Talk:Artificial language

message: It was a bad idea to create this redirect page. An artificial language can be a formal language, a programming language, and several other kinds of languages which do not fall under the definition of "constructed language". DrorK 06:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: This is not a dab page as it does not link to articles with the same or similar names ... see Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Disambiguation pages Abtract (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: DAB

message: I've just added the expert-verify template, because I'm not able to clean page content. An anonimous wikipedian in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Artificial_language&diff=220626161&oldid=211694696 claimed the page was not correctly written, and added new text in an "off-layout" fashion. To me the added text seems very similar to the former, but i do not have sufficient knowledge to do any modification.
I just think this page cannot remain like this.
Sorry for bad english and thanks. 
Jabbba (talk) 17:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone should clean up redundancies

message: This sentence was incoherent and I took it out:
::Inventions like character encodings for information storage or transliteration and transcription such as text messaging(linguistics) for international communication serve similar purposes are not artificial languages because they simply use acronyms and abbreviations.
I also removed text about pidgins; I doubt they qualify as artificial languages because they aren't deliberately designed by one person or a small group of people, but emerge by consensus through a large number of people's interactions.  I am also dubious about character encoding, or recently-devised written forms for languages that were only oral until recently.  If we call those artificial languages, why not apply the same term to all written languages no matter how old? --Jim Henry (talk) 08:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incoherent text removed 

message: * Some languages are developed to express an existing language in an alternate form (most languages only define a written and spoken form): 
** Manually Coded Languages are invented representations of spoken languages in a gestural-visual form.
** Written forms were developed in modern times for some natural languages like Hawaiian.
** Inventions like character encodings for information storage or transliteration and transcription (linguistics) for international communication serve similar purposes.
----
Written forms of spoken or signed languages, and character encodings for said written forms, are IMO codes rather than fully independent languages.  But I'm not going to get into an edit war over this if someone wants to add the above text (or preferably an improved version of it) back into the article. --Jim Henry (talk) 08:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More questionable examples removed; add them back if you like but improve the text first 

message: The term artificial language is no different from constructed language. The article was very short and only worked on a broader interpretation of the term; therefore, I made it a redirect to the latter article. If someone can show that the term can refer to computer languages, etc., then the article must be expanded beyond a disambiguation page. Jchthys (talk) 23:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, our article on constructed language only refers to natural languages, whereas artificial languages also encompass formal languages; see . Tijfo098 (talk) 14:20, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constructed language 

message: Language arts 216.10.214.146 (talk) 22:33, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @216.10.214.146 72.252.32.114 (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language arts