Talk:Saraiki language

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saraiki dialect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120206233628/http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement1.htm to http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.  Paine  ^u/c 15:00, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:52, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 21 September 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. This has been a fascinating bid to recognize Saraiki as more than a dialect in the Lahnda continuum. We all agree that Wikipedia is required to be neutral. We must be sensitive to the perspectives of those who find the term "dialect" to have a pejorative nature, and yet further, we must all recognize that "dialect" is just a word. Some different types of languages spoken a bit differently in adjacent areas do evolve into full-fledged languages, and there are those who consider Saraiki as one of these. The sources I've read make note of all this, and yet summarize by saying that Saraiki is as yet to this day more widely considered a Punjabi dialect. So thank you all for an educational discussion! (non-admin closure)  Paine  ^u/c 05:42, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Just to clarify, this decision is based upon the !votes and rationales of the following discussion, and those only.  Paine  ^u/c 05:57, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

---

Saraiki dialect → Saraiki language – Primarily to revert the LTA user. I also agree with the Utcursch's earlier move. There are more sources supporting it as a separate language (including Ethnologue) than a dialect of Pubjabi or Sindhi. The country where its spoken the most also recognizes it as a separate language (according to 1981 and 1998 census of Pakistan). – SMS ^Talk 18:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC) --Relisting.  Paine  ^u/c 09:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Filpro (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose. Most linguists agree that it is a dialect of Lahnda (Western Punjabi), the dialect continuum of Standard Punjabi and Sindhi. Besides, Ethnologue refers to all of their entries as "language" be it a language or dialect. Also see, Dialect or language and Mutual intelligibility. Filpro (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose: It shares at least 95% of its vocabulary with other dialects of Punjabi and there exists mutual intelligibility. I tested it on the personal level as well, i speak another dialect of Punjabi but when i open a Saraiki news website, i can make sense of almost all the news stories. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 19:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support Saraiki may share similarities with Punjabi or Sindhi, but calling it a part of either of these languages is far-fetched. As SMS noted, the census of Pakistan, as well as the Saraiki movement in southern Punjab, identify it as a separate language. I don't see any harm in moving the title back to what it was, and discussing the dialect controversy in a section within the article. Mar4d (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

@Mar4d: I am sure you will find a lot of discussion on this topic in the archives. The problem is Wikipedia is not governed by Government of Pakistan. When classifying a language/dialect, we need to go by expert opinion of linguists, Grierson is an expert on languages, he describes Saraiki as the dialect of Punjabi. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 16:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

• Suggestion Why not simply use "Saraiki" as the name of the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.179.208 (talk) 11:15, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Saraiki is seprate language.182.186.19.96 (talk) 12:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Referring it to a blogpost. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 16:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

• Conditionally Oppose: I will oppose it if a section is added for regional political movement to use this dialect as instrument to get new province.Yoyi ling (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC) Yoyi ling (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose: @Anthony Appleyard: Smsarmad has violated rules and deleted my comments. With out SPI no one can declare some one sock and delete his comments. He must get the block for violation. Is not this imposing behaviour to get desired result. He should have guts to defend his case rather then using illogical excuses to avoid logical argument. I am reinserting my comments . I oppose almost all linguist on Indo-Aryan languages from Grierson (1903–28) to George Cardona (2014) have classified it as dialect of Lahnda (Westren Punjabi) language along with Hindko dialect and few other dialects. Move will complicate situation. It will give prefrence to ethno-political views over scholory work of language professionals. ₯€₠€₯

It is not a good idea to call someone a sock and remove their comments unless they are proven a sock because I can see a lot of other IPs here which I might know whose socks they actually might be but I am not accusing them as socks or removing their comments by calling them such. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 16:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

• Comment: "Consensus says it's a dialect." by NeilN on 15:36, 2 August 2014. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 17:27, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

  The link you provided is a link to an edit summary supported by a claim of consensus. It would be nice to have a link to the discussion where that consensus was reached. YBG (talk) 08:18, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

