Template talk:Lang-sr

sr-Cyrl
This template isn't setting a language code for the text. AFAIK, is the assumed script and the Latin variant needs to be specified ; possibility needing a second template. —Sladen (talk) 18:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I've made template:lang-sr-Cyrl. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent, thank you! —Sladen (talk) 14:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Italic text
Shouldn't the text written into Serbian language have italic style, something like:

""

instead of

""

to be in line with templates of other languages, like: English, German, Albanian, etc.

I'm facing problems with articles that need to cite the Serbian language, let's say with Kosovan passport, where I'm being forced to make the text in Serbian language, italic:

"The Kosovan passport (Pasaportë; Пасош or Pasoš) is a travel document ..." "The Kosovan passport (Pasaportë; Пасош or Pasoš) is a travel document ..."

I think it would be better to make the text italic right from the template.

Thank you  kedadi al  00:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Back in 2006, I thought the same, but was reverted. This template has to support both Latin and Cyrillic, so I guess that there is some sort of a problem with italicizing Cyrillic text? I don't know the details. I'll leave the edit request open. In any event, I created Lang-sr-Latn which is italicized, which can be a workaround. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 14:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I found the reason at MOS:Ety:
 * Text in non-Latin scripts (such as Greek or Cyrillic) should not be italicized at all—even where this is technically feasible; the difference of script suffices to distinguish it on the page.
 * So I guess we can't change the default. Would you prefer if a Latn=yes parameter was added that made text italic? --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 10:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Request disabled for now. Please reactivate when you have decided what should be done. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * In the meantime, I noticed that Serbian Cyrillic language explains another reason why italicizing Serbian Cyrillic would be a bad idea - depending on the font, five letters wouldn't come out right. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

|links=no missing
Despite what the documentation says, this template does not accept and pass on the parameter no which seems to be standard behaviour in other templates in Category:Lang-x templates, e.g. Template:Lang-de or Template:Lang-fr. I think the necessary code would look like this:

-- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The documentation is the same for all the templates; quite a few don't actually support links yet, but Yes check.svg Done anyway - I fixed up  about three months ago in the same manner. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:44, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request, 28 August 2016
Please replace the contents of this template with the contents of the sandbox, which I have converted to use Template:Language with name and transliteration (like Template:Lang-ru and some others), allowing passing transliteration into the template. Thanks! — OwenBlacker (Talk) 01:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 01:45, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

You completelly missed ut that Serbian has nothing to do with Russian and that Serbian is a specific language that uses Cyrillic just as Latin (unlike Russian which uses just Cyrillic) so Serbian Latin version is NOT any transliteration to Latin but just another version of Serbian language. This template should eliminate the word "traliteration" and just use both versions, Cyrillic and Latin. Pease don´t mix Serbian with Russian or any other languages if you are not familiarised with it. FkpCascais (talk) 03:01, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Latin text not "romanisation"
Is there any way to modify the template in order to prevent Latin text with this template from not displaying as a "romanisation"? For example, from the Serb List article – ... (Српска листа ..., the template displays the Latin text as a "romanisation". However, the Serbian language, according to its Wikipedia article itself, is a digraphia. More importantly, according to the pravopis, the language is written equally with the Cyrillic and Latin scripts; this situation is materially different to languages such as Russian or Bulgarian, where there is no authoritative way of transliteration, whereas in Serbian, the letters and (for the most part) directly interchangeable. So once again, can we change the template so that it reads in some way like ... (Serbian: Српска листа / Srpska lista)... LeoC12 (talk) 03:15, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree.
 * I solved the problem here this way. --5.43.102.127 (talk) 16:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Per W (talk) 18:59, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

But it should be fixed in the main template in order to not say "Romanized", only then it would be fixed properly. FkpCascais (talk) 03:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * This would require changes in the underlying generic code inside lang-x I think, which is a technicality but a non-trivial one still. Instead of that, in the last year we've been introducing the use of the more clear templates like lang-sr-Cyrl-Latn and lang-sr-Latn-Cyrl where one can tag each script on input. --Joy (talk) 06:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

As everyone can see, the Serbian Latin script predated all others and was used equally along Cyrillic since 19 century. What we face here is an attempt to remove Serbian Latin (Used in Austro-Hungary) from Serbian language. Please lets fix this and remove the ridiculous "romanization" wording as if meant Serbian doesn't use Latin script, when it does, and since centuries ago. FkpCascais (talk) 03:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * You should move this part to e.g. Talk:Romanization of Serbian where I've already tried to tell people that this is a problem in the article main space, but we could not reach clear consensus. --Joy (talk) 06:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Romanization
Could we redirect this template to Template:lang-sr-Cyrl-Latn, with the transl value displaying "Serbian Latin" instead of "Romanized"? ImStevan (talk) 10:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I Agree. That would solve the problem. FkpCascais (talk) 17:48, 31 August 2023 (UTC)