Michael Jackson's secret language). --

4359: 4316: 4103: 3975: 3791: 3642:

Yes, although I'd set the bar for the language somewhat higher than the bar for the parent fiction. I.E.

3476: 3340: 3249: 3108: 2964: 2886: 2694: 2623: 2430: 2306: 2278: 1929: 1893:

Also, this is a significant criterion because the information about the language in the article has to be

1396: 618: 1229:. A better indicator than vocabulary size, but a constructed language could be notable for other things. 4373: 4284: 4125: 4016: 3873: 3838: 3776: 3677: 3572: 3511: 3430: 3418: 3303: 3221: 3148: 3098: 3081: 3008: 2827: 2732: 2578: 2458: 2444: 2384: 2241: 2157: 2152: 1986: 1448: 1180: 968: 750: 738: 541: 258: 246: 149: 570:

constructed languages and crap made up for a scifi show that never had a linguist anywhere near it. --

38: 30: 17: 4471: 4400: 4244: 4181: 4088: 3960: 3903: 3888: 3775:- a conland surviving beyond its original creator suggests something more than one obsessive's hobby 3767: 3610: 3445: 3371: 3318: 3209: 3163: 3072: 3023: 2760: 2646: 2477: 2408: 2256: 2169: 2024: 1901: 1655: 1614: 1535: 1494: 1314: 1295: 1109: 1075: 914: 683: 561: 521: 465:); it is not-so-easy to come up with a full grammar, phonology, phonetic set of sounds, and lexicon. 350: 337: 108: 1159: 708: 4387: 3664: 3415: 2906: 2747: 2504: 2441: 2062: 1967: 1591: 1436: 850: 735: 243: 197: 3719:

The sixth possible criterion for inclusion is that the language is older than usual. According to

2939:

This includes books, magazine articles, online peer-reviewed journals, moderated newsgroups, etc.

2319:

Secondly, if you have voted SUPPORT, please specify which of the following can make the criterion

2001: 734:

This is a must. Even "popular" fictional languages that lack grammars aren't worthy of entries. |

4231: 3947: 3747: 3597: 3460: 3196: 3059: 2599: 2143: 1975:

Yes, since it is quite hard to write a decent article on a non-documented language. (unsigned by

1884: 1876: 1380: 1372: 4237:

09:34, September 8, 2005 (UTC) I see this as a majorly important form of reputation (see above).

100:

How many speakers are required to merit inclusion of the language on its own? Please specify N.

4163:, who is the registering authority, is not really interested in conlangs. This may account for 4496: 4495:

I agree with L33minion and Cyde sometimes something might be minor but it is still important--

3692: 3650: 3580: 3350:

As said above: "No conlang could do this without already meeting other notability criteria" --

2785: 2399: 2103: 1809: 1734: 1646: 1526: 1357: 1053: 587: 210: 2237:

If a conlang has acquired a certain amount of fame, that should merit inclusion on itself. --

4542:

Thank you for participating! If you have any comments to this poll, please leave them here.

4522: 4370: 4281: 4122: 4013: 3870: 3835: 3674: 3508: 3427: 3300: 3218: 3145: 3005: 2824: 2729: 2575: 2455: 2381: 2238: 1983: 1445: 1242: 1177: 965: 865: 747: 596: 538: 314: 298: 255: 146: 3720: 2299:

A conlang's reputation should proceed from other criteria, not be a criterion in itself. --

955:

Somewhere in the four figures, unless notable for inclusion in a well-known artistic work.

890:"virtual" vocabulary (10 prefixes, 10 suffixes and 100 word roots do not make 10,000 words) 4468: 4241: 4085: 3957: 3764: 3607: 3291: 3206: 3069: 2566: 2372: 2166: 2165:

I would specify that this should be satisfied by either popular or academic attention. --

2040: 1898: 1622: 1611: 1502: 1491: 1311: 1277: 1106: 911: 726: 680: 518: 417: 346: 334: 231: 105: 2503:

That list may be POV and should not be included as part of Knowledge (XXG) criteria. --

1210:(Hello World doesn't count). This isn't inherently a measure of notability, though. -- 4357: 4314: 4212: 4101: 3973: 3789: 3568: 3474: 3338: 3247: 3106: 2962: 2884: 2692: 2621: 2428: 2304: 2276: 2192: 1927: 1394: 616: 81:

The first suggested, and best-known, criterion that can make a language notable is its

4556: 3576: 2915: 1976: 1407: 1294:

Since it sets a new direction within conlanging, or the boundaries of conlanging. --

1194:

substantially more than 5,000,000 words. This is equivalent to five entire novels. --

1127: 1071: 764:

Again, absolutely. A language with no grammar is not formally a language, surely? -

700: 529: 442:. The question is: can the completeness of a language contribute to its notability? 137: 4530: 4499: 4490: 4474: 4448: 4403: 4394: 4382: 4364: 4321: 4293: 4275: 4267: 4247: 4187: 4175: 4134: 4116: 4108: 4091: 4072: 4052: 4025: 4007: 3999: 3980: 3963: 3906: 3894: 3882: 3856: 3847: 3825: 3816: 3796: 3779: 3770: 3731: 3695: 3686: 3667: 3658: 3621: 3613: 3552: 3520: 3490: 3481: 3448: 3439: 3421: 3409: 3377: 3365: 3345: 3321: 3312: 3294: 3274: 3254: 3230: 3212: 3169: 3157: 3139: 3113: 3092: 3084: 3075: 3029: 3017: 2998: 2989: 2969: 2952:

Please specify N. The average value (rounded) will be used it this criterion passes.

2925: 2909: 2900: 2891: 2865: 2836: 2815:

Please specify N. The average value (rounded) will be used if this criterion passes.

2788: 2779: 2763: 2754: 2741: 2723: 2699: 2682: 2673:

Please specify N. The average value (rounded) will be used it this criterion passes.

2652: 2637: 2628: 2611: 2587: 2569: 2561: 2511: 2498: 2483: 2467: 2447: 2435: 2411: 2402: 2393: 2375: 2349: 2311: 2283: 2259: 2250: 2232: 2228:

A good means of distinguishing notability from pet projects in search of attention.

