Glyph origin --> Etymology

But I still don't think it should be converted to Etymology yet, since there are a few entries that would result in having two etymology headers under Chinese, but not really due to different etymologies but different uses of the word etymology.

Is that such an issue? We have multiple etymology sections in lots of entries.

Multiple etymology sections are only appropriate if they have different definitions/pronunciations for them, but glyph origin is for the symbol. See 象, where it looks completely out of place.

They're not the same concept; glyph origin describes why the character looks the way it does and etymology represents the sound associated with the character.

The point is still that new headers must be discussed and have consensus, you can't just use anything you like. And we use "Etymology" for characters in other scripts already, so using it for Chinese too was the option that agreed most with existing practice.

I agree with Justin and Suzukaze here. Normally I don't comment on matters like this but this seems a clear case where the change is wrong. Bots aren't supposed to make controversial changes, especially not without discussion. I'd suggest you revert the changes and get some consensus first.

You want me to revert to a state that doesn't have consensus?

Yes. Two wrongs don't make a right. Whether or not there is consensus for the header "Glyph Origin" has no bearing on whether there's consensus to change this to "Etymology", which there clearly isn't.

I will not revert without consensus for the "Glyph origin" header.

If you don't revert, how would anyone be able to target these specific headers for conversion to the newly agreed consensus?

That applies to me reverting too, doesn't it? If we establish "Glyph origin" as the practice for characters, all character entries that currently use "Etymology" would have to be changed, not just the Chinese entries that the bot edited.

Before, some entries had ===Glyph origin=== and ===Etymology=== as separate headers. Now both are appearing as separate ===Etymology=== headers. Before, we could easily target just ===Glyph origin=== in order to change that to whatever we decide is appropriate. Now, instead, we have to do more complex heuristics to decide which ===Etymology=== header to change.

Please revert Mewbot's changes in this regard.

Ok, which entries do I need to revert?

All of Mewbot's changes that turned ===Glyph origin=== into ===Etymology===.

And which are those?

I think I got them all. I looked at MewBot's edits to pages in Category:Han script characters.

Thank you.