Talk:Languages of the European Union/Archive 1

message: There should be tables for all the 20-some languages listing the English sorting order and the Union sorting order. -- Kaihsu 14:28, 2004 Mar 1 (UTC)
I removed the following section from the table: (38 % of all European citizens) Reasons: It certainly depends on the method in determining how many Europeans speak German. In order to be consistent, I think it is better to stick to one figure. Since the table refers to official numbers of the EU, I think it is better to stick to EU calculations. Gugganij 14:16, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Tables needed

message: I removed the following sentence: Romanian and Bulgarian will become official languages of the EU from 1 January 2007. Reasons: Even if it is very likely that Romania and Bulgaria will join the EU, the negotiations are not finished yet. If those negotiations turn out to be successful (again: which is quite likely), the exact date of this enlargement is also not known yet. Gugganij 16:17, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Negotions with Romania and Bulgaria not finished yet

message: Any chance to replace the numbers of the EU15 with numbers of the EU25?
Sorry, but the European Commission does not yet have up-to-date data on the languages situation since the enlargement of 2004.  --Holdspa 12:41, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For example, as a result of Spain taking advantage of this paragraph, certified translations of the Constitution may be produced in the Catalan, Galician and Basque languages. --Holdspa 12:57, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  data on EU languages 

message: The second table states that 44% of Belgians speak French as a language "other than their mother tongue", this is impossible because around 32% speak French as a first language, 60% Dutch and only 8% speak both bi-lingually, I believe the 44% refers to the total figure of French speakers in Belgium, it should simply state "n/a" as the figure should represent the number of speakers of French as a second language. Angryafghan 19:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data on percentages of Speakers of languages in Belgium 

message: 23% of the British population speak French and 9% speak German? This sounds much to high. Maybe "Parlez vous Anglais?", but not to a useable degree.
TiffaF 16:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data on percentages of Speakers of languages in the United Kingdom 

message: What happens if there is a discrepancy amang the translations? Is there a language that takes precedence in this casd?68.6.83.157 01:11, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems likely, but I don't know the standard procedure. 惑乱 分からん 21:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Man vyi 08:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Working languages: Frenh doesnt only have international influene due to "historical" reason but more importantly for political reasons - just as German has more influence for economical reasons. Feb-2006
I'd say German has more of an influence for philological and anthropological reasons than economic. The influence is strongest in countries which have, at times, been at least partially within German speaking or German/Prussian populated realms. Also Geograpy is a significant factor with Germany having a considerable number of bordering states. --217.154.33.122 17:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: I come here from [[Irish] language|Irish] where the claim Is that it will be an official working language in 2007.  The problem is the inclusion of the word working.  This article perhaps does not make clear enough the difference between the more numerous official languages and the few working languages.  Could someone make this more explicit?
Shenme 05:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official language vs. Working language 

message: What? Since when are English, German and French the only working languages. Can you cite your sources, or is that what you dreamed last night? In the EU, all 20 langauges are official and working languages according to the "EEC Council's Regulation No 1 determining the languages to be used by the European Economic Community " as ameded by the enlargement treaties. It is true that only English, French and German are used for some Internet content, but that is because there is no demand for other versions, or the deamnad is to low. But theoretically all official languages of the EU are also working languages. --Danutz
:Sorry, but that's a fact. "Working languages" are those into which all internal documents are translated, whereas "official languages" are those into which all legal acts and similar things are translated. English, French and German are the only three working languages the EU currently has. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The European Commission has declared those three languages as the languages into which all internal documents will be translated, whether you wish to accept it or not. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I would not try to "get rid of you", so please don't attack me unnecessarily. Circumstantial evidence is this, which at least states that the European Union has at most four working languages; I'll try to find a source which explicitly lists English, French and German and discounts Russian. Give me a few minutes. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The Charta of the Fundemantal Rights of the European Union, available in those three languages... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hah, this is a direct source:  Search for "working languages"; it explicitly lists en, fr and de. Good enough for you? —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I know I'm uninvolved in this, and I don't want to become involved, but please remember to refrain from personal attacks. MiraLuka 21:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Is there a distinction to be drawn between the "working langauges of the EU" and the "working languages of the Commission"? (See first hit here) For example, the press office apparently has only two working languages, French and English ("Press releases of the Commission are available in at least English and French (the working languages of the Commission's Press Room) the day of publication").  What is the practice, for example, in the Parliament?  Can't MEPs debate in the chamber in any of the official languages, with simultaneous translation?  (ISTR that the practice in committees is somewhat different.) -- ALoan (Talk) 12:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Working languages in the EU

