Talk:SIL International

message: I just made edits in regards to the nature of the organization, as it related to it's position and affilation within the greater religion of Christianity. I made similar, more focused edits, in the article for the sister organization, Wycliffe. See the discussion page for that article, in the introduction section, for detailed reasoning on these changes.
::A single sentence was just added to state (neutrally) that translating the Bible into local languages is within their mandate.  The allegations and issues surrounding their missionary activity are discussed below on this page, but, I think, the contest of views ended up as a "zero sum game" for the simple reason that some contributors had read the published sources in question, and others haven't.  The missionary issue is of great importance, and for those who don't have time to read a book, here is a succinct book-review: http://www.cephas-library.com/church_n_state_rockefeller_and_evangelism.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.90.240 (talk) 03:42, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction POV 

message: - Shame on SIL for assigning "RUW" as the code for Belarusian language! -- rydel 17:15, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belarusian Language 

message: As a complete novice to the study of languages (original training in medicine) I find myself somewhat disconcerted by the entry in Wikipedia on SIL. I was unaware that such an impressive collation of world languages existed while reading the parent article but upon reading the full entry on SIL, find myself unsure as to whether or not the political activities of the organisation (alleged or otherwise) have had a impact on the scholarship of its work. I request some clarity with regards SIL's scholarship integrity. Thank you. Anjum Madani (Dublin, Ireland) / 194.125.57.181 12:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scholarship integrity 

message: It was not my intention to delete previous discussion, just add a headline over the newest comment. I pressed edit by the lowest headline, added a new headline above the new comment, and saved. I closed the window as soon as it was saved, and did not look. I tried to replicate this behavior on a test page, but have been unable to do so. Sorry! -- DanielVonFange 04:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aplogies for discussion deletion 

message: I've tried to do a bit of tidy up of the opening section, reducing it to 2 paragraphs. I think the relationship with Wycliffe Bible Translators means the POV claim about SIL being an evangelical missionary organisation can be removed at this point - a relationship is there, we can all agree. And I think any special relationship with New Tribes needs more justification. Overall the article is biased towards an anti-SIL view, which needs some work. Of course the criticisms need to be there, and referenced, but the tone isn't NPOV yet.
--Drmaik 16:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  rewrite of opening section 

message: A note on why I reverted many of the recent changes. As above, saying SIL is a missionary organisation is POV, but the relationship with Wycliffe BT is clear and non controversial. Which is why this needs to be before the mention of the Ethnologue, which needs a little explanation. And to call all members scholars would not be accurate. Splitting into 2 paragraphs was a good idea, I think. --Drmaik 05:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: changes of 23 June

message: I removed the following line: "Dr. Pike was nominated fifteen consecutive years (1982-1996) for the Nobel Peace Prize."  According to the Nobel Peace Prize page, this is not an official distinction - the Nobel people don't release the list of nominees, and nominators are asked not to, as well.  Furthermore, dozens of people are nominated by a wide range of nominators; the fifteen consecutive years could have easily been one random professor nominating him each year (and, since nominators aren't supposed to reveal their picks, it's hard to believe that a wide range of people leaked so that 15 solid years were covered).  It's a misleading and possibly questionable distinction, but if anyone has any objection to the removal, they're free to put it back in.  Bamos 22:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nobel Peace Prize 

message: it would be nice to see the citations done properly per WP:CITE. without it it makes the article look sloppy. --Tainter 01:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  citations 

message: Over the past few days I have done a few clean-up edits to the article - removing a dead link, removing a double reference, and adding a couple of tags where I think the article is not up to Wikipedia standards. Since I am a member of SIL myself, I cannot claim to have a neutral point of view on this, and I advise you to check carefully whether these edits were justified according to Wikipedia policies or just advancing my own POV. Landroving Linguist (talk) 11:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  some clean-up edits 

