"Is the post I am going to make 100% appropriate within the context of the feelings of a for-fun volunteer website community like Wiktionary?"
"Closely review all talk page posts before posting, especially if you are or have been responding quickly."


Welcome!Edit

Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

  • Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
  • Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
  • If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
  • The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
  • A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
  • If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:23, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

FormattingEdit

Please be careful with your formatting. For making new Chinese character pages, you can copy the translingual info from Thai Wiktionary, and change Thai words into English (ข้ามภาษา ⇒ Translingual; อักษรจีน ⇒ Han character; อ้างอิง ⇒ References). For Chinese definitions, you can take a look at Guoxuedashi; it's best not to use the definitions right off the site, but you can use the definitions from the scanned dictionaries. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Chinese entriesEdit

Hi, please check out {{zh-n}} for the entry layout for Chinese entries. It also (usually) generates Pinyin automatically. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 12:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

presentationEdit

You might be interested in Talk:Cookie. —Suzukaze-c 05:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

FontEdit

I'm using the Hanazono font. You can get it from here: http://fonts.jp/hanazono/

reEdit

[1] is probably what you like.--Zcreator alt (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:36, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

referencesEdit

If you're going to be adding a lot of these, I would recommend making a template, similar to those in Category:Chinese reference templates ;) —Suzukaze-c 00:42, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Please just use {{zh-ref}} and add them to Wiktionary:About Chinese/references. An excessively long list of references is distracting in a dictionary entry. Wyang (talk) 00:53, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
I suppose so, but it's at the end of the entry anyway. It's comparatively easier to ignore, unlike lists of synonyms or massive etymologies. There's also no other way to add a reference for a specific pronunciation. —Suzukaze-c 01:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
It can be added by a note: |..._note=Per {{zh-ref|...}}. Wyang (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
I will check this out fully before I add any more references. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

鄉巴佬Edit

Hi there. Could you fix the pinyin on this page? We do not indicate erhuayin as the default reading for entries without 兒. It should look something like 好玩. ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I see your point. I have made the changes so that the formatting parallels the way it is written on 好玩. Sorry for causing trouble! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:29, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
No worries. Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Tooironic xiāngbalǎor Acceptable? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 14:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Looks good to me. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

嶽飛Edit

You can use {{delete}} instead of {{rfd}} when you create something in error. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

RedirectsEdit

It's not advisable to create redirects here in Wiktionary. I made your entries into redirects because the pages were already made. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Based on the advice you have given me, I will not actively create redirects in Wiktionary. Thanks for your assistance. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:22, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

漢字簡化方案Edit

Perhaps you might like to link to the Wikisource transcription: 漢字簡化方案. —Suzukaze-c 07:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Suzukaze-c, Justinrleung: I have attempted to implement the proposed idea on the page , & I like it a lot~ is it okay? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:53, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Sure ^^ —Suzukaze-c 08:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit

The riddle doesn't really show any meaning of 淶, so I don't think it should be directly in the entry. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung I 100% understand your perspective; you are right. But at the time I edited it, I thought that maybe the example might be useful despite the fact that it doesn't use the meaning of the word in the example. I believe that this riddle/mind-bender is somewhat well-known and reflects authentic usage of the character in Mandarin Chinese. If you aren't swayed by this argument, then I will take it down. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:03, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Quotations are used to illustrate the definitions. If you can't put a definition that corresponds to the quotation, it's not a good idea to have it in the entry itself. See WT:Quotations. I think it can at best be put in the Citations page for reference. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:16, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
@Justinrleung Understood; done. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

zhēnzhūEdit

I remember reading somewhere that non-lemma forms should not have a pronunciation section, that's why I removed it. Is that not policy? ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Suzukaze-c, Tooironic I don't know if it is policy or not, but I have added about 100 to 150 Mandarin audio files on (usually single-syllable) pinyin pages based on what I perceived as established and pervasive precedent. I think Suzukaze-c may know more about this, but I don't know where to look for the relevant policy. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Don't worry about it too much. It's just pinyin. At least the audio file is playable there - it hasn't been playable at 词 entries for months. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
@TooironicOH! I thought it was just me! You're telling me no one can play the audio in the 词 entries? That's truly a CRIME. What is going on? One of the reasons I started adding audio files to the pinyin pages was exactly because I couldn't play the audio files on the 词 entries. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:55, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
This has been a problem for a long time. I have not IT expertise so am unable to help. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:58, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Adding Min Nan referencesEdit

