User talk:Anupam/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Urdu
Please see the Urdu talk page before making changes or biased claims on the Urdu article. Thank you. Basawala 21:58, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- Please see your talk page. Thank you.
- Sorry, but that just doesn't fit in the Urdu page. In the Hindi page, Urdu is named as a variant of Hindi because of its relevancy to the Hindi page, and there are no direct references to sociolinguists at all. Also, Sanskrit borrowings do not play a major role in Urdu. I will not revert the Urdu page, but I will do so in time being, in hope of any Urdu expert who may help us on the issue. Thanks. Basawala 23:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- Basawala, thanks for your concern on this issue. I just placed what I found and researched to be correct on the Urdu article. I have two sources for Urdu being a variant of Hindi: (1) [Ethnologue: Comments] (2) [Sociolinguistics of Hindi]. For the second issue regarding Sanskrit loanwords in Urdu I, as native speaker of Urdu and Hindi, found there to be a significant amount of Sanskrit borrowings in the Urdu language, such as dant (tooth), dhuan (smoke), nakhun (fingernail), aag (fire), etc. Also, since 60% of Urdu uses vocabulary from Hindi, which is based on Sanskrit (as all Indo-Aryan/Indian origin languages are), one could deduce that Urdu would also have some Sansktrit borrowings. The same is true of Persian words in Urdu. Urdu is also based on Persian, which has a singificant amount of loanwords from Arabic. Hence, we can say that Urdu (which has a large number of borrowings from Persian) also has a significant amount of loanwords from Arabic. A source that I found hepls support this argument: [Hindi-Urdu FAQ: What are the origins of Hindi and Urdu?]. Thanks for not reverting the Urdu page. I also hope there will be another expert to help us. Thank you again for all your understanding in this matter. --Jdas07 06:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, but that just doesn't fit in the Urdu page. In the Hindi page, Urdu is named as a variant of Hindi because of its relevancy to the Hindi page, and there are no direct references to sociolinguists at all. Also, Sanskrit borrowings do not play a major role in Urdu. I will not revert the Urdu page, but I will do so in time being, in hope of any Urdu expert who may help us on the issue. Thanks. Basawala 23:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your name in Urdu/Hindi
Your Urdu name does not really match you Hindi name, because they would be pronounced differently due to the second "a" in your middle name, or I could be wrong. Basawala 23:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- I would like to point out, it seems that you use alif madd آ, for the initial Hindi अ (a), instead of just an alif. This is from the Urdu that was added on the Ayodhya page. The correct way is just an alif ا , with the optional vowel mark (sorry for the lack of a better term). This would apply for initial i and initial u, too (with different vowel marks). Your Hindi name would be in Urdu انپم for practical purposes (w/o vowel marks) and أنُثَم for it to be pronounce correctly. I used the hamzah on top of alif for the short "a" sound (a rule carried to urdu from arabic i think), but just the vowel mark could be used as well, i dont know about the rule on this. I would write the alif with no mark at all, and with the short vowel markings on the other letters. Sorry for the delay, my Urdu keyboard cannot write vowel marks and my Farsi keyboard is really different from the Urdu, so it took me a while to figure it out. Do you know how you can get vowel marks for the Urdu keyboard?
Hope this is of any help to you! Thanks! Basawala 00:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)- Oh, and I also think that John in Urdu is جان, although I have only seen this once. The way it is on your userpage, it could be read as "June, but then without the vowel markers, Urdu is like that. Jaan itself may create problems (like "Jaan jaan pakistan or Jaanu meri jaan), but I'm pretty sure that's the correct way to write John in Urdu. I hope you find this useful, too! Thanks Basawala 01:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- You're very welcome! I love the Urdu language and script, and I love helping people with it. I have learned quite a lot of scripts, and Urdu's script is one of the hardest to read and write correctly, but it is really worth learning it, especially for reading the vast amount of literature in Urdu. Thanks for appreciating Urdu, thanks also and taking the time to edit Urdu and Urdu-related articles on Wikipedia! -- Basawala 21:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, and I also think that John in Urdu is جان, although I have only seen this once. The way it is on your userpage, it could be read as "June, but then without the vowel markers, Urdu is like that. Jaan itself may create problems (like "Jaan jaan pakistan or Jaanu meri jaan), but I'm pretty sure that's the correct way to write John in Urdu. I hope you find this useful, too! Thanks Basawala 01:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edit Summaries
BhaiSaab talk 17:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dhanyavaad/Shukriya/Thanks!
