Talk:Tanka (disambiguation)

Temporary alert tags for use in relation to RM only
temporary project tags to allow projects to pick up automatic move alerts - please do not assign ratings - remove when RM is completed: In ictu oculi (talk) 12:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved to arrange primary topic at base name. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

– I thought that I might be stepping on some toes by suddenly and unilaterally posting this here, so I tried to start a discussion on the relevant talk page, to which I got only one (positive) response so far. The word tanka used by itself (i.e., without "People" or "Movement" added) in English refers overwhelmingly to the genre of Japanese poetry. Of the eight items currently mentioned on the disambiguation page, three do not have Wikipedia articles. One is a redirect to a broader article, which doesn't establish the notability of the term in English. One is an uncommon/non-standard variant spelling of a different word. One is a short article that does not apparently even have a corresponding page on the Bengali Wikipedia despite being about a Bengali subject. The only other article mentioned that is significant and uses the spelling "Tanka" with any degree of frequency is Tanka people, and that article establishes up front the name is not pronounced as "tanka", and standard romanizations of the Chinese name do not spell it that way. It also states that the name is seen as a derogatory exonym by some. Therefore, I propose we move the current disambiguation page to Tanka (disambiguation) (currently a redirect), and move Tanka (poetry) to Tanka. The article currently named tanka (poetry) could have a line added along the lines of ''This article is about the Japanese poetic genre. For the Southern Chinese ethnic group, see Tanka people. For other uses, see Tanka (disambiguation).'' elvenscout742 (talk) 08:34, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Tanka → Tanka (disambiguation)
 * Tanka (poetry) → Tanka

(The above is my formal argument to justify the move. The post below, from yesterday, was not really made as a move request, but rather as a polite way of discussing the matter before requesting a move.)

