Talk:Ripuarian language

Ripuarian Wikipedia
Rhinelanders try to build up a Ripuarian Wikipedia. If you can speak or understand ripuarian, please help! The discussion can be found here. Dbach 13:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A Ripuarian Wiki has been founded externally, plz don't use the page mentioned above any more. Dbach 14:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Please support the Ripuarian/Kölsch Wikipedia on Metawiki. --Purodha Blissenbach 04:46, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Kölsch = ksh
Hoi, according to http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=ksh the code ksh is reserved exclusively for Kölsch. I do not think it great to call something with a code that it is not. GerardM 09:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

work needs to be done
anybody got any useful links or info, like maybe language stats, infobox.

Number of speekers?Qrc2006 19:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia of Ripuarian languages
It has been suggested to merge this article with the article on the Wikipedia of Ripuarian languages.

This is complete nonsense. A language group and a Wikipedia are two so different things, far apart from each other, that you cannot have one useful article. Trying to make one would end up with 2 sections: (a) the language group (b) the Wikipedia and its history. How strange is that?

There is a policy to have an article on each Wikipedia (see List of Wikipedias) and there is another policy to have an article on each language or language group. Lets stick with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rentenirer (talk • contribs) 11:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

native name
Moved from the article as uncourced and contradicting: google books doesn't have any reliable source for any of the two names, and it would be surprising, if the native speakers would prefer names for their specific subdialect like Kölsch, Bönnsch, Öcher Platt, ... -80.133.98.23 (talk) 01:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * "| nativename      = Ripoarisch"
 * "natively Ripoarėsch"

language naming inconsistencies
I am not here to advocate for anything except consistency.

There are language naming inconsistencies between this article, categories, templates and MediaWiki: Of the above, we can do nothing about MediaWiki. For the others, we can standardize on one of 'Colognian' or 'Kölsch', and / or 'Ripuarian' and modify the templates, categories, and article as necessary.
 * Wikipedia has the article Ripuarian language (with redirects from Ripoarisch, Ripuarian (language), Ripuarian dialect, Ripuarian dialect group, Ripuarian dialects, Ripuarian Franconian, Ripuarian languages, Ripuarisch, Ripuiarian Franconian, Ripurian, Ripurian language). There has been no discussion regarding the article name.  The article describes Ripuarian as "a German dialect group", not as a separate single language.
 * categorized in, among others
 * the en.wiki article identifies an ISO 639-3 language code in the infobox:  – this is disputed; see
 * ISO 639-3 refers to the language name 'Kölsch'
 * IANA language-subtag-registry file refers to the language name 'Kölsch'
 * MediaWiki language support returns the name 'Colognian'
 * MediaWiki uses the name 'Ripuarian' to refer to ksh.wiki (see List of Wikipedias)
 * templates:
 * → (deprecated; to be replaced with  – see TfD)
 * categorizes to – calls
 * categorizes to
 * → (replaces )
 * categorizes to
 * → text (has a tool tip that reads: 'Ripuarian language text')
 * categorizes to
 * → text
 * categorizes to Category:Articles containing Ripuarian-language text
 * the cs1|2 template suite using ksh, Colognian, Kölsch, or Ripuarian:
 * categorized in
 * categorized in Category:CS1 foreign language sources (ISO 639-2)
 * categorized in
 * categorized in Category:CS1 maint: unrecognized language
 * categorized in Category:CS1 foreign language sources (ISO 639-2)
 * categorized in
 * categorized in Category:CS1 maint: unrecognized language
 * categorized in
 * categorized in Category:CS1 maint: unrecognized language
 * categorized in Category:CS1 maint: unrecognized language
 * ,, , , and all rely on Module:Lang which overrides the IANA / ISO 639 code-to-name definition (Kölsch) in Module:Language/data/wp languages (Ripuarian) – the provenance of that module is unknown
 * if 'Colognian' is the preferred language name, Module:lang/data is modified to override IANA / ISO 639 / Module:Language/data/wp languages code-to-name definitions
 * if 'Kölsch' is the preferred language name, the override in Module:Language/data/wp languages is disabled
 * if 'Ripuarian' is the preferred language name, no action is required
 * if it is desirable to preserve  for either of 'Colognian' or 'Kölsch' and desirable to have a code specific to 'Ripuarian', in Module:lang/data, create a private IETF language tag, perhaps , to specifically identify 'Ripurian' in the various Module:Lang-based templates ('Colognian' or 'Kölsch' handled as described above)
 * regardless of preferred name,, though deprecated, is modified to remove Colognian as redundant or wrong
 * categorization may change to match the preferred language name(s)
 * the cs1|2 template suite relies on the MediaWiki language name table. However, cs1|2 is capable of overriding MediaWiki code-to-name definitions
 * if 'Colognian' is the preferred language name, no action is required
 * if 'Kölsch' is the preferred language name, Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration is modified to override the MediaWiki code-to-name definition
 * if 'Ripuarian' is the preferred language name, Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration is modified to override the MediaWiki code-to-name definition
 * if either of 'Colognian' or 'Kölsch' (handled as above) along with 'Ripuarian' are the preferred language names, Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration is modified to support the private code-to-name definition described above

