Talk:Dobrujan Tatar

(Redirected from Talk:Dobrujan Tatar dialect)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by ModernDayTrilobite in topic Requested move 14 February 2024

Requested move 23 June 2023 edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Dobrujan Tatar languageDobrujan Tatar – Given that article creator Zolgoyo simply does not wish to agree no matter how many times I explain to them, I request a move to formalize the removal of the word "language" from the title. Dobrujan Tatar is a dialect of the Crimean Tatar language. No sources treat Dobrujan Tatar as a separate language. This is in fact stated on the article itself.

Dobrujan Tatar does not have an ISO 639 code nor a Linguasphere one, and its code of Glottolog lists it as a subdivision of Crimean Tatar [1]. There currently are two sources on the article allegedly treating Dobrujan Tatar as its own language yet the first one [2] continuously connects the Tatars on Romanian Dobruja with the ones at Crimea and does not explicitly differentiate between Dobrujan Tatar and Crimean Tatar. The second source pretty much doesn't even mention "Crimean Tatar" or "Dobrujan Tatar" but only "Tatar language". Again there is no explicit differentiation between the two made by the author. Super Ψ Dro 12:20, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Oppose
Just the name "Dobrujan Tatar" is not enough for the article name.
My suggestion: "Dobrujan Tatar dialect" Zolgoyo (talk) 17:51, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm okay with that. As long as we remove "language". Super Ψ Dro 20:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Agreed. Zolgoyo (talk) 20:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
...that discussion was supposed to be open for one week, Zolgoyo. I wanted it to be a formal Wikipedia process so that you would not move it again into a "language" article. Can I get some assurances at least that you will not attempt this again? Super Ψ Dro 21:18, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
The name has been glued... Zolgoyo (talk) 21:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. I hope this is the last of our disagreements. Super Ψ Dro 22:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 10 September 2023 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Participants were unconvinced that Dobrujan Tatar has been described as a language in reliable sources. An alternate proposal for "Dobrujan Tatar dialects", plural, did not achieve consensus in either direction. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talkcontribs) 15:11, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply


Dobrujan Tatar dialectDobrujan Tatar language – It includes Crimean Tatar and Nogai dialects which are now the Dobrujan Tatar language. Here is a reference. Zolgoyo (talk) 07:20, 10 September 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, oppose at the moment, unless and until a stable, independent ISO 639-3 identifier can be gained, otherwise several reliable source websites will still consider it "just a dialect of Crimean Tatar". academia.edu looks like somewhat UGC. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
There are Crimean Tatar dialects and Nogai dialects, which do represent the Dobrujan Tatar language. It alone can not be a just dialect. Zolgoyo (talk) 17:57, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Zolgoyo: Do you have any sources on the subject written by accredited subject-matter experts within the field of Turkology? While Taner Murat certainly seems well-versed in the Dobrujan Tatar dialects, he doesn't appear to be a linguist. I would like to see what linguists have to say on the subject. I'm hesitant to support changing the name to "Dobrujan Tatar language" without more sources written by Turkologists backing it up. I wouldn't say that the lack of an independent ISO 639-3 code is necessarily a disqualifying factor though. My current vote is to provisionally oppose the move in favor of moving it to Dobrujan Tatar dialects for now. It's more accurate than referring to it as one dialect, and it's fairly neutral. ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 03:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Also, didn't you propose moving the article to Dobrujan Tatar dialect in the last discussion about this article's title? Why are you trying to move it back again? ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 03:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
I do speak Dobrujan Tatar and I can say that Dobrujan Tatar is Kipchak-Nogai, even we have in some dialects the ş→s change (which also exist in other Kipchak-Nogai languages; Nogai, Kazakh, Karakalpak), were this doesn't exist in Crimean Tatar because it's Kipchak-Cuman. We also have influences from Romanian and Rumelian Turkish. However to call it "Dobrujan Tatar dialect(s)" it's not clever, to use "language" instead of "dialect(s)" will be more understandable. I am contacting with SIL International about the language code for Dobrujan Tatar, because we try to safe Dobrujan Tatar and to create a literature in Romania, but it's not supported in internet. Zolgoyo (talk) 19:40, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm not trying to be clever, and I am aware that Dobrujan Tatar is, according to most classifications, a Kipchak-Nogai dialect group (though some dispute this apparently, placing it in Rumelian Turkish, but I haven't checked the sources for that yet). The point is for it to be a neutral provisional name until the matter can be settled more definitively. ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Maybe we need to wait until we get an answer (from SIL International, Glottolog etc.). But Dobrujan Tatar can't be Rumelian Turkish, because Rumelian Turkish is Oghuz. Dobrujan Tatar is Kipchak, this is also possible to see in most of the sources. Zolgoyo (talk) 04:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 14 February 2024 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. It was shown in the discussion that removing the word "dialect" would be WP:CONSISTENT with other articles on dialects; removing "dialect" from the title was also seen as favorable due to the uncertainty over whether Dobrujan Tatar should be considered a dialect or a language. Article is move-protected, so I'll be taking the RM to WP:RM/TR for implementation. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talkcontribs) 15:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)Reply


