Talk:Gurmukhi

message: This page should mention that Punjabi is also written in the shahmukhi script, related to the Urdu, Persian, and Arabic scripts; and also in devanagari. ; Hippietrail 01:13, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I believe Wikipedia policy is that page titles use the most usual English spelling. Both Collins and Encarta online dicionaries only list "Gurmukhi" as a possible spelling. I believe "Gurmukhī" with the macron is more a transliteration of the native name. — Hippietrail 14:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that. Also, what else can Gurmukhi refer to, besides a script? I think it should just be at Gurmukhi. —Wiki Wikardo 19:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title 

message: Shouldn't there be the IPA symbols for the consonants, as well?  I have no knowledge of Punjabi, but someone with some knowledge should probably fix that. 66.165.31.200 05:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPA 

message: I just switched the pronunciations between "Fuffa" and "Fuffay paer'ch bindi" to give the unmarked consonant the straightforward "F" pronunciation and "Ph" for the modified letter. This is trivial, but I believe it is correct, being proficient in Gurmukhi/Punjabi myself and consulting with others. Does anyone have an opinion on this and, for example, "Shusha" and "Sussay paer'ch bindi," which is another pair with near-negligible difference (Many Punjabis make no distinction phonetically with such pairs; many will even ignore more distinct "paer bindi" sounds, like sticking with "Ja" even when it should technically be the "loansound" "Za.") Any thoughts?3swordz (talk) 22:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you're correct.  The pairin bindi letters should be labelled with their unmarked consonant, and pronounced as if they are marked.  A Pha with a dot makes a Fa (A Fa with a dot makes a Pha with two dots!).  And yes, many Punjabis pronounce them without the dot - but this is incorrect in "proper" Punjabi. 188.28.108.142 (talk) 13:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consonants and "Paer Bindi" 

message: This whole section seems out of place to me:
* it's unsupported by references;
* it has a lot of weasel wording, particularly the second paragraph;
* a lot of the reasoning is faulty, or simply absent - especially the contention that the script is the most important distinguishing feature of a language, when several languages (eg Malay, Serbo-Croat) have abandoned one script for another or have multiple writing systems.
Even if it does remain, it needs to be made more neutral and to be presented as an expression of a particular point of view - and should come far lower down in the overall article, after the discussion of the characteristics of the script.DrDaveHPP (talk) 14:39, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punjabi language as a misnomer for Gurmukhi language 

message: I noticed the article provides the Roman transliteration for vowels but not for consonants. Should this be added? --Joseph Yanchar (User page/Talk page) 04:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transliteration 

message: Why is this article titled "Gurmukhī alphabet" when it is an abugida. The article title should be just "Gurmukhī" as there is no other use for the word Gurmukhī.Filpro (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Abugidas are alphabets, as are abjads, and this is common WP usage, so that's not an argument. CONCISE is a legitimate argument, though a quick GBooks search suggests that "Gurmukhi" is normally used in combination with either "script" or "alphabet". (For our purposes, "script" would be used for the Gurmukhi writing system in general, and "alphabet" for the Panjabi Gurmukhi alphabet specifically.) — kwami (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Titled 

message: Nukta – is a combining character that alters the way a preceding consonant (or matra) is pronounced.
The section on other signs omits any subsection about the nukta sign. This should be added with suitable explanation.
Unicode normalization and the nukta
The nukta symbol ਼ (ੑU+0A3C) is equivalent to the sign part of each of these precomposed characters:
 ਲ਼(LLA), ਸ਼(SHA), ਖ਼(KHHA), ਗ਼(GHHA), ਜ਼(ZA), ਫ਼(FA).
Unicode normalization separates out the nukta sign as a diacritic, leaving one of these letters respectively:
 ਲ(LA), ਸ(SA), ਖ(KHA), ਗ(GA), ਜ(JA), ਫ(PHA).
All four normalization forms (NFC, NFD, NFKC, NFKD) do the same!
DFH (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There are certain precomposed Indic letters that decompose but do not recompose under any normalization form. The list of these characters is given here. The decomposed forms are preferred over the precomposed forms as indicated here. DFH (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other signs: why no subsection for the nukta ? 

