Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Persian

Might it be worth starting this from scratch? - Francis Tyers · 12:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I think so. A look through the arabic one shows that the big part of guideline is correct only for arabic. Persian is not just Arabic + some extra alphabets. The whole discussions there on articles etc are wrong when it comes to persian. Almost all the information before Persian section is irrelevant to Persian. Sangak 12:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Beside those differences that you mentioned, I think instead of the strict transliteration, we should focus on the proper transcription. Jahangard 01:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also please see the Guidelines for English And Irish language. Sangak 13:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff, I will take a look when I get some time --Rayis 13:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just found out about this page, so apologies about the lateness of this reply. I have a pretty good understanding of both Arabic and Persian, and I've worked on transliteration and romanization schemes of Persian before. Having said that, I think the current draft has way too much baggage from the Arabic manual to be useful. I suggest we start from scratch, as has been suggested above. We can certainly get some ideas from the Arabic manual, but we can also look at Persian alphabet and especially Persian grammar (replacing <æ> with <a>) for a sane romanization that is already commonly used for Persian. –jonsafari 21:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For Tajik transliteration I think we should use the Tajik Latin orthography of 1929. With the possible exception that 'ғ' -> 'ƣ' may be replaced with 'gh' or 'ğ'. - Francis Tyers · 13:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, scratch that, it could get confusing. We should probably go with Russian transliteration, except for ғ ('gh' or 'ğ'), қ ('q'), ҳ ('h'), ӯ ('ū'), ҷ ('j'). - Francis Tyers · 13:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any good source for that? I am not familiar with it. Sangak 13:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typically its something like BGN/PCGN in Transliteration of Russian. I've no problem with adding 'š' 'č' and 'ž' to that though. - Francis Tyers · 14:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think for modern Tajik figures, the names should be transliterated from Tajik alphabet, and for that purpose, I think the BGN/PCGN method for Russian Cryllic transliteration (plus the standard transliteration of ғ, қ , ҳ , ӯ, ҷ and "yo" for "ё") is good enough. We can decide about the proper transcription of them later (because it is related to the Tajik phonology). Jahangard 01:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]