This article was copy edited by Basalisk, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on Guy Fawkes Day (5 November 2011).Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
I'd like to suggest the below form for the table of names (or better yet, do it as a list so it's much easier to edit). Basically, instead of just giving an unadulterated, unordered list of all the names in a bunch of languages, organize them etymologically: subcategorize by the languages which originated the various distinct names for a given city, and then next to those originator languages, on the side list the forms in other languages which borrowed those names. I've done two examples below in different formats, for Jerusalem and Seoul. Any comments? cab09:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
From colonial-era Japanese 京城 (Keijō): Keijo (English [archaic]), Gyeongseong 경성 (Korean [archaic]), Jīngchéng - 京城 (Chinese [archaic])
From Chinese 漢城/汉城 (Hànchéng): Hansung (English [archaic]), Hanseong - 한성 (Korean [archaic]), Kanjō - 漢城 (Japanese [archaic]), Hân-siâⁿ - 漢城 (Taiwanese [Hokkien]), Hán Thành (Vietnamese),
From Hanyang - 한양 - 漢陽 (Korean variant [archaic]): No known borrowings
Not a bad proposal as the Seoul example shows but it could create new problems with some cities. For example, would "Izmir" and "Smyrna" be considered the same root? They are etymologically but they create two distinct forms in many languages. What about regional forms that differ from most known local or historical forms, e.g. the Ossetian, Abkhaz, Chechen, and Circassian forms of Tbilisi. Finally, dividing the list makes it problematic to rank which form is most used in a particular language, e.g. Ash-Sham or Dimashq for Damascus (although in fairness this info is not currently given). AjaxSmack14:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Not denying its appeal, the proposed approach is probably impracticle since you cannot expect all contributors to know enough -or trust all to care- to decide where to put their bits (often silmply their native tongue), so we'ld loose out on part of them and, worse, have others posted i he wrong section... Fastifex06:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Well, if they put it in the wrong section, a more knowledgeable editor can just correct it. I don't see that as an issue. Also, the division doesn't have to be strictly etymological. For Tbilisi and Damascus, see what I'm working on in my userspace here. That covers the hardest cases, I think; the other cities should be fairly straightforward, if we want to change it like that. cab12:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Your examples here already show somw of the problems that might arise: 1. The Peking/Pekin forms of Beijing do not derive from the Cantonese form, they are from an early Mandarin transliteration. 2. The archaic Georgian form Ţpilisi - ტფილისი is a version of Tiflis, not Tbilisi, as is Armenian Tp'xis - Տփխիս. 3. It is questionable whether the Irish and Chinese forms of Damascus derive directly from the Arabic as Cab posits.
Such info is useful but when it gets too detailed, this article no longer functions as a list. A better place for this level of detail would be to put it in text format in a "Names" section at the relevant city article. AjaxSmack14:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
