Talk:Prekmurje Slovene

"What happen"?

I'm translating this article to German to blue some redlinks, but when I came to last paragraph in "linguistic features" I was just perplexed. All this make like no sense to me and doesn't seem to be very English. Can somebody do something about that? --Kazu89 ^ノート 16:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Also the section "The question of the Wends and Prekmurian language", a sub-section of "history" is written in a nearly completely ununderstandable English... --Kazu89 ^ノート 21:59, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Need to the help, primarily for the sake of the complex linguistic concepts. Furthermore i pray the administrators for the move: the Prekmurian dialect so be it Prekmurian language, considering have standard. Doncsecz 11:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, Ákos, you can try and find another speaker of Hungarian, Slowene, or Croatian, since you seem to speak those languages somewhat better. On this page you find people that can help you ;-)

After your article is finished, we can discuss the lemma. --Kazu89 ^ノート 14:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Doncsecz 14:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I might have time for doing a cleanup in a few days - I'll bear it in mind. Don't let that put anyone else off from having a go in the meantime though! Knepflerle (talk) 22:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Moving the article

I have to disagree with the proposal to move the article from Prekmurian dialect to Prekmurian language. The argument for the move is that it has a standard. This is only partially true. It would be more appropriate to say that it had a standard, since it fell into disuse after 1945 (and it had been decaying since 1919). Even if we pass over that, I don't think having a literary standard is enough to qualify a dialect as a language. Viator slovenicus (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Viator! The Prekmurians make sense the old standard, considering this is slavic language, accordingly notable bilateral intelligibility. Perkmurian Familys apply the old prayer-books. Doncsecz 15:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, as I already mentioned to Ákos Doncsecz, I support the system used on the Italian-language Wikipedia, which is to say that linguistic variants which are assigned an ISO 693 code are saved as languages and the rest isn't. But in contrast to it.wiki, I wouldn't force the editors to use the word dialect for non-ISO 693 tongues for several reasons. Instead the proper name (e.g. "Prekmurian" e basta) should be sufficient. --Kazu89 ^ノート 20:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Existence or otherwise of literary standards is not how we make the decision - we base the titles on usage in reliable sources, per WP:NAME. A brief survey of the (English-language) academic literature would be in order first. Knepflerle (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

My other reference, that the speakers of the Prekmurian so-called: prekmurski jezik, prekmurščina. The writer Feri Lainšček and others also act for this judgement. His reference the Küzmics Gospels, the great literature, ABC books, grammar-books, dictionarys, in addition in the schools of Slovenska krajina (Prekmurje and Vendvidék) in the 17th century-1920 was the prekmurian the in use language. Doncsecz 07:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Vilko Novak linguist, ethnologist and historian was likewise accept to the existence of the prekmurian language. In 1988 compile a dictionary of the old prekmurian standard literary language (Slovar stare knjižne prekmurščine). Doncsecz 08:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The Hymn Book of Martjanci

Could somebody please provide the original title of the Hymn Book of Martjanci? I think it'll help me with my translation. Thanks. --Kazu89 ^ノート 15:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The original title in slovene: Stara martjanska pesmarica, or Martjanska pesmarica, in hungarian Régi martyánci énekeskönyv. Also Vilko Novak was analyse the hymn-book, what is more give forth with the originally text. Here the issue, the publisher is Založba ZRC. Doncsecz 16:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Hvala lepa again. The cover you linked me is from a reprint, isn't it? And why is the title not written in Hungarian script, such as sztara martjanszka peszmarica? It's a Prekmurian book after all, no?

I'm sorry, but the literature stuff is still a bit confusing (for me) --Kazu89 ^ノート 16:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I can't tell. The ABC book of Miklós Küzmics here and there ABC Kni'zicza, or ABC knižica, alike the gospel Szvéti evangyeliomi, Sveti evangjeliomi. The Old prekmurian was use to the hungarian orthography. Doncsecz 16:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Prekmurian dialect move Prekmurian language

I reprise: so be it the name of the article: Prekmurian language. Allude to the preceding sources (explorations of Vilko Novak and Ágoston Pável, the Küzmics Gospels, ABC-books, Grammars, at is were 300 year-long education), together with the article Burgenland Croatian language. This is as well a autonomous croatian dialect, have literary standard. Besides the burgenlandian was act upon to the prekmurian. Albeit other the present prekmurian, but it is here this text in old hungarian standard. Slightly other, but understandable. The present livonian language likewise yet differing, like the old livonian, inasmuch as the latvian impact, but the livonian was none latvian dialect. Doncsecz 08:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Please use WP:RM. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The prekmurian is a regional language

Viator, you wrote this: Prekmurian is sometimes considered a regional language, although it does not possess the requirements to qualify as regional language according to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, nor is it recognized as such either by the Slovenian state or by the vast majority of its speakers. It is however one of the few Slovene dialects on Slovenian soil which is still spoken in an almost integral way by all strata of the local population.

