Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Mongolian written in Mongolian script

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
main page Request for a new language edition: Wikipedia Mongolian written in Mongolian script
submitted verification final decision
Applications-system.svg This language has been verified as eligible.
The language is eligible for a project, which means that the subdomain can be created once there is an active community and a localized interface, as described in the language proposal policy. You can discuss the creation of this language project on this page.

Once the criteria are met, the language committee can proceed with the approval, will verify the test project content with a reliable neutral source, such as a professor or expert and notify the Board of Trustees for a possible veto.

If you think the criteria are met, but the project is still waiting for approval, feel free to notify the committee and ask them to consider its approval.

A committee member provided the following comment:

The software for proper representation of Mongolian script exists now. --Millosh (talk) 21:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  • The community needs to develop an active test project; it must remain active until approval (automated statistics, recent changes). It is generally considered active if the analysis lists at least three active, not-grayed-out editors listed in the sections for the previous few months.
  • The community needs to complete required MediaWiki interface translations in that language (about localization, translatewiki, check completion).
  • The community needs to discuss and complete the settings table below:
What Value Example / Explanation
Proposal
Language code mvf (SILEthnologue) A valid ISO 639-1 or 639-3 language code, like "fr", "de", "nso", ...
Language name Mongolian Language name in English
Language name ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡ Language name in your language. This will appear in the language list on Special:Preferences, in the interwiki sidebar on other wikis, ...
Language Wikidata item Q9246 - item has currently the following values:
  • en label = Mongolian
  • native label (P1705) = Монгол хэл, ᠮᠣᠨᠭᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡ
  • instance/subclass (P31/P279) = language, macrolanguage / Mongolic languages
  • Wikimedia language code (P424) = mn
  • writing system (P282) = 'Phags-pa script, Soyombo alphabet, Mongolian script, Latin script, Cyrillic script
  • number of speakers (P1098) = 7,000,000, 5,200,000


Item about the language at Wikidata. It would normally include the Wikimedia language code, name of the language, etc. Please complete at Wikidata if needed.
Community Temur (N) Harchin (N) Gubin (1)
You can optionally list your user name if you are an active contributor to the test wiki. Add "N" next to your name if you are a native speaker of this language.
Links w:Mongolian alphabet, w:Mongolian language, Mongolian, Peripheral Links to previous requests, or references to external websites or documents.
Settings
Project name ᠸᠢᠺᠢᠫᠧᠳᠢᠶᠠ "Wikipedia" in your language
Project namespace Wikipedia usually the same as the project name
Project talk namespace Wikipedia Discussion "Wikipedia talk" (the discussion namespace of the project namespace)
Enable uploads no Default is "no". Preferably, files should be uploaded to Commons.
If you want, you can enable local file uploading, either by any user ("yes") or by administrators only ("admin").
Notes: (1) This setting can be changed afterwards. The setting can only be "yes" or "admin" at approval if the test creates an Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) first. (2) Files on Commons can be used on all Wikis. (3) Uploading fair-use images is not allowed on Commons (more info). (4) Localisation to your language may be insufficient on Commons.
Optional settings
Project logo File:... 135x135 PNG derivative from a decent SVG image (instructions)
Default project timezone Asia/Hohhot "Continent/City", e.g. "Europe/Brussels" or "America/Mexico City" (see list of valid timezones)
Additional namespaces For example for a Wikisource which would need "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk"
Additional settings Anything else that should be set
submit phabricator task (includes everything automatically, except additional namespaces/settings)

Proposal[edit]

  • Speakers: 3,381,000 in China (1982). Population includes 4,806,849 Buriat and Tuvin (1990 census). 299,000 Chakhar, 317,000 Bairin, 1,347,000 Khorain, 593,00 Karachin, 123,000 Ordos, 34,000 Ejine (1982 census).
  • Regions spoken: Inner Mongolia, Liaoning, Jilin, and Heilongjiang provinces, Urumchi to Hailar. Also spoken in Mongolia.

