Talk:Kipchak languages

message: Why does this article make no mention of Kyrgyz?  Kyrgyz is listed as a member of this family on other articles in Wikipedia, notably Turkic languages.  The map depicting Kipchak distribution is also not consistent with other articles, as it does not include any areas of Kyrgyzstan.--Brokev03 (talk) 05:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kyrgyz language 

message: What is the justification for naming this page "Kypchak" as opposed to the overwhelmingly more common (in English) spelling "Kipchak?."  Just try googling Kypchak to see what I mean.  If no one has any objections, I'm going to come back in a few weeks and recommend a move to "Kipchak languages." --Brokev03 (talk) 05:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kypchak/Kipchak 

message: I added Nogai and Nogay Tatar because Nogays are seen as Tatars, too. Some interestings examples on Youtube are Nogay Tatar qart apaqayî, Nogay Tatarlar . Ногайлар . Ногъайлыла . Nogai Tatars and Nogay Turkleri NOGAY TATAR TURK KIRIM. --Buachamer (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nogai Tatar 

message: The article is a bit confused, because presumably the Kipchak language is ancestral of the lot, in which case it can hardly belong to a specific group.  Also from this article you might think that Cuman is ancestral of the Kipchak-Cuman group, but its own article suggests that it is virtually the same language as Kipchak.  We may not have much data about these extinct languages. PatGallacher (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: Is in this book: Islamic Historiography and "Bulghar" Identity Among the Tatars and Bashkirs of Russia.
Oncenawhile (talk) 08:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some of the history of the distinction between the languages / dialects 

message: The article say this: "spoken by more than 25 million people in an area spanning from Lithuania to China."  Are Kipchak languages really spoken in Lithuania?--74.103.157.38 (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  range 

message: I believe it would be useful to give the estimated numbers of native speakers for each of the Kipchak languages.  Are there mistakes in the previous table?  It cites Ethnologue and Glottolog, and is roughly consistent with the speaker numbers in the Wikipedia pages for those languages.  Freelance Intellectual (talk) 18:28, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:No original research. Beshogur (talk) 18:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:   Citing figures from well respected published sources is not original research. Are there mistakes in the previous tables that don't match the cited sources? Freelance Intellectual (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe it would be a good idea to include a table for numbers of speakers, in line with other articles, e.g.: Finnic_languages#Northern_Finnic, Celtic_languages#Demographics, Indigenous_languages_of_the_Americas#Numbers_of_speakers_and_political_recognition.  I'm not committed to the particular table that was in this article before, but some kind of table would be helpful.  The "Kipchak languages by native speakers" section of this article is also poorly written, regardless of the table, with a confusing reference to the Turkic languages.  Freelance Intellectual (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Languages by number of speakers 

message: The article begins with “For the extinct Turkic language, see Kipchak language.” However, this links back to the current article page (loop). This should be corrected, but I don’t have the required knowledge.
CielProfond (talk) 18:04, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misredirection