Talk:Esperanto

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Esperanto article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24: 6 months

Other talk page banners

Esperanto was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 25, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 4, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 25, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
July 1, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
July 3, 2007	Good article reassessment	Listed
September 4, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
June 16, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 26, 2004, July 26, 2005, July 26, 2012, and July 26, 2014.
Current status: Delisted good article

Constructed languages: Esperanto Top‑importance

	Constructed languages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Esperanto task force.
	This article is an Esperanto core topic.

Languages Top‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Criticism of Esperanto was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 April 2016 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esperanto. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Islam

When did Ayatollah Khomeini recommend Esperanto as a international language?

When was the Esperanto Koran published?

Is Esperanto still used in Iran, especially in Qom?

MountVic127 (talk) 04:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naskinto is gender neutral term for “parent”.

Naskinto is the correct term for parent; Zamenhof used it himself. the claim that “esperanto doesnt have a gender neutral term for parent” is not even correct. that claim should be removed.

»Oni nomas la donacon patrineco-pakaĵo, kaj ĝi evitigas multe da cerbumado kaj butikumado. Ĝi enhavas 54 utilaĵojn, kiel bebovestaĵojn, litaĵojn, zorgilojn por naskinto kaj naskito, kaj ankaŭ kondomojn. La kartona skatolo mem, granda 70 x 43 x 27 cm, estas uzebla kiel bebolito.« https://tekstaro.com/t?nomo=artikoloj-el-monato-2012-2018&uzistreketojn=0&tipo=&sekcio=monato-2016-011695&antauasekcio=1&postasekcio=1
»R: Jes, sed malmultaj. La ĉinoj estas seriozaj pri seksaj interrilatoj, kaj seksaj rilatoj antaŭ geedziĝo estas riproĉataj de la publika opinio. La Geedza Leĝo de Ĉinio difinas, ke eksteredzecaj infanoj estas protekta- taj. Ili povas esti vivtenataj de la naskintoj aŭ de aliuloj.« https://dlibra.kul.pl/Content/48571/55874_V-19034_El-Popola-Cinio.pdf
»Laŭ moderna prononco, „Awadi”. Aha-di signifas: „vojo al Aha“, (ĉar ĝi kuŝas mezvoje al la provinco Aha) sed la vorto volas diri nenion pri tio, ke ĝi ne „plaĉis“ al la naskintoj; tial la originala noto en la krampoj estas tute ne komprenebla; eble ĝi estas malĝusta aldonaĵo, farita de malmulteinformita manskribisto en frua tempo, kiu legis la vorton, „a-hadi“, kio tiam signifas „mia honto“.« https://www.vastalto.com/librejo/KroJap/KroJap1.html

2600:6C5D:4600:2D9F:0:6B55:DCD1:D655 (talk) 16:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naskinto is a mother (in the context of a birth), not a parent: it means 'birthgiver'. Even there, naskinto and patrino are not synonyms: Your 'mother' is not necessarily your birthgiver, any more than your 'father' is necessarily your sperm-donor. — kwami (talk) 06:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which war?

One paragraph under "20th century" starts with the three words:

"After the war"

Could anyone clarify which of the many, MANY wars of the 20th century this is about? The biggest one? Or maybe another war ... 130.238.112.129 (talk) 12:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The war discussed in the preceeding paragraph. MrOllie (talk) 12:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedits

I wasn't sure I had to spell it out, but the use of "as of" in the article is totally normal in every instance as far as I can tell. If one is getting their wires crossed thinking it's a "puffery problem" or otherwise incorrect generally, that's their own problem they shouldn't be enforcing on articles. Remsense ‥ 论 03:38, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Remsense, "as of", especially combined with the present tense, typically implies that a fact became true at some time and continues to be true into the present. Many of these statements list the value of a statistic at multiple times, so "as of" doesn't make sense (it can't both be true that the French Esperanto course has 72k students as of 2021 and that it has 101k students as of 2022). It makes a little more sense for the sentences that only mention a single date, but I think we can assume that numbers like these will change significantly from one year to the next, so I still think "in" is better.

(BTW, this isn't what I meant by "puffery"; that was in reference to some of the uncited statements that Robishungry removed. I don't think it's worth getting into those now.) Justin Kunimune (talk) 03:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, "as of" means exactly the opposite, that the figure is time-dependent, possibly being different now. A tense issue has nothing to do with the phrase's use; it is simply a tense issue. You are right that "as of 2021" followed by "as of 2022" is clumsy, and one should be changed. Remsense ‥ 论 03:58, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do think changing the tense would help. Would you object if these statements were all put in the past tense, and "as of" was only changed to "in" in cases where they're chained together? Justin Kunimune (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why so many "grossly insulting" edits ?

The deletion log for this page mentions a sizable numbers of revisions hidden because they were "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material". I wonder why the international language Esperanto in particular would be the target of so much animosity, pushing some people to plain insults rather than to (even unfounded) rational criticism. — Tonymec (talk) 06:36, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The edit I saw earlier was about immigration. I don't know what that has to do with the subject? I assume it is just another way for people to think they can sneak in some hate speech. That would require them to not know how easy it is to translate. Insults etc are fairly common in articles that use non English language. You see it sometimes in articles about India. Knitsey (talk) 06:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]