User talk:Mahagaja/List of ISO 639-1 languages by genetic affiliation

Nice work!

This should be a page in the main space. Is it?

The name seems to conform to the conventions too.

I was looking for something like this nine months ago.

Tchuess, Alastair Haines 07:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you like it! Mainspace has a List of ISO 639-1 codes, but it's alphabetical, not sorted genetically. I never put this into article space because it seems to be an indiscriminate collection of information. —An gr 13:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the ethnologue database to Language families (Ethnologue) and got some criticism for it. Genetic relationships can be controversial. So long as they are sourced, and not presented as definitive, I think some information is better than none at all.

You look as though you have been wisely conservative in your presentation. Genetic relationship by age, is the natural ordering principle for languages I would have thought. As I said, I like your list. :) Alastair Haines 14:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for nosing around your page, Angr, but I just found this and reckon it's a useful resource and well made. My only big criticism is that Guthrie zones aren't genetic by a long shot, so they don't necessarily belong in a page like this, at least without being qualified. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:48, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]