Talk:Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

message: The Frencha aliance offers now 6 exams based in this framework (b1, b2, etc...) although the ones mentioned in this page are still availabe. I think they should be included.
____
what does the asteriks behind the german language test mean?
Can someone explain it to mean. Additionally is there any international accepted german language test, like the american Toefl, or british Cambridge certificate.
--217.189.140.26 16:56, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The French aliance offers now 6 exams

message: Is there any other connection between UniCert and the CEF apart from the fact that UniCert is based on the framework? If not, is there any reason to mention UniCert particularly in this article, apart from in the table? Saint|swithin 10:11, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unicert has already existed before CEF. This mapping is important for people who want to compare old UniCert certificates to CEF certificates and to people who want to enroll for a CEF-based language class but already got a UniCert certificate. -- 79.238.174.32 (talk) 22:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Unicert

message: At the top of the entry on CEFR, we read, "Its main aim is to provide a method of learning", which is not true. The CEFR promotes, recommends, advocates no method of teaching or study at all. It is method neutral. J27325 (talk) 17:04, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Method of learning

message: How do you feel about creating a new page "Proficiency"? I would like to be able to compare different ideas of language proficience, as they vary between European, US, and other standards, and do not feel that either the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines pages would be sufficient. (Note: I am cross-posting this to both discussion pages) samwaltz 00:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, as I am asking around in other discussion pages (Japanese Language Proficiency Test), it makes sense to keep the discussion on one page. Looks like it's off to ACTFL for this thread.samwaltz 00:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Page: Proficiency

message: Why you didn't put the DELF/DALF in the frame? It is the principal French language certificate.
(Diplôme d’Etudes en Langue Française DELF / A1 
Diplôme d’Etudes en Langue Française DELF / A2 
Diplôme d’Etudes en Langue Française DELF / B1 
Diplôme d’Etudes en Langue Française DELF / B2 
Diplôme Approfondi de Langue Française DALF / C1 
Diplôme Approfondi de Langue Française DALF / C2 )
International Baccalaureate? anyone knows?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.241.192.37 (talk) 12:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DELF/DALF

message: The london Chamber of Commerce and Industry is doing a similar examination. I've done "English for Business - Level 3" and now I have a certificate that allows me to study on every english-speaking university without additional language-testing. I was said that Level 3 of the LCCI was similar to CEFR C1. I'm just not able to find any sources. Maybe somebody can help.
Maweki 08:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: LCCI

message: I noticed that there is not a paragraph about any criticism. Has the CERFL ever been criticized in some way or other that deserves to be mentioned? Onaryc (talk) 15:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism ? 

message: German certificates included.
82.113.121.154 (talk) 07:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are also the test of the Austrian Language Diploma (Österreichisches Sprachdiplom) and some others, but the Gothe exams are the most admitted ones. --Sebbe xy (talk) 19:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  German 

message: In the table under Use in language testing scores exceding current top scale scores are mentioned (see TOEFL). Tom Paine (talk) 14:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  TOEFL 

message: This article has a table with comparisons of equivalence between the CEFR and other certificats.
The corresponding article on fr.wikipedia.org has a similar table, albeit with less data.
Someone recently copied the fr.w.o table and dumped it into this article.
Having two large tables with the same data is a recipe for problems.  Editors will update and expand one or the other, but rarely both, so we'll end up with a mess.  The point of a table is to facilitate comparisons, but if the data is in two separate tables, this can't be done.
Luckily, no one added any information to the duplicate table, so fixing this problem doesn't require any work to transfer any data from one table to the other.  Some people did do the work of translating the French words of the dumped-in table to English, unfortunately, they were translating a duplicate, so there's nothing to salvage from that work.
I've moved the French table (now translated to English) to here (below).  If anyone has a use for it, do remember that the version on fr.wikipedai.org might have been updated since this snapshot was taken.
Note: The long format is better than the wide format.  If there's an emacs user or anyone else with good text manipulation skills in the audience, it would be helpful if they would convert the wide format table that is currently in the article to the long format. Gronky (talk) 00:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copying equivalence table from fr.wikipedia.org was a mistake 

