Talk:喀什噶爾

Template

@Justinrleung Hi, do you have any idea why {{bor|zh|ug|قەشقەر|tr=Qeshqer}} doesn't work? Dokurrat (talk) 03:45, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: Probably because Uyghur transliteration should not be capitalized. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:50, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Informal?

@LibCae Are you sure it's informal? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:03, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Sure as officially in Mainland China, you may check in any journalistic or common records. Otherwise it’s also used officially for a specific historic tourist attraction of the Old City (which is partially ticket-selling), but not ether the settlement or it’s administration.

LibCae (talk) 05:47, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: However it seems to be more suitable with just labels ‘historical’ and ‘poetic’ (or also ‘literary’?). It might be a better alternative. How do you think? LibCae (talk) 09:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@LibCae: I'd say ‘historical or poetic’ would be good. It's not used officially, but that doesn't really make it informal (as defined at Appendix:Glossary#informal). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:48, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Yup it is better. LibCae (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung, LibCae What does ‘historical’ mean here? I have a book from 2018 that shows this on a map of 19th century China, a computer made map. Also, the word is an entry in the MOE revised chongbian dictionary of Taiwan. The dictionary treats it like a current name in use for Taiwan Mandarin to describe this location. Geographyinitiative (talk) 17:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I would say this is still a term in part of modern Mandarin, even if only used to describe a historical situation. Words used today are not historical in that sense. I think I am mixing up different qualifiers? Geographyinitiative (talk) 17:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: It's historical in the sense that it's no longer (officially) used by the place itself to call itself. If we're using it in a historical context (like you described: a map of 19th century China, even if written in 2018), then the label is correct. Otherwise, if it's no longer used even in a historical context (which would be unusual for place names), we'd be using "archaic" or "dated". I'm not sure about the situation with what Taiwan officially calls it, though. Even though it's still being updated, Guoyu Cidian is often antiquated because it's kind of frozen in the pre-PRC mindset. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion in 欽定西域同文志

See [1]. RcAlex36 (talk) 17:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)