Talk:Vincentian Creole

Caribbean: Saint Vincent & Grenadines Low‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (assessed as Low-importance).

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

This page needs heavy reviewing. edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Almost every claim on this page is factually incorrect, shows a lack of any knowledge of Linguistics, or is a misrepresentation of the facts from a layperson.

The second paragraph of the intro is complete nonsense, using prescriptivist terms and questionable sociological and anthropological claims like "Most of the words were overheard and therefore mispronounced". This paragraph should be removed entirely, and possibly rewritten to give actual information about the origins of the language.
The pronunciation section starts with an unscientific and unjustified claim that the language is spoken "as fast or slow as they want", whatever that means. It then goes on to make observations that may or may not be valid, but in an unscientific manner. The original writer obviously had no knowledge of the IPA or of basic phonological processes, and so cannot properly articulate the observations being made. This section needs to be completely rewritten as a Phonology section, from a scientific standpoint.
The grammar section is uneducated nonsense. Claims that there is no proper grammar in the language, amongst others, mean that this section should just be purged completely. There's not really even any meaningful information here about the syntax of the language.
The vocabulary section is entirely redundant. Don't understand the need for it in this page.

In all, I think this page has so little that is salvageable in this page that I think the whole thing needs to be wiped and rewritten. Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to rebuild the page after deleting everything, but if no-one else can, I might do some basic research to try and get a minimal paragraph for this language.

Agreed, this page is horrifying. so blah 107.15.110.144 (talk) 20:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Add topic