Discussion[edit]

Basic discriptions[edit]

While there's no Wikipedia for Inner Mongolians who use different major Mongolian languages/dialects, There is no standard and free way for Mongols of different places to share information with each other. That is why we need Roman Mongolian standard.

Most Inner Mongolian website use traditional Mongolian script easily. It's easy to process Mongolian script if we give up Unicode. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 05:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Menksoft IME is the de facto Mongolian script international standard, most inner Mongolian use it (even the government website). It uses Private Use Area (PUA) of Unicode and Chinese GB standard (National Standard). It's desighed for the following writing systems:
Mongolian script
Clear script
Vaghintara script
Manchu script
'Phags-pa script
Soyombo script
Khitan scripts - Small script, etc.
It's still a problem to convert Menksoft code to Unicode or convert it back. However, I read a paper called A Method for Conversion from Nonstandard Mongolian Character Codes to the ISO/IEC Mongolian Codes, which states a method, though without realize.
Another problem is: today's HTML system is not intelligent enough to horizontal text and vertical text together easily (although there's some inconvenient methods), so Incubator is not enough for Classical Mongolian.
So my idea is: Make mon.wikimedia.org as non-Unicode Mongolian script website and
  1. when Chinese expert make a non-Unicode - Unicode convert, we import it into mon.wikipedia.org;
  2. when it's possible to convert Mongolian script and Russian script and back, we merge mn.wikipedia and mon.wikipedia together.
Currently, there're few articles in Incubator:Wp/mon just because it's Latin Mongolian. Also, few inner Mongolians knows it. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 10:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

How about adding a tab, like they do in w:kk, there they have one Kazakh Wikipedia, and a tab for Cyrillic, and a tab for Arabic, and a tab for Latin scripts??--Jdavid2008 09:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

That's a good idea. But I think having their Wikipedia hidden behind the Cyrillic one is a bit disappointing for almost 4 mil. mongolians in Inner Mongolia. Then there arises the question as to which one should be "behind". Temur 06:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion about the terminology here. Classical Mongolian is an extinct language. This proposal, however, is about (a dialect of) modern Mongolian, which happens to be written in the traditional Mongolian script. The Chahar dialect (I assume this is what is meant) only has relatively minor variations to the Khalkha dialect that mnwiki currently writes in cyrillic. Because of that, it would make sense to place the two on one site with tabs. Of course, this assumes that those tabs can support switching between pages with horizontal and vertical script... Btw., is there an incubator project yet? --Latebird 13:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Middle Mongolian gets a code xng, Classical Mongolian gets a code cmg. mvf is a code for south-eastern Nei Mongol language. (Other languages for Nei Mongol includes Bargu Buriat (bxu, north-eastern Nei Mongol) and Oirat (xal, western Nei Mongol)). Which language do the proposer suggest? -Hello World! 04:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Arguments in favour[edit]

  • Es ist möglich ein Project zu machen mit <div>-Funktionen. Deutschlehrer 13:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
  • ᠠᠨᠵ It's possible to write so and put links in it. --OosWesThoesBes 16:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Look, People

If you want to keep your diversity to mainstream western languages/culture and few other asian languages and be closed to Mongolian language/culture on your site, please go ahead. Internet is a diverse place, and we- Mongolians will have our space in it with or without Wiki.

I don't see the problem of keeping Mongolian language on Wiki.

We are open to hear your points of view. Are you ready to hear our points of view?

As far as technical difficulties go modern mainstream Mongolian language uses cyrillic alphabet few letters different from Russian alphabet.

Alta

No, please don't go ahead :) There should be a version of Wikipedia that Mongolians in Inner Mongolia can write and read.--Htgns 20:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Many languages original languages are being extinct in this wery moment. Classical Mongolian could be one of them and i think it is more mongolians that wants a classical mongolian wiki and i also think classic would be more successful than than cyrillic mongolian (I think that the mongolian alphabet is being extinct).

