Talk:Sharada script
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abugida or alphabet?
editThe article is inconsistent, describing Śāradā first as an abugida, then offering in graphical form an alphabetic representation. Someone who is knowledgeable about this script needs to sort this out.
The Wikipedia display of the Oriya script is, one might say, "how it should be done."
Requested move 7 February 2018
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Śāradā script → Sharada script – Removing diacritics as per Wikipedia policy for English wikipedia
Anish Viswa 12:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose English Wikipedia uses diacritics for almost everything so where the nom is getting ideas about "per Wikipedia policy for English wikipedia" I don't know. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Plus seems English sources use the title we currently have So, no, thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
-
- Sure but that says we normally use diacritics and follow the best English sources. Which is exactly why I just opposed. In ictu oculi (talk)
-
- Plus seems English sources use the title we currently have So, no, thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose. Removing diacritics does not make it "more English" and Wikipedia does not face the technical or style manual limitations that require removal of diacritics. The current title seems slightly more common in print sources. — AjaxSmack 04:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Glyphs appear as question marks
editI don't think this is just me as glyphs on other pages work just fine but all I see are question marks in boxes where the glyphs should appear. Quezerque (talk) 21:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- The text displays fine for me. Do you have a Sharada font installed on your machine? DRMcCreedy (talk) 22:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)