Talk:Altaic hypothesis

The arguments against the theory do not seem to be presented in a neutral fashion at all. It goes so far as to call opponent's arguments weak. I don't have time to fix this now, but I'll mark it and do something about it later. -Deicidus 07:52, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Merge

This article seems to be a relict and its content, if not already presen there, should be merged into the Altaic languages and Ural-Altaic languages articles. --Pjacobi 18:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thoroughly agree with deicidus' post above - but 1.5 years on, it probably still reads the same. Before merging the topic, it would be much better to edit the topic to a NPOV. That ought to be done by someone who knows their stuff (i.e. not me).

As it is, the article undermines its own credibility by being nothing more than a badly disguised attempt to refute criticism of the hypothesis. This has no place in an encyclopedia. --Steevm 00:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. What's useful here should be merged with Altaic languages and the rest deleted. --AAikio 05:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also completely agree to merge with the Altaic Languages article, keeping the reliable parts and deleting the rest. e104421 12:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the Altaic hypothesis article is a copy-paste edit from the following web pages:[[1]][[2]] I think there is nothing to be lost, if we totally delete this article, since it does not contain considerable encyclopedic information. E104421 06:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Altaic languages which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]