Knowledge (XXG):Conlangs/Straw poll

366:

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). --

68: 38: 1081:. 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! -- 1028:. 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. -- 828:

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. --

4226:), 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. 95:

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

4178:). 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. -- 850:

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

562:

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

2092:

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? :-/

827:

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

391:

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

2162:

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

4349:

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

2670:

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

365:

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

576:

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

3679:

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.

2197:

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.

92:, 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. 2341:

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.

2830:. 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? -- 1347:, 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". -- 1292:"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. -- 2351:

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)

2029:

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. —

2184:

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

339:

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.)

855:

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

1873:

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.

2867:

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.

1889:

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) -

1385:

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. -

1869:

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.?

481:

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.

929:

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)

248:

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.). |

1270:

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.

659:

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

1338:

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,

635:

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.--

2447:

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. |

3224:

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. --

2671:

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.

989:

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). -

3087:, 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) 2007:

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--

2461:

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. --

1012:

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,

452:

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.

1989:

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. --

2088:

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

567:, 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. — 2735:

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. --

1329:

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.

4218:

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,

1267:. 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? 655:

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.

3476:

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? --

999: 781: 501: 181: 1467:. 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. 168:. 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. 3421:

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. |

73:

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

3532:

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.

320:

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.

2927: 99:

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.

52:

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

2921:

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.

900:

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

2124:

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

4474:

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). --

171:

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. -

4175: 3744:

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.

4554: 4493: 2163:

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

2100: 1806: 1731: 1643: 1523: 1354: 1224: 1035: 835: 584: 373: 74: 53: 3859:

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

143:

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

1916:

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

4436: 4260: 4065: 3992: 3809: 3633: 3590:

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

3545: 3402: 3358: 3267: 3126: 2982: 2716: 2554: 2362: 2216: 1947: 1844: 1769: 1690: 1570: 1423: 1146: 943: 808: 335:

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

124: 4128:

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

4229:

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

4569: 455:

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

3730:, 1950 (post-WWII) was when the personal constructed language really exploded; there are only 78 known conlangs before then. 2141:

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

1274:

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

990: 772: 492: 172: 4445: 4269: 4074: 4001: 3818: 3642: 3554: 3411: 3367: 3276: 3135: 2991: 2725: 2612:

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

2563: 2371: 2225: 1956: 1853: 1778: 1699: 1579: 1432: 1155: 952: 817: 231:

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

133: 3151:

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

468:

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

2050: 1589:

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

1003: 785: 505: 427: 185: 1213:. It's conceivable a language could be constructed that is so complex that nothing could be written using it. See 4171: 4046:

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

1484:

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

417: 216:

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

4191: 3898: 3381: 3173: 3033: 2656: 2487: 2034: 664:, I just don't know it yet). And two it has to have a productive vocabulary. That is about 500-800 words i guess. 237:

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

4398: 3661:

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

2758: 2515: 2278:"Reputation" by itself is a murky concept, but I support the inclusion of some of the criteria listed below. -- 2073: 1479:

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

491:

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

401:

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

208: 3930:

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

4242: 3958: 3758: 3608: 3471: 3207: 3070: 2610: 2154: 1895: 1887: 1391: 1383: 4043:

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

194:

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

4366: 4323: 4110: 3982: 3798: 3649:

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

3483: 3347: 3256: 3115: 2971: 2893: 2701: 2630: 2437: 2313: 2285: 1936: 1900:

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

1403: 625: 1236:. A better indicator than vocabulary size, but a constructed language could be notable for other things. 4380: 4291: 4132: 4023: 3880: 3845: 3783: 3684: 3579: 3518: 3437: 3425: 3310: 3228: 3155: 3105: 3088: 3015: 2834: 2739: 2585: 2465: 2451: 2391: 2248: 2164: 2159: 1993: 1455: 1187: 975: 757: 745: 548: 265: 253: 156: 577:

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

45: 37: 17: 4478: 4407: 4251: 4188: 4095: 3967: 3910: 3895: 3782:- a conland surviving beyond its original creator suggests something more than one obsessive's hobby 3774: 3617: 3452: 3378: 3325: 3216: 3170: 3079: 3030: 2767: 2653: 2484: 2415: 2263: 2176: 2031: 1908: 1662: 1621: 1542: 1501: 1321: 1302: 1116: 1082: 921: 690: 568: 528: 472:); it is not-so-easy to come up with a full grammar, phonology, phonetic set of sounds, and lexicon. 357: 344: 115: 1166: 715: 4394: 3671: 3422: 2913: 2754: 2511: 2448: 2069: 1974: 1598: 1443: 857: 742: 250: 204: 3726:

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

2946:

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

2326:

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

2008: 741:

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

4238: 3954: 3754: 3604: 3467: 3203: 3066: 2606: 2150: 1982:

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

1891: 1883: 1387: 1379: 4244:

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

107:

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

4170:, who is the registering authority, is not really interested in conlangs. This may account for 4503: 4502:

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

3699: 3657: 3587: 3357:

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

2792: 2406: 2110: 1816: 1741: 1653: 1533: 1364: 1060: 594: 217: 23: 2244:

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

4549:

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

4529: 4377: 4288: 4129: 4020: 3877: 3842: 3681: 3515: 3434: 3307: 3225: 3152: 3012: 2831: 2736: 2582: 2462: 2388: 2245: 1990: 1452: 1249: 1184: 972: 872: 754: 603: 545: 321: 305: 262: 153: 3727: 2306:

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

962:

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

897:"virtual" vocabulary (10 prefixes, 10 suffixes and 100 word roots do not make 10,000 words) 4475: 4248: 4092: 3964: 3771: 3614: 3298: 3213: 3076: 2573: 2379: 2173: 2172:

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

2047: 1905: 1629: 1618: 1509: 1498: 1318: 1284: 1113: 918: 733: 687: 525: 424: 353: 341: 238: 112: 2510:

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

1217:(Hello World doesn't count). This isn't inherently a measure of notability, though. -- 4364: 4321: 4219: 4108: 3980: 3796: 3575: 3481: 3345: 3254: 3113: 2969: 2891: 2699: 2628: 2435: 2311: 2283: 2199: 1934: 1401: 623: 88:

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

4563: 3583: 2922: 1983: 1414: 1301:

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

1201:

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

1134: 1078: 771:

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

707: 536: 449:. The question is: can the completeness of a language contribute to its notability? 144: 4537: 4506: 4497: 4481: 4455: 4410: 4401: 4389: 4371: 4328: 4300: 4282: 4274: 4254: 4194: 4182: 4141: 4123: 4115: 4098: 4079: 4059: 4032: 4014: 4006: 3987: 3970: 3913: 3901: 3889: 3863: 3854: 3832: 3823: 3803: 3786: 3777: 3738: 3702: 3693: 3674: 3665: 3628: 3620: 3559: 3527: 3497: 3488: 3455: 3446: 3428: 3416: 3384: 3372: 3352: 3328: 3319: 3301: 3281: 3261: 3237: 3219: 3176: 3164: 3146: 3120: 3099: 3091: 3082: 3036: 3024: 3005: 2996: 2976: 2959:

