Talk:Undeciphered writing systems
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page. |
| List | This article has been rated as list-Class on the Project’s quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project’s importance scale. |
[edit] The Codex Seraphinianus
The Codex Seraphinianus script has no meaning, so why is it included on this page? --203.217.54.49 12:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Might as well get rid of the Vonix Manuscript as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.82.54 (talk) 05:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- The second is different form the first in that, with the first it is known that it has no meaning. If not, we can always ask the author. The second has real plausability and cannot simply be discovered by means of a water board. — robbiemuffin page talk 11:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Praise and contention
I love how someone has made articles like "undiciphered writing systems" and "list of languages by first written accounts". So kudos to anonymous authors!
However, in most of what I've read the implication is the that the recent claims about Indus Valley Script being proto-writing are unsubstantiated. I recommend this be changed, at least to "possibly proto-writing" although this hardly represents scholarly consensus. People said all sorts of crazy crap about Linear A and Egyptian Hieroglyphic before they were diciphered. Usually if an idiot says it, it's likely to be nonsense. Shucks, folks; I mean duh.
Wikipedian "Epigraphist" without a password at a library computer.
35.8.218.111 (talk) 21:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] peer review for rongorongo
I've asked for peer review for rongorongo, so I'd appreciate the input from anyone here. We've gotten rid of (most of?) the kookery, and hopefully it's now close to being a worthy article.