message: The Public Service of Canada "A, B, C" system may not be correctly represented in the table.  I could not find a reference to the actual equivalencies in the links cited.  But there is a PowerPoint on-line that has different "estimated equivalencies".
Captain labrador (talk) 18:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The report by Vandergrift is clear on this. See Appendix C of that report. I've reverted the change. You can include a sourced, separate table, but you can't present your equivalencies as being taken from the report by Vandergrift. 96.46.204.126 (talk) 10:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian Equivalents 

message: According to all websites of testing centres, universities, immigration services:
* A1...1.0 to 2.5
* A2...3.0 to 3.5
* B1...4.0 to 4.5-5.0
* B2...5.5 to 6.0-6.5
* C1...6.5-7.0 to 8.0
* C2...8.5 to 9.0
While there no other references these are supposed to be correct.--Divega (talk) 16:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  IELTS and CEFR 

message: This is hard to read, and frankly quite ugly. The table clearly needs to be rotated code-wise to be horizontal instead. 03:28, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Descriptions" Table 

message: I am a little puzzled about the usage of levels that do not distinguish between reading, listening, and speaking. For example, I read well French and Spanish, but even if I have a medium proficiency in listening, I am quite bad in speaking them. I think that we should AT LEAT distinguish between:
- reading
- listening/understanding
- speaking/writing
IMHO--Dejudicibus (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The table does make these distinctions, and if you look closely it acknowledges that passive proficiency is always ahead of active proficiency. 
Speaking takes a special place. It is at once the most natural way for humans to produce language and the most pressing need (asking for directions versus reading the masterworks of literature), but also the last thing a learner will be able to perfect. Also, ambitious language learners have a tendency to do a lot of reading, which is good of course, but tends to widen this passive/active gap and thereby any feelings of frustration. Another qualitative difference is that levels A1, A2 can be mastered via the classic classroom approach, whereas B1, B2 require a more informal classroom approach combined with intensive self-study. Finally C1, C2 can only be attained by speaking to the natives for many hundreds of hours, sounding like a complete idiot for most of that time. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:58A9:2815:19B4:F531 (talk) 06:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reading/Listening/Speaking 

message: Has anyone considered doing a crosswalk between CEFL and the NATO Standardized Agreement (STANAG) 6001 "Language Proficiency Levels"? As both frameworks are heavily oriented on Europe and apply across most European countries, establishing equivalencies between the two systems should be useful. STANAG 6001 has been around for decades so is a well-established benchmark for language testing. Latest version is at http://www.ncia.nato.int/Opportunities/BizOppRefDoc/Stanag_6001_vers_4.pdf . I've tested across half a dozen languages against STANAG 6001 but CEFL is new to me, so I'm not the one to try to do it. Any takers? Bilhartz (talk) 13:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  STANAG 6001 

message: How about adding JLPT equivalents?Kdammers (talk)
It looks like someone did, but I am very suspicious of the results. It lists N1 as being equivalent to a C1, but I know from experience that the test is even more advanced than the old "1kyu" level, which contained grammar and vocabulary that even native Japanese speakers sometimes had trouble with. A test of Shakespearian English would certainly not fall into the C1 category, and I suspect the same to hold true with the JLPT. Can't investigate where they got their information, though, since there's no citation listed. 27.140.141.100 (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese 

message: Suggested corrections and clarification to the 'Rest of the world' section of this page:
1.	ISE 0 to read ISE Foundation -  http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=3193 
2.	SEW 1 to read SEW B1 -  http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=1521 
3.	SEW 2 to read SEW B2 -  http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=1521 
4.	SEW 3 to read SEW B2+ -  http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=1521 
5.	SEW 4 to read SEW C1 -  http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=1521 
6.	The three Trinity exams (ISE, GESE, SEW) that currently share one row in the table could be separated into three rows, each with its respective citation number, rather than three together with three citations.  This would also be clearer as the column heading is 'Certificate' (not 'Organisation').
7.	All references to GESE grades should contain the word ‘Grade’ – eg ‘GESE Grade 2’ not 'GESE 2'.  eg  http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=3106 
Mark Hunter - Trinity College London 13:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trinity College London exams 

