বহুসংখ্যক মজ্জাকোষার্বুদ নিচের আলোচনাটি নিন্মলিখিত নিবন্ধের অপসারণ প্রস্তাবনার একটি হালনাগাদকৃত বিতর্ক। অনুগ্রহপূর্বক এটি পরিবর্তন করবেন না। নতুন মন্তব্য উপযুক্ত আলোচনার পাতায় করা উচিত (যেমন নিবন্ধের আলাপ পাতায় বা অপসারণ পর্যালোচনার পাতায়), কিন্তু কোনোভাবেই এই আলোচনাটি সম্পাদনা করা উচিত নয়।  ফলাফল ছিল:  অপসারিত।    multiple myeloma experts will get amused by the name.. :) And people who actually have the disease will never know this transation.! I suggest you keep the english name.. --সপ্তর্ষি(আলাপ | অবদান) ০৭:৫৫, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  I agree. After seeing these strange translations, I'm remembering অম্লজান উদযান, যবক্ষারযান (সপ্তর্ষিভাই শুনেছেন এগুলি? Oxygen, Hydrogen, Nitrogen এর "অনুবাদ")। I can bet my whole months grad-student salary that 0 out of 100 people can even understand any of these terms. --রাগিব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৭:৫৯, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  I remember অম্লজান উদযান had forgotten যবক্ষারযান :)--সপ্তর্ষি(আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:০১, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  Returning to the original point, আমি ১২-১৩ বছর বাংলা মিডিয়ামে পড়াশোনা করেছি (খুব একটা ফাঁকিও হয়তো বা দেই নাই), বাংলা সাহিত্যের অনেক কিছুই পড়েছি, কিন্তু জীবনেও এধরনের শব্দগুলি শুনি নাই। বিশ্বকোষের উদ্দেশ্য জ্ঞান বিতরণ, তাই বলে বিশ্বকোষ পড়তে হলে বাংলায় মাস্টার্স থাকতে হবে, সেটা আশা করা ঠিক না। এ ধরণের অতিরিক্ত অনুবাদের ফল দাড়াবে, বিশ্বকোষের এই ভুক্তি গুলি পড়ার সময় অভিধান হাতে বসতে হবে। তাই এই ব্যাপারে সচেতন হতে অনুরোধ করছি। রিডাইরেক্ট এই ক্ষেত্রে সমাধান না। ধরা যাক multiple myeloma রিডাইরেক্ট হয়ে এখানে কেউ আসলো। তার পর? বহু সংখ্যক মজ্জাকোষার্বুদ কি জিনিষ? প্রতি লাইনে লাইনে বাংলা লিখে, তার "বঙ্গানুবাদ" করতে হবে, না হলে পাঠকের জ্ঞান তো দূরের কথা, "শিরঃপীড়া /প্রদাহের উদ্রেক" হবে। --রাগিব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:০৬, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC) Unfortunately, I disagree here, too. Ignore the horribly incomplete বহুসংখ্যক মজ্জাকোষার্বুদ stub that we have for now and envision the hopefully almost-finished article that contains a lot of information. A proper and final version can justifiably  a) show in detail the etymology of the word মজ্জাকোষার্বুদ, e,g, মজ্জাকোষ + অর্বুদ। The exact same thing is done in any standard English encyclopedia entry, except that they try to clearly show the etymology of the greek/latin root/affixes for, say, "Myolema".  b) Additionally, "Myolema" itself, with its own pronunciation in Bangla and etyomology will be added to the entry as an example of the English terminology. --অর্ণব (আলাপ | অবদান) ১০:২৩, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  True.. even myself being a Physician.. plus also from bengali medium.. I could guess half of these (not all). But shouldnt expect most bengali reader to decipher any of these.. --সপ্তর্ষি(আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:১১, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  I think your reaction is justified. But I am sorry to disagree. Let me put this into perspective. These terms are extremely esoteric in English as well. Ask any American/English guy on the street what "Multiple Myeloma" means, and you will get a blank look, unless he is studying in a med school. Yet, these extremely esoteric medical terms have found their way in the English Wikipedia, despite the fact that 99.99% of enwiki users (the % of non-med-school-going population) probably won't be able to decipher what they mean in the first place. These are specialist terms. Just because this is an encyclopedia doesn't mean that we have to pander to the "least common denominator" every time.  --অর্ণব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:২২, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  BTW, Ragib, I don't one can find these in any বাংলা সাহিত্য read during school years। But one would definitely find these in med school curriculum. Probably in English, because that's the de facto medium in our country. --অর্ণব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:২৬, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  I humbly disagree. I don't want to brag, but academically, I don't consider myself as a lowest common denominator, and I did study Bangla quite well until entering BUET. That 13 years of Bangla education, and other readings thereafter didn't enable me to understand the meaning of the