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

2932: 2916: 2907: 2898: 2872: 2843: 2822:

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

2795: 2786: 2770: 2761: 2748: 2730: 2706: 2689: 2680:

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

2659: 2644: 2635: 2618: 2594: 2576: 2568: 2518: 2505: 2490: 2474: 2454: 2442: 2418: 2409: 2400: 2382: 2356: 2318: 2290: 2266: 2257: 2239: 2235:

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

2230: 2210: 2202: 2179: 2167: 2113: 2104: 2076: 2054: 2037: 2024: 2011: 2002: 1977: 1968: 1941: 1920: 1911: 1858: 1835: 1819: 1810: 1783: 1760: 1744: 1735: 1704: 1681: 1665: 1656: 1647: 1632: 1624: 1601: 1593: 1584: 1561: 1545: 1536: 1527: 1512: 1504: 1474: 1464: 1446: 1437: 1417: 1408: 1367: 1358: 1333: 1324: 1305: 1296: 1287: 1252: 1240: 1228: 1205: 1196: 1178: 1169: 1160: 1137: 1128: 1119: 1085: 1063: 1051: 1039: 1020: 1007: 984: 966: 957: 934: 924: 880: 839: 822: 789: 766: 748: 736: 726: 718: 710: 701: 693: 674: 648: 639: 630: 606: 597: 588: 571: 557: 539: 531: 509: 486: 476: 431: 411: 396: 386: 377: 360: 347: 324: 313: 284: 274: 256: 241: 220: 211: 198: 189: 165: 147: 138: 118: 4223: 2541:. This could also include languages that have been mistaken for a real language. 277:. Again, very few languages would actually qualify using a relatively low number. 4518: 4452: 4279: 4120: 4056: 4011: 3860: 3829: 3662: 3625: 3494: 3143: 3096: 3002: 2904: 2869: 2783: 2686: 2641: 2615: 2497: 2353: 2236: 2207: 1965: 1917: 1832: 1757: 1678: 1590: 1558: 1330: 1175: 1125: 963: 931: 861: 723: 698: 483: 473: 403: 294: 3169:

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

2649:

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

4179: 3249:

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

2942:

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

2295:

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

2043: 2021: 1471: 1293: 1237: 1202: 1048: 1017: 645: 636: 420: 383: 281: 195: 3906:

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

4488: 4360: 4317: 4163: 4155: 4151: 4147: 4104: 3976: 3792: 3735: 3651: 3477: 3341: 3250: 3109: 2965: 2887: 2695: 2624: 2538: 2495:

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

2431: 2307: 2279: 2095: 1930: 1801: 1726: 1638: 1518: 1397: 1349: 1344: 1219: 1030: 887: 830: 619: 579: 393: 368: 2581:

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

673:

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

602:

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

2809:

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

2530: 2042:

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

1214: 4350:

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

4150:

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

706:

Definitely an necessary requirement, but not a sufficient requirement.

908:, that means that lexicon size is not a requirement for completeness. 3571: 2864: 1925:

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

1715:

Demonstrates plausible historical derivation from a natural language:

1174:

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

1108:, that means that corpus size is not a requirement for completeness. 469: 3125:

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

2800:

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

1470:

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

3514:

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

1790:

Demonstrates plausible historical derivation from another conlang:

2711:

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

886:

Vocabulary size can be established relatively easily by perusing

3570:

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

2533:(created by an esperantist in order to cause a rift within the 1283:

Definitely an important criterion for determining notability.

1096:

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

4167: 3391:

Has established notability outside of the conlanger community:

2534: 1340: 62: 32: 3288:

Has established notability inside of the conlanger community:

618:

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

3841:

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

2805:

There exist at least N extended discussions of the language:

2338: 4174:

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

2937:

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

794:

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

1608:

Sets itself challenging artistic goals, and achieves them:

436:

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

3473:

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

3504:

Is known as the exponent of a particular conlang genre:

2782:

Quality, not quantity. Remember: Six Bored Teenagers.

1946:

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

4303:(but with respect to the conditions mentioned above) 2948:

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

2811:

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

2016:

Verifiablity is clearly the major criterion, as for

289:

That's absurd. Constructed languages shouldn't have

44:

This page is currently inactive and is retained for

3056:

Received attention in the popular/scientific media:

1363:

once again I find myself agreeing with Cyde Weys --

514:

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

1831:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1756:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1677:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1557:Completeness or notability matters, but not this. 1317:Artistic notability is one form of notability. -- 644:No. We're establishing notability, not usability. 3566:Is part of a well-known piece of written fiction: 2640:I'll call this the Six Bored Teenagers Standard. 1077:-- variety enough to have an expressive language 4513:Throw out this "straw" poll and use common sense 4222:), of the medium where it is used (for example, 2529:Languages that fall under this category include 2334:The language is in the Top-100 of Langmaker.com: 1047:. We're establishing notability, not usability. 890:. There seems to be consensus that we discount: 729:As above, necessary but not by itself sufficent. 445:The second criterion that has been suggested is 293:standards for inclusion than natural languages. 4154:codes. All other artificial languages have the 3828:Per the above, also Six Bored Teenagers-proof. 2378:I'd say this is sufficient, but not necessary. 732:Agreed. This is necessary but not sufficient. 4557:. Comments here would be counter-productive. 2863:I've known bored teenagers who created entire 1263:The third criterion that has been proposed is 2666:The languages produces at least N Googlehits: 2131:How much attention has the language received? 382:Hard to establish and not a good indicatior. 8: 2134:What influence has it had on other conlangs? 4422:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4306:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4199:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 3707:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2059:Yes--BirgitteSB 18:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4553:Discussion of this page is in progress at 3041:10--BirgitteSB 18:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2430:Notability is not a popularity contest. -- 2137:Has it caused any significant controversy? 4555:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Conlangs/Straw poll 3591: 2861:Why would anyone plant a vanity article? 2553:Yes, if the controversy was widespread. 1071:--BirgitteSB 17:58, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4146:There are five conlangs with their own 1929:, it's notable enough for inclusion. -- 1100:Has a public corpus of at least N words 4055:This indicates significant notability 3734:78 is undoubtedly an underestimate. -- 3401:wich is synonymous to notability... -- 7: 2525:The language has caused controversy: 1689:. Irrelevant. (EDIT: this was mine 227:Minor criterion: has/had N speakers 103:Major criterion: has/had N speakers 4384:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 4295:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 4166:is still in its draft format, and 4136:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 4027:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3884:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3849:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3688:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3522:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3441:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3314:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3232:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3159:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 3019:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2838:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2743:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2589:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2469:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2395:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 2252:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 1997:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 1459:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 1191:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 979:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 761:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 552:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 269:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 160:In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 31: 2857:Why would anyone become a hacker? 2128:How widely known is the language? 1488:An extreme grammar or vocabulary: 1343:is almost entirely derivative of 392:much of a movement behind them.-- 3894:Per Average Earthman, Durova. — 3193:Inspired other notable conlangs: 912:A vocabulary of at least N words 563:a basic sentence structure, and 66: 36: 2886:Too easy to game the system. -- 4482:15:08, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 4255:14:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 4099:14:05, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3971:14:04, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3960:09:31, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3787:09:44, 29 September 2005 (UTC) 3778:14:04, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3760:09:31, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3621:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3610:09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3220:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3209:09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3092:09:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC) 3083:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 3072:09:30, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 2180:14:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 2168:23:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC) 2156:09:19, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 1912:13:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1897:09:18, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 1625:13:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1505:13:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1393:09:14, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 1325:13:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1120:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 1104:Please specify N. If you pick 925:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 904:Please specify N. If you pick 694:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 532:13:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 348:13:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 119:13:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 24:Knowledge (XXG):Conlangs/Votes 1: 4538:00:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC) 4498:01:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 4456:07:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 4402:21:58, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 4390:10:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4301:10:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4283:07:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 4195:15:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 4183:13:21, 30 November 2005 (UTC) 4142:10:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4124:07:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 4033:10:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4015:07:29, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3902:15:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3890:10:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3864:01:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 