NilWil Nisse VII 17:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Certainly if the internet refuses to support the classical Mongolian script there is a chance for that. Besides, there are more Mongolians in China who use the classical script than there are Mongolians in Mongolia who use the cyrillic script.--Htgns 20:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
There are several sites in traditionnal mongolian script, this is well supported by modern browsers with good settings and the help of a bit of css/js. Two exemples : Mongol Buh (the national sport practised for the new year event), and unsen-sambar.com a writting traditionnal mongol dedicated site, for people using a foreign computer withuot this method.Popolon (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Written Inner Mongolian and written Outer Mongolian are not mutually intelligible. If the Wiki software editors were able to make Wiki work for RTL languages they should be able to make it work for vertical languages, and it should be a priority to get that working. Inner Mongolian now works with Micorosft Vista, and Word--and so is a viable computer language. If a tab in the Mongolian wiki would be set up I think that would be okay--but it is not being set up, and likely never will be. Because of this I think that Inner Mongolians should have their own wiki, and if such a tab is ever made, the two can merge.

Perhaps Inner Mongolians out there should start a incubator project for now though...until things get set up.--Alfredie 06:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

It looks like something needs to be written to make use of the css filters for vertical script on IE, and for generating svg's on other browsers. Is this possible?--Smyrtaeg 19:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Our software has to support the vertical script. It is necessary for Inner Mongolian's, (and probably will be used some in outer Mongolia as well) and is also necessary for wiki's in Xinjiang Oirat, Xibe, Manchu, and Daur languages. There is no reason these great languages (Inner Mongolian included) should be left behind in the digital information era just because they're writing isn't horizontal. It also is no reason why these peoples should give up there excellent alphabets in favour of a Latin or Cyrillic one.--Htgns 20:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Windows Vista has fairly good support for Mongolian wiriting with Classical Alphabet (including vertical positioning in IE8). I find almost no mongolian encoded in Unicode on the Internet. Such a proposal would enable better communication for Mongolians. Mandel. 24 June 2009

  • Support:
  1. Most Oppose idea consider "They're one language", however, when the problem come to them they'll find it necessary: Can you make an convertion system for Mongolian Wikipedia? Or the question could be asked as could Inner Mongolian people write Monggholian language with Monggholian script in mn.wikipedia.org? If anyone think there should be a traditional Mongolian script Wikipedia, then the Scottish English Wikipedia sc.wikipedia.org should be closed because there's already English Wikipedia and Scots language sco.wikipedia.org.
  2. For the computerize problem, there're 2 widely-used system: Unicode system and Menksoft system. Unicode is the international standard and Menksoft is the de facto international standard, which is used in government sites in China.
  3. For the point that mon is a macro language: Khalkha Mongolian(khk) is mostly used in outer Mongolia, but the used the address mn.wikipedia.org (not khk.wikipedia.org). For the Mongolian used in Inner Mongolia, it's considered as "Peripheral" Mongolian(mvf) by westerners. But it's not peripheral at all, so we should use the address mon.wikipedia.org rather than mvf.wikipedia.org. Using the "Peripheral" Mongolian (Hohhot dialect).
  4. Additionary informations see my mongolian Wiki talk page.

--虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 01:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

