Template talk:Languages of India
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Fylindfotberserk in topic Indo-Aryan
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Manipuri
editshouldnt this language name be changed to Meitei-lon, per the articles correct name, even if this is one of the common names for the language? if i dont get a response here, ill take this concern to a project page. i know enough not to just change a template, even an apparently routine change. ive never edited a template, and dont want to cause trouble.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- It seems that in the official list [1], it is called Manipuri. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- ok, that helps. i wont worry about it, and will let others more directly involved or knowledgeable take up any issues here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:03, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- It seems that in the official list [1], it is called Manipuri. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- Meitei is the preferred name even though not a government name. – ishwar (speak) 19:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Indo-Aryan
editI recommend that this template somehow denote which languages are Indo-Aryan and which are not.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- But all articles with this template will already have {{Indo-Aryan languages}}, etc. If we're going to have two sets of templates: one by state and another by family, then I think it makes sense to let them complement each other rather than overlap. One of them is organised along genetic subgroups, the other – according to state/region or official status. – Uanfala (talk) 03:09, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- Solomonfromfinland, I don't think it is necessary to highlight which languages are Indo-Aryan here in this template. It is about the "Official status" of the languages. Other similar templates like Template:Languages of Finland, Template:Languages of Russia, Template:Languages of Sweden, etc do not differentiate between Indo-European, Finno-Ugric and Altaic languages. Secondly, this kind of Indo-Aryan specific formatting might offend non-Indo-Aryan speakers. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, bolding adds undue prominence and it also interferes with the way the template displays the name of the article it's transcluded on in bold. – Uanfala (talk) 15:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Uanfala: I believe we should restore it to the old version. What do you say? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, done. – Uanfala (talk) 15:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Uanfala: Nice. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:28, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, done. – Uanfala (talk) 15:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Uanfala: I believe we should restore it to the old version. What do you say? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, bolding adds undue prominence and it also interferes with the way the template displays the name of the article it's transcluded on in bold. – Uanfala (talk) 15:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- Solomonfromfinland, I don't think it is necessary to highlight which languages are Indo-Aryan here in this template. It is about the "Official status" of the languages. Other similar templates like Template:Languages of Finland, Template:Languages of Russia, Template:Languages of Sweden, etc do not differentiate between Indo-European, Finno-Ugric and Altaic languages. Secondly, this kind of Indo-Aryan specific formatting might offend non-Indo-Aryan speakers. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)