Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages

WikiProject Languages (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
Project This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Pidgin/Creole Status of Kanbun[]

Basically, the Wikipedia page about Kanbun says that it is a creole or a pidgin, based on a single source, in Japanese, titled "'Kundoku' as a Pidgin-Creole Language". I can't read or even access that source. Based on the rest of the article, Kanbun Kundoku seems to be a way of annotating Chinese writing so it can be more easily understood by Japanese people. This can't be a creole and, although one source I found online described "simplification", it really doesn't sound like a pidgin either. Could I the article (and articles linking to Kanbun) to frame its pidgin status as just one author's opinion, rather than, say, the consensus of experts on the matter. I know I don't have any sources saying Kanbun isn't a pidgin, but I feel the current article gives undue weight to a single source. User:Error has already expressed skepticism on Talk:Kanbun, I'd appreciate feedback and discussion there. Erinius (talk) 09:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know a thing about that situation, but the way you describe it, there is a source (even if it is badly accessible) that states that Kanbun is a creole, and you have no source beyond your own strong conviction that it isn't. I think Wikipedia's policies are clear in this case - leave the article alone unless/until you find a source that supports your view. LandLing 00:34, 2 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry for the delay in responding. I'd point you towards @Dekimasu's comments on WT:WPJ and Talk:Kanbun. A single IP or added these references towards Kanbun Kundoku being a creole language, and the title of the source used could also be translated as a hypothetical. Other ors, on two occasions (here and here, reverted the IP's ions. @Aeusoes1 pointed out in their summary that Kanbun Kundoku doesn't even qualify as a language and so could hardly be called a creole. We essentially have one interpretation of a single, dubious source which goes against a basic background understanding of pidgins and creoles and which multiple ors have tried to remove. Erinius (talk) 16:44, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Erinius: the article at Ueda, Atsuko (December 2008). "Sounds, Scripts, and Styles: Kanbun kundokutai and the National Language Reforms of 1880s Japan". Review of Japanese Culture and Society. 20: 133–156. JSTOR 42800998. defines kanbun as 'classical "Chinese" writing'. - Donald Albury 01:31, 2 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The statement is about Kanbun Kundoku, not Kanbun. Nardog (talk) 01:32, 2 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JIPA would like to send us a list of their Illustrations of the IPA for us to link from our language articles -- feedback requested[]

Presumably in our "External links" section. I think they'd at least need to extract the ISO code, so a wiki bot could follow our existing ISO links to the proper articles. (Though those haven't been updated for years.) The information they supply would be something like the following:

Baima | Pingwu County, Sichuan Province, China | https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100321000219 | https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/sites/default/files/JIPArecordings/Baima.zip
Chukchansi Yokuts | San Joaquin valley, California, USA | https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100321000268 | https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/sites/default/files/JIPArecordings/Chukchansi-Yokuts.zip
Qaqet | Raunsepna, Papua New Guinea | https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100321000359 | https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/sites/default/files/JIPArecordings/Qaqet.zip
Markina Basque | Markina-Xemein, Spain | https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100322000032 | https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/sites/default/files/JIPArecordings/Markina-Basque.zip

For these recent examples, the sound files are freely available but the articles are behind a paywall and for sale (@ US$25). However, JIPA has an agreement with CUP that the articles become freely available after 3 years. I don't know if it would normally be a problem for WP to link to a bunch of pay articles, but we could make a "JIPA" link template that calculates the date and warns the reader it's behind a pay wall if more recent than 3 years, and then disappear.

Can we automatically extract the citation info from the DOI, or would JIPA need to include it explicitly? (We could always post a link without the date or issue, of course, it just wouldn't look very professional.)

What I'd like to be able to tell them is: (a) whether we'd be willing to links to JIPA articles while they're still commercial, and (b) what information JIPA needs to provide to us for us to program a bot to automate those links and to format them appropriately. Right now they're trying to figure out how they can even extract the ISO codes within a reasonable amount of effort.

@Nohat, Lingzhi.Random, M. Dingemanse, Peter Isotalo, Mahagaja, Austronesier, Maunus, WilliamThweatt, N-true, Landroving Linguist, TaivoLinguist, Anypodetos, Erutuon, Nardog, Erinius, and Uanfala: Pinging some people I happen to be familiar with; pardon for leaving anyone out. — kwami (talk) 06:53, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't see how automatic indiscriminate addition of links to illustrations would be justifiable in view of WP:ELNO. Sounds like they're effectively asking us to not only allow spam but do it for them, which is absurd. If an illustration is a source we want to cite, we cite it, but not in External links. Nardog (talk) 07:58, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was thinking of this as a general resource, much like our links to Glottolog or the ELP. — kwami (talk) 08:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't personally have a problem with incorporating automatic links to the Illustrations of the IPA articles from JIPA. They are good reliable sources that are of consistent quality and academic rigor. The paywall is a problem for me, but as a group we (WP linguist ors) don't seem to mind based on our treatment of Ethnologue, which is behind a paywall as well. We link fairly automatically to Ethnologue. I'm not a fan of the hyperlegality of WP ing and I often run afoul of some subsubsubsubsubsection of some rule that was written to prevent two particular words from occurring together consecutively, so I'll leave that issue to those with a WP law degree. But as far as good sources go, the JIPA illustrations of the IPA are as good as it gets when it comes to focused, topical high-quality sources. Incorporating their list automatically would make their citation consistent. --TaivoLinguist (Taivo) (talk) 08:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no problem with linking to sources that are behind a paywall, although we should indicate that status by using the "subscription" code in the url-access field in the citation. - Donald Albury 15:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These are regularly citable scholarly works with supplementary material. If they're not used in the relevant article, they can be added to "Further reading", but then of course with full bibliographical data. I don't this it's commercial ref-spamming since JIPA comes close to being a general resource (paywalled or not). –Austronesier (talk) 20:34, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with Taivo, Donald and Austronesier on this. I don't see a problem with JIPA as such, as it is a respectable source. For many languages this may be one of very few reliable sources, so we would include this anyway. And for other languages to include it under further reading has nothing to do with spam. LandLing 02:25, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I concur it's acceptable so long as it's to add {{cite journal}} (or {{citation}} if the article uses CS2) in the Further reading section (created if absent, following WP:SECTIONORDER) only if the article doesn't already cite it (or one from Handbook). Other than that, no. Nardog (talk) 02:33, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How would we link to the supplementary material? I don't see any such parameter in the cite journal template. Would we need to add params to the template, or am I just overlooking them? — kwami (talk) 04:34, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We don't need to. The material is linked from the webpage for each paper. Nardog (talk) 05:30, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that should work fine. We might want to mention in the citation that there's a supplement, but I don't know where to put it.
What of extracting date, volume and page numbers? Can that be extracted from the DOI somehow, or will JIPA need to supply it?
I started a practice citation at Qaqet language, so we can work out exactly how it should be formatted and what info we need. Tomorrow I'll see if doi-access will accept some script to automatically display 'free' after 3 yrs. — kwami (talk) 06:20, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks like that will need to be in the template, so maybe best to create a dedicated citation template for JIPA. — kwami (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I've created {{Cite JIPA}} to handle this. Qaqet language is the test page. If I enter 2019-08 as the print date, it shows free access through the DOI, and if I enter 2019-09 as the date, it doesn't. That can be manually overridden with doi-access=free if need be, though I haven't added an option for manual 'not free'. Journal etc. are automatically filled in, but can be manually overridden.

I'm waiting for JIPA to get the ISO codes sorted out (needed for the bot to know which articles to ), then will request a bot to add the citation in a 'further reading' section as recommended above. So there's plenty of time to modify things; please comment if you have issues. — kwami (talk) 06:06, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Umm, your example from Qaqet language with |printdate=2019-08 and |printdate=2019-09:
{{cite JIPA |authors= Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit |onlinedate= 2022 |title= Qaqet |volume= |issue= |pages= 1-22 |doi= 10.1017/S0025100321000359 |doi-access= |printdate=2019-08}}
Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit (2019). "Qaqet". Illustrations of the IPA. Journal of the International Phonetic Association: 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0025100321000359{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link), with supplementary sound recordings.
{{cite JIPA |authors= Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit |onlinedate= 2022 |title= Qaqet |volume= |issue= |pages= 1-22 |doi= 10.1017/S0025100321000359 |doi-access= |printdate=2019-09}}
Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit (2019). "Qaqet". Illustrations of the IPA. Journal of the International Phonetic Association: 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0025100321000359{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link), with supplementary sound recordings.
but:
{{cite JIPA |authors= Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit |onlinedate= 2022 |title= Qaqet |volume= |issue= |pages= 1-22 |doi= 10.1017/S0025100321000359 |doi-access= |printdate=2019}}
Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit (2019). "Qaqet". Illustrations of the IPA. Journal of the International Phonetic Association: 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0025100321000359{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link), with supplementary sound recordings.
Trappist the monk (talk) 11:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That error message is a wee bit misleading; the actual error message returned from {{time interval}} is: <strong class="error">Error: Invalid start date in first parameter</strong>. This occurs because {{time interval}} does not support YYYY-MM dates but |printdate=2019-08-01:
{{cite JIPA |authors= Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit |onlinedate= 2022 |title= Qaqet |volume= |issue= |pages= 1-22 |doi= 10.1017/S0025100321000359 |doi-access= |printdate=2019-08-01}}
Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit (2019). "Qaqet". Illustrations of the IPA. Journal of the International Phonetic Association: 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0025100321000359{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link), with supplementary sound recordings.
or |printdate=August 2019:
{{cite JIPA |authors= Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit |onlinedate= 2022 |title= Qaqet |volume= |issue= |pages= 1-22 |doi= 10.1017/S0025100321000359 |doi-access= |printdate=August 2019}}
Tabain, Marija and Hellwig, Birgit (2019). "Qaqet". Illustrations of the IPA. Journal of the International Phonetic Association: 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0025100321000359{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link), with supplementary sound recordings.
Trappist the monk (talk) 12:19, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trappist the monk: Thanks. Yes, I originally customized {{cite JIPA}} to handle that JIPA date format. But the code was rather clunky, and I was given advice on streamlining it; the reduced code does not support the JIPA format because it now relies on what {{time interval}} recognizes. I wonder if it would be worth making a request for {{time interval}} and other date templates to support JIPA format, since it's unambiguous (ISO format with / instead of hyphen, or year-month without a day). — kwami (talk) 20:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The WP coders would rather not add more date formats, and JIPA says it's easy enough for them to use a different format. — kwami (talk) 20:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Firstable, thanks for whom organized such kind of really important list of languages. I am from Karakalpakstan and my native language is Karakalpak. We have also own wikipedia which is kaa.wikipedia.org. I absolutely want to add my native language to this list as "kaa" or "ka" or simply "kk". I reckon that our both the name of country (Karakalpakstan) and the language (karakalpak) are the same in pronuncuation. In some areas, karakalpak language is abbreviated as "kk" , so the last decision is upon you) with respect [User:Inosham| Inosham] (Inosham (Inosham (talk) 19:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)) (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC))]]Reply[reply]

Talk:Vietnamese_language#Writing_systems[]

This discussion about the exact nature of the Chinese-derived script that was historically used to write Vietnamese, and how to mention it in the lede and infobox might be of interest to members of this project. –Austronesier (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested moves: List of Romanian words with possible Dacian origin > List of Romanian words of possible pre-Roman origin[]

All comments on a possibly controversial moving proposal would be highly appreciated here. Borsoka (talk) 03:46, 14 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Announcing template Wiktionarylang[]

New Template:Wiktionarylang may be used to add a small box flush right with a link to a term in a foreign language wiktionary. If you're familiar with {{Wikisourcelang}}, the operation of the new template is similar, and uses the same four positional parameters, and adds one more to allow you to specify 'section' (as in this example), 'paragraph', and so on instead of 'article'. Mathglot (talk) 03:48, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Standard WP romanization of Arabic[]

In Help:IPA/Arabic and Romanization of Arabic there are several possible romanization schemes, and of particular concern IMO for accessibility, machine readability, and consistency of encoding is the different characters for the glottal stop. There is already a Wikipedia:Indic transliteration guideline, so why not get a consensus which romanizations and characters may be simply inappropriate for general WP use (we're likely not going to come to a consensus on one particular romanization used for all cases of MSA/Classical, nor should one be necessary). Of course other scripts with problematic inconsistent and/or non-standard character usages should be considered for essay/guideline proposals as well. This is not within the scope per description of WProject Arabic. SamuelRiv (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nvm, finally found WP:MOSAR. This WikiProject should really have all the language MOS guides listed at the top. You see the navbox at WP:MOS? How is a user supposed to figure out that to find the MOS for the Arabic language you have to first navigate to Islam??? I guess we might as well put MOS:CHINESE under MOS:ACUPUNCTURE while we're at it! SamuelRiv (talk) 04:46, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Varieties of English map[]

Anglophone World.svg

Sorry if I'm repeating myself; I don't see this in the threads above.

We have a new SVG map from the Graphics Lab, File:Anglophone World.svg, intended to replace the old PNG map, File:Anglospeak(800px)Countries.png used in the clickable navigation template. With the PNG map the geographically smaller varieties of English were difficult to access and it wasn't apparent that many were missing. See Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop/Archive/Mar 2022.

Could people review and see if the SVG is still missing any national/regional varieties? E.g. it is missing Gambian English, possibly Seychelles? We might not need Tuvalu or the BIOT, but anything else that should be added? — kwami (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't see any reason to exclude Gambia or the Seychelles. As far as I can tell English is an official language in both countries. I'd add Gibraltar too, to the light blue category. Also I don't think the map currently includes Norfolk or the Pitcairn Islands (the relevant template has them in the native speakers category). I don't think Vanuatu (official but not majority L1) or some other Oceanian nations are included in the new SVG map either, but they should be IMO. I think English is still co-official in Hong Kong too.
There are populations on the Atlantic Coast of Central America, besides in Belize, who speak varieties somewhere on a continuum between English-based creoles and non-creole English. There's also San Andrés Island in Colombia which has English and a local English-based creole. I'm raising these places for consideration at least, I'm not sure they should be included, and it would certainly be a mistake to highlight, say, the entire countries of Honduras or Colombia as English-speaking. Erinius (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know the English-speaking population in the Bay Islands Department in Honduras is very small, and, afaik, English is not official there. It would not be practical to show on this map all the places where small segments of a population speak some dialect of English, but English is not official. Donald Albury 15:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe if it's worth a WP article, we should have it on the map, which functions as a navbox. — kwami (talk) 01:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is in fact a stub about Bay Islands English (which from what I can gather is not a creole), but I can't find any articles about non-creole Englishes anywhere else in Central America outside Belize. The book Central American English[1], available on ProQuest, does mention a continuum between standard English and Limonese Creole in Costa Rica, but there's no article about Standard Limonese English. I'm not sure if such a continuum exists elsewhere.
Anyway, I'm really not sure what the scope of this map should be. It doesn't seem to include any places that aren't either independent countries or dependent territories, with the exception of Hawaii. I'm not sure this maps' scope should include every minoritized English-speaking community (of which I don't think there are many), and I don't know the Bay Islands' current linguistic demographics, but English might not be the majority first language there anymore. Erinius (talk) 08:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So yeah, I wouldn't add the Bay Islands rn since I'm not even sure they're a majority-English-L1 territory. Erinius (talk) 08:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
English is official in Hawaii, and there's a different history of English there, with Hawaiian English as a redirect.
From the template list, it would appear that there are two criteria: English is the majority native language, or English is official or the language of administration, education or the like. I'm not sure about Tuvalu, where English is official but practically unused. — kwami (talk) 09:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion on the PNG map, and all the other discussions they link to, often break down around the definition of the key colors, so that should be very precise when you decide on final colors and place a caption+description. I imagine you're using data from List of countries by English-speaking population? Make sure you link to that, which columns you use are specified, and use terms like "native language" instead of "L1". It might reduce the amount of complaints, or at least make talk-back easier. SamuelRiv (talk) 03:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ Holm, John A. (1983). Central American English. Heidelberg: J. Groos. ISBN 9783872762955.

Ruanruan language[]

Hello ! I recently published the article called Rouran (langue) in French, and I saw that the article in Simple English says that the Ruanruan language was possibly Yeniseic and close to Xiongnu language. I can't verify the information. Has anybody got the full citation or an another source saying Ruanruan is a Para-Yeniseic language [fr], please ?

