Revision as of 09:48, 31 October 2014 editBabanwalia (talk | contribs)364 edits →Removal of Content & References by User:Babanwalia← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:46, 1 November 2014 edit undoAnupam (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,018 edits →Removal of Content & References by User:Babanwalia: replyNext edit → | ||
Line 179: | Line 179: | ||
Contention of user:Anupam that devnagri is third major script used for punjabi in image punjabi example at wikimedia commons is totally a myth and not reality.This has been explained in punjabi example image itself that in coming to coclusion of use of devnagri script , dogri has been considered dialect of Punjabi , whereas dogri is not at all a dialect of punjabi it is a full fledged separate language. On one hand dogri speakers are not included in punjabi speakers count on other had devnagri script is being associated with punjabi as major third script for punjabi , from this it appears that a mischievous action is being taken by some people who want that punjabi no longer remains an independent language and gets absorbed by Hindi . '''in Indian punjab population of Hindus is nearly the same as that of Sikhs.in none of punjab schools which includes substantial population of Hindus , punjabi is taught in devnagri script, as a matter of fact In schools , neither in punjab nor in Haryana or Himachal punjabi is taught in devnagri script , it is only taught in Gurmukhi script '''then how can any one conclude devnagri is major third script for punjabi. on this ground to include devnagri as third script in punjabi example image at wikimedia commons is totally irrelevant.'''action of user: Babanwalia in removing devnagri from punjabi example image on commons which has been used to illustrate articles on punjabi language on English and other language wikipedia sites is fully justified'''.assertion of some author that Hindus use devnagri for writing punjabi and Sikhs use Gurmukhi is thus a blatant lie and not a ground reality , none of established institutes like university of California in their profile for punjabi language on language material project have accepted devnagri as third script or writing system for punjabi<ref name="UCLA-Orthography of Punjabi">{{cite web|url=http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?LangID=95&menu=004| title = Punjabi|publisher = ]|accessdate = 2013-07-30}}</ref> --] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned"> — Preceding ] comment added 07:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Contention of user:Anupam that devnagri is third major script used for punjabi in image punjabi example at wikimedia commons is totally a myth and not reality.This has been explained in punjabi example image itself that in coming to coclusion of use of devnagri script , dogri has been considered dialect of Punjabi , whereas dogri is not at all a dialect of punjabi it is a full fledged separate language. On one hand dogri speakers are not included in punjabi speakers count on other had devnagri script is being associated with punjabi as major third script for punjabi , from this it appears that a mischievous action is being taken by some people who want that punjabi no longer remains an independent language and gets absorbed by Hindi . '''in Indian punjab population of Hindus is nearly the same as that of Sikhs.in none of punjab schools which includes substantial population of Hindus , punjabi is taught in devnagri script, as a matter of fact In schools , neither in punjab nor in Haryana or Himachal punjabi is taught in devnagri script , it is only taught in Gurmukhi script '''then how can any one conclude devnagri is major third script for punjabi. on this ground to include devnagri as third script in punjabi example image at wikimedia commons is totally irrelevant.'''action of user: Babanwalia in removing devnagri from punjabi example image on commons which has been used to illustrate articles on punjabi language on English and other language wikipedia sites is fully justified'''.assertion of some author that Hindus use devnagri for writing punjabi and Sikhs use Gurmukhi is thus a blatant lie and not a ground reality , none of established institutes like university of California in their profile for punjabi language on language material project have accepted devnagri as third script or writing system for punjabi<ref name="UCLA-Orthography of Punjabi">{{cite web|url=http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?LangID=95&menu=004| title = Punjabi|publisher = ]|accessdate = 2013-07-30}}</ref> --] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned"> — Preceding ] comment added 07:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
:User:Babanwalia, I do really appreciate your thoughts. I should note that my experience has been different then yours. For this reason, Misplaced Pages values ] (]) rather than personal evidence. The reference that you removed from the article is an academic text titled ''Language in South Asia'', published by ] and authored by scholars such as ]. It states: | |||
{{quotation|Sikhs often write Punjabi in Gurmukhi, Hindus in Devanagari, and Muslims in Perso-Arabic.}} | |||
:Numerous other scholarly publications on the subject corroborate that text's statement. I will kindly list a few for you to examine. The '''', which is published by ] states: | |||
