![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
Since when is DLS considered a Dutch dialect in mainstream linguitics? Please show some (English) non-chauvinistic sources. Until then, DLS goes, as it is a minority of (Dutch) linguists who share this view, including Rex, though this should be dealt with in detail at the article. What you are (rightfully so) conceding is that a Low German family does exist. Please refrain fromr everting until sources are brought up front. Ulritz 21:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 18:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I will be removing both Limburgish and Low Saxon/German from this template unless actual sources are shown stating that the two languages are Dutch dialects -- as far as my knowledge is concerned, they are German dialects, with Limburgish having leanings towards Dutch. Antman -- chat 08:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Afrikaans recognised as a separate language from Dutch, rather than just being a dialect? Likewise, surely the accepted English name for it is "Afrikaans" these days, not "African Dutch"? Dewrad ( talk) 03:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
This is part of a wider set of varieties already mentioned in this template. Continuing to include this, is a precedent. Sarcelles ( talk) 16:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
This is very similar to Limburgish. Hence I suggest its removal from this template. Sarcelles ( talk) 14:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I think it is redundant to include both. [User:Sarcelles|Sarcelles]] ( talk) 09:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
If this is considered a main dialect/the same grouping of dialects, there should be an additional single article on these varieties. Sarcelles ( talk) 15:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as I can see, there is no contradiction whatsoever between the content of this article and that of nl:Nederlandse dialecten, let alone a serious one. Who is responsible for this tag and on what grounds could it have been assigned? I am very curious to hear which reservations on whose side there possibly could be here. It looks like some unexplicable mystery. -- Ad43 ( talk) 15:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
That is no signicant difference. The Dutch article (which doesn't have to be more accurate) gives the following division:
There is surely nothing wrong with that. Neither it is with our template. It is ridiculous to call notational variants like these contradictions and it is totally unjustified to add a tag of that tenor to our template. I regard that move of yours as nearly an act of vandalism. -- Ad43 ( talk) 17:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
With all due respect to User:Rex Germanus (RIP), I think the image that is used is not good. I have a bad feeling about those words 'the series'. Has wikipedia released multiple volumes about the Dutch language? No, it just handles the entire language at once. Is it possible that those words are taken out of the picture? Apologies for my English Mallerd ( talk) 12:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Is this really different from Hollandic enough to have a place in this template? Sarcelles ( talk) 18:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. What is ISO code of East Flemish? Your dear Chris ( My talk) 19:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Would it be an improvement to rearrange according to this source ? Sarcelles ( talk) 19:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 18:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 17:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
this template has non-Groningian dialects as Westphalian. However, https://www.academia.edu/30823402/Raumstrukturen_im_Niederdeutschen_Eine_Re_Analyse_der_Wenkerdaten has Westphalian as not bordering to the Netherlands. In particular at Google Books, there is the word Zuidnedersaksisch/ Zuid-Nedersaksisch. Kind regards, Sarcelles ( talk) 08:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
Since when is DLS considered a Dutch dialect in mainstream linguitics? Please show some (English) non-chauvinistic sources. Until then, DLS goes, as it is a minority of (Dutch) linguists who share this view, including Rex, though this should be dealt with in detail at the article. What you are (rightfully so) conceding is that a Low German family does exist. Please refrain fromr everting until sources are brought up front. Ulritz 21:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 18:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I will be removing both Limburgish and Low Saxon/German from this template unless actual sources are shown stating that the two languages are Dutch dialects -- as far as my knowledge is concerned, they are German dialects, with Limburgish having leanings towards Dutch. Antman -- chat 08:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Afrikaans recognised as a separate language from Dutch, rather than just being a dialect? Likewise, surely the accepted English name for it is "Afrikaans" these days, not "African Dutch"? Dewrad ( talk) 03:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
This is part of a wider set of varieties already mentioned in this template. Continuing to include this, is a precedent. Sarcelles ( talk) 16:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
This is very similar to Limburgish. Hence I suggest its removal from this template. Sarcelles ( talk) 14:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I think it is redundant to include both. [User:Sarcelles|Sarcelles]] ( talk) 09:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
If this is considered a main dialect/the same grouping of dialects, there should be an additional single article on these varieties. Sarcelles ( talk) 15:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as I can see, there is no contradiction whatsoever between the content of this article and that of nl:Nederlandse dialecten, let alone a serious one. Who is responsible for this tag and on what grounds could it have been assigned? I am very curious to hear which reservations on whose side there possibly could be here. It looks like some unexplicable mystery. -- Ad43 ( talk) 15:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
That is no signicant difference. The Dutch article (which doesn't have to be more accurate) gives the following division:
There is surely nothing wrong with that. Neither it is with our template. It is ridiculous to call notational variants like these contradictions and it is totally unjustified to add a tag of that tenor to our template. I regard that move of yours as nearly an act of vandalism. -- Ad43 ( talk) 17:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
With all due respect to User:Rex Germanus (RIP), I think the image that is used is not good. I have a bad feeling about those words 'the series'. Has wikipedia released multiple volumes about the Dutch language? No, it just handles the entire language at once. Is it possible that those words are taken out of the picture? Apologies for my English Mallerd ( talk) 12:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Is this really different from Hollandic enough to have a place in this template? Sarcelles ( talk) 18:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. What is ISO code of East Flemish? Your dear Chris ( My talk) 19:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Would it be an improvement to rearrange according to this source ? Sarcelles ( talk) 19:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 18:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 17:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
this template has non-Groningian dialects as Westphalian. However, https://www.academia.edu/30823402/Raumstrukturen_im_Niederdeutschen_Eine_Re_Analyse_der_Wenkerdaten has Westphalian as not bordering to the Netherlands. In particular at Google Books, there is the word Zuidnedersaksisch/ Zuid-Nedersaksisch. Kind regards, Sarcelles ( talk) 08:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)