title of this article. Think of this: if you ask 10 people with a Bachelor's degree, or even Masters, would they be able to tell you the meaning of "বহুসংখ্যক মজ্জাকোষার্বুদ"? If the terms used here are understood by even 1 out of 50 doctors graduating from Bangladeshi or WB medical colleges, I'd retract my comments. You talked about Multiple myeloma being a rare term ... (I do think it's a commonly heard term in Medical dramas and countless tv ads), and that it is a specialist term. The same doesn't really apply to "বহুসংখ্যক মজ্জাকোষার্বুদ". If it were taught in medical schools, your point would be valid. But I doubt whether that's correct. May be if someone has a masters in Bangla, they will understand it. But what would be the point of writing an entry that requires a dictionary for almost 100% of the people? When your "lowest denominator" is almost everyone accessing the encyclopedia, you write in their terms. So, unless the "translated/invented" terms are used in general/specialized cases (even if exclusively by doctors), we shouldn't be inventing terms not understood by anyone.  We are not writing an encyclopedia for a few Bangla pundits, or for people writing the "poribhasha" books of Bangla Academy. If some term is not really used in common usage, or even specialist usage, we need not "invent" it just to be politically correct. IF the terms are ever used by (even) a few doctors, that will be the time we'd need to add them here. --রাগিব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:৪০, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  I too differ from you Zaheen Bhai.. I think language of science should be unified.. Forcing people to remember double number of is unfair.. You may be translating a countable number of esoteric terms.. But the medical literature is full of thousands of such esoteric terms which have already been in vogue for many years.. All the patients know these terms as their diagnosis.. Dont burden them with another horrendous name.. It may feel good to have a meaning for each wordroot for a passive researcher who is researching with a disease.. but when you suffer from disease its a traumatic feeling that you are suffering from something grave.. you may be even dying.. It would be too amusing for many of them to know the exact word roots of their killer!..  Moreover God knows who translated these when.. but paramagnetic = পরাচৌম্বক (ferromagnetic= অয়শ্~, and dia~= তিরশ্~), wheras parabola=অধিবৃত্ত, not পরাবৃত্ত (hyperbola).. Remembering all these bangla terms is difficult if you really want to learn a vast lot.. geometry terms are probably more widely known tan the magnetism terms.. bu there is no unified translation of prefixes etc.. Not that they have unified application in english as well.. but english has become the international langage f science.. we dont need to simulate the chineese or Japaneese.. though we are no less proud of our language.. Either you make your terms less cumbersome than english. or let the english be.. --সপ্তর্ষি(আলাপ | অবদান) ০৮:৪৭, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  Furthermore, if one tries very hard, they would perhaps come up with translations for Diphtheria, Malaria too.  But what purpose would that serve? Would you translate AIDS as (অর্জিত রোগপ্রতিরোধব্যবস্থীয় স্বল্পতাজনিত লক্ষণমালা or some equally awkward term, something that needs to be fished from the depths of a dictionary?) Inventing terms just for the sake of it doesn't serve any purpose in providing knowledge to a reader. --রাগিব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৯:০৪, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  And, I also looked into other language wikipedias for the term :en:multiple myeloma. Here are the results:  French: :fr:Myélome multiple Dutch: :nl:Ziekte van Kahler , because it's called Kahler's disease too Swedish :sv:Myelom German :de:Plasmozytom   You see, only one out of 5 (I couldn't read Hebrew) used a separate translated term for the disease. Even in that case, the first sentence in de wiki says that Myeloma is the modern name (I assume Otto Kahler named it Plasmozytom originally "Kahler ist vor allem durch seine Beschreibung des Multiplen Myeloms bzw. Plasmozytoms bekannt geworden. Die Erkrankung trägt daher auch den heute selten verwendeten Namen „Morbus Kahler“. Er gilt außerdem als Erstbeschreiber der Syringomyelie.") .  