Jump to content

Talk:Malacca

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BDD (talk | contribs) at 18:51, 10 December 2012 ({{oldmove}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconSoutheast Asia B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia articles
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMalaysia B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malaysia and Malaysia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia articles
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Malaysian English

Who set sail?

The European History section begins, "In April 1511, he set sail from Goa to Malacca..." What should it say? --Jere7my 23:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From looking at older edits, it would appear that "he" is {Portuguese viceroy of India, Afonso de Albuquerque and it became a strategic base for Portuguese expansion in the East Indies}. I know very little about this area that I will not add this information back in, but it would be nice if this was expanded upon. Autkm 01:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

correct. I've updated it accordingly. Merbabu 02:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

The second smallest state? Probably population-wise. Check out the Wikipedia page about Penang.

is there anything we can write about malacca sugar (gula melaka)?

Native name

Reverting back to just Melaka, not Melaka, Negeri Bersejarah. I would go for the formal name under the state constitution or common accepted ones (read - postal address). If disagree, then would have to change the name of Bandar Melaka to Melaka Bandaraya Bersejarah and Johor Bahru to Johor Bahru Bandaraya Selatan, or Kuala Lumpur Garden City of Lights, just for the sake of being fair. :)

--Bukhrin 20:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

Can someone add climate section in the article, information can be obtained from NEA Singapore - http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=1106 For formatting, we can use the one from Kuala Lumpur or Penang. Sorry, I tried to do it myself, but failed miserably. Any taker? Mhching 13:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried clicking into the link given but all that appeared on the page was 'Article not found!'. BejinhanTalk 12:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Design?

There is an awkward space made by a column of pictures. Can someone fix this?Miller4math (talk) 23:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC) . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.39.115 (talk) 21:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article name (Malacca vs Melaka)

From my understanding, naming conversion of locations is defined by consensus in Wikipedia, not by governments. Hellboy2hell, having renamed the article from "Malacca" to its Malay counterpart, "Melaka", justified doing so based on Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, a government body responsible for the use of Malay in the country. I do not support this move.

This is not merely for the reinstatement of the English translation but more of practical reasoning owing to the limited flexibility of the Malay name in English writing. "Melaka" conflicts with the "Malacca" as a demonym (Malaccan). "Melaka", being Malay in origin, has no known way of being used as a demonym, hence the need to use "Malaccan" instead when required to write a demonym. However, spelling differences between the two means confusion in spelling may arise and compromises consistency in writing. I believe a discussion is need to address this. - Two hundred percent (talk) 08:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Melaka may also be used as a demonym (as Melakan). But the use of the English spelling still looks justified given both the New Straits Times and The Star continue to use "Malacca" as well. Btw, thanks for the move. - Two hundred percent (talk) 12:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the debate. Historically, Malacca is the English given name replacing the native Malay name; Melaka. The state government is still campaigning for the use of the native name, Melaka. This will take time. This dilemma is similar to the same campaign in India to use the native name, Mumbai and not the English given name; Bombay.Shahrulazwad (talk) 07:50, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malacca and Malacca City

I think some of the article should be placed in the wiki article Malacca City instead of here?--Rochelimit (talk) 08:09, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which parts? CMD (talk) 10:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

melaka name history and conquered by alfonso de alburquerque

The name melaka came from a tree, when sultan mahmud shah sit under the tree he saw a small animal kicking a dog so he decide to name the place melaka.. melaka was conquered by alfonso de alburquerque... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.141.194.84 (talk) 09:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 18:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

– In WP:COMMONNAME says that to determine several alternative names, it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, major scientific bodies and journals. Instances on the usage of 'Melaka' by some major organizations and scholars can be observed here:-