message: At a conference of the Inter-American Indian Institute in Mérida, Yucatán, in November 1980, delegates denounced the Summer Institute of Linguistics for using a scientific name to conceal its religious agenda and capitalist worldview that was alien to indigenous traditionsBonner 1999, p. 20.
In 1979, SIL's agreement with the Mexican government was officially terminated, but it continued to be active in that countryClarke, p. 182. The same happened in 1980 in EcuadorYashar 2005, p. 118, although a token presence remained. Remnants of SIL presence were protested in every subsequent Native South American uprisingCleary/Steigenga 2004, p. 37. In the early 1990s, the newly-formed organisation of indigenous people of Ecuador CONAIE once more demanded the expulsion of SIL from the countryYashar 2005, p. 146. By the 1980s, [SIL] was expelled from Brazil, Ecuador, Mexico, and Panama, and restricted in Colombia and PeruCleary/Steigenga 2004, p. 36.
Today, according to SIL's annual report, it is funded by donations from individuals, churches, and other organizations, channeled to SIL by the Wycliffe Bible Translatorshttp://www.sil.org/sil/annualreport/English.pdf
</blockquote>
As you can see, I have removed all claims to genocide, all hearsay reports on oil-and-coffee-company financing, and the unreferenced quote of "The Denouncement of Pátzcuaro" - I googled this and found nothing relevant - I'm sure this document exists, but here it is just a quote without a reference, which does not add anything substantial to the better referenced statement by the Inter-American Indian Institute.
I will wait a few weeks to see if I can get any reaction on this proposal. If nobody provides high-quality sources supporting the claims made in the article, and nobody removes the unreferenced claims, who is less suspicious of POV than I am, then I will proceed with the edit as outlined here.
- Landroving Linguist (talk) 13:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Missionary activities

message: According to the intro of the article, SIL's "main purpose is to study, develop and document lesser-known languages, in order to expand linguistic knowledge, promote literacy and aid minority language development."
I find it rather amazing that Bible translation is not mentioned here, given that this is the very reason for SIL's existence, as well as the ultimate goal of all its linguistic activities.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.20.231.167 (talk) 08:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: SIL's work includes helping people with the creation of all kinds of books, and this happens to include Bible translations. A friend of mine who works for SIL told me that there are languages whose native speakers don't want to read the Bible, and for these languages, there is no Bible translation project that SIL could support altough SIL uses to work on these languages anyway. I don't see how SIL's main purpose could be considered Bible translation given that SIL works on certain languages without supporting a Bible translation project. -- 79.238.164.100 (talk) 02:08, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article certainly needs to explain the relation to Wycliffe Bible Translators and the fact that most SIL linguists do work on Bible translation.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SIL's main purposes do NOT include Bible translation? 

message: The article is about the organization, SIL International, which undertakes a number of activities in the field of linguistics, which are highly respected universally by professional linguists. Everyone uses their database. In this article we are not and should not be concerned with Christian missionary activities, pros and cons, possible connections of the aforesaid missionaries with military intelligence gathering of the United States or any other nation, any fringe emotional reactions or paranoid accusations and articles concerning any suspected such activities by social activists or enemies of the United States or enemies of Christianity, missionary work or Jesus Christ. I'd like to know just how this organization is supposed to do its work if it cannot go anywhere and collect language data? I'd like to know how we are going to get an acceptable article about this LINGUISTICS organization if all this paranoid emotionalism is allowed to muddy up the waters? In reponse to the tags I will be removing a good many of the extensive biblio items and links that have little or nothing to do with a LINGUISTICS organization and are not used for any references and I appreciate it if you would take your various agonies somewhere more appropriate. Thanks.Dave (talk) 19:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at this after a long while. The article looks better. I think we are improving. I will be giving it a good check at some point. I don't particularly give a rat's tail whether YOU think MY position is acceptable or not. I will tell you what is dishonest, and also is unacceptable to WP, and that is not to sign your posts with the 4 tilde's as is requested by WP. Do you think you are going snipe at us from the bushes? The critics of SIL have glaring unobjective agendas so don't give us the baloney about honesty and dishonesty. You're the worst offender. SIL appears extensively throughout WP. The language articles depend heavily on it. Whatever missionary work it may undertake cannot be either espoused or denigrated by WP, which demands - demands, I say - a NPOV. To take an organization mainly of linguistic interest to us and turn it into some kind of trumpeting before the walls of Jericho, so to speak, is just what WP does not want. If you have something non-objective to say go say it somewhere else. No one is concealing anything here or trying to conceal anything here. So SIL may have or may have had some other agendas. Those are not of interest. We want their language agenda. Christianity has a place along with all the other creeds and religions, so what? Why don't you be honest about YOUR agenda? I wouldn't expect to see much mention of Christianity in this article either pro or con, so get off it. Don't forget to sign your posts, since you are so passionate for honesty, my passionaria.Dave (talk) 02:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately what you say is not only incorrect but also ignores theorganizatoins own statements about itself. SIL was founded specifically as a way for the Wycliffe Bible Translators to get into then anti-religious Mexico. It is still and has always been a project of missionaries - some of whom today are also linguists. The first many decades of SIL's work there were no preofessionbal linguists - still many SIL linguists have little formal training. Secondly the article should reflect the literature not what you find to be of interest. There is a large body of literature criticizing SIL on linguistic, ideological and political grounds. It needs to be represented balancedly in this article - just like the historical and present ties between SIL and missionary activities does. It i correct that SIL materials are often used by linguists - more often that is however not because of its quality but because it is the only stuff available for most languages. If you read linguistic materials you will note that SIL materials will often be noted - but rarely approvingly. Their software for documentation is widely used - but again because it is free and has been developed specifically for a purpose few other organization develops software for. NPOV requires us to describe both the critiques and the supportiive statements balancedly. It doesn't require us to ignore half of SIL's history and half of the literature about it. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:42, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: A point of correction to Maunus: SIL was founded before Wycliffe, not the scenario you described.Pete unseth (talk) 11:37, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Read Todd Hartch's missionaries of the state. It may be the case that SIL was founded first and wycliffe was separated out when they moved into Mexico rather than the other way round - I'd read up on that but the scenario I am describing is basically correct. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 11:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

text: What does this have to do with the "integrity of indigenous cultures"? -- 62.156.41.239 (talk) 12:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Keep focused on SIL

message: They're not unsourced or unreasonable, they represent the concerns shown in Epps, Patience (2005). Language endangerment in Amazonia: The role of missionaries. Bedrohte Vielfalt: Aspects of Language Death, edited by Jan Wolgemuth and Tyko Dirksmeyer, Berliner Beiträge zur Linguistik, Berlin: Weissensee.
I don't think it's reasonable to not include such criticisms, since they claim, with evidence, that SIL is doing the exact opposite of what it claims. 98.197.131.80 (talk) 00:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problems with your edit, since at least you provide a good published source for your claim, and it is not blown out of proportion with the rest of the article. Obviously, I do not agree with Epps, but to include her here is appropriate, as far as I can see. By the way, there is now also an interesting series of articles discussing the work of SIL in Language, Vol 85, no.3 (2009), pp. 618-658. Particularly these articles (including one co-authored by Epps), edited by Lise Dobrin, discuss the question to which extent SIL is a missionary organization or really does what it claims to do. Landroving Linguist (talk) 08:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have not seen that article, but I'll take a look. It would be an appropriate source of additional information. 98.197.131.80 (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've added just a couple of short things. 

message: Here are some sources to be used for the article. They all describe SIL as both a missionary and a linguistic organization. Many of them are very critical and some are supporting.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: I have rewritten the lead to give a more adequate summary of the article, and I have restructured the body to give more flow. I have also expanded the criticism section by summarizing some of the prominent critical works about the organization and provide some of SIL's own responses to the critiques. Some editors have been removing sourced criticism either without giving reasons or with the reason that a specific source is not providing solid evidence for the critique. That is not a valid grounds for removal - inclusion of viewpoints is determined by the notability of the viewpoint, not whether we agree or disagree with them or whether we consider them to be well supported. In the case of "Thy Will be Done" there are works and reviews discussing the book critically and their conclusions can be included to balance the arguments of the book, but the book is clearly a notable work about SIL and hence should be mentioned. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:33, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes and removal of sourced criticism

