andy-k wrote:

Yes, but as far as I can tell that is what the author of that IEP entry
was addressing (and metaphysical solipsism seems to imply the other 2
kinds anyway). Another source also takes the view that Wittgenstein is
undermining epistemological solipsism (see bottom quote).

So how do you consider it still being a viable argument when it
circularly negates the very thing it depends upon to be viable? As I
said before, solipsism could still be the case ultimately, but PLA can
be considered as rendering both kinds (if not moral solipsism, too)
worthless from the standpoint that they depend upon (public) language
just to be presented.