message: It says that Bulgarian and Romanian will become official languages of the EU on 2007-01-01.  I seem to undetstand that it's not finally decided yet if Bulgaria and Romania will become members of the EU on 2007-01-01 or on 2008-01-01, although the latter probably is very unlikely.  Will the languages of those countries still become official languages of the EU, even if the countries themselves don't join until 2008-01-01 (I guess not)?
Stefan2 08:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, and amended. Ian3055 12:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 

message: Why isn't Arabic mentioned? According to this article, there are in France alone 4 million Arabic speakers.  Looks a language that is significant enough to be mentioned. Sijo Ripa 22:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If Arabic was mentioned then Chinese would have to be included as would other minority languages like Urdu, and the endless list of languages spoken in Britain, also the obvious reason being that Arabic is not an official language in any EU state and is therefore irrelevant to this article, Thankyou. Angryafghan 19:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Arabic

message: I did not find a clear reason why the EU has so many official languages. I don't know how it's working out for the Europeans, but I believe that English, German, and French would be plenty. Or just English on that matter because that is what most people speak in the Union. Please explain the stands that certain countries are taking regarding this issue. Thank you, (209.7.171.66 19:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From http://europa.eu/languages/en/home: Each Member State, when it joins the Union, stipulates which language or languages it wants to have declared official languages of the EU. So the Union uses the languages chosen by its citizens’ own national governments, not a single language or a few languages chosen by itself and which many people in the Union might not understand. Man vyi 16:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you please give further information on the policies of different member countries regarding this issue. Has there been a clear move to cut down on the number of languages? How do certain countries feel about paying out so much for something that could be easily avoided by eliminating some smaller languages? Has there been a proposed amendment in the EU to change the status of official languages? Thank you for your answer Man vyi, it is greatly appriciated. (209.7.171.66 19:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's pretty much one of the underlying principles of the Union that is highly unlikely to change in the next two decades; the smaller states would never agree to cutting their languages withour major concessions on other issues in return. —Nightstallion (?) 05:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So instead of coming to an agreement and save money, you just keep spending billions of euros on translation? If the people knew what else they could do with all that money, I bet they would figure out a better way to handle this issue. How about the proposement of the British politicial who wanted to change the languages of the EU? Why did his move get denied and for what reasons? I'm glad that you actually answered my question this time, instead of removing it. Good job, thanks (LonghornJohnny 15:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a matter of equal rights for all the languages in the Union; unifying it to just three or even only one language would go strongly against the wishes of the smaller nations and would most certainly not be received well. —Nightstallion (?) 20:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why so many languages? 

message: Τhere seems to be a mistake in the first table: it mentions Russian, not an official language of the EU. What is more, it mentions only 12 out of the 20 official languages of the EU, without explaining why.--Michkalas 13:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right. It wasn't a survey about official languages. Therefore now fixed. Man vyi 16:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Language skills of European citizens" 

message: Could someone show me where the image to the right is a logo of the European Year of Languages 2001?  I cannot find this anywhere, and it seems silly that there are two logos. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 18:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, Chamaeleon is one "of the graphic designs (for example the chameleon and the "hello" bubbles) that were developed for the European Year of Languages also proved to be very popular with organizers of activities."  So only :Image:European Year of Languages 2001 logo.jpg is an official logo. I was imprecise and I will fix it.--Michkalas 21:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo 