Bhai saheb: Thank you for leaving the requests! This is a pleasure for me. Thanks for doing such a great job yourself! Kitabparast 05:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rev Dr King
Could you please point me to where in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) is the language overriding WP:MOSBIO, which states Academic and professional titles (such as "Doctor" or "Professor") should not be used before the name in the initial sentence or in subsequent uses of the person's name? Neither of those deal with the honorific "Rev." either, but that's a professional title as well, I'd think. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hello! Under WP:MOSBIO#Honorific_prefixes, it says "In cases where the person is widely known by a pseudonym or stage name containing such a title (whether earned or not), it may be included as described above." From my understanding, most individuals know him with the honorific. The Wikipedia Naming conventions (names and titles) for Clerical names doesn not specify the use of "Reverend" or "Father". I guess it is up to the people who mantain an article to use whatever convention with "Reverend" and "Doctor". However, there have been many articles I have run across which include this honorific such as William S. Bowdern, Gong Shengliang, Samuel Seabury, John Hagee, Jack W. Hayford, Estus Pirkle, Frank K. Allan, and Larry Davis. Then again, there are articles that do not. Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in particular, was known as the leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He also graduated with theology degrees and was a minister. Hence, becuase of his role as a clergyman, his education, and the common convention for his name, I believe that "Reverend" and "Dr." are appropriate honorifics for this page. I hope this helps! Have a good day. Jdas07 23:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, your first citation is irrelevant, since MLKJr was not widely known by a pseudonym or stage name. That those articles include the honorific simply means those articles aren't consistant with our manual of style. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe he was not known with the honorific in the past. However, from my understanding, most individuals know him with the honorific today, as textbooks in the American education system include the honorific. I hope this helps! Thanks! Jdas07 23:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- You're missing the point. Read the sentence you're citing: In cases where the person is widely known by a pseudonym or stage name containing such a title... The point of that rule is to deal with people like Dr. John or Dr. Dre. Otherwise, WP:MOSBIO applies. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hello again! Thanks for filling me in on that and I apologize for my misunderstanding. You can remove the honorific "Dr." if you would like. However, since their is no naming convention for "Reverend", I would prefer to keep it for the reasons I listed in my first response. Thanks for all your help and concern! Jdas07 23:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- You're missing the point. Read the sentence you're citing: In cases where the person is widely known by a pseudonym or stage name containing such a title... The point of that rule is to deal with people like Dr. John or Dr. Dre. Otherwise, WP:MOSBIO applies. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe he was not known with the honorific in the past. However, from my understanding, most individuals know him with the honorific today, as textbooks in the American education system include the honorific. I hope this helps! Thanks! Jdas07 23:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, your first citation is irrelevant, since MLKJr was not widely known by a pseudonym or stage name. That those articles include the honorific simply means those articles aren't consistant with our manual of style. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Christianity
This user is a member of WikiProject Christianity
The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented. |
[edit] External links
samsloan.com and ishipress.com are the same domain, the personal siute of User:Sam Sloan. These links have a number of problems: first, they are of no evident authority; second, Sam Sloan's opinions on many things are highly contentious; third, and most important, many of the articles on his site are copyright violations. We should not link to offsite copyright violations any more than we allow copyright violations in Wikipedia. Sloan's site is linked in a number of places, suggesting an attemot at search engine optimisation or some other unwelcome purpose. [{WP:EL]] describes the purpose of external links and the kinds of links which may be added. Just zis Guy you know? 13:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hindustani grammar
Hindustani grammar is an entire copy of Hindi grammar, a page entirely authored by me. By the way I am going to make well referenced and organized, but major changes in Hindi grammar page. And the info on Urdu page is acceptable. Cygnus_hansa 16:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oh no, no problem about the Hindustani grammar page. But where do you live in the US? I am also coming there soon, to University of Illinois.Cygnus_hansa 17:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, I'll be attending University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign.Cygnus_hansa 18:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hindi grammar
I am going to make many edits to the Hindi grammar page, but none to Hindustani grammar. On one hand, I understand its utility, in that it gives the grammar in Urdu too, on the other hand, I, like Taxman, see the page as otherwise redundant. I certainly cannot think of anything in Hindustani grammar that is inherently different from hindi grammar. Anyways, you are welcome to continue.Cygnus_hansa 08:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)