Talk:Vṛṣabha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 5 July 2021[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 section.

Vṛṣabha → Vrishabha – This is English language wikipedia , so IAST spelling of Vṛṣabha is not appropirate, WP:USEENGLISH. Also Vrishabha is more common name. Same was done on Talk:Mesha (month), a month prior to Vrishabha month, but here the move got reverted. Crashed greek (talk) 05:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • From an earlier conversation I get the impression that at least some of the motivation behind this proposal comes from the mistaken belief that diacritics are not allowed in article titles. Given that this article is about a Sanskrit term, following the guidelines at WP:TRANSLITERATE should lead us to prefer the current title as it follows the established transliteration standard, provided there isn't a common English name. Now, whether there is a common name in English name that's different from the systematically transliterated form – that's up to editors to find out (and again, what matters here is usage in appropriate sources, not raw counts from a web search). Another issue to consider is consistency: apart from Mesha (which was moved after a brief RM discussion that didn't seem to consider any of the relevant issues), all the other articles in Category:Hindu solar months use IAST in their titles. In the absence of any meaningful arguments to the contrary, I'm inclined to trust the judgement of the editor who created those articles (who, if I'm not mistaken, is Ms Sarah Welch) and leave things the way they are. – Uanfala (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Crashed greek: My +1 to Uanfala's comments, plus a bit more: true, this is en-wiki. Plain english spellings make more sense or are easier to search. Unfortunately historic and contemporary sources use three or more spellings for Sanskrit terms/concepts, e.g. Vṛṣabha, Vrsabha, Vrishabha etc. You can spend quite a while searching the most used version for the title spelling, keep checking over time if that version remains most popular, argue over it and spend time on it. Another approach is to use all those spellings, by (i) creating redirect pages in en-wiki, (ii) include alt spellings in lead or nomenclature section of the main article, (iii) and updating the wikidata entry (for our readers, how they search and find wiki articles, and for general accessibility on mobile App/devices, per RexxS). There is no need to be consistent in this special case! Instead, the better practice would be to use the predominant or most common spelling in secondary and tertiary reliable sources at the time the article is created or expanded for the first time. If an article already exists with a specific style of spelling for the title, consider leaving it alone and creating redirect pages with alt spellings if they do not exist. Updating the linked wikidata entry to reflect all the alt spellings, and synonyms if any, would also help our readers. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:35, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are some articles where adding diacritics wont make much difference, it is just the English spelling and a diacritic on top of that, as seen in some other article titles. But in cases like this article, the transliteration using ISAT completely distorts the English pronunciation, as the vowel i or u is missed here due to the diacritic. Also "Vrishabha" is WP:COMMONNAME by a big margin. Also User:Uanfala's claim that all other months using ISAT is not true. Crashed greek (talk) 10:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Which articles in Category:Hindu solar months don't use IAST? – Uanfala (talk) 13:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kumbha (month) doesnt. And few other months like Mithuna (month), Makara (month), Dhanu (month) are same in English common name and ISAT both. And few others are same between English and ISAT if diacritics are removed. Crashed greek (talk) 07:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kumbha in Sanskrit is कुम्भ, whose IAST transliteration is exactly as in the article's name: kumbha. – Uanfala (talk) 13:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That m is different in ISAT, like in Siṃha. Crashed greek (talk) 14:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The ṃ in siṃha represent the anusvara; the m of kumbha is the regular m. – Uanfala (talk) 14:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No. Both are same. [1] Crashed greek (talk) 04:49, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You've linked to a Hindi text where Kumbha is written as कुंभ. Yes, unlike classical Sanskrit, Hindi regularly uses the anusvara as a shorthand for the various homorganic nasal consonants. But when this is transliterated – using either IAST or ISO 15919 – then what will be used is the corresponding nasal consonant (like m), and not the anusvara (ṃ). Compare the entry for Kumbha in McGregor's Hindi dictionary [2] with the one for haṃsa [3]. – Uanfala (talk) 22:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uanfala is right. English scholarly sources spell it Kumbha, not Kuṃbha while spelling other months with diacritics. See for example Diana L. Eck on India: A Sacred Geography (pp 151–157). Crashed greek: Why not spell it in all the ways published reliable sources do, and redirect? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:39, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, User:Uanfala is not right. English scholarly sources do spell it Kumbha, because it is correct English, but ISAT for it is Kuṃbha. It is a Sanskrit term, not a Hindi term, ISAT is about Sanskrit. Crashed greek (talk) 04:24, 12 July 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vṛṣabha&oldid=1205798279"