{{quotation|Punjabi is written primarily in three scripts: Gurmukhi, Perso-Arabic, and Devanagari. Sikhs often write Punjabi in Gurmukhi, Hindus in Devanagari, and Muslims in Perso-Arabic-called Shahmukhi.}} | |||
:Similarly, Professor Peter Austin in the text '''' (published by the ]) states: | |||
{{quotation|Three main scripts are used to write Punjabi: the Brahmi-derived Gurmukhi and Devanagari, and a Perso-Arabic script known as Shahmukhi.}} | |||
:These academic publications all confirm the fact that the Punjabi language is primarily written in three scripts: Gurmukhi, Shahmukhi and Devanagari. It is for this reason that you were reverted here, and by other well-intentioned editors at Wikimedia Commons. Misplaced Pages's articles reflect what scholarly sources, such as these state. I hope this helps. With regards, ]<sup>]</sup> 05:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
== References == | == References == |
Revision as of 05:46, 1 November 2014
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives | ||||
|
||||
Punjabi official language where?
I have removed punjabi as an official language in Pakistan. As far as my research is concerned, the official languages in Pakistan Punjab are Urdu and English. Please provide me with information, if this is not correct. Cheers everyone. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolrsa (talk • contribs) 11:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Urdu is officially regulated in Pakistan, as it is the transient language necessary to allow the many different ethnic groups of Pakistan to communicate, it is endorsed and therefore considered 'Official.' Regardless, Punjabi remains the dominant language of Pakistan and taught among the largest ethnic group of Pakistan, the Punjabis. If you are looking for an official endorsement, you will not find it, as Pakistani government delicately only endorses Urdu as one language for all ethnic groups, as to not upset any of them, although majority of them are ethnic Punjabis. Languages are official only at the national level, but Punjabi is considered official at the provincial level (if there were official regulators at the provincial level, then it would officially be 'official'), as in Punjab, Pakistan it is taught in the rural and urban areas. 11:48, 21 September 2011
- Does Punjabi really have official status in Pakistan? The claim above seems dubious to me. From what I know, only Urdu and English are talk in schools in Pakistani Punjab, unlike Sindh and other provinces which also teach the regional languages. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 20:53, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Removed Punjabi from official language of Chandigarh. Refer Talk:Chandigarh for details. •nix• 12:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.narinder (talk • contribs)
Does not work link to Pakistanian Census (2008)
Link to: "According to the 2008 Census of Pakistan, there are 76,335,300 native Punjabi speakers in Pakistan" does not work. Pamerast (talk) 15:45, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the hint; I added a template. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Eastern and Western Punjabi
A huge general problem with the article is that laymen from the Punjab area keep messing with the article, and as a consequence, the article, and Punjabi dialects, is totally inconsistent with regard to the question if "Lahnda" including Western Punjabi and other dialects in Pakistan are part of Punjabi as treated in this article or not. Perhaps the best solution would be to rename it into "Eastern Punjabi", throw the Pakistan-related content out, and create a disambiguation page for "Punjabi language". --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- That wouldn't be appropriate. Majhi is an "Eastern Punjabi" dialect which is spoken well inside Pakistan (and indeed is the main dialect there too). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.202.73 (talk) 11:08, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Eastern Punjabi in India & Eastern Punjabi in Pakistan, have more difficulties understanding each other, then Hindko & Eastern Punjabi in Pakistan have. Can you see the problem??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.154.66 (talk) 06:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Ethnologue is utterly confused as to what Western Panjabi is supposed to be. They contradict themselves in several places: is it the western part of Eastern Panjabi, or is it Lahnda? Best ignore them; there are plenty of better sources available. — kwami (talk) 04:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
History
This is the history section from Western Panjabi, which is a content fork of the history section here. I didn't know which version to keep, so I'm pasting it here. — kwami (talk) 04:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Punjabi emerged as an independent language in the 11th century in areas of Greater Punjab, literary tradition can be traced back with the Muslim Sufi poet named Fariduddin Ganjshakar (Baba Farid) (1173–1266), and later followed by many other ancient Muslim Sufis. The early Punjabi literature was principally spiritual in nature and has had a very rich oral tradition. The poetry written by Muslim Sufi poets has been the folklore of the Punjab, and is still sung with great passion in both Indian and Pakistan Punjab.
