Jump to content

Talk:Tagalog

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RioHondo (talk | contribs) at 11:42, 14 July 2015 (Requested move 30 June 2015: cmts). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconDisambiguation
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.

Requested move 30 June 2015

– No WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Tagalog": "If there is no primary topic, the term should be the title of a disambiguation page". A reader searching for "Tagalog" may actually be seeking the people "Tagalogs" rather than "Tagalog (language)". So "Tagalog" where currently the language Tagalog is located should be moved back to "Tagalog language" (it was recently moved to the current title "Tagalog" because of this move request), and the base tiitle "Tagalog" should be reserved as a disambiguation page. Khestwol (talk) 15:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural discussion

Extended content
The result of the move request was: Totally invalidated by an out-of-process move. Kwamikagami moved Tagalog to Tagalog language in the midst of a contested discussion, and changed the redirect to point to Tagalog (disambiguation). Instead of reverting this completely out-of-process move, respected administrator and experienced move request closer BD2412 noticed that a base name was redirecting to a dab page and "fixed" the problem, turning a totally valid and ongoing and contested move request into a fait accompli. What a mess. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 21:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I fixed the immediate technical problem, but I didn't close the discussion. If there is consensus that the language is the primary topic (or an absence of consensus to change this existing determination), then the status quo ante should be restored. bd2412 T 22:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • You know I respect you a lot, BD2412, and I don't mean to be critical, because I certainly never would expect you to check for every single malplaced dab page to see if there was an ongoing RM. But if you'd noticed that, it seems to me that it would have been trivial to simply revert the out-of-process move and move that language page back to Tagalog. Now that you're aware of it, I would propose for you to do that very action, in fact. The move request could even then be re-opened with no problems. Red Slash 01:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
Comment: Well no user supported that move request after the evidence was presented that "Tagalog" is also a Tagalog person. "Tagalog" is also the WP:COMMONNAME for a Tagalog person or something relating to Tagalog people. Therefore "Tagalog" should be a disambiguation page. Khestwol (talk) 00:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In the United States and Canada, Tagalog mostly refers to a language. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 22:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not an election or a vote. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 22:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make me spell it out, okay. Support per the second criteria of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC Red Slash 03:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Okay. But it has been established in the previous move that the language is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 05:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: now !voters from that same "last consensus" want to reverse that move and admit that move was a mistake and a bad precedent. So I think this RM should not be opposed when there is no good reason. Khestwol (talk) 13:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? The last RM decisively put the language at Tagalog as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It should be returned to that status quo; this series of RMs is wasting a lot of everyone's time and energy.--Cúchullain t/c 13:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No opinion on the proposal, but the mess has been cleaned up in accordance with WP:DPL and WP:MALPLACED. These fixes can always be undone. bd2412 T 14:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good step, and very helpful. Thanks, BD2412.--Cúchullain t/c 14:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, this was also the proposal to use the location "Tagalog" as a disambiguation page. Khestwol (talk) 15:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Actually the Tagalog language article stayed on the title "Tagalog" for just 9 days yet. For the longest time, the consensus was to use "Tagalog language" for the language, unless your own RM which was just recently and was closed hastily with just 3 support !votes. However, please also see the discussion at Talk:Tagalog#Requested move 5 July 2015 which happened after your RM, where now editors are opposing to using "Tagalog" for the language. Khestwol (talk) 16:07, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For a broader input, ping all editors who commented on Talk:Tagalog#Requested move 5 July 2015 but not yet here: Eldizzino, Maunus, KiwikiKiWi, Kwamikagami. Khestwol (talk) 16:07, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't call it "hastily closed", though I suppose with the backlog, a full listing period only may seem that way. "Tagalog language" may have been the longer title, but it wasn't chosen by RM. The first time there was an organized discussion about this group of pages, that was the result. --BDD (talk) 16:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. No, primary topic. Tagalog can mean different things, and so the least confusing is to list them either at Tagalog or at Tagalog_(disambiguation) with an incoming redirect from the former. Eldizzino (talk) 15:36, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE to closing admin: This has became a bit