Template talk:Arabic script needed

Notes

This template unquestionably belongs on the talk page, not in articles themselves. - SimonP 18:35, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Standard

I think it would be better if we make a standard about adding arabic script in articles. CG 11:15, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Arabic).

Do templates like this exist for other scripts?

--143.92.1.33 06:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I've created Template:Cyrillic for languages using the Cyrillic alphabet. I would like to see others, as well. Rigadoun (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Now {{Chinese script needed}}, {{Greek script needed}}, and {{Hebrew script needed}}. Rigadoun (talk) 20:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

ParserFunctions

I think the details, like the images, aren't really necessary. Does this mean it is possible for you to code it so that is displays in articles? —Anas ^talk? 14:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

using sources

I think the statement which gets included is flawed. As an example, this template has been used in Talk:Abdur Sayed Rahaman, where the name as quoted in transliteration is obvious rubbish, which no degree of being "knowledgeable enough with the original language" could reliably correct. The answer must be to use WP:RS to establish what the name in the original script really is. So I suggest that the wording of the last sentence be altered to say "Anyone who is knowledgeable enough with the original language is invited to assist in adding the Arabic script, using the sources provided." This highlights the fact that if there is no source containing the original name, any attempt to re-create it must be to a greater or lesser extent guesswork. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 17:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Flags

Apparently, User:Kintetsubuffalo really dislikes one of the edits that I made to this template, so he is reverting every change I have made to here since. Since despite all these reverts, he has not yet given one reason why he objects to the edit, I will restate my original rationale from my edit summary: to include national flags to represent languages is inappropriate. The Persian language is spoken in more places than the Islamic Republic of Iran, for example, and national flags also have a way of politicizing things and inflaming nationalism, which is why the manual of style sets strict guidelines for the use of flagicons. The costs in accuracy and neutral point of view heavily outweigh the benefits of using the flagicons, which seem only to be decorative. Quigley (talk) 01:25, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

To hoist you on your own petard, I quote you "Continuing to revert because you don't like it is not a tenable course of action." The flag system is used to represent languages throughout the Internet, and match the system used here on Wikipedia. No one else is commenting here, you're the only one inflamed.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

The fact that I'm using talk pages and you aren't means not that I am "the only one inflamed" in the discussion; it means that I am the only one who is calm about this discussion. I'm also not the one using combative language—like "hoist you on your own petard"—and continuing to revert while a discussion is ongoing. Now I don't know about "throughout the Internet", but Wikipedia's manual of style sets some strict and important guidelines for the use of flagicons which I referenced in my original rationale above for removing them. These guidelines intersect with common sense, which is that national flags represent nations and not languages. Quigley (talk) 17:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)