Talk:Hijazi script

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 7 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): LockeJames. Peer reviewers: Nzingal.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Merge Proposal - Hijazi/Hejazi
I'm not the one who put up the merge proposal (not sure who did), but I think merging the two articles would be an exellent idea, as they appear to be discussing the same thing, only spelled differently. Please do correct me if I'm wrong. –erudition FISH 17:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * You are utterly right. Hijazi/Hejazi is the very same Arabic word with only a slightly different transliteration. I would prefer "Hijazi", but I am going to consult the guidelines on that point before merging the two articles. Cvereb (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * "Hijazi" comes up much more often on Google (after filtering for English-language content) ; it is the term used at the [Library of Congress]. Therefore I am going to keep "Hijazi" as the main article and merge "Hejazi" into it. Cvereb (talk) 23:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Too bad the main article for Hijaz province is Hejaz. :-/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvereb (talk • contribs) 23:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Performed the merge, since I thought one improperly named article would be better than two parallel articles evolving in different directions. I guess the merge can be done in the other direction. So, should it be Hijaz or Hejaz, Hijazi or Hejazi? Cvereb (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Despite the Arabian region passing into English as Hejaz, it appears, according to the Google test that Hijazi is the COMMONNAME for the script. —Wiki Wikardo 09:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * In that case, it seems this merge is complete and done, what with Hejazi now redirecting to Hijazi. I'll add in an "aka" bit in the article. –erudition FISH 15:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Reference to "Abjad"?
It seems this script qualifies as an "Abjad", since it has no vowel sounds, and even more so, it has no diacritical marks indicating where vowel signs might occur. If this is the case, it seems an addition is merited. I would place the reference in the text myself but I don't feel qualified -- in particular, a reason may exist as to why this particular script does not so qualify, perhaps technical or history, or because I'm plain wrong about it.

If someone with some expertise on the matter were to agree that this is in fact an abjad, I know I would find it a helpful addition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sychonic (talk • contribs) 13:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)