3855:10:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3833:07:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3739:03:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC) 3694:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3675:16:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 3666:07:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3528:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3498:07:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3447:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3429:20:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 3385:15:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3320:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3302:22:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 3238:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3177:15:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3165:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3147:07:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 3037:15:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3025:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 3006:07:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2933:20:23, 23 November 2005 (UTC) 2917:17:00, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 2908:07:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2873:01:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 2844:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2787:07:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2762:21:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2749:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2660:15:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2645:07:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2595:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2577:22:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 2519:21:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2506:01:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 2491:15:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2475:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2455:20:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 2401:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2383:22:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 2258:10:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 2240:07:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 2105:01:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 2077:21:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2055:16:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 2038:15:14, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2025:12:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 2012:17:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 2003:10:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 1978:16:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 1969:06:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1811:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1736:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1648:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1633:22:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 1602:16:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 1594:07:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1528:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1513:22:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 1475:11:59, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 1465:10:07, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 1447:16:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 1359:01:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1334:06:52, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1297:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 1288:22:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 1241:11:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 1229:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1206:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 1197:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 1179:06:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 1170:00:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC) 1052:11:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 1040:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1021:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 1008:23:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 985:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 967:06:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 894:computer-generated vocabulary 881:23:19, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 840:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 790:23:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 767:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 749:20:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 737:22:04, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 727:06:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 719:00:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC) 649:11:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 640:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 589:01:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 572:10:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 558:10:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 510:23:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 487:06:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 432:16:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 412:01:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 397:02:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC) 387:11:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 378:01:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 361:10:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 314:22:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 285:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 275:10:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 257:20:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 242:22:03, 26 November 2005 (UTC) 212:21:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 199:15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 190:23:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 166:09:59, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4372:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 4329:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 4275:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 4116:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 4080:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 4060:00:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 4007:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3988:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3824:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3804:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3629:00:50, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 3560:04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3489:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3417:04:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3373:04:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3353:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3282:03:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 3262:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3121:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 