Talk:Gyalrongic languages

Languages High‑importance

	Language portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Eastern Rgyalrong verbal agreement

I have no idea how to read this. -- Evertype·✆ 05:37, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name of the entry

It is possible to change "Jiarongic" to "Rgyalrongic" everywhere? The term `"Jiarongic" is not used by any specialist of these languages, and should be avoided. Rgyalrongskad (talk) 09:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can make a request for a bot change, but it should probably be discussed first. There are multiple spellings in use, and accessibility is an issue.

Also, you're changing working links into red links, which is not helpful. You're also deleting articles rather than moving them. We try to keep the page history in one place. — kwami (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name should be changed to "Gyalrong(ic)" everywhere, because the major authority on these languages, Guillaume Jacques (user Rgyalrongskad), is now using this more pronounceable version. This version has also been adopted by Glottolog. Haspelmt (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: moved. —Darkwind (talk) 03:38, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gyalrongic languages → Rgyalrongic languages

– The spelling "Rgyalrong" is the only one used in English by specialists of these languages. Although the consonant cluster may appear to be counterintuitive, it is really pronunced. "Rgyalrong" is a subbranch of "Rgyalrongic" in Jackson's Sun classification (which nobody challenges), and comprises four or five languages, not "dialects", so we also have to use the plural. Rgyalrongskad (talk) 08:18, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to move the latter yourself, since the target doesn't yet exist (as shown by the red link here). We only need the move request for the occupied name, unless you think the two should be discussed together.

comment: It seems to me that "rGyalrong(ic)" is the more common form in English, so I would suggest moving there instead. (Rgyalrongskad, the ugly double capital RG- can be handled from within the article, so that's not a problem.) — kwami (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both Rgyalrong and rGyalrong are in use, but because capitalizing the middle of words is not normal in English usage (and my own impression is that Rgyalrong is gaining on rGyalrong through time) 'Rgyalrong' is probably a better choice for Wikipedia. Tibetologist (talk) 18:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and moved the one that I could, since there's no objection. — kwami (talk) 05:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

comment I requested G6 to make room for this move. Tiggerjay (talk) 03:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.