Consistency matters. Article name should match category names should match template renderings. So the question is: —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * which language name(s): 'Colognian', 'Kölsch', and / or 'Ripuarian'?

A month on, and there having been no comment, these decisions:
 * – reserved for Kölsch per IANA and ISO 639-3
 * – created for Colognian
 * – created for Ripuarian

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * 1. Colognian is merely the literal English translation of Kölsch. Both are the adjectives that refer to the City of Cologne, or Köln. 2. Kölsch is one of the varieties of Ripuarian, a language which is spoken in Cologne as well as a wider area around that city, and it can be considered the prestige variety of that language. (For comparison, Cantonese can be considered the prestige variety of Yue Chinese.) 3. The ISO 639-3 code  is clearly derived from the word Kölsch, which the standard gives as the autonym of the language designated by that code. The English primary name of the   language is, however, Ripuarian. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 20:38, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Forgive me, but what conclusion do you wish readers to draw from what you have written?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 23:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * One conclusion is that, despite its derivation and label,  is the correct ISO 639-3 code for Ripuarian including Colognian (=Kölsch), as is   for Yue Chinese including Cantonese. (Per "Denotation" links on iso639-3.sil.org/code/ksh, particularly www.ethnologue.com/language/ksh.) Colognian proper could be assigned a private-use subcode of , e.g.   ("Standard Ripuarian"),   or   (though   might be the better choice, as the spelling Colonian instead of Colognian is attested). Another conclusion is that it is not in line with ISO 639-3 to use the code   ("Uncoded languages") or an extension of that code for Ripuarian or one of its varieties. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 00:03, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Had the ISO 639-3 custodians wanted to associate  with Ripuarian or had they determined that Ripuarian should have its own code, they would not have associated   with Kölsch.  Because the ISO 639-3 custodians have not elected to 'code' Ripuarian, for our use here, Ripuarian is an uncoded language so the private IETF tag   is appropriate.  If you disagree with the custodian's decisions, you should take the issue up with them.
 * I can be persuaded that Kölsch and Colognian are more-or-less synonymous so instead of  for Colognian, we might use   –   because the en.wiki article is Colognian dialect (with the 'g').
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:58, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:58, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

About Low Dietsch redirecting here
I just noticed that Low Dietsch has been turned into a redirect towards this article. I doubt whether this is the best solution. The two language varieties are apparently very similar, but I think they still shouldn't be treated as if no difference exists between them at all. See as well Q151156, where separate articles about Low Dietsch exist both on Wikipedia-fr and Wikipedia-nl.

Another issue in this context: for the last two days, two IPs (I suppose they're actually the same) have removed several internal links to Low Dietsch (example). De Wikischim (talk) 22:49, 22 July 2023 (UTC)