Between 1600 and 1850, many famous works was written in Punjabi. The most famous Punjabi Sufi poet was Baba Bulleh Shah (1680–1757), who wrote in the famous ry that gives an eyewitness account of the First Anglo-Sikh War that took place after the death of ].
The linguist George Abraham Grierson in his multivolume Linguistic Survey of India (1904–1928) used the word "Punjabi" to refer to several languages spoken in the Punjab region of British India: the term Western Punjabi (ISO 639-3 pnb) back then covered dialects (now designated separate languages) spoken to the west of Montgomery and Gujranwala districts in Pakistan, while "Eastern Punjabi" referred to what is now based more on Hindi and simply called Punjabi (ISO 639-3 pan) After Saraiki, Potwari and Hindko (earlier categorized as "Western Punjabi") started to be counted as separate languages, the percentage of Pakistanis recorded as Western Punjabi or simply Punjabi speakers was reduced from 59% to 44%. Although not an official language in Pakistan Punjab, Punjabi is still the predominant language of Pakistan Punjab.
After the partition of the Punjab region, the region was divided between Pakistan and India. Although the Punjabi people formed the 2nd biggest linguistic group in Pakistan after Bengali (former East Pakistanis), Urdu was declared the national language of Pakistan, and Punjabi did not get any official status and no official support since 1947.
In India, Urdu language was removed as the national language and exchanged with Modern Hindi language, which have decreased Urdu loan words in Punjabi language used in India. In the 1960s, the Shiromani Akali Dal proposed "Punjabi Suba", a state for Punjabi speakers in India. Paul R. Brass, the Professor Emeritus of Political Science and South Asian Studies at the University of Washington, opines that the Sikh leader Fateh Singh tactically stressed the linguistic basis of the demand, while downplaying the religious basis for the demand—a state where the distinct Sikh identity could be preserved.See Brass, Paul R. (2005). Language, Religion and Politics in North India. iUniverse. p. 326. ISBN 978-0-595-34394-2. The movement for a Punjabi Suba led to trifurcation of Indian Punjab into three states: Punjab (India), Haryana and Himachal Pradesh.
- Modern Punjabi
Modern Punjabi consists of several dialects and is rich in their use in Punjab. Majhi (Standard Punjabi) is the written standard for Punjabi in both parts of Punjab. Compared to Indian Punjabi, the Punjabi language in Pakistan has been able to keep its original form by keeping its close relationship with Urdu language, although some traditionally used non-Urdu words have decreased in modern day spoken Punjabi in Pakistan. In addition, recent modernization and industrialization has witnessed an English influence in both parts of Punjab, as Punjab has undergone Science and Technology development. "Modern Punjabi" uses Gurmukhi script in the Indian Punjab, which is specifically developed for the Punjabi language. Pakistani Punjabis, however, uses the elder Shahmukhi script, which is a modified Persian-Nasta’liq script. These two scripts are considered the official scripts of the Punjabi language. In India, Punjabi is one of the 22 languages with official status in India. It is the first official language of Punjab (India). In Pakistan, even though Punjabi has no official status, it is still the most spoken language and in Pakistan. Punjab is the second largest and the most populous province of Pakistan.
