Talk:Andalusian language movement

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Languages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Linguistics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Spain Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I'm removing the "pseudolinguistics" tag because the movement isn't making any pseudoscholarly empirical claims, at least according to this article. If the idea was that Andalusian Spanish is a descendant of Etruscan or the ancestor of all languages or something like that, then sure, we'd be dealing with pseudoscholarship. But this looks like an ordinary case of "let's treat X as a separate language as a matter of heritage", which which isn't the sort of thing that can be true or false. Botterweg14 (talk) 21:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert on this topic but I want to state that I speak Andalusian and it is in no way a different language from standard Spanish, so it's not one of the usual disputes regarding Arabic, Chinese or German and their dialects for example. It's a fringe idea. Super Ψ Dro 13:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to any of that. The issue is just over the "pseudolinguistics" category, which should be reserved for bullshit empirical claims. Botterweg14 (talk) 14:09, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sure. If you know some other similar category that would be more appropriate here, you're welcome to add it. Super Ψ Dro 15:05, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From reading the article, the movement has achieved quite a lot to promote and standardise the dialect; why has the word fringe been used throughout? None of these uses of the word are cited directly- it feels very biased if no academic sources use it or some direct synonym. I'm by no means an expert, might be getting a bit over-philological on this so maybe it's appropriate, but it seems very belittling for no apparent reason. 86.3.41.65 (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I speak Andalusian, and live in Andalusia. I can tell it is a fringe idea among Andalusians. Though I get your point, it is true it could try to prove with more strength why it is a fringe idea. But some justification is already done at the Background section. Ethnologue classifies Andalusian as Spanish. Super Ψ Dro 20:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Andalusian and live in Andalusia as well. Andalusian is to Spanish like Bosnian, Montenegrin, Croatian and Serbian are to the standard language spoken in the former Yugoslavia; maybe, even closer. It makes no sense to differentiate it, and it's only done because of nationalistic purposes. 195.77.80.194 (talk) 08:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

Yeah it's the second time that sentence is cited in this talk page and there's only three threads. Andalusian is not "generally" considered a Spanish variety, it is always considered so by serious linguists. I find your interpretation of WP:SYNTH too strict. My version only stated one fact, that Andalusian is classified as Spanish, and its cited source verified exactly that. However, yes, the text was intentionally written to cause a contrast that the reader could notice. Rather than that this can be disputed as a fact I rather see it as that this fact is disputed by some. I do not believe such a subtlety requries verification (I can invoke

WP:SKYISBLUE

) and I think the same logic could be applied to your version, since your text "implies" that there are times in which linguists go against this notion.

By the way, as for the WP:3RR rule you mentioned in the part of your comment you deleted, it is you who has explicitly reverted me twice. I have only once, before that I did not think such a minute detail actually constituted an issue. I do not think this counts as a revert [1]. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 19:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify what you mean by "Rather than that this can be disputed as a fact I rather see it as that this fact is disputed by some"? Botterweg14 (talk) 21:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That Andalusian is a dialect of Spanish is a fact. Adding "generally" implies there's room for other interpretations. I am open to some other wording but if I've understood your concerns correctly I think there's not much room for flexibility. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 21:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andalusian is the sum of several dialects of Spanish. Their common trait is simply being spoken in the autonomous community of Andalusia. In fact that is how most or all dialects of Spanish are defined: by administrative divisions. --Jotamar (talk) 00:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They're always regarded as variants of Spanish. I am opposed to adding the word generally because it implies there are views suggesting Andalusian is not a Spanish variant but a language. And there are as this article shows, just not by serious academic authors and publications. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 23:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest seeking advice on WikiProject Linguistics. There is likely someone there with a background in sociolinguistics or variationist linguistics who can sort things out. Botterweg14 (talk) 23:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3O if necessary. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 09:17, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

You should also leave a comment at Wikipedia talk:No original research to argue whether SYNTH applies or not. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 09:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edits. I ask you to seek consensus for your points. You are attempting to alter the long-standing version. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 11:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]