message: It's interesting that the ISO 15924 code is Guru, while it can be confused with commong word, and Gurm suggests itself naturally. I'm wondering if the responsible standardization organization officer could have the similar problem like me – misread the script name as "Gurumkhi" (in my case it was "Gumurkhi"). (By the way, does this phenomenon, when you are not exactly dyslectic, but just have some words misread the first time, probably in childhood, and had never chance to fix them by hearing, have a technical term?) —Mykhal (talk) 21:26, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible misspelling and ISO 15924 code 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gurmukhi script. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905103332/http://kaulonline.com/uninagari/gurumukhi.htm to http://kaulonline.com/uninagari/gurumukhi.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040411100552/http://www.punjabonline.com/servlet/library.language?Action=Main to http://www.punjabonline.com/servlet/library.language?Action=Main
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: @Drmccreedy
@Kashmiri and @TituDutta - You were earlier quick to delete the contents; Please find some time to answer 
here are some facts with my questions that anyone would agree with even little knowledge about Gurmukhi
1) Gurmukhi started with thirty five alphabets both primary and ideal secondary experts' sourceGuru Granth Sahib
2) More letters were added [in 1959-60; Punjabi University Patiala]
Q.1 As a common practice, go and verify, if not convinced, Sikhs around the world bow before Guru Granth Sahib why the word Sacred Characteristic of Gurmukhi is missing in this conversation and when I added why I was it removed?
Q.2 Where is the mention of this addition on the page; instead a confusion is revealed about the increase number of letters? 
[Why this change is important and not shared with readers; this was a political move to marginalize the Gurmukhi script having socio-linguistic implication;]
Q.3 Instead of deleting the content - why did you allowed the contents to stay, changing the status of page, like I have seen some pages have headers indicating - authentic source required; Your immediate deletion of my contents, justifying deletion with those reasons that could have saved your action, instead of looking for those options that would have allowed, maintaining the free and fearless scholarship sharing using Wiki; This is a reflection of mean motive; a teamwork to stop minority using even free platforms; 
Suggested action - POST THIS ON TOP OF GURMUKHI PAGE UNTILL RESOLVED
 The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (November 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) 24.140.233.38 (talk) 13:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: My edits fall under two categories:
*Phrases like "some may wrongly consider", "miscommunication and wrong credits",  "sacred/profane", "Gurmukhi sacred script was diluted" express a point of view WP:POV.  Wikipedia is meant to be encyclopedic.  You'll find that edits using phrases like these are likely to be reverted, regardless of the subject of the article.
*Not all sources carry the same weight per WP:UNDUE. One edit I reverted used a blogspot.com link to overrule the consensus that Gurmukhi is a Brahmic-derived script.  This contradicts reliable sources such as "The World's Writing Systems", The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems, and others.  Ad hominem attacks on their authors don't diminish their value.
DRMcCreedy (talk) 01:46, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Gurmukhi content /deletion 

message: @Drmccreedy
Sikhs as a minority, due to political reasons, are propagated to be a part of the Hindu religion; Miscommunications through secondary sources have been shared on the Gurmukhi page that accomplishes a task to undermine Sikhs independent identity and particularly their sacred script Gurmukhi.
Using the term "Sant Bhasha" as "coalesced under the generic title of Sant Bhasha.[5]" is one such dimension of the propaganda. Guru Granth sahib has Gurbani not "Sant Bhasha" that enshrines and illuminates in Gurmukhi sacred script; Larger Sikh perspective is no one calls the language of Guru's anything other than Gurbani; An unheard phrase at a Sikh place of worship or in social get together would be lets sing :Sant Bhasha, or let us read Sant Bhasha- a generic title equivalent to the compositions contained in Guru Granth Sahib.  These people sponsored by the propaganda folks and referenced on this page who have confirmed and assigned the generic title have attempted to undermine sacred composition Gurbani- Gurmukhi-Sikh distinct identity. 
further the "sacred words" of those not included medieval saints [like Meera Bai treated with reverence by Hindus and her writing Sant Bhasha - language of Saint] are not comparable to Gurbani. There are no compositions of Meera Bai included in Guru Granth Sahib.
In the primary source Guru Granth sahib, there are only two references in the compositions of Bhagat Kabir - Hindus reverence as Sant Kabir - using the term ਬਾਣੀ Bani - the sacred language; three reference to Bani from Bhagat Namdev - Hindu reverence as Sant Namdev; that when enshrines and illuminates the Guru Granth sahib become Gurbani and transcends from what is being titled as Sant Bhasha 
Another dimension of that propaganda is Gurmukhi has been modified to add more sounds and letters recently by Punjabi University, Patiala. This dilution is highly objectionable so has socio-linguistic implication desired for political means. 
Gurmukhi page does not meet the Neutrality Criteria that Wiki has implemented; since it does not consider the larger Sikh perspective of holding Gurmukhi as a sacred script and Gurbani as the language of Guru Granth Sahib not Sant Bhasha as neatly assigned with a generic title.
Ignoring listening to Sikh side of the story and  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharanUOIT (talk • contribs) 21:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sant Bhasha -  Inappropriate titling of Gurbani  

message: I see that in March 2017 (apparently the last time the name was discussed) there was a unanimous decision to move this article to Gurmukhi script, yet now it is called just Gurmukhi and I can't find this move in the edit history. Danielklein (talk) 04:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The move to Gurmukhi happened September last year , and the editor responsible was . – Uanfala (talk) 05:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I requested the move as there is no need for descriptors/disambiguators here (script, alphabet) since it is simply known as Gurmukhi. Gotitbro (talk) 05:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Punjabi script. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Tsla1337 (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Punjabi script" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: : (ṇ ṛ v r)
If this sentence means what I think it means, I suggest rewording: .  The word naturally could be taken to mean that other consonants are long by nature, i.e. by default.  —Tamfang (talk) 14:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  unnatural geminates 

message: :
Uniquely? Don't many Brahmic scripts do the same? In Devanagari a few conjuncts are opaque (particularly kṣ) but most are readily analyzed into their components. I have the impression that Tibetan script's conjuncts are even more transparent. —Tamfang (talk) 03:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  consonant conjuncts