Talk:Mwangwego script

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 6 June 2018, see discussion.
keep, 8 November 2014 (UTC), see discussion.

	Writing portal 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.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Notability?

I've placed a notability tag on this article for it seems to be more a promotion of the abugida in an encycolpaedic guise than a genuine encyclopaedic article. Van Dieman (talk) 07:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality?

I added this neutrality tag, as ALL live references - but two - ultimately refer back to this web page, a page of and for the promotion of the script.

The second reference is an expired link, and the last reference links to a Reference.com - a Wikipedia mirror - list of notable Malawians. Van Dieman (talk) 07:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this has neutrality issues. In particular, the article fails to highlight that the takeup for this script has been really poor. However, the claim that the article is not neutral because the sources all refer back to mwangwego.com is ridiculous. First of all, a discussion of the script anywhere is inevitably going to refer to Mwangwego's own writing. Secondly, using non-neutral sources does not necessarily mean that our article is non-neutral. Non-neutral sources are explicitly permitted in policy (WP:V#Neutrality) and guidelines (WP:BIASED). SpinningSpark 10:46, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some cleanup and removed some of the numerical claims on takeup which were unsourced. I've added new sources and hopefully there is now a more balanced article. I've removed the POV tag on that basis. Please point out any specific points you think need addressing. SpinningSpark 08:43, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ISO 15924 and ISO 10646

@Evertype: please check this edit for accuracy. Tuvalkin (talk) 00:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]