Reverse: the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages is apply to the prekmurian: the prekmurian language have own territory and numerous speakers. The speakers partly therefore not define to so that language, as the Prekmurje is a high and dry region, the people mostly unlearnt. A number of persons be a stranger to the prekmurian holy gospels and books.
The two Küzmics, Klekl, Szakovics, Pável, and today Feri Lainšček and others pronounce to language.
In the communistic Yugoslavia was underrate the prekmurian, as his literature decisively is sacralian, and few writer Klek and Szakovics was hate to the comunism. Few socialistic and comunistic egg-head was worked againts the prekmurian press and impression of books, so also Miško Kranjec, where was not immaculate preson. Klekl was renew to the standard prekmurian language in the Novine and the new books, as know, why language the prekmurian. Doncsecz^znánje 11:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree that there was a possibility for Prekmurian to develop into a regional language, but - as you note yourself - this trend started declining already in the 1930s, and almost completely disappeared after 1945. Nowadays, Prekmurian cannot be regarded as a regional language. There is no serious political or cultural movement claiming that, nor is it consistently used in any public sphere (except for sporadic uses). It had a standard, but it fell into disuse (and as far as I know, people who are currently writing in Prekmurian, like Lainšček, are not using the same standard as the pre-1930s one). In short: nowadays, it can neither sociologically nor politically be regarded as a regional language. Viator slovenicus (talk) 16:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the public use of the standard prekmurian was stop, but the standard language, which József Klekl devise, today alike usable, as in the Novine the words today as such in the Goričko dialect. As spoken language the prekmurian was not ceased, and not come down all the same, that the slovene standard language was to prepossess. Alsó Lainšček he could, that apply the standard language of Klekl and Szakovics, but it have no mastery, because not wrought the new standard prekmurian language, but the olda standard (see: Slovar stare knjižne prekmurščine). Doncsecz^znánje 17:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

What Klekl was to procreate is the neologisem. As the language of the Novine, Kalendar Srca Jezušovoga, Marijin ograček was far idiomatic standard language, lo a example: V nedelo, 28. septembra, po velkoj meši se je zbrala velka vnožina – prek 2000 lüdi – pri cerkvi v Črenšovcaj... Also today alike sound to this text. Doncsecz^znánje 18:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I add to, that into the Prekmurje and in Hungary more and more speaking of the prekmurian, and non-prekmurian persons so ponder to, that the prekmurian alike second slovene language-norm, likewise the resian language in Italy. Not but to be tipify slovene language, yet the croatian language dispose foure language-norm (kajkavian, štokavian, Burgenland and čakavian languages). Doncsecz^talk 11:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggested move to "Prekmurje Slovenian"

English-language scholarship does not typically form the adjective "Prekmurian" (cf. http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/5268/1/2Greenberg.pdf). I suggest moving this page to "Prekmurje Slovenian" (or "Prekmurje Slovene", it doesn't matter to me) to avoid the language/dialect debate. Doremo (talk) 11:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

In the standard english not yet normalized size, as the searchers or Prekmurje, or Prekmurian language apply. Marko Jesenšek apply prekmurian language name. Inasmuch as in the english exist to montenegrin, kajkavian, čakavian, štokavian, etc. names, accordingly acceptable the prekmurian language name. Doncsecz^talk 13:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Prekmurje dialect or language 303 page (1, 2), Prekmurian language and dialect 3920 page (1, 2). Doncsecz^talk 14:02, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

My colleguae and administrator of the hungarian wikipedia is perfect in english, his reaction, that the name prekmurian language, prekmurian dialect suit to in the english, grammatically is acceptable. Besides: i am slovene, i and others slovenes claim the use, of the name prekmurian. Before long get to presentation the prekmurian to the SIL and with name prekmurian. Doncsecz^talk 09:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Prekmurje, not "Prekmurian"

