Talk:Xârâcùù

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Overseas France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Overseas France 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.Overseas FranceWikipedia:WikiProject Overseas FranceTemplate:WikiProject Overseas FranceOverseas France
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Languages

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wynn 629. Peer reviewers: Amartin127, Balarcon1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ying's notes

I think you article has a great organization for each session, if you can add more information about the history, geographic, and writing system to your language will be better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liying315 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

edit the ordering of sentences. Edit the middle sentence

Review from Anthony

Can you please explain the lack of reflexes part in the lead. Change is to was in the lead where you talk about xaracuu was taught. Can you explain your acronyms, such as CM1 and EPK. Grapheme should be plural in the first sentence of alphabet sentence. Also can you please explain some of the technical words such as ajie. As far as structure goes, your structure makes sense for the most part. I recommend adding subsections to some of your longer sections so readers will have a good idea about which part they're reading about. For example in your grammar section you talk about possession a lot, I'd make a subsection there for possession. Also, if possible maybe you should add information about what the language considers alienable possessions and inalienable possessions. Also in your phonology tab I think you should move that bottom paragraph into grammar because you end up talking about noun phrases which is not a part of phonology it's more grammar related. Other than that the structure is fine. Some wording I'd fix would be the first sentence of your grammar section. You said at least 17 prepositions. It's a little odd to say it like that since most languages have many prepositions. Did you mean only 17 prepositional phrases or words that are known or are there actually only 17? Also in your morphology section, even though you have the example sentences section, I think you should add some examples of using the different suffixes and prefixes in a sentence to show how they would be used. The last couple of things I recommend adding that are hopefully easy bits of info to find are if this is an SOV or an SVO language. Also maybe explaining what makes up a phoneme in the language. For example if they can be CV or just a C or just a V. C being consonant and V being vowel. These are some of the things I saw, I hope you can find more information. —Preceding undated comment added 11:26, 22 June 2016

Notes from Pierson

In the "grammar" section talking about the amount of prepositions, instead of saying "A few specific prepositions (3 exactly)," maybe just say "3 prepositions" — Preceding unsigned comment added by TiMarkov (talk • contribs) 21:41, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brian's peer review

Some of the technical linguistic terms could use further explanation or reference for what they mean as it can get a little dense. Another section before the article gets to the technical aspects of the language might help the flow. Introducing a history section or a classification section with a verbal explanation of how it branches off from Oceanic or Caledonian languages could help ad context for the language, or maybe the current status portion could be introduced before the phonology etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balarcon1 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 June 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved to Xârâcùù. (non-admin closure) Eventhorizon51 ^(talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Xaracuu language → Xârâcùù language – The name with the diacritics is overwhelmingly more common in both English- and French-language sources, as seen by a google scholar search and the the bibliography at the end of the glottolog entry. Uanfala (talk) 16:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala: Done. Adam (Wiki Ed) Protonk (talk) 19:47, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Action has already been performed while this RM is ongoing. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 22:22, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why not move to Xârâcùù without the "language" à la Arabic, Nahuatl, Luganda, and Pashto? — AjaxSmack 03:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support "Xârâcùù". We do have Finnish language, Swedish language, etc, but that's because of existing dabs at Finnish, Swedish, etc. If you see this, Protonk, wait until the RM is finished. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 06:39, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protonk has moved it already (with good reason) probably because of a remark of mine elsewhere that I'm starting the RM (rather than moving the article straight away) only because of the extra edit in the history of the target page. Uanfala (talk) 07:00, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support for Xârâcùù as language isn't a necessary disambiguator at this stage. Uanfala (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good example of why it's always useful to actually wait until a discussion can be had, rather than just moving straight away... Jenks24 (talk) 13:47, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for moving hastily. Seemed largely uncontroversial. Adam (Wiki Ed) / Protonk (talk) 14:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.