This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
Incubator incubator:Wp/jat points to this article which looks doesn't like a single language, but an ambiguous word, iso639-3:jat says Jakati, which is mentioned by Glottolog as a spurious name for Inku or somewhat from Ukraine. I wonder whether there should have a request to split the code jat. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:08, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The narrative samples attested in Rao's research on Inku consist of language that is very much mutually intelligible with both Saraiki and western dialects of Punjabi.
The Punjabi dialect of Toba Tek Singh, Sarghoda Distt. and thereabouts is commonly colloquially described as Jatki. Jatki in this sense is almost synonymous with Shahpuri, and at the very least these dialects mostly overlap with eachother. (“Jatki” is also a generic adjective in Punjabi meaning something like pure or unaltered language.) It is the closest Punjabi dialect to Saraiki phonetically and grammatically.
The wiki "jat" incubator linked is written entirely in the latter of these senses of Jatki, with article titles like سیال ("winter") which is considered a shibboleth of the continuum of western Punjabi dialects which use it. These are interesting topics to write about, but they would be entirely welcome on pnbwiki which already has many articles written in a similar register.
Most of the language codes under the "lah" macrolanguage are completely pointless. There should be just one code each for Punjabi, Saraiki, and Hindko. If Jatki is to have a code it should be one like en-au for Australian English, not a separate one. I have no idea how to convince SIL/ISO of this (and I reckon it is probably not worth trying.)
We don't have to rely on SIL, actually. The incubator can come up with its own code (as has sometimes happened before): either a variant along the lines of what عُثمان suggests above, or a simple 3-letter code (jtk, for example, appears to be unused in ISO 639 [1]). – Uanfala (talk) 13:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right, although in this case I am not sure there is even a need. I am not familiar with the incubator process, but personally I would rather see these articles merged onto pnb Wikipedia—besides my very minor contributions, there have been just two consistently active editors for years, one of whom is the sole administrator. That's a sad state for the site to be in for a language with tens of millions of writers and speakers, and if need be articles written in a certain dialect, style, or register may be marked with a template as is already done on English Wikipedia. It would be good to see some more energy put into the existing wiki before worrying about launching another very similar one. عُثمان (talk) 14:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm Uanfala and عُثمان, I'd say that non-valid ISO codes are nowadays prohibited on Incubator, and the current situation is also unfair for Inku speakers either (as those contributors also created Wt, Wb, Wn, Wq and Wy). As there are indeed separate Glottolog identifiers for Jatki in Pakistan, my suggestion is to indeed submit a SIL code change request (probably @Kwamikagami: knows more than me about doing so), to split the code jat to e.g. "jtk" you suggested for their "Jatki", and "ikj" for Inku that those Afghans speak. Don't surprise, I have some request drafts that needs help on completing, email me to get copies. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ISO is supposedly based on mutual intelligibility, except where politics interferes (e.g. Hindi-Urdu). If you have literature demonstrating that [jat] is either not coherent or not distinct, we could request an ISO change based on that. But you'd need something sufficient to demonstrate to linguists that ISO has got it wrong.
I don't know what the deal with incubator is. Evidently Teochew was denied because it doesn't have an ISO code, which would be a problem because ISO doesn't really cover Chinese. — kwami (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