message: There are 27 countries with 23 official languages.
My obvious question is: 
*What countries don't have an offical language named after their country?
Answer:
*Austria speaks German
*Belgium speaks Dutch/French/German
*Cyprus speaks Greek, the Turkish part is not part of the EU yet
*Luxembourg speaks French/German, though they do have a third official language (Luxembourgish) used within their country
Can this be mentioned somewhere in the article?
JohnI 15:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official languages Vs Countries 

message: Users trying to update this section, after the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU, have produced factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies. The section was following the latest Eurobarometer survey, published before the 2007 enlargement. By including the two then candidate countries in the section of member states and by wrongly "calculating" table figures for a the new sum of population tried to "update" the survey on their own (see also above). Only the tables, not the text, were affected. This "update" is not possible, unless someone tries to recalculate the tables and numbers of the whole survey. For example, the percentage of the population speaking English is provided by the survey for the EU25. To give the correct number for EU27, one should go to the appropriate table in the survey and make new calculations for each country and also each language and so on for the other languages. The tables according to the survey are here. The original tables should be included followed by a clear note that data were published before the 2007 enlargement.--Michkalas 20:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Original data now included, tag removed. --Michkalas 15:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Michkalas, I'm extremely disappointed by what you just did, which is neither fair-play, nor in the Wiki spirit. After our long discussion on this talk page, nobody else thought that we should eliminate the data from the 2 new countries. I'm not going to repeat myself, but ignoring the data from the 2 new members (although included in the original survey) is not the right thing to do. I honestly cannot understand why you insist in doing this. And you even do it in an unprofessional manner as well. Can you please compare the data from the table you've just put, with the text below it (that says "German is, then, the most widely spoken mother tongue with 17% (18% in your table) of the speakers, while English is the most widely spoken language in the EU with 50% (51% in your table)"). Nice consistency! Please revert the table back, at least until other users express their own opinions on this matter. Alexrap 18:07, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Data from Romania are neither eliminated, nor ignored. I am just avoiding to declare myself a Eurobarometer statistician. Do you believe that in the article is not sufficiently highlighted that Romanian is now an official EU language and Romania is now an EU member state? Do you believe the most important thing in the article is to highlight how widely is Romanian spoken in the EU? Wait a little bit for the next Eurobarometer survey and Romanian will be officially included in the tables as the "7th most spoken language in the EU" with out messing everything else. I have corrected the inconsistencies you had mentioned. --Michkalas 18:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not going to repeat myself. In the non-updated form, the table ignores the data taken from BG and RO that are included in the survey. I still cannot understand why you decided on your own to restore the old table. It would have been a lot more fair-play to wait for more people to give their opinions, don't you agree? The simple fact that in EU25 3% of the people spoke Greek (whereas in EU27 only 2% do) is not a good enough reason for ignoring data included in that report. If you don't like the new table, try to improve it (read all the discussion above) or find another way to include the data from the 2 new members. But just don't ignore it! Also, this is a Wikipedia article, not your own. If we asked for more people to express an opinion, then we should wait before imposing our own version. Alexrap 18:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand that the initial change, made by Kekrops, gives some ground for suspicion. As to me, as you can see at Slavic language (Greece) and Talk:Slavic language (Greece), I am not exactly distinguished for my patriotism. I also do not have any problem with Romania being a EU member state as the article on Leonard Orban shows. Anyway, we can wait even more, but 20 days had already passed.--Michkalas 19:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Exactly, 20 days had already passed and the other users didn't seem to have anything against updating the table. So why did you decide to revert it? Alexrap 12:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree completely; to start fudging the data like this makes all of it meaningless. The new member countires should be mentioned in the text and the fact that the data is from a different source mentioned; but it really shouldn't be attached to the data in the 2nd table; especially when that table has a valid reference attached to it - this implies to the reader that all the data in that table is valid and from the same source. Also, someone has added a "mathematical mean" column; this column actually means absolutely nothing statistically and is just confusing. I think the column should be removed; with the table needing either a substantial re-edit or a revert.--DomUK 11:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hey, sorry to keep on with this but I've noticed a few more issues with this section. Firstly in the second table where has that blue colouring/shading of the top 1 and bottom 2 come from in the table; I'm having difficulty fathoming what it's supposed to actually mean or tell people? Could someone explain what it's for or should it be removed? And another issue is the three maps running down the right side of the section, showing the proportions speaking English, French and German. It's a good idea, but the fact each image uses a different scale is confusing and at first glance it seems to imply french is by far the most commonly spoken language in the EU. The shading for "20-40%" in the French language map is dark blue (the third darkest blue on the scale) while on the english language map it is light green (the 5th darkest green shade on it's scale); if you used blue for both the French map would be overall darker implying it is a more widely spoken language. Having maps alongside each other showing the same information using different scales is confusing in my opinion and should be rectified; anyone else agree?--DomUK 11:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language skills of European Union citizens - Disputed section 