(end)
Map under language codes
This map doesn't make sense, why are the Hindko and Potwari-speaking areas of Punjab province included as "Punjabi and Lahnda speaking" but not the Hindko areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa or the Potwari/Pahari areas of Azad Kashmir? saɪm duʃan Talk|Contribs 00:20, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
dialects
I've removed the dialect section because (1) it's not referenced and (2) it contradicts the article. (Also, wording like "Hazara Division's people" is almost unintelligible, but that's 2ary concern.) Because the definition of a language is highly contentious, we really do need a good reference, or, better, reference*s*, for any identification of Punjabi dialects. But we also need to be consistent: we currently define the article as ISO + , yet those codes do not cover many of the dialects in our list. If Lahnda etc. are to be included under Punjabi, then the ISO codes, population, geographic area, governing institutions, standard forms, and maps should all be in accord with that. If they don't, then we should note that various other 'languages' are sometimes counted under Punjabi, and not just list them *as* Punjabi without that distinction.
I suspect that many Indian "languages" listed in Ethnologue might be better seen as dialects, so I wouldn't be surprised if Lahnda etc. are best treated as Punjabi. That's not how my sources treat them, however. Also, if we consolidate Punjabi, it would be nice if we could do the same with other Indic and Dravidian languages. — kwami (talk) 20:20, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's back, so in the hopes that this will be fixed, I posted a warning that these "Punjabi dialects" are not Punjabi dialects according to this article; tagged it for lacking references, deleted all the useless links, and cleaned up the grammar and punctuation. Hopefully the next time I visit this will actually be a section on Punjabi dialects that a reader would be able to use in their research? If not, I'll probably just delete it again. — kwami (talk) 07:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Those are horrible references. 1909? And from the ones I looked at, they don't actually support the claims we make. The only refs which do were the websites, which I removed because they were not WP:reliable sources. So, despite all the footnotes, the section is still essentially unreferenced.
- Are there any modern, reliable sources that these are the dialects of Punjabi? Your familiarity with the languages is very helpful: it should help you separate the wheat from the chaff. But we still need to reference which are the dialects of Punjabi, so that when we are challenged, we can defend our claims.
- Come on, it's been weeks, and you're at a university where you should be able to find adequate support. If you can't support these claims despite all that, then they evidently don't belong in the article. — kwami (talk) 11:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Some of those are better. However, we still contradict ourselves, but first saying that Punjabi does not include Lahnda, and then saying that it does. We have another problem: UCLA gives the same population for E+W Punjabi that E16 gives for E Punjabi. UCLA is frequently wrong on these things, but then so is E16. — kwami (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Its had been a nice experience you kept pushing me professionally and things are now getting clearer and improving on an up ward slide. Best Regards kwamikagami Maria0333 (talk) 05:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Merger
Request to merge content from Riasti dialect, Shah puri dialect, Multani dialect, Multani language, Thalochi dialect, Thalochi, and Derawali dialect. Discussion here:
- Oppose, These are the dialects of Punjabi Language, and there should be some information in the main Article, but no need to merge all of the content from these pages to Punjabi Language main article. Faizan (talk) 05:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose The above mentioned dialects are recognised dialects of Punjabi. These should be mentioned in the main article and their respective pages should remain too.--Khalid Mahmood (talk) 09:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Map image breaches policy & has been removed
There is currently a deletion discussion taking place at Commons regarding File:Map on Dialects Of Punjabi Language.jpg, which can be viewed here. Regardless of whether the map image is deleted at Commons, I think that it needs to be removed from all English Misplaced Pages articles because it breaches our synthesis policy. The image creator has provided a long list of sources in the deletion discussion and it is evident from those that none contain all of the information shown in the image, nor is it a simple task to work out which bits of information were gleaned from which source(s). We simply do not permit people to aggregate information in this way. It should also be noted that the chances are very high that the various sources did not even adopt the same methodology in compiling their data, which makes the analysis of the creator even more suspect.