2223: 2203: 2195: 2172: 2160: 2106: 2097: 2069: 2047: 2030: 2017: 2004: 1995: 1970: 1961: 1934: 1913: 1904: 1851: 1828: 1812: 1803: 1776: 1753: 1737: 1728: 1697: 1674: 1658: 1649: 1640: 1625: 1617: 1594: 1586: 1577: 1554: 1538: 1529: 1520: 1505: 1497: 1467: 1457: 1439: 1430: 1410: 1401: 1360: 1351: 1326: 1317: 1298: 1289: 1280: 1245: 1233: 1221: 1198: 1189: 1171: 1162: 1153: 1130: 1121: 1112: 1078: 1056: 1044: 1032: 1013: 1000: 977: 959: 950: 927: 917: 873: 832: 815: 782: 759: 741: 729: 719: 711: 703: 694: 686: 667: 641: 632: 623: 599: 590: 581: 564: 550: 532: 524: 502: 479: 469: 424: 404: 389: 379: 370: 353: 340: 317: 306: 277: 267: 249: 234: 213: 204: 191: 182: 158: 140: 131: 111: 4216: 2534:. This could also include languages that have been mistaken for a real language. 270:. Again, very few languages would actually qualify using a relatively low number. 4511: 4445: 4272: 4113: 4049: 4004: 3853: 3822: 3655: 3618: 3487: 3136: 3089: 2995: 2897: 2862: 2776: 2679: 2634: 2608: 2490: 2346: 2229: 2200: 1958: 1910: 1825: 1750: 1671: 1583: 1551: 1323: 1168: 1118: 956: 924: 854: 716: 691: 476: 466: 396: 287: 3162:

Yes. I'm sympathetic to AE's proviso, but I wouldn't know how to measure it. —

2642:

Controversy is too strongly linked to just creating attention for its own sake.

4172: 3242:

No conlang could do this without already meeting other notability criteria. --

2935:

There exist at least N extended discussions of the language in edited sources:

2288:

Yes as minor to back up other criteria--BirgitteSB 18:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

2036: 2014: 1464: 1286: 1230: 1195: 1041: 1010: 638: 629: 413: 376: 274: 188: 3899:

Yes because it sugests sustainability--BirgitteSB 18:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

4481: 4353: 4310: 4156: 4148: 4144: 4140: 4097: 3969: 3785: 3728: 3644: 3470: 3334: 3243: 3102: 2958: 2880: 2688: 2617: 2531: 2488:

I don't see what a somewhat arbitrary list has to do with Knowledge (XXG).

2424: 2300: 2272: 2088: 1923: 1794: 1719: 1631: 1511: 1390: 1342: 1337: 1212: 1023: 880: 823: 612: 572: 386: 361: 2574:

Yes, per Requiem. I'd also like to exclude the Six Bored Teenagers, BTW. --

666:

It has been suggested that this criterion could be verified by using the "

595:

If a language is notably incomplete then it is not worth its own article.

2802:

This includes books, magazine articles, web pages, mailing list postings

2523: 2035:

Support. Without published sources, the article is impossible to verify.

1207: 4343:

own, how many of the minor criteria need to be fulfilled for inclusion?

4143:

code (this will not change). These five and three others have their own

699:

Definitely an necessary requirement, but not a sufficient requirement.

901:, that means that lexicon size is not a requirement for completeness. 3564: 2857: 1918:

If at least three books have been published in or about the language

1708:

Demonstrates plausible historical derivation from a natural language:

1167:

2500 words (which is three or four pages of text in some magazines).

1101:, that means that corpus size is not a requirement for completeness. 462: 3118:

Per Average Earthman. (this must be the last time i forget to sign)

2793:

No Googlr has too much bias--BirgitteSB 18:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

1463:

This is a really bad criterion. Everything is unique in some ways.

3507:

Yes. It's not like we have hundreds of different genres anyway. --

1783:

Demonstrates plausible historical derivation from another conlang:

2704:

500. Vorlin is one of the most famous conlangs and it gets about

879:

Vocabulary size can be established relatively easily by perusing

3563:

A lot of conlangs are created as part of works of fiction, like

2526:(created by an esperantist in order to cause a rift within the 1276:

Definitely an important criterion for determining notability.

1089:

One long text or a hundred short ones, or anything in between.

4160: 3384:

Has established notability outside of the conlanger community:

2527: 1333: 55: 25: 3281:

Has established notability inside of the conlanger community:

611:

It's too difficult to define "completeness" of a language. --

3834:

Weren't there any Bored Teenagers in the 19th century? ;) --

2798:

There exist at least N extended discussions of the language:

2331: 4167:

of 24 conlangs being rather odd (it was mostly lifted from

2930:

This makes no sense--BirgitteSB 18:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

787:

Yes Very neccessary--BirgitteSB 17:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

1601:

Sets itself challenging artistic goals, and achieves them:

429:

Not of importance--BirgitteSB 17:54, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

3466:

09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) Description is too vague.

3497:

Is known as the exponent of a particular conlang genre:

2775:

Quality, not quantity. Remember: Six Bored Teenagers.

1939:

Yes, as per l33tminion & Mgm (EDIT this was mine

4296:(but with respect to the conditions mentioned above) 2941:

by authors other than the creator(s) of the language

2804:

by authors other than the creator(s) of the language

2009:

Verifiablity is clearly the major criterion, as for

282:

That's absurd. Constructed languages shouldn't have

37:

This page is currently inactive and is retained for

3049:

Received attention in the popular/scientific media:

1356:

once again I find myself agreeing with Cyde Weys --

507:

