Misplaced Pages

Talk:Pronoun

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RockMagnetist (talk | contribs) at 21:09, 21 March 2014 (Reverted 1 edit by 108.15.102.201 (talk) to last revision by RockMagnetist. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:09, 21 March 2014 by RockMagnetist (talk | contribs) (Reverted 1 edit by 108.15.102.201 (talk) to last revision by RockMagnetist. (TW))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The contents of the Pronominal page were merged into Pronoun on August 6, 2012. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.
WikiProject iconLinguistics: Theoretical Linguistics Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Theoretical Linguistics Task Force.

Archives
Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

The Views of Different Schools?

This entire section appears to be an advertisement for the Azerbaijan Linguistic School. The citation links to an article in the Russian version of Misplaced Pages, and the content is of questionable importance, at best. I think the section should be removed in its entirety. 76.167.253.199 (talk) 07:12, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Leave! The theory is interesting and necessary. Ernest-74 (talk) 13:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the original poster. This section was probably put in their by a zealot of some sort or representative of the school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.251.74 (talk) 17:52, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Full documentation of their views can only be found in WikiMedia and Wikia articles, therefore their views do not merit inclusion in Misplaced Pages per WP:RS. --Omnipaedista (talk) 02:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

More examples from other languages?

I just saw this page and noticed that it's surprisingly weak for such a prominent linguistic topic. I think it could really use some changes. For example: since English pronouns don't show much distinction, wouldn't the section with all the types of pronouns be much more beneficial with clear examples from other languages? Or should we leave that to their respective pages? I'm going to be adding things here and there to help with the typological understanding of pronouns. Joeystanley (talk) 15:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Article needs citation improvements

This article needs citation improvements, throughout the page.

I removed some unsourced info added by an IP, at DIFF.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 00:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I see some was vandalism, but the unsourced info should not have been added back in, without citations. I've removed it, and fixed the vandalism, diff. — Cirt (talk) 03:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Unsourced content was added back in, again, here diff. This article should be trimmed of all unsourced content, and replaced with appropriately cited material. — Cirt (talk) 04:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Original research problems

Tagged with original research problems, as the majority of this article is wholly unsourced, and therefore violates WP:NOR.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 03:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Unsourced section tags were removed

Diff, unsourced section tags were removed.

This article has multiple subsections that have zero (0) sources whatsoever.

I added {{unsourcedsect}} tags to those sections.

Those tags were removed inappropriately.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Note on unsourced content in article

NOTE: I won't be removing this material another time, or tagging this article anymore. But the article as it stands is in pretty poor shape with some determined individual who keeps adding back in completely unsourced content. — Cirt (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

It's not hard to find sources for the first section - after all, it was basically an annotated list of articles. The views of different schools is a much more difficult proposition. I have tried to find some sort of survey article or book that summarizes these theories, without success. As for pronominals, I'm a little skeptical that the term is used very much. I am going to change the tagging accordingly. RockMagnetist (talk) 00:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Pronominals

I have searched for uses of the term "pronominal" and can't find any that match the discussion in Pronoun#Pronominals. If none can be found, this section should be removed. RockMagnetist (talk) 00:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Categories: