| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
The Javanese script is a rather intricate writing system, and I've found it difficult to produce a suitable layout. There are no GA or FA regarding an Abugida which I can use as style guide (except Sinhala script). The article also received little attention despite high importance in wikiproject writing system and Indonesia. Following the failed gan, I'm reworking the layout from scratch. Suggestions on the layout and sourcing would be a great help for this article.
Thanks, Alteaven (talk) 13:36, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Per Alteaven's request, I'll provide some comments for improvement:
- The layout can definitely be improved. The tables are very large and seem like they take up most of the article. Sinhala alphabet has a slightly better solution, but I think you should work towards minimizing them as much as possible.
- Using a Javanese font in the article is not realistic. Very few readers will be able to display it properly. I think you should rely entirely on images, at least if you want the article to be reasonably accessible. This version used images for the tables and worked fine. The current version isn't really an improvement.
- The history section is very short. I would expect more information on its historical usage, along with illustrations from documents.
- Prose needs to be improved. There's non-standard use of bold text ("written both before and after the"), for example.
- The lead isn't a proper summary of the article. The section "Characteristics" seems to be a redundant summary. It should be split between the lead and the more specific headings.
- No detailed info on current usage of the script. The article mentions "decorative and scholarly purposes", for example, but that's about it. Why is it still compulsory in school? How many can actually read it? Are there printed books, newspapers, etc? If this script isn't used to write Javanese, then what has replaced it?
- The explanation of how the system works is very hard to follow. "Aksara" starts with an explanation mentioning sandhagan swara, but doesn't explain it until later (separately for both words). And what's a "basic character"? And which of the characters is it that takes an /a/ instead of /ɔ/? Some terms are explained rather cryptically, like mahaprana. Why is it "obscure"? If it used for aspirated consonants, when were they used and when did they disappear? The article needs to be much clearer overall.
- Explain more specifically what both Kawi and Sanskrit means, per WP:OBVIOUS. I would also recommend not to link to Balinese script with the term "Balinese" It's very easy to confuse it with a reference to the actual language.
- Peter Isotalo 15:41, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments. I'm going to address these problems one by one. I've already expanded the lead article, explained briefly what sanskrit and kawi are, improved some of the prose, and deleted characteristic section. How is it? I don't think the history section could be any longer, but i'll try to find some information. Also i'd like to ask:
- The font is available as a webfont in Wikipedia, so I thought that it is fine for tables of aksara and sandhangan. Pasangan however, is indeed not properly rendered. Should only the pasangan table use image or all the tables?
- Should tables with information (such as in sandhangan and punctuation) be deleted altogether? I thought that it is the most efficient way of showing the shape of the letters with their usage.