I have removed the image because the Commons discussion may end up as something other than "delete" and yet the thing is still invalid on English Misplaced Pages. - Sitush (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Map was deleted on two reasons. 1... Commons deletion discussion but now Deletion request by Sitush has been rejected on Wikimedia Commons. 2... Sitush has a self perception that map is synthesis, which is actually not because it is based on latest research of 2007 in the Publication named 'The Indo-Aryan Languages' by George Cardona and Dhanesh Jain. So I am re inserting it. Unless Sitush prove it again as a synthesis and refer me the areas of map being synthesized also mentioning the different publications along with page numbers where from in his kind opinion I have synthesized the map.Maria0333 (talk) 08:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Merger proposal April 2013
There is a new (re-opened) request to merge the Derawali dialect and Saraiki dialect articles into the Punjabi language article. The discussion will take place below. Thanks. GenQuest 04:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes do it. Do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.26.179 (talk) 16:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- Support The merger should be done, under the same article and all the minor dialects should be merged here. Faizan 08:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Support do it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.86.159 (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Support The merger should be done, under the same article and all the minor dialects should be merged here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.64.134 (talk) 15:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Devanagari
When/where is Punjabi written in Devnagari? The source provided is the same one that states the phantom four letters of Shahmukhi. —Wiki Wikardo 20:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Weasel words?
What does "This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. (May 2013)" refer to? Which section or part are they talking about here specifically? Jujhar.pannu (talk) 05:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Deceptive revert
In July 29 I made the edit that removed the word “majority” that is unsupported by the source cited. It also included some supplementary changes, such as replacement of a space and elimination of an excessive link.
Note that so “carefully” undid selectively my changes after several other edits, that I am almost sure that the MediaWiki undo function was used to produce it. When undo is called, it fills the edit summary field with MediaWiki:Undo-summary template, that includes a user nick (it should be my nick, in this case), but can be blanked (or otherwise altered) manually. If a user nick is linked in the summary, then MediaWiki alerts that user, that, in this situation, could prompt me to engage an intruder even if I did not watch this article. The edit summary was blank. Any experienced Wikipedian understood now what I had to say. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- I made a mistake. There were no sophisticated deception, only blatant WP:Ownership. The proof is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Punjabi_language&diff=566454370&oldid=565493458
- Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Punjabi Relation with Isolates like Korean and Japanese
Korean is a language isolate but a fresh research from Modern Linguist Afzal Ahmed Cheema has raised new questions of its linkage to a remote located Indo Aryan language. It is perhaps the first scholar to have mentioned the words borrowed from/to the Urdu and its sister language Punjabi from/to Korean language directly or through English common lexicon. Here are a few of such words as per this research
Korean word (recipient language) |
Urdu/Punjabi word | English |
---|---|---|
Abuji | Abuji | Father |
Pia | ‘‘Piaz’’ | Onion |
Chwi | ‘‘Chuwi/a | Rat |
Kuan | Pkuan | Cooked |
Chakham | Changa | Good |
Ssan | Sstaa | Cheap |
Aniyo | Niyo/ Ni | Not |
DJi | Ji | Yes |
Kori | ‘‘Gali’’ | Street |
Kae | ‘‘Kutae’’ | Dog |
Ke | Kekra | Crab |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Malignea (talk • contribs)
- It's a fringe, possibly self-invented and totally unsourced (see WP:Reliable sources) theory that User:Malignea presents, which is why I reverted his addition of thousands of kB of it to the article. By cherry-picking individual words it would be possible to "prove" that virtually any languages in the world are related to each other in one way or another. Thomas.W 09:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
- I can add that a search on Google does not in any way support the description of Afzal Ahmed Cheema as a "scholar" and "modern linguist". A more fitting description seems to be "local hobby linguist". See discussion on User talk:Malignea. Thomas.W 10:10, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
