[Wikipedia-l] Re: Why do we have them??

[Ray Saintonge]

Patrick Hall wrote:

>On 6/27/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>Tim Starling wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I think we can put the blame on our use of language code lists which are
>>>biased towards political rather than linguistic divisions.
>>>      
>>>
>>An important observation.  In Wiktionary I keep having to beat back the
>>argument that a wide assortment of  conlangs are acceptable because they
>>have been granted a code.
>>
>>Ec 
>>    
>>
>
>Which are those, just out of curiosity? (I imagine the list includes
>Esperanto and Volapük?)
>
Esperanto, Interlingua and Volapük have been established for some time.  
I suppose too that Ido and Lojban have some claim to legitimacy.

I just cleaned out a number of  Latenkwa entries.  Then there's 
Romanica, Espreso, Sasxsek, Lingua Franca Nova, Klingon, Quenya, D'ni, 
Glos, Bitruscan, Sindarin, Cirth, Tengwar, and probably a few others.

Ec