3100:00:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2997:03:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2977:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2899:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2731:03:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2707:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2690:00:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2636:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2619:00:56, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2569:03:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2443:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2357:00:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 2319:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2291:09:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 2231:03:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 2211:00:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1942:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 1921:00:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1859:03:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1836:00:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1784:03:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1761:00:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1705:03:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1682:00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1585:03:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1562:00:53, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 1438:03:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1418:03:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 1413:Too wishy-washy a criteria. 1409:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 1161:03:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 1138:03:52, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 1129:00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 958:03:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 935:00:43, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 823:03:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 711:03:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 702:00:41, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 631:09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC) 540:03:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 477:00:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 148:03:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC) 139:03:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 4507:09:26, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 4411:17:50, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3914:17:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3703:09:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 3456:18:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3340:Too difficult to define. -- 3329:17:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2796:09:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2771:17:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2419:17:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2410:09:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2267:17:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2262:I agree with Jan above. -- 2203:03:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC) 2114:09:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1820:09:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1745:09:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1666:17:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1657:09:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1546:17:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1537:08:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1368:08:52, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1306:17:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1294:Victim of signature fascism 1253:16:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1203:Victim of signature fascism 1086:16:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 1064:08:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1018:Victim of signature fascism 637:Victim of signature fascism 607:16:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 598:08:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 325:16:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 282:Victim of signature fascism 221:08:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 196:Victim of signature fascism 4586: 2652:No, per Mgm and others. — 1927:by three different authors 2483:No, per Angr and Klaw. — 1059:I agree with Cyde Weys -- 4486:Ditto on L33tminion. -- 1396:Impossible to define. -- 464:Yes. I think this is a 96:other criteria (MINOR). 18:Knowledge (XXG):Conlangs 2694:100,000 Google hits. -- 1016:it has so few words. -- 807:Not enough by itself -- 4570:Inactive project pages 1710:Doesn't matter at all. 416:Oppose, on grounds of 4470:A minor criterion is 4462:otherwise, namely ... 3580:The Lord of the Rings 3493:Six Bored Teenagers. 2903:Six Bored Teenagers. 2855:This is like asking, 4544:Comment Solicitation 3142:Yes, per the above. 2685:10,000 Google hits. 2109:I agree with Cyde -- 675:Lingua Questionnaire 4214:Notability by proxy 3592:Notability by proxy 858:Median Voter Theory 669:A complete grammar: 4427:1 major or 4 minor 4417:1 major or 3 minor 4354:1 major or 2 minor 90:number of speakers 84:Number of speakers 3658:Lord of the Rings 3588:The Wheel of Time 2931: 2503: 2387:Well, why not? -- 1973:Per the above. -- 409: 81: 80: 61: 60: 22:(Redirected from 4577: 4535: 4532: 4525: 4522: 4466:Please specify. 4441: 4387: 4368: 4325: 4298: 4265: 4139: 4112: 4070: 4030: 3997: 3984: 3887: 3852: 3814: 3800: 3784:Average Earthman 3722:Year of creation 3691: 3638: 3550: 3525: 3485: 3444: 3407: 3363: 3349: 3317: 3272: 3258: 3235: 3162: 3131: 3117: 3106:Average Earthman 3089:Average Earthman 3022: 2987: 2973: 2926: 2895: 2841: 2746: 2721: 2703: 2632: 2592: 2559: 2504: 2502: 2500: 2472: 2439: 2398: 2367: 2315: 2287: 2255: 2221: 2165:Average Earthman 2160:Average Earthman 2000: 1952: 1938: 1849: 1774: 1695: 1575: 1462: 1428: 1405: 1194: 1151: 1145:. Irrelevant. -- 994: 982: 948: 878: 875: 868: 865: 813: 776: 764: 627: 555: 496: 410: 408: 406: 311: 308: 301: 298: 272: 176: 163: 129: 70: 69: 63: 57: 40: 33: 27: 4585: 4584: 4580: 4579: 4578: 4576: 4575: 4574: 4560: 4559: 4546: 4533: 4530: 4523: 4520: 4515: 4496: 4464: 4449: 4437: 4429: 4419: 4408:ActiveSelective 4386: 4381: 4369: 4356: 4347: 4337: 4326: 4313: 4311:Support (minor) 4297: 4292: 4273: 4261: 4235: 4233:Support (major) 4216: 4206: 4138: 4133: 4113: 4088: 4086:Support (minor) 4078: 4066: 4052: 4050:Support (major) 4041: 4029: 4024: 4005: 3993: 3985: 3951: 3941: 3936: 3934:Created before: 3922: 3911:ActiveSelective 3886: 3881: 3851: 3846: 3822: 3810: 3801: 3767: 3765:Support (minor) 3750: 3748:Support (major) 3724: 3714: 3690: 3685: 3646: 3634: 3600: 3568: 3558: 3546: 3539: 3524: 3519: 3511: 3506: 3486: 3464: 3453:ActiveSelective 3443: 3438: 3415: 3403: 3398: 3393: 3377:Per requiem. — 3371: 3359: 3350: 3337: 3326:ActiveSelective 3316: 3311: 3295: 3290: 3280: 3268: 3259: 3246: 3234: 3229: 3200: 3195: 3185: 3161: 3156: 3139: 3127: 3118: 3063: 3058: 3048: 3021: 3016: 2995: 2983: 2974: 2956: 2944: 2896: 2883: 2840: 2835: 2819: 2807: 2779: 2768:ActiveSelective 2753:1,000 hits. -- 2745: 2740: 2729: 2717: 2704: 2677: 2668: 2633: 2603: 2591: 2586: 2567: 2555: 2547: 2527: 2498: 2496: 2471: 2466: 2440: 2427: 2416:ActiveSelective 2405:works for me -- 2397: 2392: 2375: 2363: 2348: 2336: 2316: 2302: 2288: 2275: 2273:Support (minor) 2264:ActiveSelective 2254: 2249: 2229: 2217: 2147: 2145:Support (major) 2122: 2103: 2085: 2066: 2064:Support (minor) 2053: 2018:everything else 1999: 1994: 1964:Per the above. 