- Mr. Thomas had it been so easy to make such list then please provide me ten words matching between Chinees and Spanish.Why not you focus on some thing relating to your own profession rather then engaging in to science of linguistics.Information is accurate.You can cross verify it from the referenced book or by checking the table word to word accuracy using Google translation so that your argument of Single book is just denied by cross verification on such famous reliable source and please focus on all other articles on WP which even dont have a single source or a single source.Korean has such basic words common with Punjabi and Urdu. Such research is very positive initiative on isolates like Korean, Japanese and Burushiski Language. Let them be reflected so that further research on isolates could be motivated to solve the mistry of isolates I do not care if Afzal Ahmed Cheema is popular or not. I have his book if you want it then I can email you the scan pages. You better focus on Validity of that basic words to word matched list on google translation rather then proving Afzal Ahmed Cheema a hospital employee. God help you.Malignea (talk) 16:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- Read WP:Reliable sources and WP:Fringe, guidelines/policies that I've pointed you to several times. Your repeated attempts to add your theories to Punjabi language and Korean language are just a waste of both your own time and everyone else's time since they're totally unsourced (a hobby linguist writing a paper about it is not a reliable source). Thomas.W 16:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- I know and respect WP:Reliable sources and WP:Fringe rules I am following them so dont make general statements to run a way from this specific linguist discussion and prove your statements that any person as a hobby can make such list by providing me ten words matching between Chinese and Spanish. I am waiting for your list. Malignea (talk) 01:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thomas in last eleven days you failed to provide the list and proof your assertions then why you have again reverted relevant insertion. Malignea (talk) 12:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- It's not up to me to prove anything, the burden of proof is always on the person trying to add something, i.e. in this case you. And since there are no reliable sources that support your fringe theories, only a paper written by a totally unknown local hobby linguist, you can't add them. It's as simple as that. Thomas.W 12:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thomas in last eleven days you failed to provide the list and proof your assertions then why you have again reverted relevant insertion. Malignea (talk) 12:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- I know and respect WP:Reliable sources and WP:Fringe rules I am following them so dont make general statements to run a way from this specific linguist discussion and prove your statements that any person as a hobby can make such list by providing me ten words matching between Chinese and Spanish. I am waiting for your list. Malignea (talk) 01:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- Read WP:Reliable sources and WP:Fringe, guidelines/policies that I've pointed you to several times. Your repeated attempts to add your theories to Punjabi language and Korean language are just a waste of both your own time and everyone else's time since they're totally unsourced (a hobby linguist writing a paper about it is not a reliable source). Thomas.W 16:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- This doesn't even deserve a discussion. The only mention I can find of "Afzal Ahmed Cheema" are in the Misplaced Pages articles inserted by the banned user Maria0333 and his/her various sockpuppets. And I won't be surprised if Malignea turns out to be another one -- the edits look quite similar. utcursch | talk 17:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip, I'll take a look at it, because I'm getting tired of this sh*te. Thomas.W 17:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- On further investigation, it seems nearly certain that Malignea is a sock of Maria0333/LanguageXpert and probably Afzal Ahmed Cheema himself (if such a person exists in real life). I am unable to find any mention of "Afzal Ahmed Cheema" outside of Misplaced Pages. A number of fake references supporting the research of Afzal Ahmed Cheema were inserted by Maria0333 in the various articles. For example, in this edit, the user has inserted "Phonology and Morphology of Panjabi " as a reference, saying it's written by Amar Nath and Cheema. A quick search for the book in the various library catalog reveals that Amar Nath Malik is the sole author. I'll undo all the edits that mention Cheema, but there is still a need to go through all the articles edited by Maria0333 and his/her socks: I suspect a lot of misinformation remains. utcursch | talk 18:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- A search on Google returns a single person named "Afzal Ahmed Cheema", who according to his FB page lives in Islamabad, Pakistan. But there's no way to see if there's a connection between the real life person by that name and the "scholar and language expert" by the same name who appears here on WP. Thomas.W 18:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- On further investigation, it seems nearly certain that Malignea is a sock of Maria0333/LanguageXpert and probably Afzal Ahmed Cheema himself (if such a person exists in real life). I am unable to find any mention of "Afzal Ahmed Cheema" outside of Misplaced Pages. A