• Comments it is a language.182.186.41.146 (talk) 07:57, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

***Support*** see http://globalrecordings.net/en/langcode/skr It is a Language.Saraiki is taught as subject in Schools, college and Universities.182.186.14.9 (talk) 11:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

References

• Comment: @182.186.19.96: You first sited a blog (which is not Reliable WP source) Then you sited globalrecordings which is also supporting the fact that Saraiki has son father relationship with Lahnda. Do you know what linguist mean by Lahnda. Lahnda means Western Punjabi) Language. So hope it will clear you about status of Saraiki as a dialect of Western Punjabi language. ₯€₠€₯
• (edit conflict) @Andy M. Wang: I Support this move. Book sources refer to it as a language. [1][2][3] A lot of what's written above appears to be WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. It matters not whether individual editors think it's mutually intelligible with something else, we go by what sources say, and I don't see much evidence of them calling it a dialect.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:17, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

You are misquoting the sources, dialects are a type of language and are described as a language in literature, we are talking about a classification of dialect vs. language and that only expert linguists can do. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 18:51, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

• Saraiki is language according to Govt of Pakistan. Saraiki is Subject in Universities. Saraiki is approved language in Radio and Television. So page be moved182.186.85.88 (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
• At 05:32, 6 October 2016 (UTC), I closed this as No consensus was reached after 2 weeks and a relisting. This is apparently still up for debate. Page has stood since 2013, so not moved., but am comfortable and overturning myself - possibly overstepped — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 15:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

*Comment: @Amakuru Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable sources. The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that context. Your first source "Political Survival in Pakistan: Beyond Ideology" is not on linguistics. It just focuses how ethnos in Pakistan is used for political survival ignoring ideology for progress. This article is on linguistics so this source is not reliable in this context [4].

Your second source "Crossing Phonetics-Phonology Lines" is on Phonetics not on Language classification or Dialect continua .Hence again it is out of context and can not be used.

Your third source showing Govt publication was already contested by other user. Which I re quote; "Wikipedia is not governed by Government of Pakistan. When classifying a language/dialect, we need to go by expert opinion of linguists, Grierson is an expert on languages, he describes Saraiki as the dialect of Punjabi." Further elaboration by me "Local linguists such as Dulai, K Narinder, Gill, Harjeet Singh Gill, A Henry. Gleason (Jr), Koul, N Omkar, Siya Madhu Bala, Aamir Malik, Amar Nath as well as modern linguistics publications such as US National advisory Committee based The UCLA Language Materials Project (LMP) along with modern linguistics such as George Cardona and Nataliia Ivanovna Tolstaia classifying Saraiki as a dialect of Punjabi".

@Andy M. Wang: not over stepped. Page stood since 2013, visited by 12,258 visitors in last 90 days (max available days data)[5]. By exploiting 147,096 users in three years. Even all page watcher (78) never objected. There was express as well implied acceptance to Saraiki dialect. Your decision to not move the page was good faith & rational. ₯€₠€₯

@Andy M. Wang: I agree that you did not overstep, it was a fair close with the discussion as it was at the time, but I also thank you for reopening it now, given my late revival of the discussion. On the question of whether it's a dialect or a language, it could very easily be classed as both. See Serbian language / Croatian language, and also Kinyarwanda / Kirundi for other examples of mutually intelligible "dialects" of some broader parent "language" (respectively, Serbo-Croatian language and Rwanda-Rundi language), which are nonetheless regarded as languages, because they are standardised and universally spoken across a coherent area. My sources quoted above may not be by expert linguists, but they nonetheless qualify for ascertaining WP:COMMONNAME, which is, after all, the policy most relevant to the matter at hand here. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 07:56, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

