Talk:Talu language

Lavu language
Hello Stevey7788 and Kwamikagami, you are the main contributors on both Lavu language and Talu language. From Glottolog, it seems that both articles are about the same language. Do you agree? If so, could you merge both articles? Pamputt (talk) 17:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Steve's the one to ask. I thought we'd had this discussion, and that Glottolog was wrong, but can't find it. (The nearest I can find is at User talk:Stevey7788/Archive6.)
 * Also note that while Talu is given as an alt name of Lavu, and Glottolog 'Talu' is ID'd as the article for our Lavu, while our Talu has no Glottolog code -- in other words, it's another language by the same name. — kwami (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Lavu is a cluster of languages. Maybe we can say "Lavu languages." The Lavu varieties are often mutually unintelligible. Cathryn Yang has more data. &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 04:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Merge with Lavu language?
I wanted to re-open the discussion on merging this article with Lavu language, as the current situation is pretty unsatisfactory because the two articles don't even make reference to each other at all, even though they display the same language code. If this is a dialect cluster, would it make more sense to treat them together? I have no particular opinion, but if we do decide to keep them separate them we should probably clarify why they're split, which should avoid confusing readers. Theknightwho (talk) 12:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * ISO isn't a WP:RS. Our sources classify them as distinct languages, so we should do the same. We can always petition ISO to correct the error. But what's our evidence that they share the ISO code? — kwami (talk) 18:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kwamikagami Sure - but that means one of the articles is wrongly giving an ISO code. Theknightwho (talk) 19:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I just removed it from Lavu. They do share a glotto code, though. — kwami (talk) 19:04, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Glottolog is a one-man job, and its classification of languages in China are completely messed up, with classifications all in the wrong places, plenty of duplicates, and names that need to be fixed. Check the Chinese sources that actually have first-hand field data. Lingnanhua (talk) 23:06, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Just saying that we're going to have duplicate codes for glottolog. — kwami (talk) 04:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose. The Taloid languages are an entire cluster of languages, most of which are completely distinct from "Lavu" proper. Lavu itself is one of the Taloid languages, and hence also the Lisoish languages. There are many mutually unintelligble Loloish languages that should not be merged with each other. Taloid is a more like a language cluster, comparable to the Gbe languages, and Lavu is a specific variety within that cluster. Lavu is not Talu, and Talu is not Lavu (Lawu). Please read and re-read the Lisoish languages and Taloid languages articles before proposing merges. Also, do not rely on ISO codes or even Glottolog. Plaese consult the actual Chinese linguistics sources. Lingnanhua (talk) 23:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Lingnanhua - Since you gave "Lavu (Lawu)" as equivalent, Lawu language is correct as a distinct article, right? Just similar names? — kwami (talk) 04:05, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, Lawu is correct as a distinct article. Lawu and Talu are both distinct languages. They are sisters of each other are both in the Taloid branch. I have also removed the merge tags in both articles. Lingnanhua (talk) 15:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)