number of fake references supporting the research of Afzal Ahmed Cheema were inserted by Maria0333 in the various articles. For example, in this edit, the user has inserted "Phonology and Morphology of Panjabi " as a reference, saying it's written by Amar Nath and Cheema. A quick search for the book in the various library catalog reveals that Amar Nath Malik is the sole author. I'll undo all the edits that mention Cheema, but there is still a need to go through all the articles edited by Maria0333 and his/her socks: I suspect a lot of misinformation remains. utcursch | talk 18:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Unfortunately I think administrative rights are given to people who do not have enough skills to convince normal users on the basis of CONTENT specific valid argumentations. UTcursch appears to me a holly wood movie action star with heavy emotions declaring enemies and targeting individuals rather then acting as a cool sober professional on validity on content. We must never target normal humans as an ethical practice. We can modify and amend materials to bring with Wiki standard using talk pages as a forum for building consensus. Secondly Developing countries do not have such scale of IT development that is why not every information is available on internet. Thomas you failed to proof what you said that is why I am not convinced. No person with out proper linguistic knowledge can make a list of common lexicon for two languages so you both user assertion is wrong. Any neutral reader can roll back and see why I am saying this. very un fortunate in fact. Malignea (talk) 04:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
An English-Panjabi Dictionary: Romanized By Thomas Grahame Bailey
An English-Panjabi Dictionary: Romanized By Thomas Grahame Bailey
Rajmaan (talk) 04:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Removal of Content & References by User:Babanwalia
I am giving User:Babanwalia the opportunity to explain why he is removing valuable information on the three major scripts used to write the Punjabi language: Gurmukhi, Shahmukhi, and Devanagari. The information is sourced by a text published by Cambridge University Press and numerous other sources corroborate it. Should User:Babanwali continue to revert, I am going to start an RfC here in which the Misplaced Pages Community can decide whether this information will be retained or not. I should note that User:Babanwalia has been reverted twice over at Wikimedia Commons by User:Stemoc for removing Devanagari from the image used in this article and I agree with User:Stemoc's edits. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam 05:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- First of all, coming to the facts. I did NOT remove any reference (merely re-positioned it), so there's the veracity of that!
Secondly, Devanagri was definitely used by some Hindus living outside core Punjabo-phone region (Himachal, Haryana) but it is neither the officially recognised nor the popular script to write Punjabi anywhere across India. It was, is not now. There has not been any appreciable Punjabi literature produced in Devanagri. Writers employ the only two scripts: Gurmukhi in India and Shahmukhi in Pakistan. So does the government which uses Gurmukhi Punjabi in Delhi, Haryana, WB or wherever Punjabi has official recognition. Just because some fringe groups employ Devanagri doesn't guarantee it the right of being called a script of that language. Moreover, Devanagari is not taught in any of the schools anywhere in the world to teach Punjabi. Even in Haryana, Himachal and Delhi, Gurmukhi is taught. Where is the Devanagri version of Misplaced Pages when Gurmukhi and Shahmukhi versions are extant and growing?!
Devanagri has the same relation with Punjabi as it has with Gujarati i.e. it was historically used not anymore (except by a few families here and there perhaps!). I don't see Devanagri being imposed on Gujarati anywhere!? If we use that logic, even Roman should be listed as its script since millions of Punjabis from both sides of the Indo-Pak border rather write Punjabi using Roman script on social media. If just the usage by some is the criterion here, then Roman should be the given the front seat, not just to Punjabi but to other Indian languages too since many Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims et al write Hindi/Punjabi/Gurmukhi in Roman! Please visit this page and tell me for how many of the wiki articles of these languages, all the scripts (popular or not, official or not) take the lead position in the starting paragraph?
My reference would be this: . According to this, Gurmukhi is used to write such languages as Braj Bhasha, Khariboli (and other Hindustani dialects), Sanskrit and Sindhi in addition to Punjabi while no mention of Punjabi under Devenagri section. So am I allowed to add Gurmukhi in the lead section of all the wiki articles related to these languages? If Devanagri would be imposed here on Punjabi article, it makes sense to do the same with Braj, Sanskrit and Sindhi etc. through Gurmukhi, doesn't it? And believe me, all these sources, yours and mine, are far from the ground reality. Nowadays, Sanskrit, Sindhi and Punjabi are almost unanimously written using their respective recognised scripts, except of course, for research/recreational purposes.