The sources you provided do not discuss the language vs. dialect aspect of Saraiki. They do not explain why Saraiki should be classified as a language and not the dialect. They just discuss its political dimensions. They do not have any bearing on deciding the common name for a tongue. I can find you many sources which call it a dialect. I will encourage people involved in this discussion to find a source which discusses the delicate difference between a language and a dialect and classifies Saraiki as a language based on their expert finding and analysis. King Julien of Wikipedia | do not try to make a move | 11:05, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@ Amakuru You claimed non linguistic classification of Serbian language / Croatian language, and also Kinyarwanda / Kirundi which may be two exceptions but hundreds of Wikipedia Language/dialects Articles are named based on linguistic classifications. If given an option. Best practices vs Exceptions. Obviously best practices should be followed as quoted by user SheriffIsInTown above. Secondly for ascertaining WP:COMMONNAME see these pro Saraiki online sources naming it as "Saraiki Boli" Here you go [6] [7] [8] . Boli means dialect [9] . @Andy M. Wang: I request for closure of this discussion by retaining Saraiki dialect as already this discussion has been open for more then two weeks and there is no agreement among users to move the article to Saraiki Language. ₯€₠€₯

I change my vote from Conditionally Oppose to Oppose after reading all views by participating members Yoyi ling (talk) 07:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

---

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

Dear Saraiki is langauge..https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jhangvi_dialect&oldid=539899656182.186.78.178 (talk) 08:01, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I do recognize the importance of your perspective and the work that went into that table of Saraiki dialects, even though it was deemed "not relevant" to discussions about the improvement of the Jhangvi dialect article. Saraiki appears to lie on a continuum between a "dialect" and a "language", and the consensus of Wikipedians as seen above is that Saraiki cannot yet be afforded the "language" qualifier except in more informal usage, such as at Ethnologue. There may be hope for the future when we see that there is a growing number of redirects in Wikipedia's Category:Redirects from Saraiki-language terms. Cheers!  Paine  ^u/c 09:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: I disagree with your analysis. Saying it is a dialect is pure WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH, as almost all sources call it a language and not a dialect. Which reliable sources in particular persuaded you not to move this article? Many thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:58, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Amakuru, the close seems to be a reasonable reading of the consensus. I've been watching this discussion (since I was involved in an earlier discussion which left me uncertain of where Saraiki lies on the language - dialect continuum) and I don't see anything here to change the consensus that linguists generally recognize saraiki as a dialect. If we are to be a functioning site, we cannot let discussions to go on endlessly and it is better, in ambiguous cases as this one likely is, to close the discussion and to move forward. whether the title is correct or not, the discussion has been closed very reasonably by a clearly uninvolved editor. --regentspark (comment) 18:33, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I understand your concern, Amakuru, as I am certainly no expert on languages; however, rest assured that my decision was not based on my own readings, but only the consensus formed in the above discussion. There was one source that was interesting, though. It's a 2010 book titled The Social Space of Language: Vernacular Culture in British Colonial Punjab by Farina Mir. We must note that the author speaks of the Lahnda continuum and doesn't even make mention of Saraiki itself, so while I do think that there may come a day when the often blurred, indistinct and subjective differences between "languages" and "dialects" will become better defined by linguists, and that Saraiki grows nearer and nearer to the "language" end of the continuum, the consensus of Wikipedians in the above discussion is spot on, at least for now.  Paine  ^u/c 20:02, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks you @Paine Ellsworth: and @RegentsPark:, and I understand that you're both uninvolved, and of course have no bias one way or the other, but I would still like to know which arguments persuaded you that there was consensus not to move, that's my only question, because I'm not convinced myself, and I would like clarity on this. I, and others, cited numerous sources stating that it is language, while the "oppose" votes were simply giving their own opinions that it shares a lot in common with other languages, without mentioning a single reliable source. So again, please just tell me what aspect of the "oppose" votes you found more convincing than the "support" votes, so that I may understand your thinking. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 20:28, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Amakuru. In the discussion, from what I can see, a total of six sources are listed. Two are from linguists (Cardona and Grierson), three that you provided, and Ethnologue. The sources you provided are contested in the discussion as either referring to a political movement to make Saraiki a language or being government sources (which are not considered reliable) while no one is contesting the linguist sources. So, as far as the discussion goes, I don't really see how this can be closed any other way. --regentspark (comment) 23:49, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

