Talk:གཙོ་ངོས།

From Wikipedia

༡ Font sizes
༢ bo.wikipedia sysop
༣ Abt the new transliteration script
༤ Tibetan Wiktionary
༥ translations
༦ ཡག་པོ་ཞེ་དྲགས་འདུག

[རྩོམ་སྒྲིག] Font sizes

Sorry for writing in English and not in Tibetan and sorry for writing without a wiki user.

I noticed that the font sizes are very small. The home page has explicit font sizing for some text, but the rest of the Tibetan Wikipedia is almost unreadable.

I think it would be best to add resonable CSS rules to MediaWiki:Common.css, which can only be done by an administrator. My suggestion is to add the following:

#globalWrapper {
        font-size: 230%;
}
#p-lang div{
      font-size: 75%;
}

This would bring the Tibetan writing to a reasonable size. (Of course it would also make English text bigger, but since this is the Tibetan Wikipedia, the primary interest should be to have readable Tibetan.) Nat Krause, would you [or any other Admin who is reading this] like to make this change or a similar one?

If people think that the font size change makes English text too big, then English Text could be reduced in size, where it occurs by using something like:

<span style="font:size:60%">English text goes here</span>

Someone could also make a template that adjusts the size for English and other latin text, but I am not very good with wiki templates.

Best regards Christian

Hi Christian, that is a good suggestion, probably 230% is a bit too much, it might probably be enough to set it to 180-200%, best regards, --Spacebirdy ༡༤:༥༢, ༣ ཟླ་ལྔ་བ། ༢༠༠༨ (UTC)

Dear Spacebirdy. Generally, I like things a bit big and maybe I also feel better, if the letters are a bit bigger and therefore easier to distinguish for me as someone who is not fluent in Tibetan. I am also happy with 200% or something. However, please notice that 200% does not mean twice as big as it is now. The current English text uses the size 127% which gives a font size of at least 11pt for people who have left the font settings of their operating sytem and browser at the default. 180% would then be at least 16pt, 200% would be at least 18pt and 230% would be at least 20 or 21pt (depending on how the browser's rounding). Maybe we could try to start with 200% then? Is there an admin who would like to add the following setting:

#globalWrapper {
        font-size: 200%;
}
#p-lang div{
      font-size: 80%;
}

Best Regards Faxi(alias Christian) ༡༠:༠༦, ༡༠ ཟླ་ལྔ་བ། ༢༠༠༨ (UTC)

P.S.I have now tried how 200% would look. Actually, quite small. At some point, the Tibetan home page had some text which had an explicit font setting of 26px. To get an identical size, one would need a setting of 260%, which means that the text would be exactly twice as big, as English text (which, as I said before has 127%). Since Tibetan has stacks where up to four glyphs are stacked on top of each other, having the Tibetan text at least twice as big as English doesn't seem very unreasonable to me. 220% is the smallest size where on my computer the Tibetan still renders nicely. Below that, it becomes too small and the lines become quite smudged by Anti-Aliasing. So, I would prefer 230% or at least 220%. What do you think? Faxi ༡༠:༢༧, ༡༠ ཟླ་ལྔ་བ། ༢༠༠༨ (UTC)

[རྩོམ་སྒྲིག] bo.wikipedia sysop

(Apologies in advance for addressing the editors of this Wikipedia in English rather than Tibetan. I don't really speak any Tibetan and I figured this would be the best way to communicate with everybody. 对不起我用英文给你们讲，而不是藏文。事实上我不会藏文，中文水平也不太高，觉得这个情况英文是最方便交流的办法。)

I happened to notice that this Wikipedia doesn't currently have any sysops or bureaucrats. I would be happy to serve as one or the other myself, until such time as home-grown Tibetan Wikipedia editors are available for the job. I don't really understand Tibetan at all, although I can read names and such. However, I can be of service deleting pages created by vandals and spammers, or rolling back such edits if they come en masse. I am already a sysop on jbo.wikipedia and I'm known as a long-standing and harmless editor on en.wikipedia.