English forms adjectives from place names for regions in various ways. Some are made with -(ia)n (e.g., Bavaria > Bavarian), some with -(n)ese (e.g., Aceh > Acehnese), and some are idiosyncratic (e.g., Wales > Welsh), among other patterns. Very many are formed through conversion, or zero derivation (e.g., Vorarlberg > Vorarlberg; “the Vorarlberg economy”). Prekmurje is one of these last examples; quality English scholarship tends to use “Prekmurje” as the adjective form. Examples include Greenberg (one of the best-known English scholars working on Slovenian) (“Prekmurje grammar”, “Prekmurje Slovene grammar”, “Prekmurje dialect of Slovene” http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/5268/1/2Greenberg.pdf), as well as research by Slovenian scholars – for example, Mihaela Koletnik (“the Prekmurje dialect” http://www.zrc-sazu.si/isjfr/jz6.htm), Tjaša Jakop (“Prekmurje dialects” http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/c/Dial/Ponovne_SLA/01_PDF_prispevki/Jakop_2006a.pdf), Matjaž Klemenčič (“the Prekmurje dialect”, “Prekmurje Slovenes” http://www2.arnes.si/~ljinv16/RIG/RIG%2055/Klemencic.pdf), and others. Good English scholarship (both native and nonnative)refers to the “Prekmurje dialect”. User Doncsecz has been unilaterally promoting the adjective form “Prekmurian”, often citing an abstract by Marko Jesenšek. However, other material by Jesenšek also contains the more typical form “Prekmurje” (“Prekmurje newspapers”, “Prekmurje dialect” http://www.centerslo.net/files/File/simpozij/sim22/Jesensek.pdf). (In general, it is difficult to rely on such material in any case, because it may reflect the effort of a nonnative translator rather than the author.) I conclude that there is no justifiable reason to use the form “Prekmurian” – not on the basis of English word-formation patterns, not on the basis of native English scholarship, and not on the basis of nonnative English scholarship. Doremo (talk) 05:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I accent, that Jesenšek and Greenberg also adopt the Prekmurian language, as grammatically admissible. Alike the magyar nyelv is hungarian language, or kajkavskohrvatski jezik is kajkavian croatian language. Doncsecz^talk 10:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

If user Doncsecz can convince the Slovenian and global scholary community that their standard terminology is wrong, then this issue can be reconsidered. Until then, regrettably, I will simply consider his changes malicious and undo them. Doremo (talk) 12:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, yes. I am the wrong, the vernacular speaker! None unkid the revesion, even more you the wrong and unkid, as keep at it force to the Prekmurje language name. Doncsecz^talk 16:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

This is becoming tedious. The following is a small selection of print sources using standard terminology on this topic:

English printed sources (not from Slovenia):

http://books.google.si/books?id=sgxxLQ9JUZoC&pg=PA27&dq=prekmurje+dialect&lr=&cd=15#v=onepage&q=prekmurje%20dialect&f=false (table at bottom of page 27)

http://books.google.si/books?id=NJ9iAAAAMAAJ&q=prekmurje+dialect&dq=prekmurje+dialect&lr=&cd=14 (note: Lenček was also a highly respected scholar in this field)

http://books.google.si/books?id=4KNiAAAAMAAJ&q=prekmurje+dialect&dq=prekmurje+dialect&lr=&cd=29 (note: another work by Greenberg, a leading scholar in this field)

http://books.google.si/books?id=c9ZmAAAAMAAJ&q=%22prekmurje+dialect%22&dq=%22prekmurje+dialect%22&lr=&cd=20 (note: another work by Greenberg)

English printed sources (from Slovenia):

http://books.google.si/books?id=pJQYAQAAIAAJ&q=prekmurje+dialect&dq=prekmurje+dialect&lr=&cd=2

http://books.google.si/books?id=GI6AAAAAMAAJ&q=prekmurje+dialect&dq=prekmurje+dialect&lr=&cd=4

http://books.google.si/books?id=263lAAAAMAAJ&q=prekmurje+dialect&dq=prekmurje+dialect&lr=&cd=9