To editor Amakuru: In addition to regentspark's comments, we also know that while many sources refer to Saraiki as a "language", many sources are not linguist sources and commonly refer to dialects as languages. Even Wikipedia, as shown by the category link I gave, does not discriminate and refers to both languages and dialects as "languages" on an informal level. It is only when we must adhere to the article titling policy that we must be "formal" and use the term dialect. Reliable linguist sources, to include the source I gave above, are what must be used to determine the way forward. This made the opposition stronger in the above RM discussion and led to my close to leave Saraiki as a dialect for now. It might be considered a "rough" consensus; however, by Wikipedia standards it is still a consensus in my humble opinion. As you know, Wikipedia has a review system in place, and that is where we should take any further discussion on this subject (if that is the desired next step).  Paine  ^u/c 00:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Classification

According to https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lahnda-language Lahanda is macro language. But in this Lahnda Western Punjabi [pnb] is not included. So Lahanda and Punjabi are two different and distinct languages. Kindly this mistake be removed. This is a big mistake and confusion. Look in to the matter. It is suggested that Lahnda macro language be renamed as Saraikis and western Punjabi [pnb] be excluded from this macro language. Western Punjabi[pnb] and eastern Punjabi [pan] are same languages. These be treated in a same group. The only difference is the writing system. Western Punjabi[pnb] is written in Arabic script and eastern Punjabi [pan] is written in Gurmukhi. All audio and vedios, media, Tv channels of these two languages are same. Any one may search this on videos and audios.

1..So the Western punjabi being as same eastern punjabi be excluded from macro language Lahnda.. 2.. Lahanda be renamed as Saraikis as saraiki is the major language in the remaining group. 3.. This Macro language Saraikis comprising Inku [jat] (Afghanistan), Khetrani [xhe], Northern Hindko [hno], Pahari-Potwari [phr], Saraiki [skr], Southern Hindko [hnd], be included in https://www.ethnologue.com/subgroups/northwestern-9 containing sindhi and Dardic. Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Outer Languages, Northwestern , Saraikis182.186.19.96 (talk) 12:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Dialects of Saraiki Languages

Dialect group of Saraiki	Subdialect	Where spoken	Alternate_names	Notes
Saraiki (Central or Pure Saraiki)	Saraiki Language	Multan District, Lodhran District, Bahawalpur District, Muzaffargarh District, Rahim Yar Khan District, Dera Ghazi Khan District, Rajanpur District, Derawal Nagar, Delhi, India	1.Riyāsatī in Bahawalpur District. 2.Ḍerāwālī in Dera Ghazi Khan	1.According to Masica, the two names Bahāwalpurī and Riyāsatī are locally specific names for the Multani dialect group, possibly specific dialects within the group. According to Shackle, they instead denote a distinct dialect group. Also according to Shackle, the Bahawalpur District of Punjab Province (i.e., within its 1976 boundaries) is split between Mūltānī in the north and Bahāwalpurī in the south, with the dialect of Bahawalpur city being of blend of these two. 2.According to Masica, this use of the name Ḍerāwālī is to be distinguished from its use as an alternate name for a different dialect group (see following row). The spelling with retroflex 'Ḍ' instead of 'D' is according to Masica. The name dialect name "Thaḷī" is used to refer to the local dialects of both Dera Ghazi Khan and Dera Ismail Khan, but "Thaḷī" in the former is the Multani dialect and "Ḍerāwālī " in the latter is the Thaḷī dialect.
	Thaḷī, Shahpori	Bhakkar District, Layyah District, Dera Ismail Khan District, Khyber Pukhtunkhwa, Tank District, Khyber Pukhtunkhwa, Derawal Nagar, Delhi, India	1.Thalochi and Thaḷochṛi in Bhakkar District. 2.Jaṭkī; Hindko or Hindki on the west of Indus River. 3.Thaḷī in Dera Ismail Khan District and Tank District	1.Named after the Thal Desert, a region bordered by the Indus River to the west and the Jhelum and Chenab Rivers to the east. 2.Hindko is classified as Lahnda language whose southern dialects are closer to Saraiki. Sometimes, in Mianwali, it is referred as Mianwali di Boli and has close link with Hindko.
	Sindhi-Saraiki	Northern part of Sindh including Kashmore District, Jacobabad District, Shikarpur District, Tando Muhammad Khan District, Tando Allahyar District, Sobho Khan Mastoi, Kamal Khan Mastoi, Thatta District, Sujawal, Dadu District and Ghotki District.	Sireli (of north)	Dialect of Saraiki which has some features of the Sindhi language. Sindhi Saraiki is also categorized as a dialect of Sindhi language. In the Interier Sindh, 40% of population speak Sindhi-Saraiki.
	Jhangvi	Jhang District, Faisalabad District, Gujrat District, Mandi Bahauddin, Chakwal, Hafizabad, Gujranwala District, Jangal Bar tract of Faisalabad District, Okara, pakpattan and all regions encompassing the former Montgomery District	Jhangochi, Jhangi	Jhangvi dialects actually be closer to the Saraiki language. It also includes Nissoani sub-dialect or local name of Jhangi spoken by a tribe, Nissoana, as of 1919 in northern parts of Jhang District. Another sub-dialect of Jhangi, Kacchī, is named for alluvial desert plain of Kacchi, southwest of Jhang town.Dialect of Jhangochi spoken by the pastoral tribes of the mentioned areas, such as the Kharals, Wattus, Johiyas, who used to rear cattle and sheep in the jungles, before irrigation of the region. It is also called Chenavari (Cināwaṛī or Cinhāwaṛī) due to the name of an area on the right bank of the Chenab River.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.37.36.15 (talk) 09:01, 10 October 2016‎ (UTC)

