It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
This is part of the hypothetical and controversial Penutian language family, not a proven genetic language family. Should we delete it, or keep it for convenience? - -sche(discuss) 01:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
I see no need for convenience here. delete -- Liliana• 07:18, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) On the one hand, it's much less hypothetical and controversial than the Penutian language family itself. On the other hand, that's not saying much... It wouldn't surprise me to see someone come up with the evidence for genetic relationship, but being able to combine just two independent groups doesn't seem like a big enough convenience to keep the family around in the absence of said evidence. The Penutian hypothesis has gone as far as it has with as little real evidence as it has because it would provide a handy structure for dealing with lots of odds and ends that are left in the bottom of the sorting bin. Yok-Utian would be just one little step towards that very faraway goal. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)