Doremo (talk) 07:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, yes, but Greenberg wrote first tractate in 1989. Thence was come in the also prekmurian idiom. Doremo, you was come one pat, when brew to the petition to the SIL. As yet was not problems at the prekmurian idiom, now you make negative procedure. Doncsecz^talk 09:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Viator Slovenicus is erudite up i, but Viator the prekmurian idiom support. Doncsecz^talk 12:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I personally find Prekmurian a much better option, since it follows the usual patterns of English adjective formation. However, as we know, no original research is allowed on wp. If there really isn't any reference to the term Prekmurian in English-language sources (I would be quite surprised if this were really so), then I see no other option than to follow the actually used terminology. However, this would mean a substantial editing effort in many articles: I thus strongly advise that the change be made only if there is somebody prepared to make all the necessary edits for a consistent usage. In my view, an "original" terminology is still much better than an inconsistent and chaotic one. Best, Viator slovenicus (talk) 13:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, Viator. There really are few or no legitimate (i.e., native-English or quality-edited English scholarly) sources using Prekmurian (or Rabian or Burgenlandian or similar words that user Doncsecz has been using. The few examples I can find in print are poor quality (linguistically, I mean -- not necessarily scholarship) and obviously non-native, like this: http://books.google.si/books?id=T9LUAAAAMAAJ&q=prekmurian&dq=prekmurian&cd=2 (The quality of Doncsecz's postings should also clearly indicate something about his competence to edit other people's English. I appreciate that he contributes to WP, but editing English is not where he should focus his efforts.) Prekmurian follows English word-formation patterns only in a superficial or mechanical manner, like Japanian, Germanian, or Turkian. (Actually, if it did exist, it would probably be Prekmurjian [like Fijian, a real word] -- there's no justification for deleting the j). Most English -ian forms are based on -ia nouns (Bavaria, -ian) or underlying -ia nouns (Italy [Italia], -ian), but Prekmuria doesn't exist either. I'm prepared to make all the necessary edits for consistent usage (as I did with Jacob on 25 Feb and frequented on 24 January) and will continue my cleanup. Doremo (talk) 15:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't care what abouth other languages, as this is prekmurian language, not german, not japan, not african. There is not yet official denomination and cut is short the persistent meticulosity, as this is my mother tongue, also i was design to this article and just is my claim! Doncsecz^talk 16:04, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

It should be remembered that: 1) Creating a page does not give an editor veto rights over others' edits; 2) Living in a particular place does not give an editor veto rights on articles about that place; 3) Being a member of a particular group does not make an editor an exclusive representative of that group. I think that the third opinion below is fair and will follow TransporterMan's suggestion that "Prekmurian" (although I consider it unreliable) appear in the lede. Doremo (talk) 05:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Doremo, you not realize to, that you force to the Prekmurje language name, but also Marc Greenberg support the Prekmurian name. I was separate ask in the petition, that the SIL register to this language with name PREKMURIAN. You speak about the legals of the users, but the Prekmurians have the right to chip on configuration of name his language in other foreign language. Doncsecz^talk 07:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

‘’Prekmurian’’ simply does not conform to normal English usage as a modifier. I will continue to modify the articles in line with good English practice. In addition to the good usage in Lenček, Greenberg, and others cited above, please consider the following additional printed sources by reputable scholars and presses with native English editors.

Anna Fenyvesi (linguistics, “Prekmurje Slovenes”, John Benjamins) http://books.google.si/books?id=y3JYwHGYn7MC&pg=PA216&dq=%22prekmurje+slovenes+are%22&lr=&cd=1#v=onepage&q=%22prekmurje%20slovenes%20are%22&f=false

Stephan Thernstrom (ethnology, “Prekmurje Slovenes”, Harvard University Press) http://books.google.si/books?id=npQ6Hd3G4kgC&pg=PA939&dq=prekmurje+ethnic&lr=&cd=15#v=onepage&q=%22prekmurje%20slovenes%22&f=false

Han Steenwijk (linguistics, “the Prekmurje examples”, Rodopi) http://books.google.si/books?id=QUcl49UwF7cC&pg=PA401&dq=%22the+Prekmurje+examples+%22&lr=&cd=1#v=onepage&q=%22the%20Prekmurje%20examples%20%22&f=false

Donald F. Reindl (linguistics, “the Prekmurje dialect”, Brockmeyer Verlag) http://books.google.si/books?id=vdaHGTDi9s8C&pg=PA43&dq=the+Prekmurje+dialects&lr=&cd=6#v=onepage&q=prekmurje&f=false

Yaron Matras et al. (linguistics, “the Prekmurje dialect”, Benjamins) http://books.google.si/books?lr=&cd=1&id=kKKBAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22related+to+the+prekmurje+dialect%22&q=%22prekmurje+dialect%22