Significant--BirgitteSB 17:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

1824:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1749:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1670:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1550:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1310:Artistic notability is one form of notability. -- 637:No. We're establishing notability, not usability. 3559:Is part of a well-known piece of written fiction: 2633:I'll call this the Six Bored Teenagers Standard. 1070:-- variety enough to have an expressive language 4506:Throw out this "straw" poll and use common sense 4215:), of the medium where it is used (for example, 2522:Languages that fall under this category include 2327:The language is in the Top-100 of Langmaker.com: 1040:. We're establishing notability, not usability. 883:. There seems to be consensus that we discount: 722:As above, necessary but not by itself sufficent. 438:The second criterion that has been suggested is 286:standards for inclusion than natural languages. 4147:codes. All other artificial languages have the 3821:Per the above, also Six Bored Teenagers-proof. 2371:I'd say this is sufficient, but not necessary. 725:Agreed. This is necessary but not sufficient. 4550:. Comments here would be counter-productive. 2856:I've known bored teenagers who created entire 1256:The third criterion that has been proposed is 2659:The languages produces at least N Googlehits: 2124:How much attention has the language received? 375:Hard to establish and not a good indicatior. 8: 2127:What influence has it had on other conlangs? 4415:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4299:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4192:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 3700:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2052:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4546:Discussion of this page is in progress at 3034:10--BirgitteSB 18:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2423:Notability is not a popularity contest. -- 2130:Has it caused any significant controversy? 4548:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Conlangs/Straw poll 3584: 2854:Why would anyone plant a vanity article? 2546:Yes, if the controversy was widespread. 1064:--BirgitteSB 17:58, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4139:There are five conlangs with their own 1922:, it's notable enough for inclusion. -- 1093:Has a public corpus of at least N words 4048:This indicates significant notability 3727:78 is undoubtedly an underestimate. -- 3394:wich is synonymous to notability... -- 7: 2518:The language has caused controversy: 1682:. Irrelevant. (EDIT: this was mine 220:Minor criterion: has/had N speakers 96:Major criterion: has/had N speakers 4377:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 4288:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 4159:is still in its draft format, and 4129:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 4020:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3877:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3842:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3681:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3515:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3434:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3307:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3225:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3152:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3012:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2831:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2736:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2582:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2462:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2388:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2245:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 1990:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 1452:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 1184:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 972:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 754:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 545:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 262:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 153:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 24: 2850:Why would anyone become a hacker? 2121:How widely known is the language? 1481:An extreme grammar or vocabulary: 1336:is almost entirely derivative of 385:much of a movement behind them.-- 3887:Per Average Earthman, Durova. — 3186:Inspired other notable conlangs: 905:A vocabulary of at least N words 556:a basic sentence structure, and 59: 29: 2879:Too easy to game the system. -- 4475:15:08, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 4248:14:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 4092:14:05, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3964:14:04, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3953:09:31, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3780:09:44, 29 September 2005 (UTC) 3771:14:04, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3753:09:31, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3614:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3603:09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3213:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3202:09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3085:09:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC) 3076:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3065:09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 2173:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 2161:23:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC) 2149:09:19, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 1905:13:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1890:09:18, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 1618:13:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1498:13:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1386:09:14, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 1318:13:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1113:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1097:Please specify N. If you pick 918:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 897:Please specify N. If you pick 687:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 525:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 341:13:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 112:13:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1: 4531:00:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC) 4491:01:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 4449:07:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 4395:21:58, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 4383:10:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4294:10:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4276:07:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 4188:15:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 4176:13:21, 30 November 2005 (UTC) 4135:10:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4117:07:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 4026:10:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4008:07:29, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3895:15:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3883:10:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3857:01:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 