Revision as of 17:34, 11 November 2024 editJoy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators143,514 edits →Requested move 3 November 2024: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:08, 19 November 2024 edit undoToadspike (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers9,375 edits →Requested move 3 November 2024: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit → | ||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
:<small>Note: ] have been notified of this discussion. ] (]) 18:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)</small> | :<small>Note: ] have been notified of this discussion. ] (]) 18:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)</small> | ||
*'''Support'''. There seems to be no ] with the ] and ]. ] (]) 00:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC) | *'''Support'''. There seems to be no ] with the ] and ]. ] (]) 00:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC) | ||
*:The language gets about 10 times as many pageviews as the alphabet . The potential primary topics are the language, ], and possible the sub-articles of each; I don't think the alphabet has much to do with this. ] </span>]] 14:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:08, 19 November 2024
This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Against merger
Although there may be one instance in which Tartar and Tatar are synonymous, there are many more in which they aren't. There's no reason to merge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.34.219 (talk) 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Requested move 3 November 2024
The request to rename this article to Tatar has been carried out.
If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag. |
Tatar (disambiguation) → Tatar – This adjective currently redirects to the plural meaning a people, but there's also the language, and it's common to see such adjectives disambiguated.
From the topic area, vaguely similar examples may include Turkic, where readers proceed to both the languages and the peoples; Turkish, most people proceed to language; Kipchak, readers visit people but also language and another major topic.
Page history for the redirect that would need to be replaced here indicates this was last attempted in 2017, and last discussed in 2005. There was a recent discussion at Talk:Tatar language (disambiguation) where there was no opposition to this idea, at the same time, it wasn't the primary focus there, and this requires disambiguating over 700 links, so it merits a discussion of its own. --Joy (talk) 18:00, 3 November 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Raladic (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support there are also other meanings such as places. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:51, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Mellk (talk) 10:39, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sympathetic to this, but what then is even the point of our umbrella article at Tatars? Srnec (talk) 18:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to be largely about the Tatar peoples, not so much about their languages. If the languages were called e.g. 'Tatarian' or 'Tatari' this would be less complex. --Joy (talk) 21:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- But if the languages do not form a family, what makes the various peoples called Tatars a family? Does any part of that article beyond the etymology section justify lumping them together? Maybe we need an article on the word 'Tatar' instead. Srnec (talk) 01:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to be largely about the Tatar peoples, not so much about their languages. If the languages were called e.g. 'Tatarian' or 'Tatari' this would be less complex. --Joy (talk) 21:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Seems to me to be a very clear primary redirect. The people are the primary topic over the language and certainly over everything else on the list. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, but why? What makes them different from other cases? --Joy (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
- We operate on a case-by-case basis. In most cases where the name of the people and the name of the language are the same both are either very well-known or pretty obscure. But I don't think that's the case here. The Tatars (of which this is the singular) are extremely well-known in history. Their language nowhere near so much. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, but even the references to Tatars in history have multiple meanings - notably our articles make a clear distinction between the historical tribal confederations and the modern-day Tatars. Is making this distinction wrong, are they all really just Tatars and there is no ambiguity with the use of the term Tatar? --Joy (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- But the current redirect is to the broad scope article covering all of them, which I think is correct. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- OK, then the main focus of the discussion is whether it's more beneficial to short-circuit both singular and plural to the broad concept or whether it's better to have links to singular disambiguated. I'd still lean towards the latter, as it would make the links from other topics be more relevant to context. --Joy (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- But the current redirect is to the broad scope article covering all of them, which I think is correct. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, but even the references to Tatars in history have multiple meanings - notably our articles make a clear distinction between the historical tribal confederations and the modern-day Tatars. Is making this distinction wrong, are they all really just Tatars and there is no ambiguity with the use of the term Tatar? --Joy (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- We operate on a case-by-case basis. In most cases where the name of the people and the name of the language are the same both are either very well-known or pretty obscure. But I don't think that's the case here. The Tatars (of which this is the singular) are extremely well-known in history. Their language nowhere near so much. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, but why? What makes them different from other cases? --Joy (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Ethnic groups have been notified of this discussion. Raladic (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support. There seems to be no WP:Primarytopic with the Tatar language and Tatar alphabet. Theparties (talk) 00:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- The language gets about 10 times as many pageviews as the alphabet . The potential primary topics are the language, Tatars, and possible the sub-articles of each; I don't think the alphabet has much to do with this. Toadspike 14:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)