Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
// request.cf · coarse context
A page that knows where it met you.
Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh 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.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
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
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The two numbers given on this page for the Hajong population differ widely i.e. 175,000 and 19,000 (in the box). I suggest changing both of those to match the current ethnologue data which says 68,000 including Bangladesh and India.Virginia C. Phillips (talk) 06:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion
@Chaipau, Austronesier, Za-ari-masen, and Msasag: The source specifically mentions 'scripts' and not 'alphabets'. It says "Bengali (Bangla) script [Beng], used in Bangladesh and India." Now since in Wikipedia 'Bengali' script refers to the Bengali-Assamese script, I believe we should only mention Bengali-Assamese script in the lead and infobox and remove this text → "Assamese in Assam and Bengali in Bangladesh" which is unsourced here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
I was also thinking about this. In some places we have Assamese, in some it's Bengali etc and being in scripts sections they refer to the alphabet articles. I think these should be changed to "Bengali-Assamese script". Msasag (talk) 07:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Fylindfotberserk and Msasag: Indeed. In this particular case this source calls it Assamese script because of the use of the Assamese ৰ; but Hajong also uses ৗ (page 2 of the PDF) which is a part of neither Bengali nor Assamese alphabets. I am giving this detail just to illustrate the point that we should use "Bengali-Assamese" whenever a script is mentioned. Chaipau (talk) 08:32, 18 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
I agree with Bengali-Assamese script, as alphabet (on Wikipedia atleast) means the variety of a script used by a specific language. Applying that logic, it would be the "Hajong alphabet" of the Bengali-Assamese script. Hajong alphabet or script doesn't give any results in Google Scholar however, so I would stick to Bengali-Assamese script. Glennznl (talk) 14:09, 18 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Austronesier: yes, it should be "Hajong alphabet". From what I see it uses a contracted list of consonants from Bangali-Assamese. Just as Manipuri too does use a contracted list . Chaipau (talk) 17:29, 18 November 2020 (UTC)Reply