complicated, but please also bring under your consideration the discussion at Talk:Tagalog#Requested move 5 July 2015. The simultaneous requested move discussion there was heavily opposed, and 6 editors who commented favored using the title "Tagalog language" for the language, and "Tagalog" for disambiguation. The requested move discussion was, however, closed procedurally as "not relevant", because that article was moved back by an admin. Khestwol (talk) 21:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's an invalid comparison. Latin has nothing to do with Tagalog, and it has the title "Latin" since 2001. The Tagalog language article on the other hand had the title "Tagalog language" for all the time since its creation until a few days ago. It will be fairer to compare "Tagalog" with "German" or "Japanese", which are also disambiguation pages. "Tagalog", "German", and "Japanese" all commonly refer to both the people as well as the language. Khestwol (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How do you know that? WP:CONSENSUSCANCHANGE. Maybe it has been wrong all these years until a few days ago? Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 17:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because "Tagalog" is precisely the enthnonym for the Tagalog people. As per the article: "The name Tagalog comes from either the term tagá-ilog, which means "people living along the river", or another term, tagá-alog, which means "people living along the ford" (the prefix taga- meaning "coming from" or "native of")." This is how the native Tagalog people self-identify as. In English-language sources, "Tagalog" has been used to refer to the language, but also commonly for the people. That is why it is comparable with other almost equally ambiguous terms, like "German" and "Japanese", which are disambiguation pages. Khestwol (talk) 23:58, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
True. I'm glad you understand this bit eventhough you're not Filipino. Tagalog literally means "those from the river" / "los del río" / "mga taga ilog" so it originally referred to the people. And even in the local language, there is ambiguity in the term which could be the people or their language. It would be a shame if you're Filipino and you don't know this @Shhhhwwww!!.RioHondo (talk) 00:12, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you RioHondo. How can Shhhhwwww!! not know this? Even in the Tagalog version of Wikipedia, the article corresponding to Tagalog language is titled tl:Wikang Tagalog, which translates to "Tagalog language"; not just "Tagalog". The title tl:Tagalog on the other hand is a redirect to tl:Tagalog (paglilinaw) ("Tagalog (disambiguation)"). "Tagalog", in both languages English and Tagalog/Filipino, can refer to both the language and the people, although originally it was a Tagalog-language endonym used explicitly for the Tagalog people. Khestwol (talk) 00:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RioHondo, I, for a fact know what Tagalog means in its original language. Yes, it means "river-people" but that is beside the point. It's original meaning has no bearing in English where it mostly means "the dominant language of the Philippines."
  • @Khestwol, the policies of one wiki should not have any bearing on another. They are separate projects after all. This move is a reversal of a previous trend that incorporated the word "language" into its name. Whether Tagalog Wikipedia would follow suit is a separate issue. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 07:21, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Shhhhwwww!!: you should at least indent your comments properly so that they can be taken more seriously. RioHondo just said above that there is ambiguity in the term "Tagalog" as it can be the people or the language. "Tagalog" is ambiguous in not only Tagalog language itself but also in English language. Our own linguist at Wikipedia Kwamikagami, who is a native English-language speaker, has also testified at Talk:Tagalog#Requested move 5 July 2015 that "Tagalog" has ambiguity and must therefore be a disambiguation page, not the location of the language page. Khestwol (talk) 14:17, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – the current title configuration in my mind is correct. As much as I abhor WP’s primary topic guideline as one of the most divisive and useless guidelines we have, Tagalog the language is clearly primary. Search of scholarly works such as Google Scholar and JSTOR overwhelmingly (90%+) return titles dealing with the language not the people. Even when searching for the specific string Tagalogs, the overwhelming returns are on topics about the language, not the ethnic group. Under the current configuration, no one will have any difficulty finding articles about the language or the ethnic group no matter how they search for it. I chose not to close this as I am biased having lived in Tagalogland for three years, but I would strongly recommend the closer, no matter what the outcome, move protect this article for some time to prevent this silliness in the future.--Mike Cline (talk) 10:58, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Actually, I don't know why Tagalog is being singled out here when articles like English are also disambiguation pages. Yup, 90%+ of Google books results also deal with the language. And globally, that's what English is, a language more than anything. (The people are more commonly referred to as British). Anyways, the fact that the title is being disputed means there is reasonable ground for the recreation of a disambiguation page at this title in dispute. That's what a dab page does, we don't have to complicate things for us and for our readers.--RioHondo (talk) 11:41, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tagalog which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tagalog language which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]