3848:10:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3826:07:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3732:03:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC) 3687:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3668:16:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 3659:07:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3521:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3491:07:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3440:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3422:20:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 3378:15:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3313:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3295:22:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 3231:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3170:15:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3158:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3140:07:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3030:15:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3018:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2999:07:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2926:20:23, 23 November 2005 (UTC) 2910:17:00, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 2901:07:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2866:01:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 2837:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2780:07:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2755:21:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2742:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2653:15:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2638:07:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2588:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2570:22:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 2512:21:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2499:01:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 2484:15:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2468:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2448:20:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 2394:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2376:22:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 2251:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2233:07:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2098:01:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 2070:21:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2048:16:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2031:15:14, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2018:12:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2005:17:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 1996:10:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 1971:16:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 1962:06:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1804:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1729:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1641:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1626:22:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 1595:16:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 1587:07:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1521:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1506:22:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 1468:11:59, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 1458:10:07, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 1440:16:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 1352:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1327:06:52, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1290:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 1281:22:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 1234:11:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 1222:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1199:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 1190:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 1172:06:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1163:00:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC) 1045:11:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 1033:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1014:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 1001:23:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 978:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 960:06:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 887:computer-generated vocabulary 874:23:19, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 833:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 783:23:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 760:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 742:20:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 730:22:04, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 720:06:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 712:00:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC) 642:11:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 633:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 582:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 565:10:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 551:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 503:23:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 480:06:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 425:16:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 405:01:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 390:02:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC) 380:11:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 371:01:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 354:10:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 307:22:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 278:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 268:10:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 250:20:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 235:22:03, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 205:21:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 192:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 183:23:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 159:09:59, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4365:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 4322:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 4268:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 4109:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 4073:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 4053:00:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 4000:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3981:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3817:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3797:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3622:00:50, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 