References

RfC: Is Saraiki language?

Should the Title of the Page be Saraiki language? Should Jhangvi dialect and Shah puri dialect be written as dialect of Saraiki language?39.37.28.177 (talk) 11:21, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

IP 39.37.28.177 I think you have neither read article in full with quoted sources nor Talk page and Achieve 1 & 2 which are filled with this discussion. Please follow the steps to get a complete in sight that Saraiki in it self is not a language but a dialect then how can it can have Jhangvi dialect and shahpuri dialect which are other dialects of Punjabi. We should not waste Wikipedia editors precious time Again & Again. ₯€₠€₯

• Move Saraiki dialect to Saraiki language. There's no substantive linguistics meaning to the distinction between language and dialect and any discussion (as above) about mutual intelligibility or shared vocabulary is pure original research. What we have to decide is which designation is more common in relevant reliable sources. A brief purview of Saraiki dialect#Status of language or dialect leaves the impression that there is an even split between the two, but a closer look reveals that "dialect" is the term used in Punjabi reference grammars and other books that don't specifically treat Saraiki. On the other hand, all the sources in the Bibliography that are about Saraiki, call it "Siraiki language" or "Saraiki language". On google books, there are seven times more sources that use "language"[10] than ones using "dialect" [11]. – Uanfala (talk) 08:37, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose Uanfala I have no words to express my emotions when someone attacks linguistics calling it unclear and then google search and provide same linguistic books as his proof. It is kind an insult to call linguists unclear. The hard work and headache linguist take to classify languages or dialects can not be radicalized. If you please again google search you will get over 50 different results which will show mutual intelligibility or shared vocabulary between Punjabi and Saraiki dialect. Linguistics is very clear with its levels.

1. Language = A group of mutually intelligible dialects.

2. Dialect = Linguists refers to a variety of a language that is a characteristic of a particular group of the language's speakers.Despite their differences, these varieties known as dialects are closely related and most often mutually intelligible. It has sub groupings if we mix language sciences with social sciences

a. Standard dialect = A dialect that is considered prestigious.

b. Non standard dialect= are based on social, political, cultural, or historical considerations

I. Sociolect = A dialect that is associated with a particular social class.

II. Ethnolect = a dialect that is associated with a particular ethnic group.

III. Regiolect = A dialect that is associated with a particular region.

3. Accent = A dialect is distinguished by its vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation (phonology, including prosody). Where a distinction can be made only in terms of pronunciation (including prosody, or just prosody itself), the term accent may be preferred over dialect

4. Other types of speech varieties = include jargons, which are characterized by differences in lexicon (vocabulary); slang; patois; pidgins; and argots.