Any chance this page could be moved to Tanka (disambiguation) and Tanka (poetry) be moved here? I'm not sure how notable the other usages are in English, as I'm not a specialist in their subject-matter, though. elvenscout742 (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC) The only other article linked to here that is significant and uses the word "Tanka" with any frequency is Tanka people, which openly admits that the spelling is an out-of-date and inaccurate romanization, and says that the name itself is offensive and not in common use (Chinese Wikipedia says different, though). Also, although my knowledge of Chinese is limited, I think the "ka" part of "Tanka" means people, so the name is inaccurate and repetitive. elvenscout742 (talk) 15:53, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support for the reasons you've outlined. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Tentative Support the only one that matters is Talk:Tanka people, I have left a move note there. Other uses are some of them notableish, but certainly not close to the usual/obvious meaning. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment this is a malformed multimove. The bot will not pick it up as a multimove. -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 22:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment can someone delete the duplicate RM banner (the incorrect single move one) since we now have two templates, and only need the correct one. -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 19:49, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. None of the terms are native English words. None are in common usage in English beyond specialist literature describing the respective Japanese or Chinese concepts. The idea of "primary topic" therefore doesn't apply here and Wikipedia shouldn't give preference to over another. If a primary topic shall be determined, I believe the Tanka people have a stronger case than tanka poetry, being a legally recognised ethno-cultural group in Hong Kong where English is an official language. Deryck C. 00:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to respond to elvenscout742's allegation that that article (Tanka people) establishes up front the name is not pronounced as "tanka", and standard romanizations of the Chinese name do not spell it that way. This is completely incorrect. The name is pronounced "tanka" in Cantonese, and would be romanised as "Tan Ka" under Hong Kong Government Cantonese Romanisation which isn't one-to-one and therefore not used for phonetic transcription purposes. elvenscout742's misstatement has arisen because there is no universally adopted romanisation scheme for Cantonese. That Cantonese doesn't use voiced consonants, but has aspirated consonants instead, is the reason for the apparent confusion (t'->t, t->d when converting between transcription schemes). The name Tanka is used for the Tanka people article because it is the official name of the group as recognised by the Hong Kong government and popularised by the Hong Kong Museum of History. Deryck C. 19:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * In addition, re "I think the "ka" part of "Tanka" means people, so the name is inaccurate and repetitive." - completely incorrect. "Ka" (家) means family, often extended to mean a business but never an ethnic group. A common usage of the name Tanka is in the phrase "蜑家人" (tan ka yan / daan gaa jan, "water-family people", so the name is neither inaccurate nor repetitive. Deryck C. 22:12, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Regarding Deryck's opposition, per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC we should consider:
 * Incoming wikilinks: Tanka (poetry) has 485 links; Tanka people has 212
 * Wikipedia article traffic statistics: 201208: Tanka (poetry) 4332; Tanka people 2483
 * Google searches - I don't have time right now, but would be surprised if google should buck the trend seen above. A Google web search on 'Tanka', excluding wikipedia.org, (and adding &pws=0 to the search string to eliminate personal search bias) reveals well over 90% of the first 100 results relate to tanka poetry. The remainder were for a fruit bar, a village in Italy, people's handles on Facebook etc. and I didn't see even one for Tanka People. In Google Book search, the results are, as expected, a little more disparate, but the vast majority of the first 100 results relate to poetry, with again not a single result relating to Tanka People.
 * --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 09:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Incoming wikilink and page-hit stats of 2:1 is far from "overwhelming". Deryck C. 19:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Elvenscout said, "The word tanka used by itself (i.e., without "People" or "Movement" added) in English refers overwhelmingly to the genre of Japanese poetry." The Google web search and Book search results clearly support that assertion. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 19:41, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment again regarding Deryck's opposition
 * I was recently involved in a dispute on Talk:Uta monogatari in which it was pointed out a number of times that the word "tanka" in reference to the poetry genre is used constantly in non-specialist literature in English.
 * It doesn't really matter since English is not the primary language of either HK or Japan, but Japan doesn't have an official language. One of the reasons for this is that the highest legal document of the land was composed in English and the English version takes precedence. English is a de facto official language of Japan, and tanka is its national poetry form.
 * The article at haiku would almost certainly remain at its current place even if there was a significant Chinese ethnic group with the same name.
 * elvenscout742 (talk) 11:50, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I also must point out that the original reason for this page being a disambiguation page is that the article presently at Tanka (poetry) was originally created as Tanka but then moved for several years to the name Waka. Chances are that it would still be there if an article on Tanka people and an accompanying disambiguation page hadn't been created in the intervening time. (On a related note, English Wikipedia included an article on the poetry genre for four years before an article on the ethnic group was started.) elvenscout742 (talk) 06:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Your analogy with haiku is distracting to this discussion because there isn't a significant ethnic group called haiku. Deryck C. 19:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Please don't try to cloud the issue by responding only to the weakest of my three points. I completely refuted two of your principal points, and if you have no response to that then your comment is more distracting to the present discussion. elvenscout742 (talk) 06:10, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You may also notice that I've refuted everything you've said about the Tanka ethnic group in your two opening statements. But so what? We discuss in order to get the facts straight and assist other editors and the closing admin to draw a consensus, not to attack each other. We're all friends :) Deryck C. 22:12, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Deryck, in the interest of comprehensiveness, it would be useful if you addressed the points I've raised regarding WP:PRIMARYTOPIC which are, I believe, the core issue here. In this context, a ratio of 2:1 (incoming wikilink and page-hit stats) is, by any sensible definition, decisive; however, the results of Google Web and Book searches as outlined above are truly overwhelming. Have you any response to this? --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 23:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I have nothing to dispute about the cited statistics. I simply disagree that 2:1 is anywhere close to "decisive" or "overwhelming". Perth, Western Australia vs. Perth, Scotland  had 5:1 and yet the attempt to make Perth, WA the primary topic has created such a fiasco that it went up to ArbCom. The purpose of a primary topic is to help determine what the reader wants, therefore page hit stats (which measures what readers read on Wikipedia) should give more weight than Google results ranking (which measures what prominent writers write).
 * In short: Yes, a few more people want tanka (poetry) than Tanka people, but per precedent the difference isn't large enough to make the poetry the primary topic. Deryck C. 09:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You have not responded, though, to any of the evidence provided that the poetry form is more prominent in English than the ethnic group. I admit my initial statement appears to have contained a few minor errors regarding the name of the ethnic group, but the basic points remain the same. Wikipedia is not a democracy, so your statement that a few more people want tanka (poetry) than Tanka people, but per precedent the difference isn't large enough to make the poetry the primary topic has little significance. It's not about how many voting users want what; it's about what users expect to find under the name "Tanka". My initial proposed solution (disregarding minor details in my statement -- I did not expect a lengthy debate, nor did I expect every word of my request to be put under scrutiny) was to place the more-widely viewed and prominent article under that name, place a link to the only other article that matters at the top of the page, and relegate the others to a disambiguation page. I still don't see any evidence to refute this solution. elvenscout742 (talk) 07:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.