Battle of Old Fort Wayne

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

Languages 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Indigenous peoples of North America This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Oklahoma Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma 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.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I just read about this dying out language in a magazine. Now I'm a bit confused: In the magazine it says, there are 7 speakers, the table in the article here says 3 and the article itself 1. So, how many Wichita speakers are there???--Alexmagnus2 17:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pretty arbitrary number. The 7 number I know for a fact is too large by now. I have worked with Dr. Rood, the expert on the language, and last I heard there was only 1 truly fluent speaker of the language, and without anybody to practice with even that level of fluency is debatable. The other 2-6 individuals, depending on what you read, can understand spoken Wichita and can produce broken Wichita. Most of these individuals were in their 70s and 80s last I heard and some of them have certainly passed away. Wichita is for all intents and purposes nearly extinct. 128.138.64.115 (talk) 22:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the status on the "Wichita Documentation Project" and the classes that they offered? I've gone through the links provided, a few are outdated, and the last update on the class site is for 2009.

Mr Languages (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm out of touch with folks doing the Wichita language classes through the tribe, but I'll ask around this coming week. In the meantime, you can reach David Rood at david.rood@colorado.edu. -Uyvsdi (talk) 00:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

The opening paragraph of Wichita language#Number marking says

Countable nouns can be marked for dual or plural; if not so marked, they are assumed to be singular.

But earlier, Wichita language#Grammar and morphology, paragraph 2, says

Nouns do not distinguish between singular and plural, as this information is specified as part of the verb.

These contradict each other. Loraof (talk) 20:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wichita language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100702224745/http://www.wichitatribe.com/language_class.htm to http://www.wichitatribe.com/language_class.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100702224745/http://www.wichitatribe.com/language_class.htm to http://www.wichitatribe.com/language_class.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060329165243/http://texashistory.unt.edu/permalink/meta-pth-6105 to http://texashistory.unt.edu/permalink/meta-pth-6105

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd leave a note that the UNESCO Atlas of the World's Languages In Danger lists Wichita as critically endangered but not extinct as of 2010. I don't know enough to resolve the conflicting information (maybe it's a terminology issue?) but perhaps someone else can. Botterweg14 (talk) 20:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It went extinct in 2016, so that makes sense. — kwami (talk) 22:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• /ɾ/, /j/, and /h/ change to /s/ after /s/ or /t͡s/:

In the phonological changes section after the consonants in section, in the Phonology supersection, theres this example. but it's contradictory since h should change to s after c, i.e. icsiriss... (icciriss... ?).

How can I add a "contradictory" note? Ill look into it later. Awelotta (talk) 01:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article matches the source (Rood). I was considering that maybe it only occurs at morpheme boundaries but Rood doesn't say that. Awelotta (talk) 01:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]