I'm posting this message here to see if anyone in the bo.wikipedia community has any opinions on this. If not, after some time has passed, I'll take steps on meta to get bureaucrat permission.—Nat Krause ༠༥:༡༣, ༡༡ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

I would support your request. (Actually there is currently no frequent editor in the bo.wikipedia community). Perhaps most native Tibetans do not yet have access to the computer or the internet. --Jason ༠༩:༡༨, ༡༡ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

Pardon me for using English here, but I dont know Bod Skad very well. I have just been assigned as a temporary admin here to install and develop the Tibetan inkey. In the meantime, if there is anyother changes such as change of the messages etc., please feel free to contact me at my page in Nepal Bhasa. Thank you.--Eukesh ༡༧:༡༩, ༡༧ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

Since no significant local community present yet at bowiki, a 3 months temporary sysop status is more reasonable in these cases. So you have 3 month temporary sysop status now. --Dbl2010 ༢༢:༡༤, ༢༠ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

[རྩོམ་སྒྲིག] Abt the new transliteration script

I dont know Tibetan script. However, as this script is very similar to devnagari, I am trying to develop an inkey for it. Please help me correct and modify the script. The current inkeys are: "k":"ཀ","ཀh":"ཁ","g":"ག","ནg":"ང","c":"ཅ","ཅh":"ཆ","j":"ཇ","ནy":"ཉ","t":"ཏ","ཏh":"ཐ","d":"ད","n":"ན","p":"པ","པh":"ཕ","b":"བ","m":"མ","ཏs":"ཙ","ཙh":"ཚ","དz":"ཛ","w":"ཝ","z":"ཟ","ཟh":"ཞ","A":"འ","y":"ཡ","r":"ར","l":"ལ","སh":"ཤ","s":"ས","h":"ཧ","a":"ཨ","I":"ཨི","U":"ཨུ","E":"ཨེ","O":"ཨོ","i":"ི","u":"ུ","e":"ེ","o":"ོ","0":"༠","1":"༡","2":"༢","3":"༣","4":"༤","5":"༥","6":"༦","7":"༧","8":"༨","9":"༩"

Thank you.--Eukesh ༡༧:༤༡, ༡༧ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

I don't know anything about inkeys, but what you have described above is essentially the Wylie system of transcribing written Tibetan (it doesn't display very well, because some of the Latin letters have been transformed into the corresponding Tibetan). Since this is very widely used and agreed upon, you should probably conform to Wylie. I use Tisé, which is Tibetan input program using Wylie.—Nat Krause ༠༧:༡༩, ༡༩ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

Please tell me about Tise. Which one is the most used? Which one is easier for beginners and editors here? Also, if possible please provide me with inkeys of these systems. I have used modified Wylie system here. Judging by other abugida derived from Brahmi, this system seems incomlete as a lot of sounds are not present in this system. Arent there any Tibetans involved in this project? Also, please check whether the vowel marks are correctly placed as there are a lot of problems with the vowel marks in these scripts. Thank you.--Eukesh ༠༨:༥༥, ༢༠ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

You can find more information about Tise here: [1]. I don't really know much about any other input systems, so I can't comment on which is most common. Also, I'm not really sure what you mean by "inkeys"; Tise's input pattern is almost always identical to Extended Wylie transliteration, which includes punctuation and is case sensitive; Extended Wylie is identical to the original Wylie with regard to lowercase letters. Wylie does include every sound that existed in Classical Tibetan, which is the basis of Tibetan spelling. The placement of vowel marks looks fine to me so far, although this might be different for you depending on what fonts you have installed on your computer.

As for Tibetan people on this project, I am yet to be aware of a Tibetan Wikimedian on any project. As Jason pointed out, most Tibetan people, unfortunately, don't have access to computers, the internet, or Wikipedia.—Nat Krause ༢༢:༤༢, ༢༢ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the information and help. About Tibetans not being able to use internet, I dont think that the statement is wholly correct. I live in Nepal and I know a lot of Tibetans who use internet. Besides, there are a lot of Tibetan websites as well. They have a better presence in cyberspace than say Newars of Nepal. However, there are very few Tibetan wikipedians. I think we can change this by telling Tibetan people about wikipedia. I really appreciate your attempts to look after this wikipedia till Tibetans find it. But would not it be better if we went to the Tibetan forums or Tibetan online community and bring some interested volunteers here so that they can form a community of their own? Please put up your views and correct me wherever I am wrong. Thank you. --Eukesh ༡༧:༣༢, ༢༤ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)

Absolutely. I think there are a lot of language communities that could benefit a lot from Wikipedia, if they have relatively few outlets for writing in their language on the internet. Tibetan is certainly among them! Anything we can do make Tibetan speaking people aware of bo.wikipedia would be excellent. I only know of a couple Tibetan forums myself, but I'll post a message about Wikipedia there when I get a chance. It would cool if you'd do what you can think of publicise this as well. Great idea!—Nat Krause ༠༢:༤༥, ༢༥ January ༢༠༠༧ (UTC)