For more details, please see :

PS : it seems that the article in Simple English was translated from this version, itself a derivative of this version

After all the research I've done, I haven't found anything.

Yours sicerly, --Rishāringânu 09:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Courtesy link: Le rouran, une langue ienisseïenne ?
@Richaringan:, Ethnologue does not have entries for either name; neither does Linguist list, which is a bit of a red flag. I would try adding a request at Linguist list, and see what kind of response you get. What's the level of sourcing at the articles, have you accessed the sources? If there doesn't appear to be anything, maybe the articles should be challenged, or nominated for deletion. Mathglot (talk) 21:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mathglot:, Hello, thank you for your response. Firstly, I'm sorry for the links, I replaced them.
I'm not familiar with these sites and wouldn't know if I get an answer. However, I don't think entry to these sites is an eligibility requirement.
Regarding sources:
-the article in English has 6 references for 5,325 bytes, which is good,
-the article in Simple English has 6 references too (but they are messy) for 1,968 bytes,
-and the article in French has 27 references for 16,294 bytes, which is correct, I guess.
And yes I accessed the sources, except one, Vajda (2013). So there is no need to delete the articles, only to verify the information.
Yours sincerly, --Rishāringânu 07:07, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Mathglot:
Ethnologue's cut-off date for extinct languages is 1950, so they're not relevant.
It looks like the only info Linglist has anymore is ISO codes, and Ruanruan isn't well enough established as a language to have one of those, so that might not mean anything either.
— kwami (talk) 05:22, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Kwami; I didn't know that about Ethnologue! Sad about Linguist-list; they used to have a lot more; I admit I haven't been there in quite a while now. Is there something better now? Mathglot (talk) 05:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very strange, for example, the Ye-Maek language, which is hypothetical, has an ISO 3 code, and the Xiongnu language, hypothetical too, has a Glottolog entry. Let's refocus the discussion, can you access the Vajda's book ? --Rishāringânu 07:18, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Afar people and Ethnologue[]

I was surprised by this pair of s, which changed numbers by millions. The numbers are sourced to Ethnologue; and so "No problem", I thought: "I'll look them up." So a few minutes ago I made my first visit to Ethnologue in months -- and I was amazed to find that (for me, in a not-poor country), (i) even humdrum records are behind a paywall, and (ii) the asking price is very high. Could somebody with access to Ethnologue please look at "aar"? -- Hoary (talk) 21:45, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Consider cross-posting also at the Resource Exchange -- Resource Request, though be sure to specify there that you need an updated (2021/2022 or whatever) version of the page, since open archived copies are from 2013. SamuelRiv (talk) 02:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hoary: if you check the history, you'll see that the numbers were changed without changing or updating the ref, which almost certainly means that the numbers will fail verification. And if you check further back, you'll see that's not the first time that has happened. — kwami (talk) 06:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, SamuelRiv and Kwamikagami. But does nobody here ("WikiProject Languages", after all) not have paid-up access and a few minutes spare? -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The page says:
  • User Population: 1,862,800 in Ethiopia, all users. L1 users: 1,840,000 in Ethiopia (2018). L2 users: 22,800. 906,000 monolinguals (1994 census). Total users in all countries: 2,563,800 (as L1: 2,541,000; as L2: 22,800).
Please note that this is about the language, and not the ethnic population. The page also mentions that the Afar language is "Used as L2 by Argobba [agj]."
Access to Ethnologue is extremely expensive but you can get a free access by applying to their Contributor program: https://www.ethnologue.com/contributor-program A455bcd9 (talk) 07:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is more info in the lists of languages per country:
  • Djibouti: 196,000 speakers, 335,000 ethnic population
  • Eritrea: 505,000 speakers (no ethnic figure)
Austronesier (talk) 08:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I corrected the figures after posting here. — kwami (talk) 02:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, all. I wouldn't qualify for Ethnologue's "Contributor Program". (Simply, I've nothing to contribute.) I'm sure that Ethnologue is A Good Thing, but I was shocked by the request for that much money: I was sure I remembered a limited access to Ethnologue for no payment whatever. I like to "AGF" and to suspect that information has been misunderstood before suspecting that it has been deliberately misrepresented or just fabricated; but must also remind myself that some ors just like to invent stuff and that they may be able to get away with doing so for quite some time (example; supplement). -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not always in bad faith. Sometimes people update figures and don't bother to update the associated citation, perhaps because they don't understand how WP and citations work. But then of course it looks like the figures are cited when they're not. If they don't understand that they should change the citation, it's likely that they can't determine whether their source is reliable either. It's possible that they're correcting miscited figures to what it says in the ref, but if so they'll usually say as much in the summary. So IMO it's best to revert s like this even when you can't access the ref. — kwami (talk) 02:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feedback requested at Template:Infobox language[]