Moreover, this source and this one clearly state Gurmukhi and Shahmukhi to be the only two orthographies for writing Punjabi in modern times. WHere is the mention of Devanagri?!
Winding it all up, edit-wars are not one-sided but I don't see any warning being engraved on Stemoc's page! Double-standards much??! Thank you for giving me the opportunity to articulate my views. I hope they would be helpful for your perusal. --Babanwalia (talk) 03:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Contention of user:Anupam that devnagri is third major script used for punjabi in image punjabi example at wikimedia commons is totally a myth and not reality.This has been explained in punjabi example image itself that in coming to coclusion of use of devnagri script , dogri has been considered dialect of Punjabi , whereas dogri is not at all a dialect of punjabi it is a full fledged separate language. On one hand dogri speakers are not included in punjabi speakers count on other had devnagri script is being associated with punjabi as major third script for punjabi , from this it appears that a mischievous action is being taken by some people who want that punjabi no longer remains an independent language and gets absorbed by Hindi . in Indian punjab population of Hindus is nearly the same as that of Sikhs.in none of punjab schools which includes substantial population of Hindus , punjabi is taught in devnagri script, as a matter of fact In schools , neither in punjab nor in Haryana or Himachal punjabi is taught in devnagri script , it is only taught in Gurmukhi script then how can any one conclude devnagri is major third script for punjabi. on this ground to include devnagri as third script in punjabi example image at wikimedia commons is totally irrelevant.action of user: Babanwalia in removing devnagri from punjabi example image on commons which has been used to illustrate articles on punjabi language on English and other language wikipedia sites is fully justified.assertion of some author that Hindus use devnagri for writing punjabi and Sikhs use Gurmukhi is thus a blatant lie and not a ground reality , none of established institutes like university of California in their profile for punjabi language on language material project have accepted devnagri as third script or writing system for punjabi --Guglani (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 07:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
- User:Babanwalia, I do really appreciate your thoughts. I should note that my experience has been different then yours. For this reason, Misplaced Pages values reliable sources (WP:RS) rather than personal evidence. The reference that you removed from the article is an academic text titled Language in South Asia, published by Cambridge University Press and authored by scholars such as Braj Kachru. It states:
Sikhs often write Punjabi in Gurmukhi, Hindus in Devanagari, and Muslims in Perso-Arabic.
- Numerous other scholarly publications on the subject corroborate that text's statement. I will kindly list a few for you to examine. The Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World, which is published by Elsevier states:
Punjabi is written primarily in three scripts: Gurmukhi, Perso-Arabic, and Devanagari. Sikhs often write Punjabi in Gurmukhi, Hindus in Devanagari, and Muslims in Perso-Arabic-called Shahmukhi.
- Similarly, Professor Peter Austin in the text One Thousand Languages (published by the University of California Press) states:
Three main scripts are used to write Punjabi: the Brahmi-derived Gurmukhi and Devanagari, and a Perso-Arabic script known as Shahmukhi.
- These academic publications all confirm the fact that the Punjabi language is primarily written in three scripts: Gurmukhi, Shahmukhi and Devanagari. It is for this reason that you were reverted here, and by other well-intentioned editors at Wikimedia Commons. Misplaced Pages's articles reflect what scholarly sources, such as these state. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam 05:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
References
- Shackle 1970:240
- "Punjabi". University of California, Los Angeles. Retrieved 2013-07-30.
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class language articles
- Top-importance language articles
- WikiProject Languages articles
- C-Class Punjab-related articles
- Top-importance Punjab-related articles
- B-Class India articles
- Top-importance India articles
- B-Class India articles of Top-importance
- B-Class Punjab (India) articles
- Top-importance Punjab (India) articles
- B-Class Punjab (India) articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject Punjab (India) articles
- WikiProject India articles
- C-Class Pakistan articles
- High-importance Pakistan articles
- WikiProject Pakistan articles