1960: 1948: 1939: 1880: 1878:Support (major) 1867: 1857: 1845: 1828: 1809: 1797: 1792: 1782: 1770: 1753: 1734: 1722: 1717: 1703: 1691: 1674: 1663:ActiveSelective 1646: 1615: 1610: 1583: 1571: 1569:. Irrelevant -- 1554: 1543:ActiveSelective 1526: 1495: 1490: 1461: 1456: 1436: 1424: 1406: 1376: 1357: 1314: 1312:Support (minor) 1303:ActiveSelective 1280: 1278:Support (major) 1261: 1227: 1193: 1188: 1159: 1147: 1102: 1094: 1083:ActiveSelective 1038: 1001: 992: 981: 976: 956: 944: 914: 876: 873: 866: 863: 848: 838: 821: 809: 801: 783: 774: 763: 758: 683: 671: 628: 615: 587: 569:Daniel Brockman 554: 549: 521: 519:Support (minor) 503: 494: 461: 459:Support (major) 443: 430: 404: 402: 376: 358:Daniel Brockman 333: 309: 306: 299: 296: 271: 266: 229: 183: 174: 162: 157: 137: 125: 105: 86: 67: 51: 29: 28: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4583: 4581: 4573: 4572: 4562: 4561: 4545: 4542: 4541: 4540: 4514: 4511: 4510: 4509: 4500: 4492: 4484: 4463: 4460: 4459: 4458: 4450: 4443: 4439:Requiem the 18 4433: 4428: 4425: 4424: 4423: 4418: 4415: 4414: 4413: 4404: 4395:King of Hearts 4392: 4382: 4374: 4365: 4355: 4352: 4346: 4343: 4342: 4341: 4336: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4322: 4312: 4309: 4308: 4307: 4304: 4293: 4285: 4277: 4267: 4263:Requiem the 18 4257: 4245: 4234: 4231: 4220:J.R.R. Tolkien 4215: 4212: 4211: 4210: 4205: 4202: 4201: 4200: 4197: 4187:Per Gareth. — 4185: 4161: 4144: 4134: 4126: 4118: 4109: 4101: 4087: 4084: 4083: 4082: 4072: 4068:Requiem the 18 4062: 4051: 4048: 4040: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4025: 4017: 4009: 3999: 3995:Requiem the 18 3990: 3981: 3973: 3961: 3950: 3947: 3946: 3945: 3940: 3937: 3935: 3932: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3921: 3918: 3917: 3916: 3907: 3904: 3892: 3882: 3874: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3869: 3868: 3867: 3866: 3847: 3826: 3816: 3812:Requiem the 18 3806: 3797: 3789: 3780: 3766: 3763: 3762: 3761: 3749: 3746: 3742: 3741: 3723: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3713: 3710: 3709: 3708: 3705: 3696: 3686: 3677: 3668: 3647: 3640: 3636:Requiem the 18 3631: 3623: 3611: 3599: 3596: 3576:J.R.R. Tolkien 3567: 3564: 3563: 3562: 3552: 3548:Requiem the 18 3543: 3538: 3535: 3534: 3533: 3530: 3520: 3510: 3507: 3505: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3491: 3482: 3474: 3463: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3449: 3439: 3431: 3419: 3409: 3405:Requiem the 18 3397: 3394: 3392: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3375: 3365: 3361:Requiem the 18 3355: 3346: 3336: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3322: 3312: 3304: 3294: 3291: 3289: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3274: 3270:Requiem the 18 3264: 3255: 3245: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3230: 3222: 3210: 3199: 3196: 3194: 3191: 3190: 3189: 3184: 3181: 3180: 3179: 3167: 3157: 3149: 3140: 3133: 3129:Requiem the 18 3123: 3114: 3108:'s proviso. -- 3102: 3094: 3085: 3073: 3062: 3059: 3057: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3047: 3044: 3043: 3042: 3039: 3029:60 will do. — 3027: 3017: 3009: 2999: 2989: 2985:Requiem the 18 2979: 2970: 2955: 2952: 2943: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2935: 2919: 2910: 2901: 2892: 2882: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2847: 2846: 2836: 2818: 2815: 2806: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2798: 2789: 2778: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2766:1,000 hits -- 2764: 2755:King of Hearts 2751: 2741: 2733: 2723: 2719:Requiem the 18 2709: 2700: 2692: 2676: 2673: 2667: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2650: 2647: 2638: 2629: 2621: 2613: 2602: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2587: 2579: 2571: 2561: 2557:Requiem the 18 2551: 2546: 2543: 2537:movement) and 2526: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2512:King of Hearts 2508: 2493: 2481: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2467: 2445: 2436: 2426: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2412: 2403: 2393: 2385: 2376: 2369: 2365:Requiem the 18 2359: 2347: 2344: 2335: 2332: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2312: 2301: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2293: 2284: 2274: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2260: 2250: 2242: 2233: 2223: 2219:Requiem the 18 2213: 2205: 2182: 2170: 2157: 2146: 2143: 2139: 2138: 2135: 2132: 2129: 2121: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2107: 2099: 2084: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2070:King of Hearts 2065: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2057: 2046: 2040: 2027: 2014: 2005: 1995: 1987: 1980: 1971: 1962: 1954: 1950:Requiem the 18 1944: 1935: 1923: 1914: 1898: 1879: 1876: 1866: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1851: 1847:Requiem the 18 1838: 1827: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1813: 1805: 1796: 1793: 1791: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1776: 1772:Requiem the 18 1763: 1752: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1738: 1730: 1721: 1718: 1716: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1708: 1697: 1693:Requiem the 18 1684: 1673: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1659: 1650: 1642: 1635: 1627: 1614: 1611: 1609: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1596: 1587: 1577: 1573:Requiem the 18 1564: 1553: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1539: 1530: 1522: 1515: 1507: 1494: 1491: 1489: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1477: 1468: 1457: 1449: 1440: 1430: 1426:Requiem the 18 1420: 1411: 1402: 1394: 1375: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1361: 1353: 1336: 1327: 1313: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1299: 1290: 1279: 1276: 1260: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1248:As per above. 1243: 1231: 1223: 1208: 1199: 1189: 1183:5000 words. -- 1181: 1172: 1163: 1153: 1149:Requiem the 18 1140: 1131: 1122: 1101: 1098: 1093: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1072: 1066: 1054: 1042: 1034: 1023: 1010: 998: 987: 977: 969: 960: 950: 946:Requiem the 18 937: 927: 913: 910: 902: 901: 898: 895: 884: 883: 860:should apply. 847: 844: 843: 842: 834: 825: 815: 811:Requiem the 18 800: 797: 796: 795: 792: 780: 769: 759: 751: 739: 730: 721: 713: 704: 696: 682: 679: 670: 667: 666: 665: 653: 652: 651: 642: 633: 624: 614: 611: 610: 609: 600: 591: 583: 574: 560: 550: 542: 534: 520: 517: 516: 515: 512: 500: 489: 479: 460: 457: 442: 439: 438: 437: 434: 423: 414: 399: 389: 380: 372: 363: 350: 332: 329: 328: 327: 318: 317: 316: 278: 267: 259: 246: 245: 244: 228: 225: 224: 223: 214: 205:King of Hearts 201: 192: 180: 169: 158: 150: 141: 131: 127:Requiem the 18 121: 104: 101: 85: 82: 79: 78: 71: 59: 58: 50: 41: 30: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4582: 4571: 4568: 4567: 4565: 4558: 4556: 4551: 4550: 4543: 4539: 4536: 4527: 4526: 4517: 4516: 4512: 4508: 4505: 4501: 4499: 4495: 4491: 4490: 4485: 4483: 4480: 4477: 4473: 4469: 4468: 4467: 4461: 4457: 4454: 4451: 4447: 4442: 4440: 4434: 4431: 4430: 4426: 4421: 4420: 4416: 4412: 4409: 4405: 4403: 4400: 4396: 4393: 4391: 4388: 4385: 4379: 4375: 4373: 4370: 4362: 4358: 4357: 4353: 4351: 4345:Last question 4344: 4339: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4327: 4319: 4315: 4314: 4310: 4305: 4302: 4299: 4296: 4290: 4286: 4284: 4281: 4278: 4276: 4271: 4266: 4264: 4258: 4256: 4253: 4250: 4246: 4243: 4240: 4237: 4236: 4232: 4230: 4227: 4225: 4221: 4213: 4208: 4207: 4203: 4198: 4196: 4193: 4190: 4186: 4184: 4181: 4180:Gareth Hughes 4177: 4176:Linguist List 4173: 4169: 4165: 4159: 4157: 4153: 4149: 4145: 4143: 4140: 4137: 4131: 4127: 4125: 4122: 4119: 4117: 4114: 4106: 4102: 4100: 4097: 4094: 4090: 4089: 4085: 4081: 4076: 4071: 4069: 4063: 4061: 4058: 4054: 4053: 4049: 4047: 4044: 4038: 