Talk:Esperanto phrasebook

Norwegian Esperanto, bork bork bork
The variant of Esperanto used in this edit looks suspiciously like Norwegian, but maybe somebody else can rescue some wheat out of the chaff... (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:50, 26 January 2007 (EST)

Long or Short?
"o always short as in porous; never long as in open"

To my ears, "porous" and "open" both use almost the exact same long sound. This description becomes ambiguous in this case. Granted, "open" tends to sound more like "ou-pen", but that isnt necessarily "long".

As for the "almost the exact same" comment, the word "porous", using the o as in the word "or", uses a middle, somewhat airy o, as in languages like Finnish (hold out that o on "or" to hear what I mean), whereas the Esperanto o is probably closer to the Spanish o, which is the same sound as in "open", just without shifting toward a u sound at the end, like English speakers tend to do in our words. 76.175.211.56 17:15, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

Usefulness and relevance for travelers
How is knowledge of Esperanto related to travel? I would be reluctant to suggest deleting this phrasebook, which people worked on, but I wouldn't have suggested starting it because I don't see the relevance or utility. Shall we also have phrasebooks in ancient languages that aren't spoken anymore? I see that there's no Latin phrasebook, and I'll bet more people know that language than Esperanto. No disrespect intended, but please show me how I'm wrong. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:50, 17 May 2011 (EDT)


 * This was brought up before and I was the loudest advocate against adding useless fake languages. You can read the discussion here: Talk:List_of_phrasebooks. Although most other users also agree that Esperanto has no practical use in the real world, there are a couple users who didn't want to part with it. The reasons given seem to be that Esperanto is "less silly" than other constructed languages and that created phrasebooks need not be deleted even if they serve no travel-related purpose.


 * The discussion was left there, as those in favor of Esperanto did not wish to move towards a difinitive policy formation against fabricated languages (because that would lead to the deletion of this article). (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:01, 18 June 2011 (EDT)

vfd?
, I'm wondering why deleting this page is "required" (to quote the edit reason you gave when you added the vfd template to the page). Didn't Wikivoyage have this discussion eight years ago (before I started editing here), as mentioned under "Usefulness and relevance for travelers" above? --Robkelk (talk) 00:29, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I added the tag because someone else started a deletion discussion. I don't think deleting the page is required; in fact, I've been arguing for keeping it in the deletion discussion. If you have an opinion on whether or not the article should be deleted, I encourage you to participate in the discussion. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:35, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, and thanks for the explanation. --Robkelk (talk) 01:35, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Archive?
Last fall I recommended the Wikivoyage Esperanto phrase book to several other people as supplemental introductory instruction material. Several months later, someone went and deleted it all! Sigh. Did anyone archive this page before that happened? I found a mirror over at Internet Archive, but the original source data might be easier to use for my purposes. --Bouncey (talk) 04:40, 9 July 2018 (UTC)


 * It can be found at User:LPfi/Esperanto phrasebook. —Granger (talk · contribs) 05:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that was helpful. Between that and the Internet Archive copy, I should be able to do something with it.  --Bouncey (talk) 17:49, 9 July 2018 (UTC)