Viktor Elšik & Yaron Matras (linguistics, “Prekmurje Romani”, Mouton de Gruyter) http://books.google.si/books?id=nZu4YK8MnIUC&pg=PA289&dq=%22prekmurje+romani%22&lr=&cd=1#v=onepage&q=%22prekmurje%20romani%22&f=false

Charles Bidwell (linguistics, “the Prekmurje Slovenian dialect”, University of Pittsburgh) http://books.google.si/books?id=jggaAQAAIAAJ&q=%22the+prekmurje%22&dq=%22the+prekmurje%22&lr=&cd=156

Steve Fallon (travel guide; “the Prekmurje plain”, Lonely Planet): http://books.google.si/books?id=Pb_eXmEyPvwC&pg=PA264&dq=%22Prekmurje+plain%22&cd=3#v=onepage&q=%22Prekmurje%20plain%22&f=false

James Minahan (historical dictionary, “the Prekmurje region”, Greenwood): http://books.google.si/books?id=RSxt-JB-PDkC&pg=PA59&dq=%22Prekmurje+region%22&lr=&cd=20#v=onepage&q=%22Prekmurje%20region%22&f=false

Doremo (talk) 11:30, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

You now bring geographic names, when this is for a long while is received (Prekmurje region)?! Cut it short! I said, Greenberg accept the name prekmurian, as is adequate. If the SIL accept the prekmurian name, i hope so you and his prekmurje language-t disappear. Doncsecz^talk 12:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The following WP principles (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Neutral_point_of_view) may be helpful in resolving this discussion:

• If your viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts; ("Prekmurje" as a modifer is easily substantiated by the references above)
• If your viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents; (Greenberg does not use "Prekmurian" in any published source and Jesenšek's sources vary between terms)
• If your viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, then — whether it's true or not, whether you can prove it or not — it doesn't belong in Wikipedia, except perhaps in some ancillary article. Wikipedia is not the place for original research.

Doremo (talk) 05:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You wherefore not grant, that for the present not yet official name. I not be hostile to the letterhead of the Prekmurje language, if you wrote aside, and not reverse. The name prekmurian grammatically is adequate, correct, usable. The tractates of Greenberg was not institutionalize the Prekmurje dialect name, only wa give a alternative name. Got it? The SIL international in Dallas then standardisate either names. Doncsecz^talk 08:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Doncsecz, please join the conversation by responding to the WP principles above (majority / significant minority / extremely small minority) and please provide some quality English sources using your preferred form. Doremo (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I have reverted my most recent edits because I do not wish to "edit war." I would like to solve this issue by relying on quality English sources and established usage. Doremo (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Doncsecz, you are continuing to degrade this and other articles by changing good English to broken English (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prekmurian_dialect&diff=prev&oldid=348946058). Please join this conversation by 1) providing some quality English sources using "Prekmurian" (you have offered absolutely nothing so far) and 2) stating why "Prekmurian" is justified as either a majority or significant minority usage in literature on this topic. Doremo (talk) 07:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Response to Third Opinion Request:

Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Prekmurje Slovene and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here.

Opinion: It appears to me that the weight of reliable sources favors Prekmurje and that is what ought to be used, but if the source relied upon by Doncsecz can be considered reliable then that form should at least be mentioned in the lede. Ultimately the question is what's best for Wikipedia, especially as the title of an article, and what's best is what an English-speaking ordinary Internet user would type into the search blank. That would be the most common usage, which is Prekmurje, not Prekmurian or Prekmurjian which would in most cases be a guess.

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

TransporterMan! Marc L. Greenberg already see the article and i ken Greenberg. Greenberg so far not take objection to the name Prekmurian. Doncsecz^talk 08:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Addendum re Third Opinion: I note that someone relisted this dispute at the Third Opinion Project. Another volunteer at the project (not me) removed the listing because I had already given a third opinion. While it is possible to relist a new dispute about an article, it is not possible to get another opinion on the same dispute. If the original third opinion does not settle the dispute, you need to move on to some other form of dispute resolution such as a request for comments (RfC), a posting at an appropriate Wikipedia project (perhaps WikiProject Languages), or taking it to the Mediation Cabal. An RfC request or project posting can often be the most helpful because it invites other editors into the discussion which will often help to reach consensus rather than just settle the matter between the two or three editors currently involved in the dispute. Be careful, however, not to get involved in improper canvassing, either directly or by forum shopping. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 19:58, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Prekmurian/Prekmurje as modifier