4034: 4031: 4028: 4022: 4018: 4016: 4013: 4010: 4008: 4003: 3998: 3996: 3991: 3989: 3986: 3978: 3974: 3972: 3969: 3966: 3962: 3959: 3956: 3953: 3952: 3948: 3943: 3942: 3938: 3933: 3931: 3924: 3923: 3919: 3915: 3912: 3908: 3905: 3903: 3900: 3897: 3893: 3891: 3888: 3885: 3879: 3875: 3865: 3862: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3853: 3850: 3844: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3837: 3836: 3835: 3834: 3831: 3827: 3825: 3820: 3815: 3813: 3808:per Averange 3807: 3805: 3802: 3794: 3790: 3788: 3785: 3781: 3779: 3776: 3773: 3769: 3768: 3764: 3759: 3756: 3752: 3751: 3747: 3745: 3740: 3737: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3729: 3728:Langmaker.com 3721: 3716: 3715: 3711: 3706: 3704: 3701: 3697: 3695: 3692: 3689: 3683: 3678: 3676: 3673: 3669: 3667: 3664: 3660: 3659: 3654: 3653: 3648: 3644: 3639: 3637: 3632: 3630: 3627: 3624: 3622: 3619: 3616: 3612: 3609: 3606: 3602: 3601: 3597: 3595: 3593: 3589: 3585: 3584:Robert Jordan 3581: 3577: 3573: 3565: 3561: 3556: 3551: 3549: 3544: 3541: 3540: 3536: 3531: 3529: 3526: 3523: 3517: 3513: 3512: 3508: 3503: 3499: 3496: 3492: 3490: 3487: 3479: 3475: 3472: 3469: 3466: 3465: 3461: 3457: 3454: 3450: 3448: 3445: 3442: 3436: 3432: 3430: 3427: 3424: 3420: 3418: 3413: 3408: 3406: 3400: 3399: 3395: 3390: 3386: 3383: 3380: 3376: 3374: 3369: 3364: 3362: 3356: 3354: 3351: 3343: 3339: 3338: 3334: 3330: 3327: 3323: 3321: 3318: 3315: 3309: 3305: 3303: 3300: 3297: 3296: 3292: 3287: 3283: 3278: 3273: 3271: 3265: 3263: 3260: 3252: 3248: 3247: 3243: 3239: 3236: 3233: 3227: 3223: 3221: 3218: 3215: 3211: 3208: 3205: 3202: 3201: 3197: 3192: 3187: 3186: 3182: 3178: 3175: 3172: 3168: 3166: 3163: 3160: 3154: 3150: 3148: 3145: 3141: 3137: 3132: 3130: 3124: 3122: 3119: 3111: 3107: 3103: 3101: 3098: 3095: 3093: 3090: 3086: 3084: 3081: 3078: 3074: 3071: 3068: 3065: 3064: 3060: 3055: 3050: 3049: 3045: 3040: 3038: 3035: 3032: 3028: 3026: 3023: 3020: 3014: 3010: 3007: 3004: 3000: 2998: 2993: 2988: 2986: 2980: 2978: 2975: 2967: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2953: 2951: 2949: 2941: 2936: 2934: 2929: 2924: 2920: 2918: 2915: 2911: 2909: 2906: 2902: 2900: 2897: 2889: 2885: 2884: 2880: 2874: 2871: 2866: 2862: 2858: 2854: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2845: 2842: 2839: 2833: 2829: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2816: 2814: 2812: 2804: 2799: 2797: 2794: 2790: 2788: 2785: 2781: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2769: 2765: 2763: 2760: 2756: 2752: 2750: 2747: 2744: 2738: 2734: 2732: 2727: 2722: 2720: 2714: 2710: 2708: 2705: 2697: 2693: 2691: 2688: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2674: 2672: 2665: 2661: 2658: 2655: 2651: 2648: 2646: 2643: 2639: 2637: 2634: 2626: 2622: 2620: 2617: 2614: 2611: 2608: 2605: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2593: 2590: 2584: 2580: 2578: 2575: 2572: 2570: 2565: 2560: 2558: 2552: 2549: 2548: 2544: 2542: 2540: 2536: 2532: 2524: 2520: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2507: 2501: 2494: 2492: 2489: 2486: 2482: 2476: 2473: 2470: 2464: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2453: 2450: 2446: 2444: 2441: 2433: 2429: 2428: 2424: 2420: 2417: 2413: 2411: 2408: 2404: 2402: 2399: 2396: 2390: 2386: 2384: 2381: 2377: 2373: 2368: 2366: 2360: 2358: 2355: 2350: 2349: 2345: 2343: 2340: 2339:Langmaker.com 2333: 2331: 2329: 2321: 2320: 2317: 2309: 2304: 2303: 2299: 2294: 2292: 2289: 2281: 2277: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2265: 2261: 2259: 2256: 2253: 2247: 2243: 2241: 2238: 2234: 2232: 2227: 2222: 2220: 2214: 2212: 2209: 2206: 2204: 2201: 2196: 2195:Nude Study #4 2192: 2188: 2183: 2181: 2178: 2175: 2171: 2169: 2166: 2161: 2158: 2155: 2152: 2149: 2148: 2144: 2142: 2136: 2133: 2130: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2119: 2115: 2112: 2108: 2106: 2102: 2098: 2097: 2091: 2087: 2086: 2082: 2078: 2075: 2071: 2068: 2067: 2063: 2058: 2056: 2052: 2049: 2045: 2041: 2039: 2036: 2033: 2028: 2026: 2023: 2019: 2015: 2013: 2010: 2006: 2004: 2001: 1998: 1992: 1988: 1985: 1981: 1979: 1976: 1972: 1970: 1967: 1963: 1958: 1953: 1951: 1945: 1943: 1940: 1932: 1928: 1924: 1922: 1919: 1915: 1913: 1910: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1896: 1893: 1888: 1885: 1882: 1881: 1877: 1875: 1871: 1864: 1860: 1855: 1850: 1848: 1842: 1839: 1837: 1834: 1830: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1818: 1814: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1803: 1799: 1798: 1794: 1789: 1785: 1780: 1775: 1773: 1767: 1764: 1762: 1759: 1755: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1743: 1739: 1737: 1733: 1729: 1728: 1724: 1723: 1719: 1714: 1709: 1706: 1701: 1696: 1694: 1688: 1685: 1683: 1680: 1676: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1664: 1660: 1658: 1655: 1651: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1640: 1636: 1634: 1631: 1628: 1626: 1623: 1620: 1617: 1616: 1612: 1607: 1603: 1600: 1597: 1595: 1592: 1588: 1586: 1581: 1576: 1574: 1568: 1565: 1563: 1560: 1556: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1544: 1540: 1538: 1535: 1531: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1520: 1516: 1514: 1511: 1508: 1506: 1503: 1500: 1497: 1496: 1492: 1487: 1485: 1478: 1476: 1473: 1469: 1466: 1463: 1460: 1454: 1450: 1448: 1445: 1441: 1439: 1434: 1429: 1427: 1421: 1419: 1416: 1412: 1410: 1407: 1399: 1395: 1392: 1389: 1384: 1381: 1378: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1366: 1362: 1360: 1356: 1352: 1351: 1346: 1342: 1337: 1335: 1332: 1328: 1326: 1323: 1320: 1316: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1304: 1300: 1298: 1295: 1291: 1289: 1286: 1282: 1281: 1277: 1275: 1272: 1268: 1266: 1258: 1254: 1251: 1247: 1244: 1242: 1239: 1235: 1232: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1221: 1216: 1212: 1209: 1207: 1204: 1200: 1198: 1195: 1192: 1186: 1182: 1180: 1177: 1173: 1171: 1168: 1164: 1162: 1157: 1152: 1150: 1144: 1141: 1139: 1136: 1132: 1130: 1127: 1124:10,000 words 1123: 1121: 1118: 1115: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1107: 1099: 1097: 1091: 1087: 1084: 1080: 1079:Basic English 1076: 1073: 1070: 1067: 1065: 1062: 1058: 1055: 1053: 1050: 1046: 1043: 1041: 1037: 1033: 1032: 1027: 1024: 1022: 1019: 1015: 1011: 1009: 1006: 1005: 1000: 996: 988: 986: 983: 980: 974: 970: 968: 965: 961: 959: 954: 949: 947: 942:irrelevant -- 941: 938: 936: 933: 928: 926: 923: 920: 916: 915: 911: 909: 907: 899: 896: 893: 892: 891: 889: 882: 879: 870: 869: 859: 854: 853: 852: 845: 841: 837: 833: 832: 826: 824: 819: 814: 812: 806: 803: 802: 798: 793: 791: 788: 787: 782: 778: 770: 768: 765: 762: 756: 752: 750: 747: 744: 740: 738: 735: 731: 728: 725: 722: 720: 717: 714: 712: 709: 705: 703: 700: 697: 695: 692: 689: 685: 684: 680: 678: 676: 668: 663: 658: 657: 656: 650: 647: 643: 641: 638: 634: 632: 629: 621: 617: 616: 612: 608: 605: 601: 599: 596: 592: 590: 586: 582: 581: 575: 573: 570: 566: 561: 559: 556: 553: 547: 543: 541: 538: 535: 533: 530: 527: 523: 522: 518: 513: 511: 508: 507: 502: 498: 490: 488: 485: 480: 478: 475: 471: 467: 463: 462: 458: 456: 453: 450: 448: 440: 435: 433: 429: 426: 422: 419: 418:verifiability 415: 413: 407: 400: 398: 395: 390: 388: 385: 381: 379: 375: 371: 370: 364: 362: 359: 355: 352:I agree with 351: 349: 346: 343: 338: 337: 336: 330: 326: 323: 319: 315: 312: 303: 302: 292: 288: 287: 286: 283: 279: 276: 273: 270: 264: 260: 258: 255: 252: 247: 243: 240: 236: 235: 234: 233: 232: 226: 222: 219: 215: 213: 210: 206: 202: 200: 197: 193: 191: 188: 187: 182: 178: 170: 167: 164: 161: 155: 151: 149: 146: 142: 140: 135: 130: 128: 122: 120: 117: 114: 110: 109: 108: 102: 100: 97: 93: 91: 83: 76: 72: 65: 64: 55: 49: 47: 42: 39: 35: 34: 25: 19: 4552: 4548: 4547: 4519: 4504:Kylehamilton 4487: 4471: 4465: 4438: 4383: 4348: 4294: 4262: 4228: 4224:Harry Potter 4217: 4162:by default. 