5. Idiolect = The particular speech patterns used by an individual.

Saraiki is linguistically not a language, accent, idiolect,jargon slang, patois, pidgins, argots, accent. It does not represent any social class so not a Sociolect. Nor it is an Ethnolect because it is spoken by Jat or Arrain who also speak other dialects of Punjabi through out Punjab with few exceptions of non-Punjabi castes such as Balochi and Pathan who migrated to South Punjab and adopted Saraiki. [12]

Linguistics is very clear and as per majority linguistic sources mentioned through out talk page discussions over the years it as a southern dialect of Western Punjabi language. It falls in 2:b:III above i.e. Regiolect spoken specifically in southern districts of Punjab region. I oppose to move it to level 1 = Language. It should stand Saraiki dialect. Here on Wikipedia we can not accept pressures of some regional political powers. We Wikipedia have standards and we will stand by them no matter what pressure is created by repeated move requests / move review request/ Rfc / Dispute resolution mechanism. We have very decent knowledgeable people here to maintain those standards and WP policies. ₯€₠€₯ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.60.247.238 (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• • @₯€₠€₯: Here on wikipedia we don't do original research. You might want to familiarise yourself with WP:OR. And in choosing article titles, we don't try to take sides with one or another political point of view (see WP:POV). We simply go with whatever is the common term in English (see WP:COMMONNAME). Thanks. – Uanfala (talk) 14:19, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

    That was the point I was trying to make in the move request above, but it kind of fell on deaf ears... That said, this debate is now open in way to many places, with the ongoing entry at WP:MRV as well. We can't allow WP:FORUMSHOPPING to take place.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

    I'm not sure this is a valid argument. The common name is Saraiki (commonly, "X is a Saraiki speaker", not "X is a Saraiki language or dialect speaker"). Language or dialect is a classification that we need to make, for disambiguation purposes, based on what scholarly sources say - which is why the emphasis on linguists. --regentspark (comment) 15:01, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

    I agree with RegentsPark. @ Uanfala where I did WP:OR ? Read [13] with quoted sources. where I try to take sides with one or another political point of view ? what I said 'Here on Wikipedia we can not accept pressures/ WP:POV of some regional political powers. We Wikipedia have standards and we will stand by them no matter what pressure is created by repeated move requests / move review request/ Rfc / Dispute resolution mechanism. We have very decent knowledgeable people here to maintain those standards and WP policies.As per majority linguistic sources mentioned through out talk page discussions over the years it as a southern dialect of Western Punjabi language. Even if we go by (Non relevant ) common name logic then for ascertaining WP:COMMONNAME see these pro Saraiki online sources naming it as "Saraiki Boli" Here you go [14] [15] [16] . Boli means dialect [17] . I request @Andy M. Wang: being a non related editor for closure of this discussion by retaining Saraiki dialect as already this discussion has been open for periods and there is WP:NOCONSENSUS among users to move the article to Saraiki Language. ₯€₠€₯

    Social media websites aren't reliable sources. Your whole previous post was original research, but that's probably because of the misleading RfC question. I'm not claiming you're taking sides politically, I was just hinting that when choosing to call a language variety a "dialect" or a "language", whatever choice we make it will happen to coincide the view of one or another group: whether those who use the name as a tool for empowerment, emancipation or regional nationalism/separatism, or those who feel threatened by such an empowerment of a community they've hitherto seen as subordinate, or those whose sentiments of national unity or shared cultural heritage might be hurt. If I should read the aricle Dialect, then maybe you could have a look at the section Dialect § Dialect or language. – Uanfala (talk) 17:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