3553:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3482:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3410:04:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3366:04:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3346:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3275:03:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3255:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3114:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3093:00:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2990:03:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2970:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2892:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2724:03:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2700:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2683:00:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2629:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2612:00:56, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2562:03:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2436:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2350:00:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2312:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2284:09:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2224:03:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2204:00:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1935:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 1914:00:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1852:03:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1829:00:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1777:03:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1754:00:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1698:03:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1675:00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1578:03:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1555:00:53, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1431:03:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1411:03:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 1406:Too wishy-washy a criteria. 1402:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 1154:03:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1131:03:52, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 1122:00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 951:03:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 928:00:43, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 816:03:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 704:03:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 695:00:41, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 624:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 533:03:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 470:00:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 141:03:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 132:03:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 4500:09:26, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4404:17:50, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3907:17:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3696:09:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 3449:18:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3333:Too difficult to define. -- 3322:17:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2789:09:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2764:17:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2412:17:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2403:09:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2260:17:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2255:I agree with Jan above. -- 2196:03:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC) 2107:09:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1813:09:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1738:09:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1659:17:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1650:09:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1539:17:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1530:08:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1361:08:52, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1299:17:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1287:Victim of signature fascism 1246:16:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1196:Victim of signature fascism 1079:16:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1057:08:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1011:Victim of signature fascism 630:Victim of signature fascism 600:16:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 591:08:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 318:16:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 275:Victim of signature fascism 214:08:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 189:Victim of signature fascism 4579: 2645:No, per Mgm and others. — 1920:by three different authors 2476:No, per Angr and Klaw. — 1052:I agree with Cyde Weys -- 4479:Ditto on L33tminion. -- 1389:Impossible to define. -- 457:Yes. I think this is a 89:other criteria (MINOR). 18:Knowledge (XXG):Conlangs 2687:100,000 Google hits. -- 1009:it has so few words. -- 800:Not enough by itself -- 4563:Inactive project pages 1703:Doesn't matter at all. 409:Oppose, on grounds of 4463:A minor criterion is 4455:otherwise, namely ... 3573:The Lord of the Rings 3486:Six Bored Teenagers. 2896:Six Bored Teenagers. 2848:This is like asking, 4537:Comment Solicitation 3135:Yes, per the above. 2678:10,000 Google hits. 2102:I agree with Cyde -- 668:Lingua Questionnaire 4207:Notability by proxy 3585:Notability by proxy 851:Median Voter Theory 662:A complete grammar: 4420:1 major or 4 minor 4410:1 major or 3 minor 4347:1 major or 2 minor 83:number of speakers 77:Number of speakers 3651:Lord of the Rings 3581:The Wheel of Time 2924: 2496: 2380:Well, why not? -- 1966:Per the above. -- 402: 74: 73: 54: 53: 4570: 4528: 4525: 4518: 4515: 4459:Please specify. 4434: 4380: 4361: 4318: 4291: 4258: 4132: 4105: 4063: 4023: 3990: 3977: 3880: 3845: 3807: 3793: 3777:Average Earthman 3715:Year of creation 3684: 3631: 3543: 3518: 3478: 3437: 3400: 3356: 3342: 3310: 3265: 3251: 3228: 3155: 3124: 3110: 3099:Average Earthman 3082:Average Earthman 3015: 2980: 2966: 2919: 2888: 2834: 2739: 2714: 2696: 2625: 2585: 2552: 2497: 2495: 2493: 2465: 2432: 2391: 2360: 2308: 2280: 2248: 2214: 2158:Average Earthman 2153:Average Earthman 1993: 1945: 1931: 1842: 1767: 1688: 1568: 1455: 1421: 1398: 1187: 1144: 1138:. Irrelevant. -- 987: 975: 941: 871: 868: 861: 858: 806: 769: 757: 620: 548: 489: 403: 401: 399: 304: 301: 294: 291: 265: 169: 156: 122: 63: 62: 56: 50: 33: 26: 4578: 4577: 4573: 4572: 4571: 4569: 4568: 4567: 4553: 4552: 4539: 4526: 4523: 4516: 4513: 4508: 4489: 4457: 4442: 4430: 4422: 4412: 4401:ActiveSelective 4379: 4374: 4362: 4349: 4340: 4330: 4319: 4306: 4304:Support (minor) 4290: 4285: 4266: 4254: 4228: 4226:Support (major) 4209: 4199: 4131: 4126: 4106: 4081: 4079:Support (minor) 4071: 4059: 4045: 4043:Support (major) 4034: 4022: 4017: 3998: 3986: 3978: 3944: 3934: 3929: 3927:Created before: 3915: 3904:ActiveSelective 3879: 3874: 3844: 3839: 3815: 3803: 3794: 3760: 3758:Support (minor) 3743: 3741:Support (major) 3717: 3707: 3683: 3678: 3639: 3627: 3593: 3561: 3551: 3539: 3532: 3517: 3512: 3504: 3499: 3479: 3457: 3446:ActiveSelective 3436: 3431: 3408: 3396: 3391: 3386: 3370:Per requiem. — 3364: 3352: 3343: 3330: 3319:ActiveSelective 3309: 3304: 3288: 3283: 3273: 3261: 3252: 3239: 3227: 3222: 3193: 3188: 3178: 3154: 3149: 3132: 3120: 3111: 3056: 3051: 3041: 3014: 3009: 2988: 2976: 2967: 2949: 2937: 2889: 2876: 2833: 2828: 2812: 2800: 2772: 2761:ActiveSelective 2746:1,000 hits. -- 2738: 2733: 2722: 2710: 2697: 2670: 2661: 2626: 2596: 2584: 2579: 2560: 2548: 2540: 2520: 2491: 2489: 2464: 2459: 2433: 2420: 2409:ActiveSelective 2398:works for me -- 2390: 2385: 2368: 2356: 2341: 2329: 2309: 2295: 2281: 2268: 2266:Support (minor) 2257:ActiveSelective 2247: 2242: 2222: 2210: 2140: 2138:Support (major) 2115: 2096: 2078: 2059: 2057:Support (minor) 2046: 2011:everything else 1992: 1987: 1957:Per the above. 