Talk:Namchö Mingyur Dorje

Tibet Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet 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.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Buddhism Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Please fix wrong spelling of name

Please fix the wrong spelling of the Namcho terton Migyur Dorje's name. The spelling Mingyur is wrong both grammatically and meaningwise from the Tibetan language point of view. Though, when spoken, there appears to be the sound of an N, in actuality, there is no N in the Tibetan spelling. In fact, the spelling Mingyur leads to misinterpretation as the words Mi and Min have very different meanings in Tibetan. Consider changing the wiki page title. Bugso (talk) 07:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bugso, Wikipedia requires reliable sources for verifiability. Although both are used Mingyur appears to be more common. Also you can not just blindly change words as your edit broke both Wikilinks and the image. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 10:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KylieTastic, I can understand your point. But please, don't be dismissive. I'll try to explain that it matters. Whoever wrote this entry is ignorant of the Tibetan language. If you look at the Wylie transcript, it's mi-gyur, there's no N. It's ridiculous and misleading to add the N. There's a meaning in Tibetan to the name min-gyur, which is Changless, whereas the ming-gyur means Name-change. I'm advocating for the dignity of this saint's name to be preserved. The modern teacher Yongey Mingyur Dorje, which shows up in your search, has chosen to spell his name like that, which is his choice. But no connection with the historical figure Migyur Dorje. As you can see in references, the official biography of terton Migyur Dorje written by the keepers of the lineage. I have just discussed with Khenpo Sonam Tsewang, a co-writer, and he is absolutely adamant. What do I have to get this entry fixed? Bugso (talk) 11:20, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bugso:I understand your point. But, just to clarify, although there is no ན(NA) in the Tibetan spelling of the name, in common Tibetan pronunciation (at least in some dialects of Tibetan) of the name a slight 'n' sound occurs - something like "minjur" with no stress on the n. It seems that it is for this reason that the name has come to be commonly written in English with the n. Tibetan scholars writing in English do this too. For instance the biography of the same གནམ་ཆོས་མི་འགྱུར་རྡོ་རྗེ། Namcho Mingyur Dorje on the Treasury of Lives website written by the Tibean scholar Dr. Samten Chhosphel uses the spelling Mingyur and I see Lotsawa House also uses the same spelling. Both would be regarded as authoritative sources. Of course if people pronounce Mingyur as "Ming-jur", rather than as "Mi(n)-jur", then that pronunciation is clearly wrong - and I understand perfectly well why your Khenpo says it is wrong. But changing the spelling to Migyur doesn't really solve this problem though as then some people would inevitably pronounce it something like 'Mig-yur" /"Mik-yur" or "Mig-jur"/ "Mik-jur" ~ which would be just as wrong. The official Wikipedia naming policy in cases like this is to use the most prevalent or common English spelling of the name (or the spelling of the name that predominates in English language reliable sources) and states: "if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic (as with Tchaikovsky and Chiang Kai-shek)". Whatever flaws it has, right now the most predominant English language form seems to be Mingyur Dorje.
Chris Fynn (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS The Wylie transliteration is mi 'gyur not mi-gyur. Properly, there are no hyphens used in the Wylie system and you missed the apostrophe indicating the Tibetan letter 'a-chung (and that changes the meaning too). Unless you already know how to read Tibetan out loud, Wylie transliteration is almost useless as a guide to the pronunciation of Tibetan words, though it does accurately represent the Tibetan spelling. Wylie transliteration maps Tibetan letters to Roman letters, it is not a phonetic transcription system.

Check the English language sources, cause one has it one way and the other the other way, so when sources show up I'll be convinced. I am holding 260 pages with it translated as Migyur and I've heard it pronounced many ways. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, this [1] source has it as Migyur, which appears to be the English translation throughout the Palyul school to his credit. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 02:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]