message: There is a problem defining what a "lesser-used language" is exactly. It is used loosely. According to a draft report for the European Parliament, "lesser-used language" doesn't include official member state languages, but only regional, minority and non territorial (i.e. Romani and Yiddish) languages. On the other hand, European Bureau for Lesser-Used Languages covers Irish too, an official member state language. Because Irish is now an official EU language and because of the vagueness of the term I am removing the heading "lesser-used languages" and I am replacing it with "Reg and minority languages". There will be a special subsection on Irish and Maltese  under the official languages section. --Michkalas 20:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "lesser-used language" 

message: Could someone please add the Finnish flag beside the Swedish in Languages of the European Union-template? Swedish is an official language of Finland and there are far more Swedish speakers in Finland than German speakers in Belgium. Aaker 13:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Michkalas 18:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks a lot! Aaker 22:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finnish flag to the Swedish language 

message: This article isn't supposed to be a list of all languages spoken in each country, that would be impossible they're so many (Greek is spoken and has been spoken for centuries in most EU member states for example; the Greek community - paroikia - in Vienna for example came into existence hundreds of years ago). Couldn't we stick with those with some official recognition (e.g. Greek in Italy, Turkish in Greece, Hungarian in Romania, Basque in France, Danish in Germany etc). I also think that there should be a table with the languages organized by country; it would take up far less space and would be easier to read.--Domitius 16:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the scope of the article is to say which languages are spoken in the European Union today irrespectively of there legal status. So regional and/or minority languages as well as  migrant languages and foreign language skills have to be included. There is a EU source for this, the Euromosaic study (though not yet available for Bulgaria and Romania). There are 61 languages mentioned in this study and they are all now included. Using the EU survey is also a good idea, because we are avoiding (or we are now having a good argument against) what was happenning until now: someone was adding a language because it was a language s/he supported (like Breton, Ulster Scots etc.) or removing a language s/he dislikes (like Catalan or Russian). --Michkalas 19:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No. Though Irish is the first official language of Ireland, it is considered by the study a minority language (because of number of speakers). I don't think that being now an an official language of the EU affects this. --Michkalas 18:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of minority languages 

message: I find it difficult to reconcile the claim that "Migrant languages are not given formal status or recognition in the EU or in the EU countries and they are not covered by EU language-teaching programmes." with the statement in Yiddish Language, "[Yiddish is an] officially recognized minority language in Sweden". The slight technicality by which the two would not be seen as conflicting is if Yiddish were considered a native, and not a migratory language, but I doubt anyone wants to argue that. Does anyone see a clear solution? samwaltz 06:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yiddish is considered a minority language in Sweden, as you have said, which means a "native" language. It is not considered a migrant language, as the Jewish community dates back to the late 18th century, according to Minority_languages_of_Sweden#Yiddish. It is of course obvious that it is a question as to when a language and a community is not considered anymore migrant and becomes a native language, a political and legal question. --Michkalas 09:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Section: "Migratory languages", Sweden, and Yiddish