4135: 4067: 4045: 4042: 4026: 3994: 3929: 3883: 3848: 3811: 3743: 3725: 3700:Kylehamilton 3687: 3656: 3650: 3635: 3569: 3547: 3521: 3440: 3404: 3360: 3313: 3269: 3231: 3158: 3128: 3018: 2984: 2958: 2957: 2947: 2945: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2837: 2827: 2821: 2820: 2810: 2808: 2793:Kylehamilton 2742: 2718: 2712: 2679: 2678: 2669: 2588: 2556: 2528: 2468: 2407:Kylehamilton 2394: 2364: 2337: 2327: 2325: 2305: 2251: 2218: 2194: 2190: 2186: 2140: 2123: 2111:Kylehamilton 2094: 2089: 2017: 1996: 1949: 1926: 1901: 1872: 1868: 1846: 1840: 1817:Kylehamilton 1800: 1771: 1765: 1742:Kylehamilton 1725: 1692: 1686: 1654:Kylehamilton 1637: 1572: 1566: 1534:Kylehamilton 1517: 1483: 1458: 1425: 1365:Kylehamilton 1348: 1273: 1269: 1264: 1262: 1245: 1233: 1218: 1210: 1190: 1165:5,000 words 1148: 1142: 1105: 1103: 1095: 1092:Corpus size: 1074: 1068: 1061:Kylehamilton 1056: 1044: 1029: 1025: 1013: 1002: 978: 945: 939: 905: 903: 885: 862: 849: 846:Lexicon size 829: 810: 804: 784: 760: 672: 661: 654: 595:Kylehamilton 578: 564: 551: 504: 465: 454: 451: 447:completeness 446: 444: 441:Completeness 367: 334: 295: 290: 268: 230: 218:Kylehamilton 184: 159: 126: 106: 98: 94: 89: 87: 54:village pump 43: 4378:IJzeren Jan 4289:IJzeren Jan 4130:IJzeren Jan 4021:IJzeren Jan 3949:Before 1950 3939:Before 1900 3878:IJzeren Jan 3843:IJzeren Jan 3682:IJzeren Jan 3516:IJzeren Jan 3435:IJzeren Jan 3308:IJzeren Jan 3266:per above. 3226:IJzeren Jan 3153:IJzeren Jan 3013:IJzeren Jan 3008:Unhackable. 2832:IJzeren Jan 2737:IJzeren Jan 2583:IJzeren Jan 2463:IJzeren Jan 2389:IJzeren Jan 2246:IJzeren Jan 1991:IJzeren Jan 1865:Publication 1453:IJzeren Jan 1250:BigBlueFish 1185:IJzeren Jan 973:IJzeren Jan 755:IJzeren Jan 604:BigBlueFish 546:IJzeren Jan 322:BigBlueFish 280:50, 000. -- 263:IJzeren Jan 154:IJzeren Jan 4476:L33tminion 4249:L33tminion 4172:their list 4093:L33tminion 3965:L33tminion 3772:L33tminion 3615:L33tminion 3299:Voyager640 3214:L33tminion 3077:L33tminion 2574:Voyager640 2380:Voyager640 2361:per above 2328:reputation 2215:per above 2174:L33tminion 2120:Reputation 1906:L33tminion 1902:verifiable 1630:Voyager640 1619:L33tminion 1510:Voyager640 1499:L33tminion 1422:Oppose. -- 1319:L33tminion 1285:Voyager640 1265:uniqueness 1259:Uniqueness 1114:L33tminion 919:L33tminion 734:Voyager640 688:L33tminion 526:L33tminion 354:L33tminion 342:L33tminion 239:Voyager640 113:L33tminion 48:reference. 46:historical 4489:Cyde Weys 4472:sometimes 4164:ISO 639-3 4156:ISO 639-2 4152:ISO 639-2 4148:ISO 639-1 3652:Star Trek 2539:Europanto 2200:Haikupoet 2191:Mona Lisa 2096:Cyde Weys 1802:Cyde Weys 1727:Cyde Weys 1639:Cyde Weys 1519:Cyde Weys 1442:Oppose -- 1350:Cyde Weys 1345:Esperanto 1220:Cyde Weys 1031:Cyde Weys 995:you know? 991:Just zis 888:Langmaker 831:Cyde Weys 777:you know? 773:Just zis 662:is finite 580:Cyde Weys 497:you know? 493:Just zis 369:Cyde Weys 203:1000. -- 177:you know? 173:Just zis 75:talk page 4564:Category 4039:ISO code 3672:Burbster 2923:Nazgjunk 2914:Burbster 2531:Adjuvilo 2187:Guernica 1984:Nazgjunk 1975:Burbster 1599:Burbster 1444:Burbster 1415:Caerwine 1215:Malbolge 1135:Caerwine 971:2500. -- 708:Caerwine 537:Caerwine 145:Caerwine 123:1000. -- 111:1000. -- 4367:tɔktəmi 4324:tɔktəmi 4111:tɔktəmi 3983:tɔktəmi 3799:tɔktəmi 3753:Yes. - 3484:tɔktəmi 3348:tɔktəmi 3257:tɔktəmi 3116:tɔktəmi 2972:tɔktəmi 2964:100. -- 2928:Signing 2894:tɔktəmi 2865:MMORPGs 2853:Comment 2702:tɔktəmi 2631:tɔktəmi 2438:tɔktəmi 2330:valid: 2314:tɔktəmi 2286:tɔktəmi 2189:or the 2009:Captdoc 1937:tɔktəmi 1404:tɔktəmi 1014:because 626:tɔktəmi 152:100. -- 4479:(talk) 4453:Durova 4399:(talk) 4335:Oppose 4280:Durova 4252:(talk) 4204:Oppose 4121:Durova 4096:(talk) 4057:Samboy 4012:Durova 3968:(talk) 3920:Oppose 3861:Durova 3830:Durova 3775:(talk) 3663:Durova 3626:Samboy 3618:(talk) 3572:Elvish 3495:Durova 3217:(talk) 3144:Durova 3097:Samboy 3080:(talk) 3003:Durova 2905:Durova 2870:Durova 2784:Durova 2759:(talk) 2687:Samboy 2642:Durova 2616:Samboy 2516:(talk) 2499:Snurks 2354:Samboy 2300:Oppose 2237:Durova 2208:Samboy 2193:, but 2177:(talk) 2083:Oppose 2074:(talk) 1966:Durova 1918:Samboy 1909:(talk) 1833:Samboy 1758:Samboy 1679:Samboy 1622:(talk) 1591:Durova 1559:Samboy 1502:(talk) 1374:Oppose 1331:Durova 1322:(talk) 1176:Durova 1133:1,000 1126:Samboy 1117:(talk) 964:Durova 932:Samboy 922:(talk) 805:MINOR. 724:Durova 699:Samboy 691:(talk) 613:Oppose 565:voila! 529:(talk) 484:Durova 474:Samboy 470:Samoan 405:Snurks 345:(talk) 331:Oppose 291:higher 261:10. -- 209:(talk) 116:(talk) 4531:ɹəəds 4524:speer 4446:email 4270:email 4158:code 4075:email 4002:email 3819:email 3736:Chris 3643:email 3603:Yes. 3555:email 3412:email 3368:email 3277:email 3136:email 3104:with 3011:2. -- 2992:email 2726:email 2713:509gg 2564:email 2372:email 2226:email 2044:GeeJo 2022:Zocky 1957:email 1904:. -- 1854:email 1779:email 1700:email 1580:email 1472:Zocky 1433:email 1238:Zocky 1167:Jamie 1156:email 1049:Zocky 953:email 874:ɹəəds 867:speer 818:email 716:Jamie 646:Zocky 421:GeeJo 394:Chris 384:Zocky 307:ɹəəds 300:speer 134:email 16:< 4494:vote 4361:Angr 4318:Angr 4189:mark 4105:Angr 3977:Angr 3896:mark 3793:Angr 3655:and 3478:Angr 3426:Talk 3423:Klaw 3379:mark 3342:Angr 3251:Angr 3171:mark 3110:Angr 3031:mark 3001:10. 2981:10. 2966:Angr 2925:- - 2888:Angr 2696:Angr 2654:mark 2625:Angr 2485:mark 2452:Talk 2449:Klaw 2432:Angr 2308:Angr 2280:Angr 2101:vote 2090:were 2032:mark 1931:Angr 1807:vote 1732:vote 1644:vote 1524:vote 1398:Angr 1355:vote 1225:vote 1112:0 -- 1036:vote 1004:AfD? 993:Guy, 917:0 -- 851:is. 836:vote 786:AfD? 775:Guy, 746:Talk 743:Klaw 620:Angr 585:vote 506:AfD? 495:Guy, 466:very 374:vote 356:. — 254:Talk 251:Klaw 186:AfD? 175:Guy, 4432:... 4406:-- 4340:... 4239:Mgm 4209:... 4168:SIL 4160:art 3955:Mgm 3944:... 3925:... 3909:-- 3755:Mgm 3717:... 3605:Mgm 3598:Yes 3594:") 3586:'s 3582:or 3578:'s 3574:in 3542:... 3509:Yes 3468:Mgm 3451:-- 3396:Yes 3324:-- 3293:Yes 3204:Mgm 3198:Yes 3188:... 3067:Mgm 3061:Yes 3051:... 2954:Yes 2950:. 2859:or 2817:Yes 2675:Yes 2607:Mgm 2550:... 2545:Yes 2535:Ido 2414:-- 2346:Yes 2151:Mgm 2051:(c) 2048:(t) 1892:Mgm 1884:Mgm 1795:Yes 1720:Yes 1661:-- 1613:Yes 1541:-- 1493:Yes 1388:Mgm 1380:Mgm 1341:Ido 1075:850 681:Yes 677:". 428:(c) 425:(t) 4566:: 4534:ɹ 4528:/ 4435:-- 4397:| 4376:-- 4359:-- 4316:-- 4287:-- 4259:-- 4247:-- 4103:-- 4091:-- 4064:-- 4019:-- 3975:-- 3963:-- 3876:-- 3791:-- 3770:-- 3712:No 3698:-- 3680:-- 3670:-- 3613:-- 3537:No 3462:No 3433:-- 3335:No 3306:-- 3244:No 3212:-- 3183:No 3075:-- 3046:No 2930:is 2912:-- 2881:No 2828:10 2813:. 2791:-- 2777:No 2757:| 2715:. 2623:-- 2601:No 2514:| 2425:No 2072:| 2020:. 1843:. 1826:No 1815:-- 1768:-- 1751:No 1740:-- 1672:No 1652:-- 1552:No 1532:-- 1451:-- 877:ɹ 871:/ 799:No 753:-- 686:-- 593:-- 544:-- 524:-- 340:-- 310:ɹ 304:/ 207:| 4521:r 4448:) 4444:( 4363:/ 4320:/ 4272:) 4268:( 4241:| 4192:✎ 4107:/ 4077:) 4073:( 4004:) 4000:( 3979:/ 3957:| 3899:✎ 3821:) 3817:( 3795:/ 3757:| 3645:) 3641:( 3607:| 3557:) 3553:( 3480:/ 3470:| 3414:) 3410:( 3382:✎ 3370:) 3366:( 3344:/ 3279:) 3275:( 3253:/ 3206:| 3174:✎ 3138:) 3134:( 3112:/ 3069:| 3034:✎ 2994:) 2990:( 2968:/ 2890:/ 2728:) 2724:( 2698:/ 2657:✎ 2627:/ 2609:| 2566:) 2562:( 2488:✎ 2434:/ 2374:) 2370:( 2310:/ 2282:/ 2228:) 2224:( 2153:| 2035:✎ 1986:) 1961:) 1959:) 1955:( 1933:/ 1894:| 1886:| 1856:) 1852:( 1841:N 1781:) 1777:( 1766:N 1707:) 1702:) 1698:( 1687:N 1582:) 1578:( 1567:N 1435:) 1431:( 1400:/ 1390:| 1382:| 1246:0 1234:0 1211:0 1158:) 1154:( 1143:N 1106:0 1069:0 1057:0 1045:0 1026:0 997:/ 955:) 951:( 940:N 906:0 864:r 820:) 816:( 779:/ 622:/ 499:/ 297:r 179:/ 136:) 132:( 77:. 56:. 26:)

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

Knowledge (XXG)

:Conlangs/Straw poll - Knowledge (XXG)

Index