sc.wikipedia.org isn't the Scottish English Wikipedia, it's the Sardinian Wikipedia. There's no "Scottish English Wikipedia". Saimdusan 08:01, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Not all Inner Mongolians can read Cyrillic. One cannot simply assume that a language is unified. Cyrillic is only used in Outer Mongolia, which thus excludes two thirds of the Mongol population (there are twice as many Mongol speakers in China than in the Republic of Mongolia). -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs 05:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Support per above. --RubiksMaster110 17:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Support per above. --Ephert (talk) 19:13, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Support Every man, woman and child deserves free information in their language and their script. Kanzler31 02:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Support. - I believe marginalised written varieties should be given a chance here in Wikipedia.---`23prootie 09:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Support. I myself would like to apply. More than 6 million people know the language. Its page can be like this. This is my rough draft. I want to edit this wiki. In the test wiki there are many active native speakers. I believe that this Wikipedia will develop. In a short period of time there are more than 10 articles. Википедиа мандтугай! Сайхан зам - урт зам... Зам дээр шавхайтай байна... Зов зам, сайхан! ᠳᠡᠭᠡᠳᠦ ᠪᠤᠯᠪᠠᠰᠤᠷᠠᠯ ᠳᠤ ᠵᠤᠷᠢᠭᠤᠯᠤᠭᠰᠨ ᠮᠤᠨᠭᠭᠤᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡ ᠳᠡᠭᠡᠷᠡᠬᠢ ᠸᠢᠺᠢᠫᠧᠳᠢᠶ᠎ᠠ ᠨᠡᠪᠲᠡᠷᠬᠡᠢ ᠲᠤᠯᠢᠨ ᠳᠤ ᠲᠠᠪᠠᠲᠠᠢ ᠮᠤᠷᠢᠯᠠᠨᠤ! --Gubin 08:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Support. It's a good linguistic project. I agree! --WikiUserFS (talk) 13:44, 28 October 2012 (UTC)/
Support per above. --Аришин Дмитрий (talk) 16:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Support Contact with Mongolian friends, he said that if you do not know the pronunciation rules text with Outer Mongolia Mongolia literate people will not read.--Qa003qa003 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Support The argument given for setting the proposal on hold on, is that it's right now not possible to create web pages with vertical text. However apparently Mongolian CAN be written horizontally as well. So we can open the project and add the vertical text later on. --Sannaj (talk) 14:30, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Kurdbuddha (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Support more than 6 millions people write using this script in inner mongolia and probably most doesn't understand cyrillic version that is used by only 3 millions of mongol, in Mongolia country (or outer mongolia), there are probably lot of old people that use mainly this in Mongolia country and could add some interesting sources before they disappear.Popolon (talk) 11:02, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Arguments against[edit]

The code mvf is NOT the ISO code for "Classical Mongolian". What is the intention of this project ? GerardM 02:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

See Meta talk:Language proposal policy#Question: Classical Mongolian. It appears that the proposal is for the w:Mongolian language written in the w:Mongolian alphabet as used in Inner Mongolia in the People's Republic of China, as opposed to the Mongolian language written in the Cyrillic alphabet as used in the Republic of Mongolia. There may also be some small dialectal differences, but you'd have to ask them for details. I believe that is what the term "Peripheral Mongolian" used in the ISO refers to.--Pharos 04:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

GerardM, if you asking the intention of starting Classical Mongolian Wikipedia, then it is just the same as any other Wikipedia. Four million mongolians in Inner Mongolia do not read Cyrillic, and their language has own peculiarities. Temur 22:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

  • As long as the language itself is considered a single linguistic entity (albeit with regional differences), a single multi-script Wikipedia should absolutely be the first choice. I expect the Mongolian on-line community to be a relatively small one. Here, the force lies in unity, rather than division. The goal should not be to have yet another microproject, not to establish yet another online community, but to build a viable Encyclopaedia, which is a highly ambitious goal that most existing Wikipedia editions have yet to achieve. This should be the focus of attention, not catering regional or national sentiments. Wikipedia editions are not owned or governed by states. Neither is the current Cyrillic Mongolian edition a property of the Mongolian government, neither would a Classical Mongolian edition be subject to Chinese law. The Kazakh and Serbian examples have shown that multi-script Wikipedias do work. Which alphabeth comes first (for unregistered users and users who don't understand how to set their prefs) - well that's such a childish argument. I should even be technically possible to switch that automatically on a daily basis. Cyrillic on odd, Classical Mongolian script on even dates, since this involves no more than switching a boolean variable. --Johannes Rohr 12:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, I completely agree in principle that Wikipedias should not be multiplied beyond necessity. In this particular case, I wonder whether a multiple-script solution is possible. Writing in the Mongolian alphabet vs. writing Mongolian in Cyrillic script use very different spelling, as opposed to Serbian, for instance, where there is basically a one-letter-to-one-letter correspondence. Do we have software which will recognise whole Mongolian words and re-spell them? There might also be important differences in vocabulary; I don't know.—Nat Krause 15:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
"where there is basically a one-letter-to-one-letter correspondence": wrong:
Inner Mongolian:Vikipediya.  čilügetü  nebterkei toli bičig bolai..
Outer Mongolian:Vikipedia,  chölööt  nevterkhii toly bichig boloi.
"Do we have software which will recognise whole Mongolian words and re-spell them?"
If we had, we would it before this talk.
It's even impossible to convert Unicode traditional Mongolian to mostly-used traditional Mongolian!

--虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 07:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Wait a second. From what I have heard, it seems the Mongolian script is always written vertically, as was Chinese in the days of yore. This writing direction is uncompatible with our software. If it can be done at all, it will take extensive efforts to make such a Wikipedia possible. I simply don't see how this could be accomplished. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 16:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Note: [2] --OosWesThoesBes 16:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
If extensive efforts are needed, extensive effort should be given.--Htgns 20:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Mongolian (mon) is a macro language. So it is more then one language. GerardM 23:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Replied in Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Mongol#Arguments in favour: If you think we should use mvf.wikipedia.org, then the Outer Mongolian Wikipedia should be moved to khk.wikipedia.org. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 05:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • It seems this is a proposal for Latinized Mongol. So, it's not sufficiently unique. Try to make a deal with the Cyrillic Wikipedia to make it a two-script wiki like the Serbian wiki. --OosWesThoesBes 16:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Replied in Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Mongol#Arguments in favour: I asked them for using Classical Mongolian script, but that's impossible. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 05:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Mongols of different places should learn Cyrillic and then they will have a way to share information with each other. That is why there is no need to have a Roman Mongolian standard. A.M.D.F. 17:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Inner Mongolians does not understand that Russian-Mongolian script, they use the historical Mongolian. But if you can made an transliterator in mn.wikipedia.org, it would be great. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 05:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • No, per the others... if it is multiple languages, would it be unreasonable to consider multiple wikipedias for this? --Anonymous DissidentTalk 23:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't get your idea. Could you state it clearier? --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 05:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • A strange reason that if different mongols have different dialects they should write in latin alphabet, isn't it? Mongols use cyrillic script so it is just one more attempt to creat artificial latinized wikipedia of a language using cyrillic. Sura 20:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Mongolians only use the latin script where computer (or mobile phone) systems force them to do so, transliterating at random. There is no standard transliteration system (or rather, there are dozens of competing ones, including en:Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Mongolian)). It seems that the single page that currently exists in the incubator project uses something very similar to one of the several variants of ISO 9, which were invented for scientific purposes before the days of Unicode, and are rather unsuitable for practical use. Besides that, the Khalkha dialect spoken in Mongolia and the Chahar dialect spoken in China use very different orthographies in two radically different writing systems, so that a common transliteration system is not possible (even when igrnoring the differences between the dialects as such). Interestingly, a en:Mongolian latin script was officially in use in Mongolia for all of 2 months in 1941, after which Stalin forced them to switch to cyrillic. In summary, a rather absurd proposal. --Latebird 13:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
The Mongolian Latin script has only a short history since 1941 and it's not widely used. I think Mongolian script and 'Phags-pa script are better. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 04:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Either Inner Mongolians use different language - then it deserves its own Wikipedia with traditional script. Or they use the same language as in Mongolian Republic albeit different script then automated transliteration solution to and from traditional script is possible.--Nxx 15:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose--Reality006 23:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I am strictly against creating separate Wikipedias for the same language due just to different script system. New tab should be added to existing Mongolian Wikipedia instead. Kazakh Wikipedia is good example. Calmouk 05:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose--Like Kazakh Wikipedia, please add automatic converter in existing Mongolian Wikipedia. Korean Wikipedia written in mixed script of Hangul and Hanja was rejected because Korean WP (currently written in Hangul exclusively) already exists. --Yes0song 14:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC) cancelled
    • I cancel my opinion above because of Special:Contributions/60.240.101.246's description below: "The two scripts are not interconvertible." It is difficult to convert noninterchangeable scripts automatically and it is messy and inconvenient to coexist by making two pages per article in the same wiki. Thus, I defer making my decision. --Yes0song 14:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Other discussion[edit]

