Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

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.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2572728388e97b7

Jump to content

Talk:Pogali

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Mohammad Talha Pogli in topic The problems, and how to resolve them

As a researcher, it is crucial to clarify that the label "Khah" is a contemporary political construct rather than a linguistic reality. There is no historical, academic, or census-based trace of this term prior to **2019-2020**. Its sudden emergence—primarily centered in the Sath 𝙱𝚊𝚗𝚒𝚑𝚊𝚕 area—is a clear example of "glottopolitics," where a new identity is manufactured as a reaction to political neglect. By creating an arbitrary distinction from the broader **Pogali** identity, this narrative functions as a misleading propaganda that fragments the region’s cultural heritage for short-term political leverage. Scientifically, the speech remains Pogali; "Khah" remains an unfounded neologism.

The problems, and how to resolve them

[edit]
  1. iso639-3:hkh exists, and says "Khah, Poguli" as the language names;
  2. Both Khah language and Khah dialect redirect here;
  3. @Taskeenmak: always remove "iso3=hkh" parameter, without explaining why remove;
  4. There's a draft Draft:Khah Language that is rejected for submitting because the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia.

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Khah propaganda Mohammad Talha Pogli (talk) 01:59, 22 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Spelling of title

[edit]

The article was just renamed from Poguli to Pogali, based on a claim that this is the common name. I don't know which of the two is more "correct", or if Pogali is more common in informal discourse. What I do know is that while this spelling has some uses in the literature , it's still less common there than Poguli , which is the spelling used in the virtually all the better quality linguistics literature. – Uanfala (talk) 13:10, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Uanfala Thanks for the message. First of all, let me be clear that I am working on Wikipedia: WikiProject Chenab Valley because I belong to this area. I most need to make improvements in the articles about the region. But this is not enough. I would suggest to read this and read this . There are many more citations which use the word "Pogali" as commonly as I firstly saw Poguli, I got surprised because I have seen it as "Pogali" only," but when I researched, I found that "Poguli" is also used. But as per WP:COMMONNAME, I prefer Pogali, because the majority of people search for that. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri (Speak🗣️ or Write✍️) 16:47, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Uanfala and TheChunky: Another problem might be ISO code-related, iso639-3:hkh is created in early this year, but after that, several users (include me, indeed) added to and removed from this article, makes nearly everyone who edited this article touching 3RR line. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply