Contents

Talk:Ido

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ido article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: Index, 1

	Ido is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 25, 2005.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 30, 2005 Peer review Reviewed December 12, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted September 13, 2008 Featured article review Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Constructed languages: Esperanto Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed 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.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Esperanto task force. Languages Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I've heard significantly different story about Ido from Esperantists. --Taw

I think the links were better embedded into the material rather than being listed at the end. Is there a Wikipedia policy on this? --Chuck Smith

Agreement of adjectives and the accusative ending were not simply eliminated as redundant, they were traded for free word order. If you have free word order, you need markers to tell what function each word has in the sentence. Once you impose a rigid word order (as in modern English), then these markers become redundant. Also, I would add that, in constrast to Esperanto-speakers who "attack" Ido, there are Esperanto-speakers who prefer Ido but would rather stick with the momentum and support Esperanto as an international language. -- Quark

Did Zamenhof really reject changes to Esperanto? I had read that he preferred to let the Esperanto community decide on changes. It was a biased source, though. cprompt

To my knowledge, you are correct. The community saw that most of the reforms made the language more European and less international. Every change has its advantages and disadvantages, so they decided to reject them. I tried to edit the article, but then decided not to because I can't do it NPOV... if you could edit it accordingly, I would appreciate it. --Chuck SMITH

I'll give it a try. --cprompt

Template:Ido has been created from the Esperanto one - it needs to be pruned somewhat but afterwards it could be put on the bottom of every page.

Where did the three infinitives come from for the table? According to this page, there's only one, the "-ar" ending. If this is not the case, then I think that two things are in order: (1) an external citation, and (2) a brief explanation between the differences in use between the three. Anyone?

Just a note that I don't see anywhere in the article any sort of criticism section. Esperanto has one, and since this is also a constructed language I would imagine that not everyone is pleased with every aspect of it. Sevey13 (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two items on the existing list comparing Esperanto and Ido do not seem to be differences and I recommend that they be moved from the list as I can see that this article will be consulted to try to identify such differences. The two items are:

• Ido imposes consistent rules on the use of endings to transform a word from one meaning or part of speech to another... (Esperanto does this also).

• Ido's vocabulary attempts to use cognates ... (As with Ido, Esperanto derives most of its roots from the European languages -- while in a few cases different choices are made with Ido, there does not seem to be a significant enough advantagage to one choice over another to justify this being identified as a real difference.)

If others don't disagree with these differences, I will move these items to other parts of the article since they don't seem to be differences.

--Gary Anderson (talk) 10:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hi to all,

I wanted to ask if you can translate the following articles to ido :

1 -『 גלידה מסטיק 』 => (hebrew wikipedia)

2 - " Mastic (resin plant)『 => (english wikipedia)

3 - 』Mastichochoria " => (english wikipedia)

thank you, burekas (talk) 14:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the pronunciation section, and what I know about the language, the pronunciation should be a simple /ˈido/, rather than /ˈiːdoʊ/. Maybe the second is the English pronunciation, so both should be added. N4m3 (talk) 21:55, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article says that Ido uses the same 26 letters as those in the English alphabet, but should it not say Latin alphabet,which is more commonly used term for this alphabet?ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Latin alphabet" would be a bit of a misnomer because the Latin alphabet did not include the letters J, U, or W. But if we say "English alphabet" then everyone knows exactly what is meant. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 01:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The figure of a couple of hundred speakers is outdated, being from 2000. I think this should be retained as it probably marks a "bottleneck population"; more or less, survivors of the pre-internet movement just before the internet was able to repopularize Ido. But, new figures would be useful. Also, are there any native Ido speakers? (There are native Esperanto speakers, and I think it's significant whether or not anyone has learned a language in the manner used by children acquiring native ability.) Roches (talk) 11:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The audio file of the Ido recitation of the "Lord's Prayer" clearly uses some different words than are given in the typed-up Ido version. Are you sure the clip is really in Ido? If it is, what explains the discrepancies, and should the transcription not be changed accordingly? Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The clip is really in Ido. Evidently someone changed the text since the clip was added, causing the discrepancy. I've restored the original text. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:35, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Thank you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article said

Ido was created in 1907 out of a desire to reform perceived flaws in Esperanto, a language that had been created for the same purpose 20 years earlier.

Esperanto was not created "to reform perceived flaws in Esperanto", which is circular and absurd. It was created to facilitate international communication, and I have changed the text to say so. I have also linked "Esperanto", which, very strangely, was not linked. --Thnidu (talk) 21:34, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect ایدو. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#ایدو until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ido de Esperanto. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#Ido de Esperanto until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:13, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ido alphabet. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#Ido alphabet until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:15, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ido (language). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#Ido (language) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:17, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect IDO (disambiguation). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#IDO (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:18, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect ایدو. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#ایدو until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ido (language). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#Ido (language) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 13:50, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey User:CritiquesCritics, you recently edited the page to remove a sentence saying Ido is the most successful Esperanto derivative, on the basis that it is incorrect since Ido has many less speakers than Esperanto. This is incorrect: Esperanto is not a derivative of Esperanto, so it's number of speakers is here irrelevant in relation to Ido's; the sentence here is saying it is the most successful Esperanto derivative, not the most successful international auxilliary language. Therefore, I've undone your change: if you disagree, you're welcome to respond here. Frzzl (talk) 22:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ðis seems like a weird fact to include, especially since it apparently needs better citations. Why is Finland in particular mentioned? IndigoGollum (talk) 03:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Likely because it's the only concrete example of Ido natives we have - I can't find any estimates for them globally, but it's important to acknowledge that there are native speakers in the lead (although it could certainly be better phrased)  Frzzl  talk; contribs  08:05, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sometimes seen a statement that Ido – besides meaning ‘descendant’ – is an acronym from Linguo Internaciona di la Delegitaro. Which came first? —Tamfang (talk) 03:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]