Talk:Romanization of Greek

ISO states that its tables (that his page includes supposedly as an ISO standard) are for information purposes only^[1]. It is my understanding that the standard only attempts to set a precedent for certain 'types' of systems based on what qualities transliteration/transcription systems should abide by based on certain needs they may fulfill. So the tables only seem to be examples of a system. The tables in the paper released by ISO are neither proposals nor an integral part of the international standard itself.

Thus, I believe that a clarification in this Wikipedia article is warranted so non-expert users are less likely to be confused. Frankly speaking, I don't think I myself am qualified but perhaps someone with knowledge on the subject should look into this and write something with more validity. Thankfully that is mentioned in the Greek version of the article on [ISO 843], but non in the English one. Gnkgr (talk) 00:36, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Wiktionary uses only the scientific romanization whereas we don't even list it and instead list three others. I think it's a very bad idea to use a different romanization than Wiktionary. Most editors will copy-paste romanizations from there.

In addition, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Lang-grc refers to this page but doesn't explain which of the three romanizations listed should be used.

The easiest and best solution would be to automate the process using the code at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Template:inherited or is it https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Module:grc-translit ? --Espoo (talk) 21:50, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

What is the reverse of this process called? Is there an article about that? Should there be? Hellenization? That does not seem to be it. Rwflammang (talk) 20:28, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I have again removed the un-referenced changes that BetaFromEEVV has made to this article. There are two issues with the change. One is that there are significant changes to the content of the article that aren't referenced at all. The other is that the change introduces the invocation of a reference named "betagreek", which isn't defined. This generates are ferencing error and adds the article to Category:Pages with broken reference names. The article is already tagged for referencing problems, and new referencing issues should never be deliberately added to an article.

(Oop! Looks like Future Perfect at Sunrise did this reversion while I was writing here.) -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Betagreek is my Greek romanization. I just wanna fit in... BetaFromEEVV (talk) 11:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The Kai ligature (ϗ), for those unaware, is a symbol used occasionally to abbreviate "και" in manuscripts and signage. Where could it be put in the article, since it was clearly not part of the alphabet. JordiLopezboy (talk) 23:44, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there is a specialized Romanization for ligatures or abbreviations like that (except perhaps in Beta Code, which is only marginally in the scope of this article). Romanization is typically done on the fully spelled-out text, letter by letter, so the Romanization of ϗ would simply be "kai". Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

@Future Perfect at Sunrise Well, on Wiktionary, ϗ is romanized as an ampersand. Yes, literally. JordiLopezboy (talk) 02:24, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Well, that might be a reasonable choice if you're translating a text that uses "ϗ", but as a transliteration in the strict sense, I doubt it has much use. In any case, as long as it's not defined in any of the formal standards we can cite here, it's of no relevance to us. The use on Wikitionary was just made up by some Wikipedian, probably on the spot. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:31, 3 September 2025 (UTC)