Appendix talk:Esperanto-Latin relations

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

The Esperanto entry for each word already mentions if it came from Latin. I can't think of a reason this list would be useful as a reference in itself. — This unsigned comment was added by 128.193.8.116 (talk) at 18:03, 9 November 2012.

Delete, the appendix is very, very incomplete. And if it were complete it would be absolutely enormous. Category:Esperanto terms derived from Latin has 274 entries, but should be much, much more than that because we either lack an Esperanto entry or we have an entry that lacks an etymology, or {{etyl|la|eo}} in that etymology. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Delete this for being redundant. --Æ&Œ (talk) 00:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Delete. These are labeled cognates, but Esperanto isn't descended from a common ancestor with Latin, so that's wrong. The "language relations" appendices in general seem to be a magnet for etymological sloppiness: they're very inconsistent about words that are borrowed or inherited from other languages that also have appendices. For instance, why is abrupta in the Esperanto-German appendix, but not in the English or Latin ones? Most of them also have no information at all beyond word pairings. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Three days after nomination is too soon for deletion. At least seven days should pass from the nomination, or even more. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:50, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but, you see, seven days is not especially speedy for a speedy delete. When the community voices their approval and the page is undeniably crappy, then I think that immediate destruction is not out of the question. If suddenly an uncharacteristi quantity of keeps pop up, it can always be undeleted to boost the Appendix's crap percentage. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

What are you going to say to someone who asks for a list of words that are similar in Esperanto and Latin? "Sorry, Wiktionary had that but we deleted it"? That person will be disappointed. --Gilward Kukel (talk) 09:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a terrible argument. It's a bit like saying what happens if someone asks for examples vandalism and we says "sorry, Wiktionary deletes all its vandalism". Mglovesfun (talk) 11:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Nobody asks for vandalism, and Wiktionary is not a place for vandalism but a place for information about words. --Gilward Kukel (talk) 13:09, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Nobody is asking for a list of words that are similar in Esperanto and Latin either. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I am asking for it. And an administrator of the Esperanto wiktionary found the list good enough to copy it to the Esperanto wiktionary. And concerning all the other people in the world: if you don't ask them you cannot know if they are interested in this. Your interests are not the only interests people may have. --Gilward Kukel (talk) 14:18, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

See also: Category:Esperanto terms derived from Latin. --WikiTiki89 13:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. Gilward, that's what I'd point them to, although it is woefully incomplete as well. Personally, as a Latin speaker who finds Esperanto interesting, this appendix should appeal to me, but I think that quality is better served by expanding the category in question (and thus, simultaneously, Esperanto etymologies). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:09, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's a good category. Some of the Esperanto words and etymologies were contributed by me. But there are disadvantages:

• it only shows the Esperanto words. To see the Latin word, you have to click on the Esperanto word and look for it.
• you have to click on "next 200"
• it can only contain Esperanto words that have an entry
• it is more difficult to add an Esperanto-Latin word pair to the category than to the list, especially when the Esperanto word has no entry yet
• you can't group the words. For example, the list had a section for words that have the same spelling (like apud, sed, tamen). The category does not inform us about that.
• you can't add extra information to an Esperanto-Latin word pair (on the category page)

--Gilward Kukel (talk) 10:32, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Tell you what Gilward Kukel, ask all the 7 billion people on Earth and then reply. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)