    RegentsPark, Saraiki would be a suitable name, but that's ambiguous by itself. We just go with the next best common name. If something is referred to as "Siraiki language" in the majority of reliable English-language sources, that's what the article's title should be. It's not our job to try to make any classifications. – Uanfala (talk) 17:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• Note The RfC question is misleading: the aim of this discussion isn't establishing whether something is a language or a dialect, it's to find the best title for the article. – Uanfala (talk) 17:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• Comments The aricle Dialect's lead with many quoted sources clearly mentions that mutual intelligibility is the most common criteria to distinguish between dialect and language. The subsection you mentioned is having statements with out any source. Only one line is supported by a refrence to Formalizing the Notion'Language. This is not available online for cross verification. Yes I agree social media sites are not reliable sources for quoting in an article. But I am not using them in the article, These are giving us an insight to a topic which is vague. These help full sources are just few examples. There are many. Out of three such sources I mentioned. One is a song on youtube which with a title, Mithri boli bol Saraiki (Sweet dialect-speak Saraiki) this song has eighteen hundred seventy views which proof even common Saraiki accepts the fact that it is a dialect. Second a Saraiki blog spot where author writes Main tain medi boli ( I and my dialect) and urges others to promote it so that it becomes a language. Third is a Saraiki face book page titled Saraiki boli with Saraiki people liking this page. When locals also accept it a dialect it further cements linguistic classifications validity. ₯€₠€₯

RfC: Should the pages Multani dialect, Derawali dialect. Riasti dialect and Thalochi dialect be merged in Saraiki language?

Should the Title of the Page be Saraiki language? Should Multani dialect, Derawali dialect. Riasti dialect and Thalochi dialect be merged in this page Saraiki language?39.37.28.177 (talk) 11:35, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

IP 39.37.28.177 I think you have neither read article in full with quoted sources nor Talk page and Achieve 1 & 2 which are filled with this discussion. Please follow the steps to get a complete in sight that Saraiki in it self is not a language but a dialect. We should not waste Wikipedia editors precious time Again & Again.

₯€₠€₯ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.50.91.225 (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Saraiki

The filing party (the editor who opened this request) will add the basic details for this dispute below.

Editors involved in this dispute

1. 182.186.61.74 (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. Smsarmad (talk · contribs)
3. Paine Ellsworth (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. Saraiki dialect (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
2. Saraiki language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

• Talk:Saraiki dialect#I disagree with this edit

Issues to be mediated

What is this dispute about? What sections, sentences, or issues in the article(s) can you not agree on? If you are the editor who opened this request, list these issues to be mediated under "Primary issues". If you did not open this request, you can add additional issues to be mediated under "Additional issues". The issues to be mediated would be properly agreed upon later, if this request for mediation is accepted.

Primary issues (added by the filing party)

1. Should the Title of the Page be Saraiki language? Should Multani dialect, Derawali dialect. Riasti dialect and Thalochi dialect be merged in this page Saraiki language?
2. Should Jhangvi dialect and Shah puri dialect be written as dialect of Saraiki language?

Additional issues (added by other parties)

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

If you are a named party, please sign below and indicate whether you agree or refuse to participate in mediation. Remember that all editors are obliged to resolve disputes about content through discussion, mediation, or other similar means. If you do not wish to participate in mediation, you must arrange another form of dispute resolution. Comments and questions should be made underneath the numbered list below, to avoid confusion.

1. Agree. 182.186.61.74 (talk) 08:00, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

1. Disagree. Not an appropriate request for this noticeboard. There has already been an open WP:RFC which is a consensus process. ₯€₠€₯ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.60.247.238 (talk) 15:44, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

This section should only be edited by a mediator. The Mediation Committee's representative will indicate in due course whether the request is accepted (meaning a mediator will be assigned) or rejected (meaning you will have to try a different type of dispute resolution). If the mediator asks you a question in this section, you may edit here.

182.186.61.74 (talk) 08:02, 11 October 2016 (UTC)