Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unsolved problems in linguistics

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 00:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of unsolved problems in linguistics[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This list has never been well sourced and I think there are some fundamental issues with the topic which make it pretty much impossible for it to be so.

unlike say List of unsolved problems in mathematics, it doesn't really aid in navigation between articles on unsolved problems. It just lists a bunch of open ended questions.
if "unsolved problems" includes simple controversies that different linguists disagree on, then the list of unsolved problems in linguistics is potentially infinite. It would be more sensible to compile a list of "solved problems". As such this list is a violation of WP:LISTCRIT as the selection criteria are way overbroad.
any attempt to source this list properly would undoubtedly run into WP:SYN issues - I can't find many sources whose main topic is "unsolved problems in linguistics" which apply such a broad brush for "unsolved problem". It might be possible to write a completely new article with more objective criteria (in which case WP:TNT applies)
Category:Unsolved problems in linguistics is sparsely populated and includes a few articles that probably shouldn't be in there (Latin word order, really?) I don't think the few articles in that category which actually discuss unsolved problems could be usefully summarised in a list.

– filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 00:29, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Lists. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 00:29, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible WP:TNT candidate. Andre🚐 00:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm pretty sure you can solve most of the first set of questions with a dictionary. I can't see the need for this list, half of it is unsourced. Oaktree b (talk) 00:34, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm neutral to the question of deletion, but amused by how much this !vote reminds me of a certain XKCD cartoon. Cnilep (talk) 04:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:FORUM. This is nothing more than an esoteric and eclectic list of philosophical questions. There are no answers, just questions. Reading through this rambling list reminds me of a title to an early Bill Cosby comedy album: Why Is There Air?. Cosby's answer to his own question was, "There's air to blow up basketballs." In this case, we should ask, "Why are there questions but no answers?" — Maile (talk) 03:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Oaktree and Maile. Andre🚐 05:20, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think the version of the article at here, actually is a good article and maybe could be referenced to today's standards satisfactorily. Andre🚐 05:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reasons given by Oaktree and Maile. “Rambling” is the right word. Athel cb (talk) 08:52, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete! Most of these are not that great, and I've never heard of "unsolved problems" being a concept in linguistics. Many of these have a clear but theory-specific answer, the answer to questions about universality are most likel "no", and some of them are rather unsolvable than unsolved. There's also the question of what makes a problem a linguistic problem... I can't see any improvement that wouldn't turn it into something redundant with Outline of linguistics. //Replayful (talk | contribs) 11:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The article looks good with references pertaining to the unsolved problems of philosophy, and it would be a quicker reference instead of wasting time looking for multiple websites. But, other users have extremely good arguments. I'm staying as weak keep for now, and there's plenty of articles like this one that list such things with reliable sources. Geko72290 (talk) 20:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 00:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.