message: All the tables in this article are based on calculations before Romania and Bulgaria entered the EU. To take just a few examples
:- Romanian is one of the largest European languages, much larger than Swedish, Czech, Hungarian or Slovak, yet is missing from the table over the most spoken languages.
:- The knowledge of English is lower in Romania and Bulgaria than in the EU average, so the percentage of people speaking English is a bit lower than stated.
:- In contrast, the percentage of people speaking French is a bit higher, as more Romanians speak French than the average EU-citizen.
In short, having tables based on the EU25 is misleading and I would guess that quite a few Romanians and Bulgarians would also view it as a bit offensive. Is there any way to update the tables and the information in the article? Dusis 20:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To my knowledge, there is no new Eurostat and Euromosaic survey on languages after the 2007 enlargement. I suppose we can agree we should not improvise. I can understand the feelings of the fellow Bulgarian, Romanian and Francophone Wikipedians, but the only thing I can say is: don't take it personally, it happens after every enlargement.--Michkalas 20:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There was already a debate on these things some time ago between Michkalas and myself. As I pointed out at the time, the Eurostat survey already contains all the needed information to update the tables. Thus, not updating them is at least strange... Not many people expressed their opinion at the time and those who did, did not prefer the old version of the table. However, after some time (when the updated version was included in the article), Michkalas decided to put back the old version of the table (as a joke now, I would say that he behave like a "little dictator" at the time). At that point, as I had already spent to much time on that discussion and I was a bit dissapointed by Michkalas' (otherwise a valuable contributor to this article) attitude, I decided to leave things as they were. In the end, there are many other articles on Wikipedia that need improvements, so there is no point in wasting too much energy on small issues, especially when unreasonable stubborn attitudes are encountered. Alexrap 11:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partly outdated 

message: I do not understand what the column "mean" which user:16@r has added in the second table of the section "Language skills of European Union citizens" is supposed to show. Could 16@r or someone else, please, explain?--Michkalas 14:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't add it. But mean or I presume arithmetic mean is a specific type of average. Commonly the arithmetic mean is just called the average but there are other types of averages like the mode, median, geometric mean ... Nil Einne (talk) 13:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  column "mean" 

message: List of names of the European Union in the official languages should be merged into this article. It's not that long of a list, and the information could easily be included in this article. As they are official languages, the name they give to the EU is extremely relavant to this article. Could be a table or something. Savidan 17:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge Yes, it would majorly improve this article, and i agree with what you mean about its being relavant. Scibah 16:40, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I have reviewed this article and compared it to the criteria as outlined in WP:WIAGA, and I have unfortunately had to fail the nomination.  Here are the reasons why:
*Criteria 1: The article EGREGIOUSLY violates the MOS.  It is well below GA standard and is NOT easy to read or follow, and not well written.  Here are some of the more obvious problems:
**There is a missing close tag for "small text" that messes up the second half of the article.
**The lead section (see WP:LEAD does not even come close to fully summarizing the article.  If it merits a section in the article, it merits mention in the lead.
**Organization is a mess.  See WP:LAYOUT and indeed the entire Manual of Style WP:MOSThere is no flow to the article and no clear reason why certain sections are set aside as sections, or even why the article follows the organization it does.  It reads like it has been cobbled together from many sources, and no attention has been given to creating a coherent article.  The first section on official languages, for example, gives the impression (look at the Table of Contents) that Maltese and Irish are the official langauges.  The entire article needs a complete rewrite to create a cohesive article and not just a random bunch of facts about the subject.
*Criteria 2: Referencing
**No consistent referencing style is used.  The use of blind external links is deprecated in favor of a referencing style that clearly indicates the sources of the information, such as the use of a bibliography, and the use of a references section where full bibligraphic information for each source is listed.  This article uses a mix of blind external links and inline cites.  All references should be converted to one style, preferably either footnotes or parenthetical notes, so that full bibliographic information can be listed.
**Additionally, several sections lack any clear reference whatsoever.
It is a shame this article is not in better shape.  It seems to be a worthwhile topic, but this article needs some serious work before it will pass GA standard.  I see that it is B-class; I wonder if it even meets that standard; it reads more as start-class to me.  Good luck in fixing this article up.  It needs a LOT of work.  If you feel that this review was handled inappropriately, you may seek remediation at WP:GA/R.  If you have any questions or seek further clarification, drop a note on my talk page --Jayron32|talk|contribs 04:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Nomination failed