-Andayas (A History of Malaysia)
-Barnard (Contesting Malayness)
-Milner (The Malays)
-Khoo Kay Kim (Malay society)
-Sneddon (The Indonesian language)
-Ooi Keat Gin ( Southeast Asia)
-Benjamin (Tribal Communities in the Malay World)
-Wade's Ming Shilu
-Other publications of ISEAS
-Other publications from Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Malaysian Branch. سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 13:26, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Either way this article should have the Malaysian English template, so I've added it... but I'm not sure that would prove/override the proposal (I simply haven't had time to look). I also added Malacca to List of English exonyms, whichever way the RM goes. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:42, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "Melaka" is the Malay name for the city, made into an English WP:Official name that is used and promoted by the Malaysian government. All the linked source examples given above, except for the Lonely Planet, are Malaysian government and government sponsored sources, a UNESCO source and the Factbook which both use official names, and companies that have to do extensive work in Malaysia. "Malacca" is the traditional English name, and the name which is still most commonly used in English sources. Examples of sources that use Malacca are the BBC, the New York Times, Aljazeera, The Australian, and even the Malaysian New Straits Times and The Star. A google books ngram shows that "Malacca" is historically completely dominant, and even now is used three times more. In somewhat analogous cases (although obviously they're not identical), an August 2012 move request at Burma to the official name of Myanmar was closed with the result being a consensus for Burma, an early 2011 move for the city of Bangalore to be renamed to the official "Bengaluru" was almost unanimously opposed, and Cote D'Ivoire was moved to the unofficial Ivory Coast in mid-2012. The clear consensus on all of these was that an older English name that is still used is preferable to a pushed official name. CMD (talk) 00:30, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What i can say, your argument is weak but surprisingly accepted by few wise men here. If the WP:Commonname should be based on google books ngram, then Bombay and Madras names should'nt be changed to "Mumbai" and "Chennai" respectively in the first place. As google books ngram shows, "Bombay" and "Madras" are supposed to be "historically completely dominant". I believe that it is wrong to name a place based on its "historically completely dominant" name. Whether you like it or not, common name should take into account the official English name as promoted by the local government as well as other major international organizations, media and academic writings by experts of the subject. NYtimes and The Australian are obviously isolated cases and not major international medias. Although there are some instances of "Malacca" used by BBC, it also used "Melaka" here and here. Similar case for Aljazeera that also used Melaka here. As for The Star and Nst, please see explanation from In ictu oculi below. There are also abundant use of "Melaka" in other major English dailies in Malaysia; The Sun, The Malay Mail, The Edge, Sarawak Tribune, Borneo Post, Daily Express and The NST.OG|سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 12:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
According to 2010 census, the national language (Malay) speaking population of Melaka city district outnumbered these so called "English-speaking" minority, neither these majority think the name Malacca name as "traditional" to their town.OG|سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orhanghazi, yes I get that. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:UE (use English)/WP:OFFICIALNAMES. Note the evidence of English usage provided by User:Chipmunkdavis and User:In ictu oculi above. —  AjaxSmack  03:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Malacca is still its common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The fact that even Malaysian English-language news sources use Malacca is fairly compelling. It's regrettable but it's required by WP:UCN. In summary, per CMD. --Mkativerata (talk) 09:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - A quick check through Google Scholar for the use of "Malacca" and "Melaka" shows that the former is cited about 20,000 results higher than the latter. Omitting the term "strait" and "straits" from the results shows "Malacca" is 10,000 results higher than "Melaka", possibly indicating a more commonly used term of Malacca in English-language academic papers. Also, to say certain news sources ie NYTimes and The Australian are isolated cases and not major international media automatically shots down any credibility to use The Star, the NST, the Borneo Post, the Sun, the Malay Mail etc to support that same argument as they too are isolated cases catering mostly to the Malaysian audience. Admittedly searching news usage through Google might not be reliable as pointed out in WP:GOOGLETEST, and these major news sources use both terms interchangeably. — Blue。 01:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly, "Bombay" outnumbered "Mumbai" by about 300,000 and "Madras" outnumbere "Chennai" by 270,000 in google scholar, we cant name an article based on google search. My original sources are not of "certain news sources", but its official usage (Melaka State Gov and Tourism Malaysia) as well as usage in some major international organizations (UNESCO and CIA), major international publications (Lonely Planet, Google Maps), major regional airlines and banks, major academic sources and major encyclopedias (Britannica, Malaysia) that are obviously not intended exclusively for Malaysian audience. Please check again who brought about "certain news sources" here as i was merely replying his comment.OG|سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 05:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indian place names are a different case. In favour of renaming our articles on Bombay, Madras and Calcutta, it was argued (not persuasively in my opinion) that, as English is an official language of India, the current official Indian version of the names should be used on English Wikipedia. This is not the case for Malaysia, where English, although widely used, is not strictly an official language. It's highly controversial even for India (given the political reasons for the renaming, the fact that many even in India oppose it, and the fact that many, if not most, Indians continue to use the old names). -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The point is, google search is not the only source you must rely on, any people can write any stuff and upload any books and articles, which later appeared in google search results. International recognition from major English language sources are more vital, as outlined in WP:Commonname. And this is the case for Mumbai, Chennai and Melaka.OG|سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 13:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, but you haven't proved that it is the case for Malacca. A search on the BBC website, for instance, produces 76 hits for Malacca and only 10 for Melaka. The BBC is certainly a "major English language source". And it's not alone, as outlined above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
a bit surprised to read the claim that i haven't proved anything when i have listed up major international organizations (UNESCO and CIA), encyclopedias, dictionaries (Oxford and Merriam-Webster), scholarly sources and even Map (google Maps). And what you wise men able to produce are some google searches and news sources that only contradicting themselves by having both spellings!. LOLOG|سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 03:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The current Mayor of Melaka repeatedly used "Malacca" in his English written speech in the official Melaka City Council website: [1]. I think this shows that this RM may be still too early as what User:In ictu oculi suggested above. ќמшמφטтгמtorque 02:04, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Quite agree with your concern that this RM is a bit early. But we must be realistic, even if we wait for another one thousand years, the current google search results as pointed out by certain editors here would not likely change, as there will always ignorant and misinformed individuals adding contents on the internet. All these would in turn added up with contents from over 200 years ago that used Malacca. I am merely suggesting the move that already taken by others, e.g: Britannica, UNESCO, CIA, Oxford dictionaries, Merriam-Webster dictionaries, Google Maps and so on.OG|سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 03:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Malacca&oldid=527391997"