Talk:Waidhofen an der Ybbs

Do not use Germany German pronunciations for Austrian places

@Kbb2: Please stop adding German Standard German pronunciations for articles like this one that ought to use Austrian German. In your edit summaries, you have given several explanations, none of which are convincing:

1. “we use NSG for ASG on WP” [1]
   • No, we don’t, it is just your POV that we should do that. No other editor besides you has shared that POV so far.
   • To the contrary, your POV that we should use Germany German transcriptions instead of Austrian (or Swiss) has been rejected by all other editors who have participated in the discussions on Help talk:IPA/Standard German: LiliCharlie, Freigut, and yours truly.
2. “we've already discussed this” [2]
   • No, we have never discussed the pronunciation of Waidhofen an der Ybbs or whether adding [ʔ] is OK.
3. “Undid revision 924174506 by J. 'mach' wust (talk) per Help talk:IPA/Standard German nobody has presented a convincing argument to transcribe ASG on WP as something separate from NSG as there are conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature, you've participated in that discussion yourself” [3]
   • Your POV is not the default that everybody else has to fall back to unless they can convince you. That is really not how Wikipedia works. If you want to get any traction, it is your job to convince the others.
   • You have constructed the apparence of “conflicting descriptions” by comparing with a detailed (allo-)phonetic analysis of Austrian German that was not meant to be a dictionary-style description. In this way, I could easily construe “conflicting descriptions” for any IPA key that we are using on Wikipedia.
   • On the other hand, it appears you have chosen to ignore more dictionary-style descriptions of Austrian German that have been repeatedly pointed out to you.

In the spirit of WP:BRD, I am reverting your edits again. Please discuss first. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 08:41, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: I'm not answering to this, especially given your dishonest edit summary which reads "this issue was never discussed". Here is the discussion in which we've established the consensus to treat ASG the same as NSG on WP: Help_talk:IPA/Standard_German#Remove_Austrian_and_especially_Swiss_SG_from_the_guide. I'm not going through that again. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Please read that discussion again: Nobody has shared your POV of using Germany German instead of Austrian (or Swiss) German. To the contrary, out of four editors who have participated, three editors have opposed it. There is no consensus for your POV. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 10:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: Numbers aren't an argument. Nobody has addressed the issue of conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature, which makes it a dealbreaker. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

As I have said above: Your POV is not the default that everybody else has to fall back to unless they can convince you. That is really not how Wikipedia works. If you want to get any traction, it is your job to convince the others.

And as I have said above: You have constructed the apparence of “conflicting descriptions” by comparing with a detailed (allo-)phonetic analysis of Austrian German that was not meant to be a dictionary-style description. In this way, I could easily construe “conflicting descriptions” for any IPA key that we are using on Wikipedia. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 10:39, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: This isn't about "my POV" (you really like that phrase, no?) but about common sense. It is also common sense not to treat German IPA completely literally and it is a fact that most features of Standard Austrian pronunciation are already recoverable from NSG transcriptions. This, by the way, is exactly how both pronunciation dictionaries tell us to treat their transcriptions. Reading them literally is a choice, not something you have to do (which you've been suggesting pretty much all along). Please don't impose on us your choice to treat the dictionary IPA literally. It is your business to do so. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:43, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Just by boasting that your POV is common sense does not make it so. The fact is that nobody has shared your POV so far. Please stop changing Austrian German pronunciations to Germany German pronunciations unless you can build a consensus to do so. And please do not BRRD, but WP:BRD. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 10:50, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: Thanks for the offer, but no. It is on other editors to provide a solution to reconcile the conflicting descriptions of ASG, which they haven't done (that includes you by the way). It's also on you when you treat NSG IPA literally. It's your right to do so, but don't impose it on other people - especially if that POV is at odds with what the dictionaries themselves tell their readers to do. There's a consensus not to transcribe ASG on WP. It was added along with SSG to the guide about 4 years ago without any prior discussion nor sourcing. I say that the sources provide conflicting descriptions of ASG and I've already proven that. You seem to be operating on a false assumption that we have to differentiate ASG from NSG on Wikipedia, and we don't. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:55, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

There has never been a consensus not to transcribe ASG on WP. You have proposed no longer transcribing Austrian German at Help talk:IPA/Standard German. We have discussed your proposal, but your proposal has not found any support. Instead, three out of the four editors who have participted have rejected your proposal.

