Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulu script

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Tulu language#Writing system. Disregarding the SPAs, there is consensus not to have a separate article on this topic. Where to redirect to and whether to merge anything remain questions to be settled through the editorial process. Sandstein 11:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tulu script

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Tulu script (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The script, per the cited britannica source, appears to be a variety of Grantha script, rather than a separate script entirely. For this reason, I would propose that this page be redirected to the page of the Grantha script Tigalari script (updated at 07:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)), where the topic can be adequately covered. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment We have one editor repeatedly pushing this without RSs. If there's a modern script it might be Tigalari script, which per our article is aka "Tulu script". Can't say much without RSs to refer to. — kwami (talk) 07:38, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Something that worries me about this article (but not directly important for deciding whether the article should exist) is the following sentence: "It is one of the oldest language born almost during the same time when Tamil & Prakrit were born.". That's the sort of thing you might read in a popular magazine article about Tulu, but experts in linguistics don't usually say things like that, as they generally reject the notion that languages have ages. It might be fair to say that Dutch is older than Afrikaans, because we know pretty well when Afrikaans came into existence, but that is the exception. Athel cb (talk) 10:10, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another comment. In the history of the article we can read the following, written by an editor who has made a major contribution to it: "Tulu, malayalam and tigalari are differnt script from the same source which is grantha. There are misconception that tulu and tigalari are same which is false. Even kannada and telugu script looks 90 percent similar that doesnt means they are similar. Same with tulu and tigalari". To say that two things that are 90% similar are not "similar" seems absurd, written by someone with a private definition of "similar". Athel cb (talk) 10:17, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I oppose the deletion of this page. I also oppose redirecting to some other page. Combining two Different script in one page will make it too controversial. In Wikipedia many newly created script have their own page. Where as this tulu script has a historical evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr anonymousMr (talk • contribs) 17:28, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I strongly oppose the deletion of this page, As a linguist and I have studied about Tulu script in the tulunad itself, it can be said that this article is telling the correct information about the script. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blensonc (talk • contribs) 18:03, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Tulu language#Writing system. This appears to be a content dispute (although there's also a deeper politics here as well, regarding official language recognition); if there's sufficient RS material shown to exist, a separate article can be created. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:28, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I strongly oppose the deletion of this page, As a linguist and I have studied about Tulu script in the tulunad itself, it can be said that this article is telling the correct information about the script.
In Wikipedia many newly created script have their own page. Where as this tulu script has a historical evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iampuneeth (talk • contribs) 23:38, 5 November 2021 (UTC) — Iampuneeth (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The citation that's being used doesn't actually support keeping this article. The source, a letter, is written by a single instructor at the Karnataka Tulu Sahitya Academy (although we run into a sparsely sourced page for its Wikipedia entry...). And, that letter (which, granted, doesn't actually carry all that much weight being what appears to be an WP:SPS) doesn't actually object to considering Tulu and Tigalari as the same script; the quibble is with the name of the script. If that alone were a justified reason to split the pages, WP:POVFORK might as well be dead. Covering the two scripts together is more than reasonable. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:34, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of unified script is not appropriate as it deviates from the idea of evolution of script. Several inscriptions diciphered in Tulu are in late 21st century and are still being discovered. Multiple researches done previously are inadequate or lack enough evidence to classify Tigalari and Tulu as same script. There is clear attempt to overshadow Tulu with Tigalari. The epigraphists and paleographic experts have found multiple stone inscriptions dated to 10th CE, If you look into few stone inscriptions it is found that Tulu script was used to write Tulu sentences, and Kannada script was used to write Kannada sentences in a single stone inscription. This is substantial proof that Tulu was used in administration along with Kannada and script itself was Tulu. I Request you to don't delete this article. I think the tigalari page needs a complete cleanup as it includes lot of wrong information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr anonymousMr (talk • contribs) 08:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2021/21213-tulu-reply.pdf
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tulu_script&oldid=1138755861"