message: would you please explain why you removed Christina Krüsi as a see also?  Thanks.Jytdog (talk) 01:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Because she is not meaningfully related to this organization. Her experiences are related to individuals, not to the organization. There are many other people who have written criticism of SIL who are equally notable. If we were to add critics as "see also" items, which is itself not obviously a good idea, critics whose "beef" is with the organization would be a better choice than her. We also don't add "Ted Nugent" as a see also at "Republican Party", or "Monica Lewinsky" as a see also to the democratic party. It looks like coatracking. If you insist on including her, you should file an RfC. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 01:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi thanks for replying.  WP:COATRACK would be if I added a big bunch of content to this article about SIL abusing people.  I do see what you mean about the existence of the link being critical.  In my view there is a distinction between this link and the examples you give, which would indeed be POINTY.  I see that.  But the abuse that Krüsi suffered occurred at a facility in Bolivia run and established by SIL, and if you look at this statement by Wycliffe Switzerland, it says: "Unsere Partnerorganisation SIL, unter deren Verantwortung die Schule in Tumi Chucua geführt wurde und die auch die Aufarbeitung der Übergriffe leitet, hat sich bei allen Opfern persönlich entschuldigt."  My translation: Our partner organization SIL, under whose responsibility the school in Tumi Chucua was administered, and which also directed the investigation of the assaults, has personally apologized to all victims."  ( Google translate version).   Further, that investigation took place in the mid-2000s.  In 2006 SIL, together with New Tribes Mission, formed the Child Protection and Safety Network to ensure children in missions are protected ( see about page)  I don't know if you knew that.  Now that you do, do you change your stance on the see also link?  I won't jump to an RfC until we talk more and others can weigh in; doing it now is premature. Jytdog (talk) 17:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I had read the article on Krüsi before removing the link. If there is sufficient coverage the apology can be included in the text - I think a sentence with a link to Krüsi might be justified - certainly it is better than simply a see also link with no context. I think Daniel Everett would be a better see also link - his break with and critique of SIL I think is both more relevant and more notable than Krüsi's book - especially because he actually critiques the organization and its work, not crimes committed by some of its members.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 22:28, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The facility in Bolivia was under the control of SIL.  "some of its members" misses the boat.   I don't agree but I am dropping this as my argument is as tenuous as yours and disagreements like this are not resolveable rationally and just become stupid..  Jytdog (talk) 22:34, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also 