Now you are trying to push your POV even though nobody else has supported it. That is really not how Wikipedia works.

Whether or not Help:IPA/Standard German has a dedicated column for Austrian German does not matter. The help page refers to Standard German phonology which obviously reflects the accepted POV that standard German is a pluricentric language that does not have a uniform pronunciation. Also, Austrian German was introduced to that help page more than nine years ago [4], and after discussion. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 11:19, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: That is false. I challenged the existing weak consensus to transcribe ASG that wasn't backed up by sources (meaning: whoever included ASG in the guide wasn't aware of the conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature. No wonder that was the case, as the JIPA article about ASG was published after both of those edits were performed). I was the only one who actually discussed the fact that there are conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature and because of that we shouldn't transcribe it. Nobody has challenged that. I didn't need any support when the opposition wasn't based on the literature but on wishes of individual editors. Numbers are not an argument, and there is a consensus not to transcribe ASG on WP as something separate from NSG. You trying to talk around that doesn't change it.

You're not only trying to equate my messages which are based on sources with the opinions of other people that weren't backed by sources, you're also trying to tell me that the latter are more important. WP:RS should tell you that it's not only not true, it's the other way around.

It does matter. Per WP:PRON transcriptions linking to Help:IPA/Standard German should agree with that guide.

This diff is just as unsourced as this one. This also doesn't address the issue of conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature, and the fact that transcriptions provided by pronunciation dictionaries already account (for the most part) for the phonetics of ASG. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 11:30, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I was the only one who actually discussed the fact that there are conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature and because of that we shouldn't transcribe it. Nobody has challenged that. Yes, I have challenged it repeatedly: there are no “conflicting descriptions”. You have created the appearance of conflicting descriptions by referring to a detailed allophonetic analysis. However, nobody has ever considered introducing detailed allophonetic analysis on Help:IPA/Standard German. That help page provides broad dictionary-style transcriptions, not detailed allophonetic analysis.

Again: There has never been a consensus not to transcribe ASG on WP as something separate from NSG. On Help talk:IPA/Standard German, you have proposed we should no longer transcribe Austrian German. We have discussed your proposal. Your proposal has not found any support. Instead, three out of the four editors who have participted have rejected your proposal. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 12:49, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: Yes, there are. I didn't "create" anything, I quoted the sources. You trying to repeatedly make this about me is suspicious to say the least.

With all due respect, I don't care. You don't get to reject a source-based attempt to challenge the status quo with wishful thinking. You were the second most active participant in that discussion (or the most active one, along with me - I don't want to count the messages right now). You've had more than enough chances to come up with something other than "I don't agree" and "there are no conflicting descriptions". Numbers are irrelevant. I'm now reverting you. Unless you have something to say that is based on WP:RS, I'm outta here. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 12:56, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Numbers—and, of course, arguments—ARE relevant, Kbb2. Why do your refuse the discussion? Why are you so stubborn? --Freigut (talk) 14:20, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Freigut: Source-based arguments made by any number of editors are relevant. This is why, the only one who actually took into account the conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature, was able to successfully challenge the status quo. Mach seems to think otherwise but all I can see are words that don't address the issue.

Unless either of you two (or other editors) are able to properly address the issue of conflicting descriptions of ASG in the literature, there doesn't seem to be anything to discuss here. It's on you if you can't challenge my position with WP:RS, including the ones I've quoted myself.

If anything, you should take a look at your friend Mach first. It's him who's basically given up on the discussion regarding ASG (but not the one about SSG) at Help talk:IPA/Standard German and now says that it had a different outcome to what it actually was. This WP:GASLIGHTING nonsense should stop. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 14:42, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Please abstain from alleging I have said things I never did: I have never given up on the discussion regarding ASG. And the outcome was that your POV did not gain any support at all. Both things are plain for all to see, yet somehow you still pretend the opposite. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 15:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: I described what you did, not what you said. I don't remember seeing anything like it in your messages, that's true.