Related project: Wikipedia Mongol, Question: Classical Mongolian. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 06:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Mongolian script used in Inner Mongolia in China. --Shizhao 02:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Related project: Wikipedia Classical Mongolian, Question: Classical Mongolian. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) 06:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Please, reformulate the request as request for Inner Mongolian Wikipedia. Otherwise, the proposal will be rejected as Wikipedia in Mongolian already exists. Codes are separate issue, which should be discussed. --Millosh

Would it be possible to automatically generate the Mongolian script version based on the Cyrillic version, or vice versa? I also don't understand why you can't use the same wiki for both scripts. πr2 (tc) 15:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Detailed argument and opinion by User:Benlisquare[edit]

I would like to propose that either the Mongolian Wikipedia use both Cyrillic and Mongol script as writing systems, or in the case where that is not possible, a separate Wikipedia be made catering for Mongol script. Currently Mongolian is written in Cyrillic only and the Mongol script is completely omitted, to which I consider to be imbalanced. Given that there are two "Mongolian political entities", it would be fair to include the official writing system of both, as neither is more significant than the other. Overall within Mongol speakers, the use of Mongol script exceeds that of Cyrillic, and therefore should be included.

  1. Mongolian history, culture, language and national identity does not solely and specifically apply to those within the Republic of Mongolia. Ethnic Mongols within Inner Mongolia, People's Republic of China are just as relevant, and exclusion would be unfair on their behalf.
  2. The population of ethnic Mongols within the Republic of Mongolia is 2,134,493 (Reference 1), while the population of ethnic Mongols within Inner Mongolia is 3,995,349 (Reference 2) and within the entire People's Republic of China, 5,813,947 (Reference 3). (Note that figures and sources are used as a rough guide for demonstration purposes only.) Whilst the Cyrillic script is official in the Republic of Mongolia, it is not used within Inner Mongolia nor the rest of the People's Republic of China, where the Mongol script is used officially instead. Therefore, as there is a larger population of Mongols that do not use the Cyrillic script (or do not use it officially), it is unfair that only Cyrillic is used, which does not represent the larger majority of Mongol speakers. A similar analogy for comparison would be that of the Korean language; there are minor language and orthography differences between the spoken and written languages of North and South Korea, for example, "labour" is 로동 rodong in the North and 노동 nodong in the South; "woman" (女) is 녀 nyeo in the North and 여 yeo in the South; "hello" is an-nyong and an-yong, North-South respectively; the surname Lee (李) is 리 Ri and 이 Yi; "friend" is 동무 dongmu and 친구 chingu; "Poland" is 뽈스까 Ppolsŭkka and 폴란드 Pollandeu. However, the common argument is that since the Republic of Korea (South) has a larger population, has greater international influence, better internet penetration and is not politically isolated, the ROK can, so to speak, represent "Korea" for the entire peninsula. That is why the Korean Wikipedia is written entirely in the Southern dialect, using the grammar style used in the South, and not that of North Korea. Similarly, Korean-language textbooks abroad instruct in the Southern dialect, as does various United Nations documents, and Google Translate only renders the Korean language as how it sounds in the South.
  3. A common false perception is that China as a whole has little internet penetration. China has 404,000,000 internet users (Reference 4), and quite a relatively strong internet penetration, and of that total, Inner Mongolia makes up 1.08 million (Reference 5). By ranking countries by internet penetration, China is at No.1, and Mongolia is at No.119 with 330,000 (ibid. reference). China's internet penetration is just as greater than that of the Republic of Mongolia.
  4. Another argument commonly used is in regards to censorship of Wikipedia within China. Currently censorship of Wikipedia is keyword-based on the English and Chinese language Wikipedias. Pages blocked are usually political in nature, such as en:Sino-Japanese relations, en:Falun Gong and en:Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Also, readers and editors of Wikipedia from within mainland China are well known to be capable of bypassing filters using VPNs such as Tor.
  5. Regarding technical issues, although some users may be unable to properly display the Mongol script due to a lack of supporting fonts, this does not mean that they should be excluded for this reason. The Mongol script is, and permanently will be a part of Unicode. For the people who are able to correctly display Mongol script, their viewing experience should not be reduced because other people aren't as "fortunate" as them, so to speak. Mongol fonts are included along with Windows 7; although there is no "rule" that all people must upgrade to the latest Windows, this does mean that the option of viewing Mongol script on computers is readily available to many people. Plus, Mongol fonts can be readily downloaded off the internet for people who do not have Windows 7 yet have a desire to view the Mongol script.
  6. Mongol script has been the traditional script of the Mongol people. The Cyrillic script was introduced in the Republic of Mongolia following extensive Russian influence. Excluding the traditional script for one that is relatively foreign is quite an odd thing to do.