message: It's complicated. See Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi # Estimates of equivalent CEFR levels (2 September 2015). Since Hanban apparently does not uphold its original claims, the German (and French) estimates remain. --Gregor Kneussel (talk) 09:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  CEFR and HSK 

message: This section appears to exist for the sole purpose of referencing an online handout expressing a private idea. Very creative for sure, but I doubt that it should be referenced from a Wikipedia page. Bansp (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "other applications" 

message: Why does this link Frantastique Certification lead to a page on Gymglish?
108.18.136.147 (talk) 22:29, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  why? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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/20060313041051/http://www.babylonia-ti.ch:80/BABY205/PDF/tschirner.pdf to http://www.babylonia-ti.ch/BABY205/PDF/tschirner.pdf
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 15:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The table gives the A1–C1 equivalencies of the Japanese Language Proficiency Test, but this is misleading in that (a) it's unsourced; and (b) there are no speaking or writing components on the JLPT. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:02, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Validity of Japanese equivalencies in table? 

message: Following up on the above thread: perhaps tests should be included in the table only when they've been developed in compliance with CEFR? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:28, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equivalence table 

message: 1. Although the hours it takes to learn E, F, & D are sourced, they are simplistic.  For example, a Dutch speaker can learn English much faster than a Hungarian or Finnish speaker, to say nothing of a Japanese speaker.
2. The hours given are cumulative.  That should be explicitly stated.
3.  There is an unexplained reference to two subdivisions (2.1 & 2.2).Kdammers (talk) 00:46, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Learning hours 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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/20130921060148/http://www.xunta.es/linguagalega/arquivos/ORDE_CELGA_30.07.07.pdf to http://www.xunta.es/linguagalega/arquivos/ORDE_CELGA_30.07.07.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150926135105/http://www.lnu.edu.ua:80/test-dpt/index.php?lang=ua&id=levels to http://www.lnu.edu.ua/test-dpt/index.php?lang=ua&id=levels
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What does "... is the margin" mean with respect to IELTS.  I am a college-educated native speaker of English, and this pretty much baffles me. 5.34.85.197 (talk) 17:12, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does "... is the margin" mean? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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:
https://www.luenglish.co.uk/learn-english-online/
*Replaced archive link https://web.archive.org/web/20110905043513/http://www.bcatml.org/Vandergrift-CEFRinCanada.pdf with https://web.archive.org/web/20110725045524/http://www.bcatml.org/Vandergrift-CEFRinCanada.pdf on http://www.bcatml.org/Vandergrift-CEFRinCanada.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.gnb.ca/0381/032-e.asp
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130101030537/http://secure.vec.bc.ca/toefl-equivalency-table.cfm/TOEFL to http://secure.vec.bc.ca/toefl-equivalency-table.cfm/TOEFL
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110828170914/http://www.cilt.org.uk/home/standards_and_qualifications/languages_ladder.aspx to http://www.cilt.org.uk/home/standards_and_qualifications/languages_ladder.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120614155552/http://ww3.fl.ul.pt/caple/default.aspx to http://ww3.fl.ul.pt/caple/default.aspx
*Added  tag to http://celpebras.inep.gov.br/inscricao/default.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121221020915/http://trki.org/tkri-overview.php to http://trki.org/tkri-overview.php
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lnu.edu.ua/test-dpt/index.php?lang=ua&id=levels
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) 10:14, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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  tag to http://www.aucp.org/sous_pages/aix/Students_Aix_docs/TEF_Levels_and_Equivalencies.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140513200217/http://www.britishcouncil.org/slide_cef_b.pdf to http://www.britishcouncil.org/slide_cef_b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130226082623/http://www.cnavt.org/files/alg.folder_EN.pdf to http://www.cnavt.org/files/alg.folder_EN.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) 15:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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/20140714160512/http://eaquals.org/pages/7110 to http://eaquals.org/pages/7110
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150730223125/http://www.certyfikatpolski.pl/pl/oegzaminie to http://www.certyfikatpolski.pl/pl/oegzaminie
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) 17:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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/20111205075639/http://www.cambridgeesol.org/about/standards/can-do.html to http://www.cambridgeesol.org/about/standards/can-do.html
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) 12:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 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/20150729063810/http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/why-cambridge-english/international-language-standards/ to http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/why-cambridge-english/international-language-standards/
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) 21:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hey- I think something we really need to see on this page is a discussion about the linguistic ability of native speakers. For instance, some native speakers can't write their language- does that mean they can't achieve C1 in their own language? If we took a look at the population of literate or semiliterate Americans, what percentage of Americans would be level B1 or B2 in English, their mother tongue? What percentage would be C2 in English? Are native speakers reaching C2 in some languages more common by percentage of population than native speakers reaching C2 in other languages? Are there any populations speaking their native language who don't have very many people reaching C2? 
On a related note, I would definitely love to see research on the SAT's Reading and Writing sections and how scores on those tests correspond to CEFR levels. Same with the PSC test in Mainland China- what CEFR level corresponds to Level 3B or Level 1A? Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:54, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  What is the percentage of native speakers that reach C2 level in a language losing speakers to competing languages like in the case of  Taiwanese Hokkien where some parents had refused to speak the language with their children, and many only have a knowledge of the oral component of the language? Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:21, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Native speakers 