1953: 1941: 1932: 1873: 1871:Support (major) 1860: 1850: 1838: 1821: 1802: 1790: 1785: 1775: 1763: 1746: 1727: 1715: 1710: 1696: 1684: 1667: 1656:ActiveSelective 1639: 1608: 1603: 1576: 1564: 1562:. Irrelevant -- 1547: 1536:ActiveSelective 1519: 1488: 1483: 1454: 1449: 1429: 1417: 1399: 1369: 1350: 1307: 1305:Support (minor) 1296:ActiveSelective 1273: 1271:Support (major) 1254: 1220: 1186: 1181: 1152: 1140: 1095: 1087: 1076:ActiveSelective 1031: 994: 985: 974: 969: 949: 937: 907: 869: 866: 859: 856: 841: 831: 814: 802: 794: 776: 767: 756: 751: 676: 664: 621: 608: 580: 562:Daniel Brockman 547: 542: 514: 512:Support (minor) 496: 487: 454: 452:Support (major) 436: 423: 397: 395: 369: 351:Daniel Brockman 326: 302: 299: 292: 289: 264: 259: 222: 176: 167: 155: 150: 130: 118: 98: 79: 60: 44: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4576: 4574: 4566: 4565: 4555: 4554: 4538: 4535: 4534: 4533: 4507: 4504: 4503: 4502: 4493: 4485: 4477: 4456: 4453: 4452: 4451: 4443: 4436: 4432:Requiem the 18 4426: 4421: 4418: 4417: 4416: 4411: 4408: 4407: 4406: 4397: 4388:King of Hearts 4385: 4375: 4367: 4358: 4348: 4345: 4339: 4336: 4335: 4334: 4329: 4326: 4325: 4324: 4315: 4305: 4302: 4301: 4300: 4297: 4286: 4278: 4270: 4260: 4256:Requiem the 18 4250: 4238: 4227: 4224: 4213:J.R.R. Tolkien 4208: 4205: 4204: 4203: 4198: 4195: 4194: 4193: 4190: 4180:Per Gareth. — 4178: 4154: 4137: 4127: 4119: 4111: 4102: 4094: 4080: 4077: 4076: 4075: 4065: 4061:Requiem the 18 4055: 4044: 4041: 4033: 4030: 4029: 4028: 4018: 4010: 4002: 3992: 3988:Requiem the 18 3983: 3974: 3966: 3954: 3943: 3940: 3939: 3938: 3933: 3930: 3928: 3925: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3914: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3900: 3897: 3885: 3875: 3867: 3866: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3862: 3861: 3860: 3859: 3840: 3819: 3809: 3805:Requiem the 18 3799: 3790: 3782: 3773: 3759: 3756: 3755: 3754: 3742: 3739: 3735: 3734: 3716: 3713: 3712: 3711: 3706: 3703: 3702: 3701: 3698: 3689: 3679: 3670: 3661: 3640: 3633: 3629:Requiem the 18 3624: 3616: 3604: 3592: 3589: 3569:J.R.R. Tolkien 3560: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3545: 3541:Requiem the 18 3536: 3531: 3528: 3527: 3526: 3523: 3513: 3503: 3500: 3498: 3495: 3494: 3493: 3484: 3475: 3467: 3456: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3442: 3432: 3424: 3412: 3402: 3398:Requiem the 18 3390: 3387: 3385: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3368: 3358: 3354:Requiem the 18 3348: 3339: 3329: 3326: 3325: 3324: 3315: 3305: 3297: 3287: 3284: 3282: 3279: 3278: 3277: 3267: 3263:Requiem the 18 3257: 3248: 3238: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3223: 3215: 3203: 3192: 3189: 3187: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3177: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3160: 3150: 3142: 3133: 3126: 3122:Requiem the 18 3116: 3107: 3101:'s proviso. -- 3095: 3087: 3078: 3066: 3055: 3052: 3050: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3040: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3032: 3022:60 will do. — 3020: 3010: 3002: 2992: 2982: 2978:Requiem the 18 2972: 2963: 2948: 2945: 2936: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2928: 2912: 2903: 2894: 2885: 2875: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2840: 2839: 2829: 2811: 2808: 2799: 2796: 2795: 2794: 2791: 2782: 2771: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2759:1,000 hits -- 2757: 2748:King of Hearts 2744: 2734: 2726: 2716: 2712:Requiem the 18 2702: 2693: 2685: 2669: 2666: 2660: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2643: 2640: 2631: 2622: 2614: 2606: 2595: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2580: 2572: 2564: 2554: 2550:Requiem the 18 2544: 2539: 2536: 2530:movement) and 2519: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2505:King of Hearts 2501: 2486: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2460: 2438: 2429: 2419: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2405: 2396: 2386: 2378: 2369: 2362: 2358:Requiem the 18 2352: 2340: 2337: 2328: 2325: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2305: 2294: 2291: 2290: 2289: 2286: 2277: 2267: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2253: 2243: 2235: 2226: 2216: 2212:Requiem the 18 2206: 2198: 2175: 2163: 2150: 2139: 2136: 2132: 2131: 2128: 2125: 2122: 2114: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2100: 2092: 2077: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2063:King of Hearts 2058: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2050: 2039: 2033: 2020: 2007: 1998: 1988: 1980: 1973: 1964: 1955: 1947: 1943:Requiem the 18 1937: 1928: 1916: 1907: 1891: 1872: 1869: 1859: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1844: 1840:Requiem the 18 1831: 1820: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1806: 1798: 1789: 1786: 1784: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1769: 1765:Requiem the 18 1756: 1745: 1742: 1741: 1740: 1731: 1723: 1714: 1711: 1709: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1701: 1690: 1686:Requiem the 18 1677: 1666: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1652: 1643: 1635: 1628: 1620: 1607: 1604: 1602: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1589: 1580: 1570: 1566:Requiem the 18 1557: 1546: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1532: 1523: 1515: 1508: 1500: 1487: 1484: 1482: 1479: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1470: 1461: 1450: 1442: 1433: 1423: 1419:Requiem the 18 1413: 1404: 1395: 1387: 1368: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1354: 1346: 1329: 1320: 1306: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1292: 1283: 1272: 1269: 1253: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1241:As per above. 1236: 1224: 1216: 1201: 1192: 1182: 1176:5000 words. -- 1174: 1165: 1156: 1146: 1142:Requiem the 18 1133: 1124: 1115: 1094: 1091: 1086: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1065: 1059: 1047: 1035: 1027: 1016: 1003: 991: 980: 970: 962: 953: 943: 939:Requiem the 18 930: 920: 906: 903: 895: 894: 891: 888: 877: 876: 853:should apply. 840: 837: 836: 835: 827: 818: 808: 804:Requiem the 18 793: 790: 789: 788: 785: 773: 762: 752: 744: 732: 723: 714: 706: 697: 689: 675: 672: 663: 660: 659: 658: 646: 645: 644: 635: 626: 617: 607: 604: 603: 602: 593: 584: 576: 567: 553: 543: 535: 527: 513: 510: 509: 508: 505: 493: 482: 472: 453: 450: 435: 432: 431: 430: 427: 416: 407: 392: 382: 373: 365: 356: 343: 325: 322: 321: 320: 311: 310: 309: 271: 260: 252: 239: 238: 237: 221: 218: 217: 216: 207: 198:King of Hearts 194: 185: 173: 162: 151: 143: 134: 124: 120:Requiem the 18 114: 97: 94: 78: 75: 72: 71: 64: 52: 51: 43: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4575: 4564: 4561: 4560: 4558: 4551: 4549: 4544: 4543: 4536: 4532: 4529: 4520: 4519: 4510: 4509: 4505: 4501: 4498: 4494: 4492: 4488: 4484: 4483: 4478: 4476: 4473: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4454: 4450: 4447: 4444: 4440: 4435: 4433: 4427: 4424: 4423: 4419: 4414: 4413: 4409: 4405: 4402: 4398: 4396: 4393: 4389: 4386: 4384: 4381: 4378: 4372: 4368: 4366: 4363: 4355: 4351: 4350: 4346: 4344: 4338:Last question 4337: 4332: 4331: 4327: 4323: 4320: 4312: 4308: 4307: 4303: 4298: 4295: 4292: 4289: 4283: 4279: 4277: 4274: 4271: 4269: 4264: 4259: 4257: 4251: 4249: 4246: 4243: 4239: 4236: 4233: 4230: 4229: 4225: 4223: 4220: 4218: 4214: 4206: 4201: 4200: 4196: 4191: 4189: 4186: 4183: 4179: 4177: 4174: 4173:Gareth Hughes 4170: 4169:Linguist List 4166: 4162: 4158: 4152: 4150: 4146: 4142: 4138: 4136: 4133: 4130: 4124: 4120: 4118: 4115: 4112: 4110: 4107: 4099: 4095: 4093: 4090: 4087: 4083: 4082: 4078: 4074: 4069: 4064: 4062: 4056: 4054: 4051: 4047: 4046: 4042: 4040: 4037: 4031: 4027: 4024: 4021: 4015: 4011: 4009: 4006: 4003: 4001: 3996: 3991: 3989: 3984: 3982: 3979: 3971: 3967: 3965: 