I don't see any need to make an entry understandable by perhaps 2-3 people in the whole of Bangladesh. --রাগিব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৯:১১, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  Yes, but Myelom comes from a Greek root called "Myelos" which means "marrow." And almost all the European languages happily borrow from Greek to create terminology all the time. But observe, the Europeans/English/Americans do not call it the much easirer "Multiple Marrow Tumors" and instead use the standard terminology "Multiple Myeloma", something that makes no sense from a "common usage" point of view. Why would they blithely ignore the masses? I mean 99% of the Europeans/Amnericans aren't supposed to understand some esoteric Greek root that is never used outside the medical domain. Yes, I am being a little sarcastic. ;-) --অর্ণব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৯:২৩, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)    This is areply to Ragib's earlier reply. I again disagree with some of your points. As I discuss them, I hope a lot of my ideas re: Wikipedia will be clarified.   First off, multiple Myeloma IS a rare term, and yes, it could be heard in American medical TV dramas, but you cannot seriously tell me that an average American viewer actually understands those terms until it is described to him right then in that same ad/drama. Even though Americans tend to be more knowledgable in medical terms because the quality of education on average is higher than, say, Bangladesh, it would be absurd to claim that an average American knows what "Myolema" means. The average American cannot even place Iraq on a map for Chrisssake. :-)    Secondly, "Myolema" and 99% of the medical terms are derived mainly from Latin or Greek. They are extremely esoteric and "datbhanga" to pronounce for even an American/English person. Ask any American graduate student in anything other than medicine what "Extramedullary plasmacytoma" means, and he will give you a weird look. It's literally, yes, LITERALLY, "greek" to him. And he doesn't mind not knowing that term. Because it's a specialist medical term. Same with Bangla. "Sanskrit" or "Sanskrit-like" Bangla is the source language we use for inventing specialist terms. Even if we use trasliterated versions of these Latin/Greek terms, they remain as esoteric to the common Bangali people as the Bangla terms.  Thirdly, I believe that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia writing project, not a democracy. This is a serious project. As an encyclopedia, wikipedia must uphold some standards. This is supposed to be a REAL encyclopedia aspiring to be of Britannica standard, not an encyclopedia-wannabe like the countless "Tell-me-why?" books for the masses or some children's encyclopedia. Therefore, correct, standardized and uniform poribhsha used throughout the encyclopedia MUST be agreed upon and then enforced strictly. And it is best to use the poribhasha that are published by an authority that is supposed to create these poribhasha as part of their job. It is not my job to create medical poribhasha. That's "মৌলিক গবেষণা".   And lastly, there is no limit on when, how, by whom or whether an entry is to be added to the Wikipedia. Since this is a wiki, any part of an entry is subject to change, including its title, hopefully for the better. Where "better" does not necessarily mean "more accessible" by a common guy or a child. --অর্ণব (আলাপ | অবদান) ০৯:১৪, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  In case I am taken the wrong way, let me clarify that I am NOT inventing these terms by myself. I am basically following the book "চিকিৎসা-পরিভাষা অভিধান" by "ডা. নৃপেন ভৌমিক" published by Ananda Publishers (which imo is a respectable WB pubishing house) in 2001. This is apparenty the only book of its kind in Bangla, The author is a neuroscientist and apparently worked on this book for 10 years. He includes in this book an extensive bibliography (pp. 5-6) where more than 100 books on medcine and terminology are listed. On pp. 7-31, the  author meticulously describes and lists the prefixes, roots and suffixes he has chosen for Bangla terms for their countarparts in Latin and Greek. On p. 32, he describes why he mostly prefers Sanskrit/Bengali roots and affixes over Latin/Greek ones. He essentially says that European medical scientists over the centuries invented, out of necessity,  countless medical terms using elements from Greek and Latin and got richer for this practice. Sanskrit's stature in the subcontinent is similar to that of Greek/Latin in Europe and in fact, all three lanaguages share the same proto-language root. Hence, his rationale is that Bangla medical terminology, too, can be enriched by carefully choosing Sanskrit elements that closely parallel the Latin/Greek elements in European medical termonology.   