message: This is to provide some extra information on the removal of JLPT one-to-one equivalence from the Language-specific scales table.
==== 1. There is a newer, more reliable source ====
In the section Language-specific scales, the JLPT table entry since May 2019 cited a one page summary  of a report  for a small trial survey conducted by the Japan Foundation (JF) in 2012.
Key figures of the trial survey:
* 96 subjects
* that participated in a JF language course in 2011
* that took the JLPT during the time of aforementioned language course(s)
** i.e. in 2011
** i.e. in Japan
* none of the participants were Chinese or Korean native speakers
Based on above trial survey, the JF conducted a larger survey  with the following key figures:
* 967 subjects
* that took the JLPT between 2013 and 2016
* either in Japan or aborad
For the report of this survey the JF, again, provides a summary page with part of the findings 
and this time even an English version of the summary page .
==== 2. According the newer, more reliable source ====
* there is a "moderate relation between JFS-based evaluation [CEFR levels] and JLPT pass or fail"  
* "One-to-one correspondence between particular levels was not observed" 
Looking at the graph presented in  (also  and page 8 in ), we can see, that participants deemed to be CEFR A2, passed:
* JLPT N2 with a likelyhood of 65.2%
* JLPT N3 with a likelyhood of 44.6%
* JLPT N4 with a likelyhood of 60.9%
This makes, at first glance, obviously no sense. N2 is harder than N3 and N4, but for these 221 survey subjects (that were rated CEFR A2 and took one of N2, N3, N4) N2 shows the highest passing rate. A possible explanation is given in , section 4.4 ②:
    "(A2、N2)の調査対象者では、海外の大学で日本語を主専攻として学ぶ漢字圏母語話者の学習者比率が高かった。一方、(A2、N3)の調査対象者ではそのような学習者の比率は低く、その差は全セル間で最大であった。"
    -> A large portion of the 69 A2 rated N2 takers were people whose native language uses Kanji. Of the 65 A2 rated N3 takers, only a small portion were people whose native language uses Kanji. In fact, the difference in "portion of people whose native language uses Kanji" is the highest overall between cells (A2,N2) and (A2,N3).
==== 3. Simply put ====
Because two thirds of the JLPT is reading comprehension, an overall A2 level learner from China or Taiwan is more likely than not to pass N2 and has a fair chance of passing N1. In contrast, if your native language doesn't use Kanji, you might pass N3 as an overall A2, but are probably better of with N4 or even N5.
--IllDepence (talk) 18:25, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of JLPT one-to-one equivalence 

message: Because two thirds of the JLPT is reading comprehension, an overall A2 level learner from China or Taiwan is more likely than not to pass N2 and has a fair chance of passing N1. In contrast, if your native language doesn't use Kanji, you might pass N3 as an overall A2, but are probably better of with N4 or even N5.
--IllDepence (talk) 18:25, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  3. Simply put 

message: No sign language is added yet. --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:04, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sign languages 

message: Way back in 2008 someone asked here about criticism, and unfortunately this was never followed up on. It would be nice if some of the difficulties, limitations  and problems arising were  looked at in a section.
One limitation that has already been addressed by the Council of Europe is the unnecessary focus on the individual user, rather than co-operatve production of meaning - above all in what language experts call mediation. We either need a section on the 2018 Companion volume,which has already sent major waves through the leanguage teaching/testing  world,  or a separate article on it. (Surprisingly, Wikipedia doesn't even have an article on Mediation in the linguistics/language learning sense - that would help too.)
Perhaps, rather than a section on the 2018 companion volume, it would be enough to have a new section of the CEFR article called "Legacy and continuing developments" or similar?
Northtowner (talk) 12:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mediation - the New Companion Volume from 2018. 