message: The following has no independent sources so is WP:UNDUE here.  This is a Wikipedia article not an extension of SIL's website. See WP:PROMO and WP:NOTWEBHOST.  can be restored if there are independent sources discussing this stuff. 
;Methodological contributions 
;Ethnologue and ISO 639-3 codes 
The Ethnologue, a guide to the world's languages, is published by SIL. The 16th edition of the Ethnologue was published in 2009 and uses the ISO 639-3 standard, which assigns 3-letter codes to languages; these were derived in part from the 3-letter codes that were used in the Ethnologue's 15th edition. SIL is the registration authority for the ISO 639-3 standard. The 15th edition, which was published in 2005, includes 7299 codes. A 16th edition was released in the middle of 2009, and a 17th in 2013.
;Software 
SIL has long been a pioneer in the field of software for linguistic research. Several pieces of software are available. Adapt It is a tool for translating text from one language into a related language after performing limited linguistic analysis. In the field of lexicon collection, ShoeBox and the newer ToolBox (Field Linguist’s Toolbox) have largely been replaced by FieldWorks Language Explorer (FLEx Windows and Linux) for linguists, and WeSay (also Windows and Linux) for non-professionals. Graphite is a smart-font technology and rendering system.
;Fonts 
SIL has developed  several font sets that it makes available as freeware under the SIL Open Font License (OFL). Most of them are designed only for specific writing system, including less common ones, such as Ethiopic, Devanagari, New Tai Lue, Hebrew, Arabic, Khmer, Yi, Myanmar, Coptic, and Tai Viet, or some more technical notation, such as cipher musical notation or IPA. Fonts that support Latin include:
*Gentium: "a typeface family designed to enable the diverse ethnic groups around the world who use the Latin, Cyrillic and Greek scripts to produce readable, high-quality publications. It supports a wide range of Latin- and Cyrillic-based alphabets."
*Doulos SIL: "a Unicode serif font similar in design to Times/Times New Roman. It contains a comprehensive inventory of glyphs needed for almost any Roman- or Cyrillic-based writing system, whether used for phonetic or orthographic needs. In addition, there is provision for other characters and symbols useful to linguists. It contains near-complete coverage of all the characters defined in Unicode 7.0 for Latin and Cyrillic."
*Charis SIL: "a Unicode-based font family that supports the wide range of languages that use the Latin and Cyrillic scripts. It is specially designed to make long texts pleasant and easy to read, even in less than ideal reproduction and display environments."
*Andika: "a sans serif Unicode font designed especially for literacy use and the needs of beginning readers. The focus is on clear letterforms that will not be easily confused with one another. It supports near-complete coverage for Latin and Cyrillic."
-- Jytdog (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Disclaimer: I am a member of SIL and therefore somewhat biased. I hope that my conflict of interest here still allows me to see things objectively. I think your complete removal is going a bit too far. The most blatant example of this is the Ethnologue - this source is even here on Wikipedia the accepted main reference for general data on languages, and I think it is not undue if readers learn that this source is provided by SIL. This knowledge is even useful to those who want to critize Ethnologue on this ground (which does happen occasionally). Furthermore, the reliance of the linguistic community on technical resources provided by SIL has gotten so far that it needed to be pointed out as a severe problem in that 'Language' article by Lise Dobrin cited on the page. These fonts and software resources are widely used, and mostly without (free) alternatives for practical linguists. You do not really not want the readers to know that SIL provides these. Does it have to be done as above, just with links to the SIL website? I don't know, I guess there may be better ways with more objective sources (such as Dobrin). Until these sources are provided, I do not think great harm is done by leaving the information on the page as it was. Landroving Linguist (talk) 07:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeh, it is quite silly. Quite a lot of this could easily be sourced, and as a non-SIL linguist I can say that none of it is controversial or non-notable.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 07:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: We are not SIL's website; per every policy articles should be built from secondary sources.  If these resources are important (which is the claim being made as to why this should be here at all), providing secondary sources should be easy.  Jytdog (talk) 12:41, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You removed even the section on the ethnologue - you are clearly not a linguist if you believe that the ethnologue is not notable. There is hardly any linguists either (at least not field linguists) who are not familiar with some of SIL's software. And yes, of course it can be sourced, did you spend ten minutes looking for sources before removing material?·maunus · snunɐɯ· 13:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Who I am is utterly irrelevant. You are experienced enough to know that.  Jytdog (talk) 14:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not having a clue about the topic one is editing is relevant. You dont seem to. You are removing content that is not controversial or non-notable and for which a competent editor can find sources in a couple of minutes.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 14:57, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am talking about content; please do the same.  Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 15:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You are trying to enforce your view of what the article should or shouldnt include, without being receptive to arguments from editors who know the topic better. And your arguments are based on the fact that you dont have the basis for knowing whether these fonts and software products are notable. Hence your knowledge or lack of same is consequential to the argument that you are making.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:19, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The content you are insisting on keeping is a) promotional, which violates WP:PROMO which is policy; b)  in some places unsourced, which violates WP:VERIFY which is policy; and c) where there are sources, they are WP:SPS, not-independent sources, which is basically also promotional and makes it impossible to follow WP:NPOV which is policy and which relies on the use of independent secondary sources to assign WEIGHT and provide context.  In response to these content issues, you have d) just laid personal attacks down  and e) you keep talking about personal expertise, which is irrelevant in Wikipedia.  Everyhing in WP depends on reliable sources.   What you are writing here is not appropriate on any level. Jytdog (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No it is not promotional, it is factual. SIL is the worlds major developer of fonts for less studied languages and software for language documentation. Your characterization is as the rest of your agurment based on ignorance - the handful of sources I have added are fine (several are peer reviewed), the information is neutral and not-promotional. So either get some wider input or stop trying to lawyer to control the article·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:36, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: But really, this is not worth my effort.  This is not a Wikipedia article, it is a fanboy page.  Unwatching and walking away. Jytdog (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Fanboy page! Lol! I am, if anything, a critic of SIL as an organization, but regardless I use their fonts and software cause there are no alternatives with which I can do my job. Thanks for doíng the smart thing and stopping wasting everyones time.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:36, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

text: apparently to you being "a fanboy" means knowing what one talks about. You should go be a little bit more of a fanboy then. If edits make the man then that make you a pretentious ignoramus.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:51, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That's out of line. Comment on the article, please, not the editor. Jonathunder (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on SIL International. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20010426175339/http://www/ to http://www/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:28, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on SIL International. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051124141723/http://www.sil.org/sil/ to http://www.sil.org/sil/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012190742/http://www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-823387-6.pdf to http://www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-823387-6.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: SIL International was cited in  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovewhatyoudo (talk • contribs) 09:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What's this link supposed to accomplish? If this isn't made clear to those of us who don't read Chinese, I'd suggest that this whole messy section gets deleted. LandLing 13:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Records of being cited