Talk:Burushaski

message: I would very much like to see Chashule's work included on the page, there very few people who have put a lot of research into the genetic affiliation of Burushaski this century, and out of all the other theories on this matter, his is the the position with the most evidence provided for it, as the dene-caucasion theory isn't held to be tenable by most linguists. Please include his viewpoint and his evidence and let the reader make an informed decision. I found the article sparse when I read it, and I was disappointed when I couldn't find any updates on his recent work on the language. -August 16th 2012      — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kysius (talk • contribs) 23:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: He *is* a crackpot. Fringe theories may get some mention, but they don't deserve half the biblio. Most linguists think Dene-Caucasian is nonsense, but there are at least a number of linguists working on it. No-one follows Chashule, despite the fact that it would be major news if he were correct, and would be picked up by newspapers and general science journals. The only reason he deserves any mention at all is that he somehow got himself published in a reputable journal. Pick the most representative of his pubs, and stick with that. kwami (talk) 02:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

text: And I'm deleting again. It's a matter of WP:Weight: Casule vs. everyone else in the world; normally we give the most space to everyone else. Pick a good representative work and use that. Since his latest has been announced on LingList, maybe we'll get a review that we can use for evaluation. If we actually have reputable sources that say he's on to something, great; but we don't parrot claims just because someone got himself published. (Hell, I've gotten myself published, but I don't add that stuff to WP.) kwami (talk) 01:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  unsubstantiated editing 

message: On what basis did this article get moved from Burushaski, which is far and away the most common English name?  --Taivo (talk) 04:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burusho? 

message: Saying that Vajda confirmed Ruhlen's hypothesis is a very easily verified and a very specific claim.  The word 'unprecedented', for example, does not appear.  Ruhlen's own 1998 paper specifically claiming that Yeniseian and Na Dene are each other's closest relatives is available in PDF form and Vajda's own paper specifically credits Ruhlen as publishing the hypothesis and providing the crucial cognate for birch bark.  Of course Trombetti and others have made broader prior claims - feel free to add them with my thanks - but that does not mean that Ruhlen's hypothesis was not his own or that it is "false" to say that Vajda' provided conclusive evidence confirming the two families as each other's closest relatives.  This is a matter of three words ("Merritt Ruhlen's hypothesis") and a verifiable reference to a peer-reviewed journal, not our own opinions on Ruhlen or his wider claims.  Rather than removing this legitimate source, please add any other referenced claims you find relevant.  Readers deserve the full context if they want to judge scholars' intuitions about Burushaski.μηδείς (talk) 01:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ruhlen 

message: Could you please write some description what kind of meaning the "conative" mood bears? I'm asking this because it doesn't seem to be a widely used linguistic terminology, so it would be useful for most readers of the article if this term is clarified, at least to some extent.--Imz (talk) 16:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "conative" mood 

message: I only came here when I read this [] in the news. I wanted to learn more but this article looks old (or maybe it's an unconfirmed theory?), doesn't even mention that it's IE. 69.136.155.232 (talk) 03:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not. See 'relationships' above. — kwami (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is still an unconfirmed theory and given the skepticism of Phyrgian experts, it's probably just smoke and mirrors.  --Taivo (talk) 05:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

text: No, it's not the 'biggest news in decades'. It's yet another unsubstantiated fringe theory placing a language that is overwhelmingly agreed not to be IE into IE. Postulations that [isolate X] is in [family X] based on incidental and often strained similarities, or probable loans, or severe misunderstandings of comparative linguistics, are a dime a dozen and they need to meet serious notability criteria for inclusion. It very much matters and it's a good thing the standards here are as they are and not what you're proposing. Harsimaja (talk) 16:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Indo-European language 

message: I cannot find any indication that "Burusho language" is actually in use as an alternative name for the language. The term seems to me about as odd and ungrammatical as "Spaniard language" or "Finn language"; according to what I have been taught, there is a clear distinction between Burusho, the name of the ethnic group, and Burushaski, the name of their language. If there is no actual ambiguity, I wonder why Burusho people is not at Burusho, where it used to be. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 08:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burusho language? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Burushaski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090526221250/http://www.uaf.edu:80/anlc/dy2008.html to http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/dy2008.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The term listed as "native name" is just a direct transliteration from Latin to the Persian/Urdu alphabet, a transliteration doesn't make sense as a "native name" for a predominantly spoken language. I think the spelling in Persian/Urdu is relevant, but should be called something else? possibly "local name" or "Persian spelling"? Irtapil (talk) 15:13, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language name and script 

message: Burushaski is mentioned in . I wonder if the claim of possible connection is notable enough to be included in ? Daask (talk) 13:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible relationship with Hattic