message: Hello,
I don't understand, how could anybody have C2 in any language. I am studying PHD in chemistry. I don't understand many of the concepts I study (regardless on the language used). How could anybody "understand virtually any concept", without hunderds of years of studying of all science fields?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vks (talk • contribs) 10:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The wording of notional levels is poetry. Actual C2 levels are high, often higher than most native speakers in some dimensions, and much lower in others (such as the language of the street.) Knotaholic (talk) 20:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

text: It is implied to be followed with “, when it is explained to him”. Having common sense is a clear advantage. ^^ 2A0A:A546:CA8C:1:4799:23C7:AFCC:D39 (talk) 06:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of C levels. 

message: In the table of bodies that assess language levels, for several languages, a company called "Speexx Language Assessment Center" has added themselves. 
It makes absolutely no sense. 
- For Spanish there is Instituto Cervantes, that's it, anything else is irrelevant.
- For Italian there is cert.it by Roma Tre which is not on the page (along with CELI, CILS and PLIDA), it is not big but it is real, as opposed to Speexx Language Assessment Center. Knotaholic (talk) 20:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam by Speexx Language Assessment Center 

message: I believe it would be of public value to also include a comparison of CEFRL to ICAO Levels for the English language (the ICAO scale is used for international pilots and air traffic controllers English assesment). I tried to look such a comparison up on the Internet, however to no avail, none is available here in the major language versions of this article either. There are 6 or 7 ICAO language levels, the threshold is Level 4 (minimum for international operations).
While I'm unable to produce this "mapping", I hope there would be editors who could include this in the article over time.
77.85.6.55 (talk) 09:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ICAO 

message: As a programmer with 30 years of experience, who has taught others… that is, at best, ridiculous, and at worst, actively malevolent abuse of the framework. None of the listed criteria (e.g. for C2) can be applied in to programming in a way that isn’t either useless for determining programming skills, or has nothing to do with the CEFL anymore. …
Programming is not communication. It is engineering. Applying the CEFL to it makes as much sense as applying it to the ability to construct of a car.
The whole thing sounds more like a business consultant firm came up with it to scam PHBs into paying money for a “certification”.
We need someone to look at this section of the article with a sharp eye and experience in weeding out pseudo-science or business esotericism.
— 2A0A:A546:CA8C:1:4799:23C7:AFCC:D39 (talk) 06:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  CEFL for ''programming'' languages?? 

message: General elections are scheduled to be held in Indonesia on 14 February 2024 to elect the President, Vice President, People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) which consists of the House of Representatives (DPR) and the Senate (DPD). The newly elected members of the MPR will be sworn in on 1 October 2024, while the elected President and Vice President will be sworn in on 20 October 2024. Incumbent President Joko Widodo is ineligible to run for a third term due to the term limits established by the Indonesian constitution.
 
        The previous election was regulated by Law No. 7 of 2017. The General Elections Commission (KPU), a legally independent government body was responsible for organizing the election. In addition, the vote is monitored by the General Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu), which also has the authority to rule on violations of election rules (e.g. administrative errors, vote-buying, etc.). Any ethical violations committed by either Bawaslu or the KPU were to be handled by the Elections Organiser Honours Council (DKPP), which consists of one member from each body and five others recommended by the government. The same system and regulations are expected to be applied in 2024.
 
        Voters will be given three ballot papers: one for the presidential candidates and their running mate, one for the Regional Representative Council (DPD) and one for House of Representatives. Voters use a nail to poke a hole in the ballot paper indicating which party or candidate they wish to vote for, and then dip their fingers in ink as a precaution against voter fraud. 103.247.13.79 (talk) 06:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indonesian General Election