Any suggestions, corrections, criticisms, comments or feedback? -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs 10:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Please, may you describe the relation between Cyrillic and Mongolian orthographies? --Millosh 04:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Mongolian written in the traditional Mongolian script, as used in Inner Mongolia, is quite conservative. Certain endings in the written language are not pronounced in the modern language. The Cyrillic script used in Outer Mongolia is phonemic, and is closer to the modern language. The two scripts are not interconvertible. 60.240.101.246 01:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I have a question. Is correspondence between the two scripts regular or not? I think it can be converted automatically if it is regular. --Yes0song 14:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

There is actually a third standardised Mongolian language, and that is Buryat. Buryat has its own Wikipedia (although it is proposed for deletion), so I don't see why Inner Mongolian should not.

Malaysian and Bahasa Indonesia have separate Wikipedias. Although the two languages are separate standardisations of what is at base the same language, for obvious political, cultural, etc. reasons they get separate Wikipedias. There are many ways in which the Mongolian of the two political entities -- Mongolia and Inner Mongolia -- are different, including but not confined to the script used. There is no reason why Inner Mongolian should not have its own Wikipedia, just as Malaysian and Indonesian do. In fact, the current Mongolian Wikipedia is a very narrowly-based Mongolian effort. It basically ignores Inner Mongolian usage, linguistic or otherwise. Opening a Wikipedia for Inner Mongolian users would thus not be a simple duplication of Mongolian Wikipedia given the linguistic, cultural, and political differences between the two.

Setting up a 'rival' Inner Mongolian version would possibly breathe a bit of life into Mongolian Wikipedia, which is rather poorly developed -- there are huge gaps in coverage. Firstly it would possibly set up a friendly rivalry, secondly it might expand the pool of contributions that could be drawn upon by both Mongolian Wikipedias.

Support for the alphabet is, however, a major problem, and a consensus would need to be reached before an Inner Mongolian Wikipedia could start. Unfortunately Mac does not support traditional script, although iPad apparently does.

124.65.50.210 08:50, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I think we need to take stock of this situation again[edit]

1. Large strides have been made in supporting Unicode-standard Mongolian script on the Internet. Many platforms and browsers now support it, although the situation is hard to pin down since it keeps changing. Moreover, unless you have the ability to test various systems and browsers, it's not possible to be totally sure. However:

  • The Windows platform appears to support Mongolian script quite well. IE has always provided good support, although some versions on some computers (although I don't have specific information on this) seem to be broken.
  • The Macintosh platform supports Mongolian script quite well in most browsers. Ironically, Safari used to be one of those that supported it well but no longer does so (although this may depend on implementation of the script).
  • iOS supports Mongolian script quite well, although there have been hiccups.
  • Android partially supports Mongolian script. Some Samsung phones support it; others do not (I know this because I have two different models of Samsung). I have no specific details about brands or models that support it.
  • Linux: No information.