message: Hey, I've just removed this info from the EU page as part of a small rework. I am placing it here just in case it is missing from this page. Can someone familer with this article check?
The EU provides interpretation, translation and publication services in its official languages, but only legislation and important documents are produced in all 23 official languages. Other documents are translated only into the languages necessary for their use. For internal purposes the EU institutions make their own language arrangements. The European Commission, for example, conducts its internal business in English, French and German, and only use all languages for public information and communication purposes. The European Parliament, on the other hand, has members who need working documents in their own languages, so its document flow is fully multilingual from the outset. In the EU, language policy is the responsibility of member states, but EU institutions, based on the principle of subsidiarity, promote the teaching and dissemination of the languages of the member states, through a number of programmes, most prominently Lifelong learning Programme 2007-2013.
Thanks. - J Logan t: 15:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info 

message: :Image:Eutranslationlogo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 10:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Eutranslationlogo.svg

message: Should mention that Latin has a limited use in official symbols or mottos, when there isn't space to write 20 different language translations. AnonMoos (talk) 12:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Latin

message: Serbocroatian or Croatoserbian language is one language, with 2 main dialects (or 'writting standards')-western (croatian) and eastern (serbian), and nobody can make 2 languages of these 2 dialects. By analogy, it's same like making 2 languages from English language's 2 major dialects: british and american. There's tons of materials on Serbocroatian language as ONE language, spoken in Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Hercegovina. If you go by the 'logic' of making some 'new languages' of one language's dialects, then besides serbian and croatian, there should be also- montenegrin, bosnian and bunjevac languages on the map!!! Not to mention how the real map should look like if you consider all the languages that exist in Italy-(Friulian, Sicilian, Napulitan, etc.) and Spain ( Andalusian, Castillian, etc.)Wikipedia also has some very good scientific articles about this language, with quite a realistic points of view on this matter. Despite all (luckily now-sentenced to death) the obsessive-compulsive phanatic propaganda from the croatian nationalists about 'theirown' language, there's NO DIFFERENCE in all linguistic aspects between the serbian and croatian dialects of the SERBOCROATIAN language. It is and it will stay ONE, SAME language, with 2 or more dialects. The only thing that needs to be considered now and in the near future, when the West Balkan joins EU-is probably the name of this beautiful language, which because of the known political reasons, maybe needs to be changed to 'Croatian/Bosnian/Serbian', like it is done in the International Haag Tribune, or into 'South Slavic Group language' like it is in some on-line scientific forums and journals. Best Christmas Wishes and Cheers.24.86.110.10 (talk) 04:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the Bosnians and Montenegrins would have us split Serbo-Croatian into four languages, not just two. I agree with you in principle that it's silly to pretend Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin are four different languages instead of one language with several different written standards, but we at Wikipedia don't have control over the situation. The EU and the countries involved all treat Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian at least as three different languages (Montenegrin is less clear-cut at this point), and all we can do is report on that. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 07:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The language map is wrong! You cannot split Serbocroatian language into 2! It's ONE language!