Talk:Interglossa

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Languages Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Untitled

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I do not agree to REDIRECT the page INTERGLOSSA to GLOSA. They are quite different languages. I do know Interglossa since I have bought the original handbook, which I have actually scanned upon a google site ( https://sites.google.com/site/interglossa1943/ ) So I think the article INTERGLOSSA should be developped. I may do it in a few days. --Xabadiar (talk) 11:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Xabadiar, you did a great job with the article and the web site.

Thank you for adding the dictionary to your site too. Opoudjis (talk) 05:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Untitled