When we use auto transliteration to generate English labels then I think we should follow the practice of the English Wikipedia with other transliterations demoted to aliases.
Similarly auto generated German labels should follow the transliteration practices in the German wikipedia.
When we use an auto transliteration bot to generate qualifier statements with transliteration of values in "birth name" statements (and other name statements ) then we just need a separate property for each transliteration scheme and make sure the bot uses the appropriate property for each qualifier statement. We can have lots of transliteration qualifier statements for each value (plus statements for IPA and for a pronunciation recording ).
Joe On 26 Apr 2015 21:40, "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, <grin> ISO is a reliable source; it is THE standard </grin> Wikipedia is definitely not a standard by its own admission. Thanks, GerardM
On 26 April 2015 at 22:37, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
On 2015-04-26 22:33, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi My point is that it is not a given that we should follow any WIkipedia for anything. Also the point of romanisation of Russian is not for the benefit of Russian speakers, it is for the speakers of English. Thanks, GerardM
On one hand, yes.
On the other hand, no reliable source uses ISO. When NYT writes about a Russian person, they do not use ISO, they use what the English Wikipedia uses or smth similar. In my passport, they do not use ISO (fortunately), why should then ISO be used on Wikidata in an entry about me?
Cheers Yaroslav
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l