2. A clone of Wikipedia already exists at Uhaan.com [[3]]. This clone is basically taking articles from Wikipedia (Mongolian Wikipedia) and reproducing them in the traditional script. The site does make some changes to content, such as adopting some Inner Mongolian terminological standards (there are quite a few differences, large and small, from Mongolia itself), but in many cases it ignores Inner Mongolian standards and simply reproduces Mongolian terminology.

Given that a third party is already filling the gap that was created by the decision here to hold off on starting a new Wikipedia in the Mongolian script, I suggest it is time to reconsider that decision.

Incidentally, a decision needs to be made about terminology. Currently, Mongolian Wikipedia appears to have a policy totally different from that on English Wikipedia. On English Wikipedia, where various different terms exist, these are usually listed at the article. For example, the English page on "Trunk (car)" notes that North American usage is "trunk" while Commonwealth usage is "boot". This is one of the great strengths of Wikipedia since it allows people to cross-check articles against their own usage.

In contrast, Mongolian Wikipedia adopts a very narrow approach whereby only one term is used on the page and no alternative terms are noted. A simple example is the page on beer. The common Mongolian term for beer is "Pivo" (Пиво) from Russian. However, efforts are being made in Mongolia to establish a native term, "Shar airag" (Шар айраг), in place of the borrowed word. This is reflected at Mongolian Wikipedia, where the article on beer is at "Shar airag", and "shar airag" is the only term listed at that article. If you search for "Pivo" on Mongolian Wikipedia, you are automatically redirected to the page on "Shar airag", with no indication at the article itself that "Pivo" is, indeed, the same thing as "Shar airag". "Shar airag" does not appear to be current in China.

This is not a very satisfactory approach since this kind of situation, where several different terms exist for the same thing, often an officially-promoted native term vs a commonly used borrowed word, is very common in Mongolian. It is even worse between Mongolia and Inner Mongolia due to dialect differences, different sources of borrowing, and differences in terminological development. A major example is the name of China itself, which is "Khyatad" (Хятад) in Mongolia and "Dundad Uls" (Дундад Улс) in Inner Mongolia. Neither of these names is acceptable in the other country. Another example is the name of the United Nations (Нэгдсэн Үндэстний Байгууллага vs Олон Улсын Холбоот Байгуулга). Even words like 'economy' and 'education' differ between Mongolia and China. Since these usages often have either political or cultural undertones, I can see many cases where clashes might occur between Wikipedians in the two countries, which could become a source of major anger, frustration, resentment, and possibly endless edit wars. My suggestion is that Mongolian Wikipedia should adopt a similar policy to English Wikipedia and list various alternative names that exist for the same thing.

122.201.24.79 12:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Technical issues[edit]

Mongolian Wikipedia in Mongolian script will require support for vertical writing modes in Mediawiki. See phab:T353, phab:T11436, phab:T149056. --Yair rand (talk) 17:49, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Is any appreciable progress being made on the technical issues. The links you listed seemed to suggest that not much is being done at the moment.

103.229.121.33 07:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Almost two years since I asked this question and nothing is happening. Is this proposal dead in the water?

66.181.191.44 04:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Progress seems to be stalled. See [4]. --Yair rand (talk) 23:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Krinkle said "It would help a lot if you can show an existing (realistic, as opposed to demo) example of a top-to-bottom website that uses the kind of layout we're proposing here." What about Wiki Uhaan (Wikipedia clone) at http://wiki.uhaan.com/%E1%A0%A8%E1%A0%A2%E1%A0%AD%E1%A0%A4%E1%A0%B7_%E1%A0%AC%E1%A0%A0%E1%A0%AD%E1%A0%A4%E1%A0%B3%E1%A0%A0%E1%A0%B0%E1%A0%A4

66.181.176.80 11:20, 14 January 2019 (UTC)