Viewpoints not based on WP:RS or those that, in effect, dismiss RS have no relevance. I'm sorry Mach but you don't get to talk your way out of the fact that you failed to address my argument properly, nor do you get to equate personal opinions not based on RS or those who fail to address what I said with my arguments that are based on RS. That's not how WP works. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I have adressed your argument over and over again. Our IPA guides are not detailed allophonetic analyses, but broad dictionary-style transcriptions. Take a detailed allophonetic analysis of any language. There will always be “conflicting descriptions” with our IPA guides. Your insistence on a detailed allophonetic analysis is nothing but a diversionary tactic: seemingly plausible, though ultimately irrelevant.

Anyhow, it seems you are unwilling to get that point, so now we can wait for the outcome of the RfC. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 17:04, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: You seem to be well-versed in diversionary tactics yourself, being the one who applies them regularly (the sentence There will always be “conflicting descriptions” with our IPA guides is one of the most recent examples of that). And about that RfC - it's not gonna override what I said about ASG (it still needs to be addressed), and the fact that you didn't bring it up yourself shows your true intentions - preserving different transcriptions of NSG, ASG and SSG on WP at all costs. You're choosing to ignore the fact that the dictionary transcriptions already cover all three varieties almost equally (no, they don't represent NSG to the exclusion of everything else) and the fact that there's variation within NSG that's similar to that found in ASG, which makes transcribing them as separate even more of a useless endeavor. It's not my business that you're doing that, but I find it disruptive that you should do that to other editors and readers. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 06:08, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: and @Kbb2:, I'm the one who originally tagged the name to be transcribed and I only just noticed this conflict. This whole debate is confusing, but I had an idea: Why not just lost both Standard and Austrian pronunciations, even compressed as a note? Considering the context of the town, would not that be good and informative for everyone?--~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 22:38, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Sigehelmus: If the Austrian pronunciation is recoverable from the Northern one then there's no point in doing that. Those who are interested in the local pronunciation can apply a non-literal reading of the IPA, where the glottal stops are dropped and the [eːɐ̯] of der is turned into [ɛɐ̯]. Here's the problem though: in Northern Standard German, the glottal stop before "an" can be dropped as well (as far as I know) and the r-diphthong in der can be [ɛɐ̯] too! It's only the glottal stop in "Ybbs" that is mandatory in this position in NSG. If Mach isn't aware of this variation within NSG itself then I don't know why he's editing in the area of German phonetics and phonology. This is pretty much 101 stuff. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 06:08, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@Sigehelmus: Because of Kbb2’s obstinacy, I have now initiated a proper RfC to settle this question once and for all: Help talk:IPA/Standard German#Should we use Austrian (or Swiss) Standard German pronunciation for topics related to Austria (or Switzerland)?

@Kbb2: Your guess about the Germany German pronunciation of “an” in this context is not only mistaken, but also in bizarre contradition to the pronunciation you insist on. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 07:29, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@J. 'mach' wust: I do not insist on any pronunciation but on transcription. You don't get to impose on others your subjective choice to treat dictionary transcriptions literally. You've chosen that route because it then allows you to falsely claim that treating them literally is the only option (and you do that so that SSG and ASG are preserved on Help:IPA/Standard German), which is a blatant manipulation that contradicts the instructions of the authors of those dictionaries themselves. I think I trust them more than you, as far as interpreting their transcription is concerned. Also, someone who claims that Atem can be pronounced with a syllabic nasal (which would make the word sound like Apem) doesn't have a lot of credibility.

I'm glad that we're pretty much approaching the end of the conversation about transcribing German on WP because I thoroughly dislike interacting with you. You're dishonest. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 07:40, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Very sorry, what I meant to say is that what you have guessed about Germany German pronunciation is in bizarre contradiction to the transcription you have chosen.

The «Atem» question or your continuous dismissal of WP:BRD show that you expect your own ideas always to prevail unless proven wrong. That is really not how Wikipedia works. You need to justify your own ideas by finding sources that back them up, not by expecting other editors to find sources that prove them wrong. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 07:52, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Austria Lower Austria location map.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)