Requesting comment on the appropriateness of Prekmurian/Prekmurje as a modifier. Doremo (talk) 04:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Summary and comment. I have posted a neutral request for comment on this topic and look forward to other editors’ comments. The following comment is not neutral because it reflects my position. On 28 February 2010 (when my edit history on this topic begins) I appear to have wandered into an area important to user Doncsecz: Prekmurje and Prekmurje Slovenian. There is an established tradition of English-language scholarship on this topic (see “Suggested move” and “Prekmurje, not ‘Prekmurian’” above) and scholarly literature typically refers to “the Prekmurje dialect,” “Prekmurje Slovenes,” and so on (see linked references above). Many of the articles I have edited on this topic had been tagged for copy editing for quite a long time due to their very poor language quality. Unfortunately, it has been impossible to move forward on copy editing these articles due to reversion by Doncsecz (in addition to reverting “Prekmurje” to “Prekmurian” he has repeatedly and unhelpfully reverted other good copy-editing changes to broken English; e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prekmurian_dialect&diff=prev&oldid=346878113). Because Doncsecz’s activity appears to be focused on “Prekmurian” (a word form that I can find in no well-edited scholarly literature on this topic, of which there is plenty), I request that any comments focus on this issue in particular. Doremo (talk) 07:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

If the wikipedia await, that the SIL what adjudicate, but now brew the petition. Greenberg simply and solely was he didn't mean to beget new name, accordingly wrote the Prekmurje dialect name. The first erudite works of the croatian variants in english also wrote, that: Kajkavski croatian dialect, Štokavski croatian dialect, etc. Later was evolve the Kajkavian, Štokavian, Čakavian idioms. Prekmürščina have not yet official name, accordingly the Greenberg's name Prekmurje dialect neither official. Doncsecz^talk 09:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

As an English speaker who does not know Croatian, it is certainly easier for me to read Prekmurian, so that would be my preference. While we do consider WP:Common name, we also go by WP:English. The two conventions would appear to be at odds in this case, so argument could be made for either. kwami (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:Common name and WP:English are not at odds on this issue. For the first principle, "Prekmurje dialect" follows "the usage of reliable sources" as cited above. For the second principle, the choice would be between the English name and prekmurščina (the Slovenian name), not between two English names. The principle WP:English also recommends following "general usage in English reliable sources." Doremo (talk) 07:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Irrespectively of the Greenberg's tractates and others the SIL likely that adopt to the prekmurian name. Doncsecz^talk 10:34, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Here a new article in english from Marko Jesenšek The Slovene Language in the Alpine and Pannonian Language Area. The History of the Slovene Language], where apply the prekmurian language name. Doncsecz^talk 11:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Needless and blunt stretch: not formal the Prekmurje or Prekmurian name.

1. Wherefore Resian the language of Résia?
2. The Prekmurians also much love the Prekmurian name and not the Prekmurje
3. Prekmurian correct grammatical idiom
4. Marko Jesenšek the rector of Maribor University evenly use the Prekmurje, Prekmurian
5. The meta-wiki also accept to the Prekmurian and hopefully make Prekmurian wikipedia. Doncsecz^talk 07:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Excessive examples

Hello. Please read:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary

Best regards, --R.Schuster (talk) 10:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

But this is not simply words, as the Lord's Prayer is coherent text. Doncsecz^talk 14:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Besides, you was defecate my image, for ex. the Grave of Vince Talabér. Doncsecz^talk 15:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia is not a bible either. And not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files.

Please read the basic wikipedia guidelines, starting from here:

• Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
• Wikipedia:How to write a great article

--R.Schuster (talk) 09:18, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The examples exemplify the language. Few articles of languages in wikipedia be full of similar examples. Doncsecz^talk 09:24, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Wends language

Wends was a Slavic language: Prekmurian language. Vandalic was a Germanic language.--95.250.48.36 (talk) 17:52, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

My God! The article's theme not this, that the Prekmurian is the Vandalic language, but the old name of the Prekmurian language is the Vandalic (lingua vandalica, vandalski jezik). Doncsecz^talk 17:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

The old name of the Prekmurian is Vandalic language it's ok, but the Prekmurian language is the Wends language.--95.250.48.36 (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)