I am not commenting on whether I entirely support his rationale or not. However, if we want to use Bangla terminology in this Bangla wikipedia, his is the only well-written work on this particular matter. From what I have seen so far, it is not light work. It's an exemplary work with 50,000 medical terms whose formation strictly adhere to some principles, consistently using word roots/affixes taken from a 24-page-long list for anyone to see. That's serious hard work by a man who loves his language. Whether his work will gain currency in Bangla encyclopedia-writing community/agencies, I don't know.  Let me add some more about his methodology. He seems to follow the principles laid out in Rajendralal Mitra's "A Scheme for the Rendering of European Scientific Terms into the Vernacular of India." According to that article, all scientific terms can be divided into six categories. He suggested that four of these categories be translated and the remaining two be transliterated.  The categories to be "transliterated" are:  Equipments and objects used in modern science. Such as Quinine, Oxygen, etc. That is these should be কুইনিন ও অক্সিজেন in Bangla.  Scientific names of biological species should be transliterated, not translated. Homo Sapiens should be হোমো সেপিয়েন্স in Bangla.  The categories fit to be "translated" are:  the common everyday terms like hand=হাত, head=মাথা, blood=রক্ত, etc.  some words like malt, yeast, lymph, etc., which can either be general or specific, can be both translated or transliterated.  words that denote some reaction or process such as secretion, excretion, absorption, etc. should be translated.  Specific scientific terms that are used in medicine or chemistry should be translated.  The author says that out of the 50,000 medicine-reated words included in this dictionary, he   transliterated 20,000 terms that are names of chemicals, medicines, microbes or virii. He left them untouched.  transliterated around 10,000 anatomical names set by Nomina Anatomica Perisionsia.  collected in one place around 10,000 terms introduced by Calcutta University, Bangla Academy of Dhaka, and other authorities.  says around 5,000 English terms are very commonly used in Bangla-speaking community, such as Tonsil, Tumor, Brain, Stethoscope, Appendicitis, Sinusitis, etc. and says that he wouldn't touch them [Ed: at this point I must say then that he does not follow his own policy at least for Tumor=অর্বুদ; mea culpa for not noticing this]  says that the rest of the 15,000 terms can be translated by translating only 500 Greko-Latin roots and 100 prefix-suffixes. This, he claims, is the main task that he performs in this book.  He also mentions that if the Bengali term is used side by side with the English term several times in any article, it should be accepted pretty easily.  My take on this: Introducing these medical terms is bound to create controversy and backlash, as any other conscious attempt at popularizing newly coined (but much needed) words. We, the wikipedia community, have no obligation to use exactly the terms used by theauthor, but if we do so, we at least have a reference to fall back on. And the reference is not some hodge-podge reference, it seems to be well researched and well organized.   Even if we deviate from these terminologies, our deviation has to be rationalized against some backdrop, and this book can be that backdrop. As just one example, I find myself more comfortable with the transliteration টিউমার than অর্বুদ। In that case, if we at Wikipedia decide to use টিউমার, we should do it uniformly throughout the pedia.  --অর্ণব (আলাপ | অবদান) ১৩:৩৩, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  I've moved the discussion to [] Let's continue there. --রাগিব (আলাপ | অবদান) ২০:৪৩, ২৯ আগস্ট ২০০৬ (UTC)  ''উপরের আলোচনাটি নিবন্ধের অপসারণ প্রস্তাবনার একটি হালনাগাদকৃত বিতর্ক। অনুগ্রহপূর্বক এটি পরিবর্তন করবেন না। নতুন মন্তব্য উপযুক্ত আলোচনার পাতায় করা উচিত (যেমন নিবন্ধের আলাপ পাতায় বা অপসারণ পর্যালোচনার পাতায়), কিন্তু কোনোভাবেই এই আলোচনাটি সম্পাদনা করা উচিত নয়।