3962: 3959: 3955: 3952: 3949: 3946: 3945: 3941: 3936: 3935: 3931: 3926: 3924: 3917: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3905: 3901: 3898: 3896: 3893: 3890: 3886: 3884: 3881: 3878: 3872: 3868: 3858: 3855: 3851: 3850: 3849: 3846: 3843: 3837: 3833: 3832: 3831: 3830: 3829: 3828: 3827: 3824: 3820: 3818: 3813: 3808: 3806: 3801:per Averange 3800: 3798: 3795: 3787: 3783: 3781: 3778: 3774: 3772: 3769: 3766: 3762: 3761: 3757: 3752: 3749: 3745: 3744: 3740: 3738: 3733: 3730: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3722: 3721:Langmaker.com 3714: 3709: 3708: 3704: 3699: 3697: 3694: 3690: 3688: 3685: 3682: 3676: 3671: 3669: 3666: 3662: 3660: 3657: 3653: 3652: 3647: 3646: 3641: 3637: 3632: 3630: 3625: 3623: 3620: 3617: 3615: 3612: 3609: 3605: 3602: 3599: 3595: 3594: 3590: 3588: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3577:Robert Jordan 3574: 3570: 3566: 3558: 3554: 3549: 3544: 3542: 3537: 3534: 3533: 3529: 3524: 3522: 3519: 3516: 3510: 3506: 3505: 3501: 3496: 3492: 3489: 3485: 3483: 3480: 3472: 3468: 3465: 3462: 3459: 3458: 3454: 3450: 3447: 3443: 3441: 3438: 3435: 3429: 3425: 3423: 3420: 3417: 3413: 3411: 3406: 3401: 3399: 3393: 3392: 3388: 3383: 3379: 3376: 3373: 3369: 3367: 3362: 3357: 3355: 3349: 3347: 3344: 3336: 3332: 3331: 3327: 3323: 3320: 3316: 3314: 3311: 3308: 3302: 3298: 3296: 3293: 3290: 3289: 3285: 3280: 3276: 3271: 3266: 3264: 3258: 3256: 3253: 3245: 3241: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3229: 3226: 3220: 3216: 3214: 3211: 3208: 3204: 3201: 3198: 3195: 3194: 3190: 3185: 3180: 3179: 3175: 3171: 3168: 3165: 3161: 3159: 3156: 3153: 3147: 3143: 3141: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3125: 3123: 3117: 3115: 3112: 3104: 3100: 3096: 3094: 3091: 3088: 3086: 3083: 3079: 3077: 3074: 3071: 3067: 3064: 3061: 3058: 3057: 3053: 3048: 3043: 3042: 3038: 3033: 3031: 3028: 3025: 3021: 3019: 3016: 3013: 3007: 3003: 3000: 2997: 2993: 2991: 2986: 2981: 2979: 2973: 2971: 2968: 2960: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2946: 2944: 2942: 2934: 2929: 2927: 2922: 2917: 2913: 2911: 2908: 2904: 2902: 2899: 2895: 2893: 2890: 2882: 2878: 2877: 2873: 2867: 2864: 2859: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2838: 2835: 2832: 2826: 2822: 2819: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2809: 2807: 2805: 2797: 2792: 2790: 2787: 2783: 2781: 2778: 2774: 2773: 2769: 2765: 2762: 2758: 2756: 2753: 2749: 2745: 2743: 2740: 2737: 2731: 2727: 2725: 2720: 2715: 2713: 2707: 2703: 2701: 2698: 2690: 2686: 2684: 2681: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2667: 2665: 2658: 2654: 2651: 2648: 2644: 2641: 2639: 2636: 2632: 2630: 2627: 2619: 2615: 2613: 2610: 2607: 2604: 2601: 2598: 2597: 2593: 2589: 2586: 2583: 2577: 2573: 2571: 2568: 2565: 2563: 2558: 2553: 2551: 2545: 2542: 2541: 2537: 2535: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2517: 2513: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2500: 2494: 2487: 2485: 2482: 2479: 2475: 2469: 2466: 2463: 2457: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2446: 2443: 2439: 2437: 2434: 2426: 2422: 2421: 2417: 2413: 2410: 2406: 2404: 2401: 2397: 2395: 2392: 2389: 2383: 2379: 2377: 2374: 2370: 2366: 2361: 2359: 2353: 2351: 2348: 2343: 2342: 2338: 2336: 2333: 2332:Langmaker.com 2326: 2324: 2322: 2314: 2313: 2310: 2302: 2297: 2296: 2292: 2287: 2285: 2282: 2274: 2270: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2258: 2254: 2252: 2249: 2246: 2240: 2236: 2234: 2231: 2227: 2225: 2220: 2215: 2213: 2207: 2205: 2202: 2199: 2197: 2194: 2189: 2188:Nude Study #4 2185: 2181: 2176: 2174: 2171: 2168: 2164: 2162: 2159: 2154: 2151: 2148: 2145: 2142: 2141: 2137: 2135: 2129: 2126: 2123: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2112: 2108: 2105: 2101: 2099: 2095: 2091: 2090: 2084: 2080: 2079: 2075: 2071: 2068: 2064: 2061: 2060: 2056: 2051: 2049: 2045: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2032: 2029: 2026: 2021: 2019: 2016: 2012: 2008: 2006: 2003: 1999: 1997: 1994: 1991: 1985: 1981: 1978: 1974: 1972: 1969: 1965: 1963: 1960: 1956: 1951: 1946: 1944: 1938: 1936: 1933: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1915: 1912: 1908: 1906: 1903: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1889: 1886: 1881: 1878: 1875: 1874: 1870: 1868: 1864: 1857: 1853: 1848: 1843: 1841: 1835: 1832: 1830: 1827: 1823: 1822: 1818: 1814: 1811: 1807: 1805: 1801: 1797: 1796: 1792: 1791: 1787: 1782: 1778: 1773: 1768: 1766: 1760: 1757: 1755: 1752: 1748: 1747: 1743: 1739: 1736: 1732: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1721: 1717: 1716: 1712: 1707: 1702: 1699: 1694: 1689: 1687: 1681: 1678: 1676: 1673: 1669: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1657: 1653: 1651: 1648: 1644: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1633: 1629: 1627: 1624: 1621: 1619: 1616: 1613: 1610: 1609: 1605: 1600: 1596: 1593: 1590: 1588: 1585: 1581: 1579: 1574: 1569: 1567: 1561: 1558: 1556: 1553: 1549: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1537: 1533: 1531: 1528: 1524: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1513: 1509: 1507: 1504: 1501: 1499: 1496: 1493: 1490: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1478: 1471: 1469: 1466: 1462: 1459: 1456: 1453: 1447: 1443: 1441: 1438: 1434: 1432: 1427: 1422: 1420: 1414: 1412: 1409: 1405: 1403: 1400: 1392: 1388: 1385: 1382: 1377: 1374: 1371: 1370: 1366: 1362: 1359: 1355: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1344: 1339: 1335: 1330: 1328: 1325: 1321: 1319: 1316: 1313: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1297: 1293: 1291: 1288: 1284: 1282: 1279: 1275: 1274: 1270: 1268: 1265: 1261: 1259: 1251: 1247: 1244: 1240: 1237: 1235: 1232: 1228: 1225: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1214: 1209: 1205: 1202: 1200: 1197: 1193: 1191: 1188: 1185: 1179: 1175: 1173: 1170: 1166: 1164: 1161: 1157: 1155: 1150: 1145: 1143: 1137: 1134: 1132: 1129: 1125: 1123: 1120: 1117:10,000 words 1116: 1114: 1111: 1108: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1100: 1092: 1090: 1084: 1080: 1077: 1073: 1072:Basic English 1069: 1066: 1063: 1060: 1058: 1055: 1051: 1048: 1046: 1043: 1039: 1036: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1025: 1020: 1017: 1015: 1012: 1008: 1004: 1002: 999: 998: 993: 989: 981: 979: 976: 973: 967: 963: 961: 958: 954: 952: 947: 942: 940: 935:irrelevant -- 934: 931: 929: 926: 921: 919: 916: 913: 909: 908: 904: 902: 900: 892: 889: 886: 885: 884: 882: 875: 872: 863: 862: 852: 847: 846: 845: 838: 834: 830: 826: 825: 819: 817: 812: 807: 805: 799: 796: 795: 791: 786: 784: 781: 780: 775: 771: 763: 761: 758: 755: 749: 745: 743: 740: 737: 733: 731: 728: 724: 721: 718: 715: 713: 710: 707: 705: 702: 698: 696: 693: 690: 688: 685: 682: 678: 677: 673: 671: 669: 661: 656: 651: 650: 649: 643: 640: 636: 634: 631: 627: 625: 622: 614: 610: 609: 605: 601: 598: 594: 592: 589: 585: 583: 579: 575: 574: 568: 566: 563: 559: 554: 552: 549: 546: 540: 536: 534: 531: 528: 526: 523: 520: 516: 515: 511: 506: 504: 501: 500: 495: 491: 483: 481: 478: 473: 471: 468: 464: 460: 456: 455: 451: 449: 446: 443: 441: 433: 428: 426: 422: 419: 415: 412: 411:verifiability 408: 406: 400: 393: 391: 388: 383: 381: 378: 374: 372: 368: 364: 363: 357: 355: 352: 348: 345:I agree with 344: 342: 339: 336: 331: 330: 329: 323: 319: 316: 312: 308: 305: 296: 295: 285: 281: 280: 279: 276: 272: 269: 266: 263: 257: 253: 251: 248: 245: 240: 236: 233: 229: 228: 227: 226: 225: 219: 215: 212: 208: 206: 203: 199: 195: 193: 190: 186: 184: 181: 180: 175: 171: 163: 160: 157: 154: 148: 144: 142: 139: 135: 133: 128: 123: 121: 115: 113: 110: 107: 103: 102: 101: 95: 93: 90: 86: 84: 76: 69: 65: 58: 57: 48: 42: 40: 35: 32: 28: 27: 19: 4545: 4541: 4540: 4512: 4497:Kylehamilton 4480: 4464: 4458: 4431: 4376: 4341: 4287: 4255: 4221: 4217:Harry Potter 4210: 4155:by default. 