Your feedback regarding parameter |ethnicity= in Template:Infobox language would be appreciated. Please see this discussion. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Chinese language#Requested move 6 September 2022[]

Information.svg

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Chinese language#Requested move 6 September 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 03:36, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move: Languages of x to Language in x[]

Hello, I just started a conversation for a requested a move from Languages of Morocco to Language in Morocco, as the former title suggests that the languages are either endemic or official in some way, which is not necessarily the case, while the latter title would be more suitable for an article that discusses the matter of language in the country in general. I then noticed that most articles are named the former way, such as Languages of the United States and Languages of India, so I wanted to see if there would be support for this kind of a change for these kinds of articles in general. If you have an opinion on the matter, please participate in the discussion. إيان (talk) 00:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
Country digests on Ethnologue ("A PDF document that collates all the information from Ethnologue about the language situation in X.") are called "Languages of X" and they include all languages (endemic, immigrants, official, etc.), see for instance: Languages of Morocco. So "Languages of X" seems okay but I understand your point. The problem is even more apparent for geographical regions (Languages of South America vs Indigenous languages of South America, Languages of South Asia) and political unions (Languages of the European Union, Languages of the African Union, Languages of the Soviet Union, on the other hand for the UN we have Official languages of the United Nations). Sometimes we have one article for the official languages and one for the language situation (Official languages of Spain vs Languages of Spain and Languages with official status in India vs Languages of India): not ideal?
So "Language in X" or "Language situation in X" or "Languages in X" may be better and it would be consistent with articles dedicated to a single language in a country: Russian language in Israel, French language in the United States, or German language in Namibia. But we can also keep "Languages of X" and make it clear in the lede that the article covers the whole language situation in the area (endemic, official, immigrant & past, present, future). A455bcd9 (talk) 07:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Target link for Template:lang-arc[]

The name for ISO 639-3 code arc changed in 2007. This should be reflected in the link of {{lang-arc}}. I started a discussion at Template talk:lang-arc#Change language link to Imperial Aramaic respectively Module talk:Lang/data#Template-protected request on 25 September 2022. I‘d be glad for your input. S.K. (talk) 21:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

common term for Japanese and Chinese?[]

Is there a common term that can apply to both Japanese language and Chinese language? {{Nihongo}} has been forked to {{Hanyu}}. Forking is considered bad. The only differences that I have found are:

Nihongo → Hanyu
Japanese → Chinese
romaji → pinyin
ja → zh
Hepburn → Pinyin

I want to unfork this template by creating common code. To do that it would be nice to have a term to serve as a variable name that can mean either Japanese or Chinese. I can use romanized to replace both of romaji and pinyin. I'm pretty sure that I can hack some sort of term chijap or japchi that will serve, but if there is already an existing term, I'd prefer to use that.