Dobrujan Tatar dialectDobrujan Tatar – It's on discussion about the situation of Dobrujan Tatar (Dialect(s)? Language?), so is better just to rename it as "Dobrujan Tatar", to be neutral. Zolgoyo (talk) 19:10, 14 February 2024 (UTC)— Relisting. Bensci54 (talk) 20:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. asilvering (talk) 19:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oppose As sais many times before, just renaming here doesn't really benefit from any benefited parties, the only way to legally rename it would be upstream efforts. I would instead propose a moratorium for such unfair, unnecessary and un-actionable repeating of "just a renaming request" Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just to rename it to "Dobrujan Tatar" will be the best solution. Glottolog and SIL is in discussion about the situation of the language, this year (?) they should to announce it actually. And until than, to be neutral in Wikipedia is important. Zolgoyo (talk) 05:13, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
What do you mean "legally rename it"? Which laws of which countries do you think Wikipedia's naming conventions have to abide by? Brusquedandelion (talk) 20:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Note: WikiProject Languages has been notified of this discussion. asilvering (talk) 19:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Note: WikiProject Bulgaria has been notified of this discussion. asilvering (talk) 19:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Note: WikiProject Romania has been notified of this discussion. asilvering (talk) 19:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Relisting comment: Relisting following wikiproject notifications. asilvering (talk) 19:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Support. The argument is two-fold. Suppose you consider Dobruja Tatar a language, not a dialect. Then, clearly, it should not have "dialect" in the title. Suppose instead that you do consider it a dialect. But the Wikipedia naming policies for other dialects is clearly not to have "dialect" in the title- see, for example, Rioplatense Spanish or Egyptian Arabic (the "dialect" status of the latter is debated amongst non-professionals, of course, but that just makes it an even better example). And as a final argument, this is simply more consistent with a WP:NPOV.
The reasoning given by @Liuxinyu970226 to not move is fundamentally incoherent. First, this is not a legal procedure, so this has nothing to do with legality or illegality. Second, the purpose of this request has nothing to do with "benefit[ing] parties," so I have no idea what they are going on about with that. Brusquedandelion (talk) 20:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Brusquedandelion The question is that whether the proposer Zolgoyo indeed "submitted an ISO 639 change request" or not? By checking [3], although there are some 2023 requests shown, non of them are about Dobrujan Tatar, so I'd love to know what's the actual situation here: Zolgoyo really submitted a request in the last year, but the request is dropped by SIL due to revision of ISO 639 in last year? Or Zolgoyo didn't submit it, and make a lie to claim "It's on discussion about the situation of Dobrujan Tatar (Dialect(s)?" Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
But what's that got to do with the price of tea in China? I don't see how that's relevant to what the name of this article should be on Wikipedia. You haven't addressed my points above. The fact is that even for linguistic varieties that can be uncontroversially labelled dialects, the titles of their Wikipedia articles do not contain the word "dialect". Brusquedandelion (talk) 02:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Liuxinyu970226 I don't have reason to lie. You maybe also know that not all "Change Requests" are posted now. Zolgoyo (talk) 15:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. The proposed title can include language and/or dialect. —  AjaxSmack  01:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • note: Asilvering, you can close the move and then list it at WP:RMTR in the admin needed section. Admin protection doesn't mean admin close. Brusquedandelion, please don't list move discussions unless they're already closed at WP:RMTR. I've removed your request for now until the discussion is closed. Sennecaster (Chat) 13:04, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
    Sure, I can in theory, but I can also take it as a pre-emptive trout for closing a contentious decision, and not do that. -- asilvering (talk) 15:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
    @Asilvering It's not really contentious. There's one dissenter whose explanation is confusing, and they have not bothered to respond to repeated requests for clarification. The move is well-founded in policy, in particular, WP:CONSISTENT. True, not many people have responded here, but I have little doubt that if there had been more eyes on the discussion, there would have been a broad consensus in favor of the move. It's a pretty textbook application of WP:CONSISTENT, even without invoking questions of neutrality.
    Also, what is a "pre-emptive trout"? Brusquedandelion (talk) 16:21, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
    I agree, and that's why I closed it originally. However, I'm now content to sit it out.
    A pre-emptive trout is a WP:TROUT that occurs before you manage to do the trout-able action. asilvering (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
    Sit it out and wait for what, exactly? Brusquedandelion (talk) 15:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
    For an admin to close it, like I said. -- asilvering (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.