Talk:Alan Gua

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. Andrewa (talk) 09:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To attract the attention of people who might be more familiar than us with the intricacies of WP:UE, I'm turning this into a formal morve request.

My assumption is that the naming conventions mandate latin characters for page titles. From the possible transcriptions available, Alan Goa is the most popular in Google scholar and Google books (with Alan Qoa as distant second), so that's seems the best candidate. Both latin and greek gamma give no results. --Latebird (talk) 12:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Both latin and greek gamma give no results" is because the OCR software turns the gammas into y's, T's, or f's. You could at least have mentioned this, as it was discussed above. Yaan (talk) 12:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot about that, but then the discussion above is not hidden or anything. I actually also forgot that Alan Qo'a returns many results as well, and would probably be a reasonable alternative. --Latebird (talk) 13:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that the common ttranscription (common outside China, anyway) of the Mongolian script into latin letters uses the greek gamma for the letter , while the 'g' is reserved for . There is of course the variant that uses 'gh' instead of gammas and 'kh' instead of q's, but I think this one is somewhat less common. OTOH it would be more compatible with words like "Khan" etc.

Note that Alan Qoa is actually not just a different transcription, in modern(?) orthography it would also look different (the difference being that the 'q' would have no dots, while the modern(?) 'gamma' would). Yaan (talk) 13:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see evidence confirming your assertion that the gamma is "the common" transcription. Even when cumulating all the OCR errors, Goa and Qo'a are wide ahead of everything else on Google Books/Scholar. I also don't think it matters here what they exactly refer to in the traditional script, that's something to explain in the article text. --Latebird (talk) 05:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are actually proving my point here. Alan Qoa and Alan Γoa are products of the same transcription scheme, the difference is in what letters you see in the original ( or ), not what letters you use for the transcription. I.e. the decision between Alan Γoa and Alan qoa is not between two different transcription schemes, but between different readings of the original. If we accept the transcription to Alan Qo'a, we should also accept transcriptions like Qutuγtu, Qalqa-yin γoul etc. Yaan (talk) 12:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We just need to find a solution within the guidelines. How does "proving points" help with that? --Latebird (talk) 04:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were the one who asked for evidence about which transcription for is common. My answer was that that people who use q's in transcriptions of Classical Mongolian usually also use gammas (also cf. stuff like Qutuytu vs. Qutugtu or Qutughtu), i.e. the gamma is the common transcription of and, consequentially, if you find q's acceptable you should also find gammas acceptable. Yaan (talk) 15:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, non sequitur. There's no consensus to use a fixed transcription system, so we'll have determine the most common spelling of each name individually. --Latebird (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to something using English alphabet, whatever it is. 70.55.89.211 (talk) 04:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support for a move to any phonetic equivalent that relies on Latin characters. It's more convenient to work with for editors and WP:ACCESS comes to mind from the reader perspective. – Cyrus XIII ^(talk) 10:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.