Trappist the monk (talk) 17:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CJK? – Uanfala (talk) 18:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thought about that but so far there is no 'K'...
Trappist the monk (talk) 18:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
CJK would show we support the inclusion of K, just no need so far. — kwami (talk) 09:35, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Aye, it would. But really, if we need to add more languages (in this discussion Greek has been mentioned) then a more universal solution (discuss that elsewhere) is needed.
Trappist the monk (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whatever you settle on, just never abbreviate Japan(ese) to "jap". Nardog (talk) 10:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that. For the nonce, jpnchi, a portmanteau of the ISO 639-2 tags for Japanese and Chinese languages.
Trappist the monk (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How are the trio Chinese, Japanese, Korean special in this regard? Comparable to
Tokyo Tower (東京タワー, Tōkyō tawā)
for a Greek topic we are no less likely to want to display
Colossus of Rhodes (Κολοσσὸς Ῥόδιος, Kolossòs Ródios)
So why a template just for Japanese and why a template just for CJ or just for CJK? Largoplazo (talk) 11:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My interest in this discussion is to find a common term for Japanese and Chinese because those are the only two languages that have {{nihongo}}-like templates. If there is interest in creating a more universal template that mimics {{nihongo}}, we can talk about that elsewhere.
Trappist the monk (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't see any reason to be so specific in what you're looking for. If someone does fork off a Greek template like the Japanese and Chinese ones, will you seek a common name that specifically refers to the trio Chinese, Japanese, Greek but expressly not a general term applicable to all scripts/languages? You won't find one, and even if you did, it would fall apart the instant somebody else forked off an Armenian variant. So forget creating a template that needlessly boxes its use into a very specific pair of languages and go with a generic term that has the potential to cover any language/script combination. And I'm discussing this here because this is in response to you. Largoplazo (talk) 14:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why are you so angry? Did I kick your puppy? Until your post, as far as I know, no one had ever voiced a desire for a {{nihongo}}-like template for another language. As far as I know, the forking of Module:Nihongo to Module:Hanyu was not discussed, it just happened. As I said before, if there is a desire for a more generic solution, we can talk about that. But this discussion is not the right place because a discussion about a generic solution is likely to be long and rambling.
Trappist the monk (talk) 15:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I said nothing angry, so I don't know what you're going on about now. Now, can you explain why it's an appropriate place to artificially choose two languages to merge together into one template based solely on the circumstances of the moment but not a place to respond to that by saying it isn't a good idea to lock ourselves in by the very specific happenstance and that it would be better to create a generic solution? This isn't WikiProject Japanese and Chinese, it's WikiProject Languages, so I can't imagine in what sense you believe this isn't the right place. Largoplazo (talk) 15:25, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To me, everything that you have written in this discussion has overtones of anger, of combativeness. I came here to ask one question. The answer is, apparently, there is no common term for those two languages.
I have never said that WT:LANG is not the proper place to discuss a generic solution to the {{nihongo-for-all}} template if such is desired. I have said that this discussion is not the right place (emphasis added).
Trappist the monk (talk) 15:54, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You didn't simply ask "I wonder, is there a single term that comprises Chinese and Japanese?" You wrote I want to unfork this template by creating common code. To do that it would be nice to have a term to serve as a variable name that can mean either Japanese or Chinese. I wrote in direct response to that because I disagreed that it would be nice to have a term to use as the name of a template only for those two arbitrary languages. It flatly addressed what you'd written, so of course it was relevant to this section. I don't know why you read anger into that. Since you feel free to read emotions into me, I'm going to return the favor and suggest that you seem to be in an extremely defensive mood today, so sensitive that you can't tolerate any questioning of your proposition or any broadening of the scope of the discussion from your very narrow initial goal. If I'm wrong, well, now you know how it is to have somebody mysteriously attribute emotions and attitudes to you that you aren't having. Largoplazo (talk) 16:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You didn't simply ask "I wonder, is there a single term that comprises Chinese and Japanese?" I did not use exactly those words, but the first sentence in the OP is: Is there a common term that can apply to both Japanese language and Chinese language? That was the question, everything else was an explanation of why I wanted to know the answer.
We all read emotion in every discussion, it is inherent in us to do so, that is why this medium is such a poor way to communicate. Clearly, we are not getting anywhere with this discussion so perhaps it would be best to abandon it?
Trappist the monk (talk) 16:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
FWIW I don't understand why {{Nihongo}} and similar templates have persisted for so long. Its name and syntax are unclear and it makes the lead a hassle to . Any more forking (or merging) is a nightmare if you ask me. Nardog (talk) 00:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree. {{Nihongo}} and its relatives try to do too much, and are confusing. They generate both part of the text of a sentence (often the opening sentence of an article) and the parenthesized native script form. At least lang templates or {{zh}} are clearly inside the parentheses in the opening sentence. They've probably persisted so long because Japanese articles are largely in their own world, but now an or accustomed to them wants to do the same for Chinese. Kanguole 11:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]