4128: 4060: 4038: 4035: 4019: 3987: 3922: 3876: 3841: 3804: 3736: 3718: 3693:Kylehamilton 3680: 3649: 3643: 3628: 3562: 3540: 3514: 3433: 3397: 3353: 3306: 3262: 3224: 3151: 3121: 3011: 2977: 2951: 2950: 2940: 2938: 2853: 2849: 2845: 2830: 2820: 2814: 2813: 2803: 2801: 2786:Kylehamilton 2735: 2711: 2705: 2672: 2671: 2662: 2581: 2549: 2521: 2461: 2400:Kylehamilton 2387: 2357: 2330: 2320: 2318: 2298: 2244: 2211: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2133: 2116: 2104:Kylehamilton 2087: 2082: 2010: 1989: 1942: 1919: 1894: 1865: 1861: 1839: 1833: 1810:Kylehamilton 1793: 1764: 1758: 1735:Kylehamilton 1718: 1685: 1679: 1647:Kylehamilton 1630: 1565: 1559: 1527:Kylehamilton 1510: 1476: 1451: 1418: 1358:Kylehamilton 1341: 1266: 1262: 1257: 1255: 1238: 1226: 1211: 1203: 1183: 1158:5,000 words 1141: 1135: 1098: 1096: 1088: 1085:Corpus size: 1067: 1061: 1054:Kylehamilton 1049: 1037: 1022: 1018: 1006: 995: 971: 938: 932: 898: 896: 878: 855: 842: 839:Lexicon size 822: 803: 797: 777: 753: 665: 654: 647: 588:Kylehamilton 571: 557: 544: 497: 458: 447: 444: 440:completeness 439: 437: 434:Completeness 360: 327: 288: 283: 261: 223: 211:Kylehamilton 177: 152: 119: 99: 91: 87: 82: 80: 47:village pump 36: 4371:IJzeren Jan 4282:IJzeren Jan 4123:IJzeren Jan 4014:IJzeren Jan 3942:Before 1950 3932:Before 1900 3871:IJzeren Jan 3836:IJzeren Jan 3675:IJzeren Jan 3509:IJzeren Jan 3428:IJzeren Jan 3301:IJzeren Jan 3259:per above. 3219:IJzeren Jan 3146:IJzeren Jan 3006:IJzeren Jan 3001:Unhackable. 2825:IJzeren Jan 2730:IJzeren Jan 2576:IJzeren Jan 2456:IJzeren Jan 2382:IJzeren Jan 2239:IJzeren Jan 1984:IJzeren Jan 1858:Publication 1446:IJzeren Jan 1243:BigBlueFish 1178:IJzeren Jan 966:IJzeren Jan 748:IJzeren Jan 597:BigBlueFish 539:IJzeren Jan 315:BigBlueFish 273:50, 000. -- 256:IJzeren Jan 147:IJzeren Jan 4469:L33tminion 4242:L33tminion 4165:their list 4086:L33tminion 3958:L33tminion 3765:L33tminion 3608:L33tminion 3292:Voyager640 3207:L33tminion 3070:L33tminion 2567:Voyager640 2373:Voyager640 2354:per above 2321:reputation 2208:per above 2167:L33tminion 2113:Reputation 1899:L33tminion 1895:verifiable 1623:Voyager640 1612:L33tminion 1503:Voyager640 1492:L33tminion 1415:Oppose. -- 1312:L33tminion 1278:Voyager640 1258:uniqueness 1252:Uniqueness 1107:L33tminion 912:L33tminion 727:Voyager640 681:L33tminion 519:L33tminion 347:L33tminion 335:L33tminion 232:Voyager640 106:L33tminion 41:reference. 39:historical 4482:Cyde Weys 4465:sometimes 4157:ISO 639-3 4149:ISO 639-2 4145:ISO 639-2 4141:ISO 639-1 3645:Star Trek 2532:Europanto 2193:Haikupoet 2184:Mona Lisa 2089:Cyde Weys 1795:Cyde Weys 1720:Cyde Weys 1632:Cyde Weys 1512:Cyde Weys 1435:Oppose -- 1343:Cyde Weys 1338:Esperanto 1213:Cyde Weys 1024:Cyde Weys 988:you know? 984:Just zis 881:Langmaker 824:Cyde Weys 770:you know? 766:Just zis 655:is finite 573:Cyde Weys 490:you know? 486:Just zis 362:Cyde Weys 196:1000. -- 170:you know? 166:Just zis 68:talk page 4557:Category 4032:ISO code 3665:Burbster 2916:Nazgjunk 2907:Burbster 2524:Adjuvilo 2180:Guernica 1977:Nazgjunk 1968:Burbster 1592:Burbster 1437:Burbster 1408:Caerwine 1208:Malbolge 1128:Caerwine 964:2500. -- 701:Caerwine 530:Caerwine 138:Caerwine 116:1000. -- 104:1000. -- 4360:tɔktəmi 4317:tɔktəmi 4104:tɔktəmi 3976:tɔktəmi 3792:tɔktəmi 3746:Yes. - 3477:tɔktəmi 3341:tɔktəmi 3250:tɔktəmi 3109:tɔktəmi 2965:tɔktəmi 2957:100. -- 2921:Signing 2887:tɔktəmi 2858:MMORPGs 2846:Comment 2695:tɔktəmi 2624:tɔktəmi 2431:tɔktəmi 2323:valid: 2307:tɔktəmi 2279:tɔktəmi 2182:or the 2002:Captdoc 1930:tɔktəmi 1397:tɔktəmi 1007:because 619:tɔktəmi 145:100. -- 4472:(talk) 4446:Durova 4392:(talk) 4328:Oppose 4273:Durova 4245:(talk) 4197:Oppose 4114:Durova 4089:(talk) 4050:Samboy 4005:Durova 3961:(talk) 3913:Oppose 3854:Durova 3823:Durova 3768:(talk) 3656:Durova 3619:Samboy 3611:(talk) 3565:Elvish 3488:Durova 3210:(talk) 3137:Durova 3090:Samboy 3073:(talk) 2996:Durova 2898:Durova 2863:Durova 2777:Durova 2752:(talk) 2680:Samboy 2635:Durova 2609:Samboy 2509:(talk) 2492:Snurks 2347:Samboy 2293:Oppose 2230:Durova 2201:Samboy 2186:, but 2170:(talk) 2076:Oppose 2067:(talk) 1959:Durova 1911:Samboy 1902:(talk) 1826:Samboy 1751:Samboy 1672:Samboy 1615:(talk) 1584:Durova 1552:Samboy 1495:(talk) 1367:Oppose 1324:Durova 1315:(talk) 1169:Durova 1126:1,000 1119:Samboy 1110:(talk) 957:Durova 925:Samboy 915:(talk) 798:MINOR. 717:Durova 692:Samboy 684:(talk) 606:Oppose 558:voila! 522:(talk) 477:Durova 467:Samboy 463:Samoan 398:Snurks 338:(talk) 324:Oppose 284:higher 254:10. -- 202:(talk) 109:(talk) 4524:ɹəəds 4517:speer 4439:email 4263:email 4151:code 4068:email 3995:email 3812:email 3729:Chris 3636:email 3596:Yes. 3548:email 3405:email 3361:email 3270:email 3129:email 3097:with 3004:2. -- 2985:email 2719:email 2706:509gg 2557:email 2365:email 2219:email 2037:GeeJo 2015:Zocky 1950:email 1897:. -- 1847:email 1772:email 1693:email 1573:email 1465:Zocky 1426:email 1231:Zocky 1160:Jamie 1149:email 1042:Zocky 946:email 867:ɹəəds 860:speer 811:email 709:Jamie 639:Zocky 414:GeeJo 387:Chris 377:Zocky 300:ɹəəds 293:speer 127:email 16:< 4487:vote 4354:Angr 4311:Angr 4182:mark 4098:Angr 3970:Angr 3889:mark 3786:Angr 3648:and 3471:Angr 3419:Talk 3416:Klaw 3372:mark 3335:Angr 3244:Angr 3164:mark 3103:Angr 3024:mark 2994:10. 2974:10. 2959:Angr 2918:- - 2881:Angr 2689:Angr 2647:mark 2618:Angr 2478:mark 2445:Talk 2442:Klaw 2425:Angr 2301:Angr 2273:Angr 2094:vote 2083:were 2025:mark 1924:Angr 1800:vote 1725:vote 1637:vote 1517:vote 1391:Angr 1348:vote 1218:vote 1105:0 -- 1029:vote 997:AfD? 986:Guy, 910:0 -- 844:is. 829:vote 779:AfD? 768:Guy, 739:Talk 736:Klaw 613:Angr 578:vote 499:AfD? 488:Guy, 459:very 367:vote 349:. — 247:Talk 244:Klaw 179:AfD? 168:Guy, 4425:... 4399:-- 4333:... 4232:Mgm 4202:... 4161:SIL 4153:art 3948:Mgm 3937:... 3918:... 3902:-- 3748:Mgm 3710:... 3598:Mgm 3591:Yes 3587:") 3579:'s 3575:or 3571:'s 3567:in 3535:... 3502:Yes 3461:Mgm 3444:-- 3389:Yes 3317:-- 3286:Yes 3197:Mgm 3191:Yes 3181:... 3060:Mgm 3054:Yes 3044:... 2947:Yes 2943:. 2852:or 2810:Yes 2668:Yes 2600:Mgm 2543:... 2538:Yes 2528:Ido 2407:-- 2339:Yes 2144:Mgm 2044:(c) 2041:(t) 1885:Mgm 1877:Mgm 1788:Yes 1713:Yes 1654:-- 1606:Yes 1534:-- 1486:Yes 1381:Mgm 1373:Mgm 1334:Ido 1068:850 674:Yes 670:". 421:(c) 418:(t) 4559:: 4527:ɹ 4521:/ 4428:-- 4390:| 4369:-- 4352:-- 4309:-- 4280:-- 4252:-- 4240:-- 4096:-- 4084:-- 4057:-- 4012:-- 3968:-- 3956:-- 3869:-- 3784:-- 3763:-- 3705:No 3691:-- 3673:-- 3663:-- 3606:-- 3530:No 3455:No 3426:-- 3328:No 3299:-- 3237:No 3205:-- 3176:No 3068:-- 3039:No 2923:is 2905:-- 2874:No 2821:10 2806:. 2784:-- 2770:No 2750:| 2708:. 2616:-- 2594:No 2507:| 2418:No 2065:| 2013:. 1836:. 1819:No 1808:-- 1761:-- 1744:No 1733:-- 1665:No 1645:-- 1545:No 1525:-- 1444:-- 870:ɹ 864:/ 792:No 746:-- 679:-- 586:-- 537:-- 517:-- 333:-- 303:ɹ 297:/ 200:| 4514:r 4441:) 4437:( 4356:/ 4313:/ 4265:) 4261:( 4234:| 4185:✎ 4100:/ 4070:) 4066:( 3997:) 3993:( 3972:/ 3950:| 3892:✎ 3814:) 3810:( 3788:/ 3750:| 3638:) 3634:( 3600:| 3550:) 3546:( 3473:/ 3463:| 3407:) 3403:( 3375:✎ 3363:) 3359:( 3337:/ 3272:) 3268:( 3246:/ 3199:| 3167:✎ 3131:) 3127:( 3105:/ 3062:| 3027:✎ 2987:) 2983:( 2961:/ 2883:/ 2721:) 2717:( 2691:/ 2650:✎ 2620:/ 2602:| 2559:) 2555:( 2481:✎ 2427:/ 2367:) 2363:( 2303:/ 2275:/ 2221:) 2217:( 2146:| 2028:✎ 1979:) 1954:) 1952:) 1948:( 1926:/ 1887:| 1879:| 1849:) 1845:( 1834:N 1774:) 1770:( 1759:N 1700:) 1695:) 1691:( 1680:N 1575:) 1571:( 1560:N 1428:) 1424:( 1393:/ 1383:| 1375:| 1239:0 1227:0 1204:0 1151:) 1147:( 1136:N 1099:0 1062:0 1050:0 1038:0 1019:0 990:/ 948:) 944:( 933:N 899:0 857:r 813:) 809:( 772:/ 615:/ 492:/ 290:r 172:/ 129:) 125:( 70:. 49:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

:Conlangs/Straw poll - Knowledge (XXG)

Index