Hi, I don't think it's necessary to add Min Nan references to all those entries, especially if a word doesn't have any particular difference in meaning from the standard Chinese word. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung I understand that you are saying that words like 附近 which mean the same thing in Mandarin and Min Nan need no Min Nan dictionary reference- it is not necessary to add a reference to the Min Nan dictionary. But I would like to present an argument that it is still extremely valuable to add this reference. 1) In the case of words that are not proper nouns (like hù-kīn), the dictionary I am linking to gives readers an audio file of the sound of the Min Nan pronunciation for these words, something we seemingly lack in Wikimedia Commons (there are some Min Nan pronunciations, but no hù-kīn etc.). Adding the reference to the 附近 page gives readers a chance to hear Min Nan pronunciations in the way we already give readers an opportunity to hear Mandarin Chinese pronunciations (by playing the audio file in zh-pron). This increases the utility of Wiktionary. When and if Martin vin Kiser or somebody uploads a bunch of audio files, then yeah, there will no longer be any need for the reference to the 附近 page in the Min Nan dictionary. 2) Yesterday I found two automatically-generated proper noun pronunciations on Wiktionary for districts of Taipei which gave incorrect?/alternate? Min Nan pronunciations for those names: 大安 and 松山. Adding the dictionary reference shows readers that someone has done a simple check of what could EASILY be a mistaken/misleading/not fully-representative Min Nan pronunciation. If 1/6th of the names of the districts of Taipei are not right/representative of all existing pronunciations, anything could be wrong/incompletely representative. For these reasons, I feel that all Min Nan words for which we have no Min Nan pronunciation audio files in Wikimedia Commons would be helped by adding the reference. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
I see. It might be better to call it "Further reading" instead of "References" per Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/"External sources", "External links", "Further information" or "Further reading". If we want audio, we can also add a request for audio (but of course, we wouldn't want to flood that category with requests). As for the autogenerated Min Nan pronunciations, they all come from a relatively reliable source ([2]). For 松山, it probably is a mistake, but I'm not sure about 大安. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 00:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
@Justinrleung How can I make the request for audio files that we are talking about? I think they are probably out there somewhere on the web, but that we just have to find out how to get them uploaded onto Wikimedia Commons legally. Also, even though the purpose of including the links is sometimes only for the audio file, the linked page always support some of the material on the page- the pronunciation- making it qualify as a reference in some sense in my book. I tried to use the website you linked to to search for words, but it gave me a "500 - 內部伺服器錯誤。"error. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
What I meant by request for audio is using {{rfap}}. I'm not sure if any of our Min Nan native speaker editors would be willing to upload some of their own pronunciations, so it might not be that effective to request for audio that way.
About references, I guess it is somewhat useful to support our entries, but I find it odd that we're only putting the link to a Min Nan dictionary. It would also be too much to put links to all possible dictionaries. As a general practice, I feel like we shouldn't put references to commonly referenced dictionaries just to reduce clutter on entries. We already list them under WT:About Chinese/references. As for the dictionary I mentioned above, try this link. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:10, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
@Justinrleung How about now? 附近 --Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
@Justinrleung I believe that my recent 附近 shows promise. But if it is still no good, consider my new edit to 老師, where I, a non-native speaker, uploaded an .ogg of myself pronouncing Min Nan and adding it to the page. (As far as I can tell, Min Nan was not included in http://packs.shtooka.net.) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for my late reply. I feel like we don't really need to specify "Min Nan pronunciation audio" in front of the link because that's not the only info on the page we're linking to. Also, I'd advise against trying to record Min Nan pronunciations yourself since you're non-native. For 老師 it sounds ok enough, so I'm fine with leaving it there, but don't make more Min Nan pronunciation audio files yourself. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Justinrleung I will delete the "Min Nan pronunciation audio" qualifiers, but as long as there are no Wikimedia Min Nan pronunciation files, the link to the Min Nan dictionary is vital. I am considering contacting educational institutions in Taipei to find Min Nan pronunciation audio files that can be uploaded to Wikimedia. Any hints or tips about who or where to contact would be appreciated. I also wanted to point out another 'error'(?) from the the dictionary you gave me: the POJ/Tailuo spellings for 鶯歌 given on Min Nan Wikipedia and in the Taiwan Minnanyu Changyongci Cidian were slightly different from that of the dictionary used to automatically generate the POJ for Wiktionary. I suspect that the dictionary may have made up the pronunciation based on random guessing. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Justinrleung 有關您建議開放《臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典》音檔上傳非營利網站一事,說明如下:因辭典正在進行檢校及改版作業,部分字、音仍在檢視更新,若需調整或改動,等完成相關程序,將進行調整與公布,恐需一定時程,完成後會依據創用CC授權條款,於網頁開放民眾下載運用,請您見諒。--Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:08, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
@Justinrleung I remember we were talking about the pinyin and romanizations in zh-der somewhere, and I wanted to add another argument: all our pages order entries by alphabetical order of the name of the language in English. So I don't see why zh-der's order of picking romanizations would need to be ANY different (unless a rationale could be thought of for specific words). Just go according to the order found in zh-pron. Simple. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:35, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think it's ideal to pick any one dialect to display. Order is different from picking one over another. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 12:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit

Thank you for solving my curiosity. :) B2V22BHARAT (talk) 12:14, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

The actual origins of Chinese characters are not well understood outside of the academic community that studies the issues seriously. Making guesses is good, but it does lead to errors, and Shuowen includes some guesses. There is a gigantic literature of nonsense surrounding the issue, just like there is a gigantic literature about the Bible telling us how all the animals could have fit on the ark etc etc. You are absolutely right to question every glyph origin you see on this website and others. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:31, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah thanks man.. It feels so good when curiosity dissolves into wind by others who know.. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 12:43, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

沒戲唱 & 没戏唱Edit

I have moved your topic to WT:GP where it belong. WT:TR deals with words, senses, parts of speech, etc, not with technical issues. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:45, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

ChineseEdit

@Chuck Entz American English and British English are combined into one English language version on Wikipedia. But there are alternate Wikipedias for the independent languages of Classical Chinese, Gan, Wuu, Min Nan, Min Dong, Cantonese, and Hakka etc.It is wildly inappropriate to treat them all as one thing on Wiktionary when every other language has its own header. I have literally and figuratively been blocked for speaking truth to power. (I don't contest the block for now; I have been a little disruptive.) When they came for the dialect-languages of the Chinese macrofamily, I said nothing-... --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:13, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@Atitarev, Chuck Entz This block is probably deserved, but I wanted to let you know that I have made a new page on Wikipedia- Protection of the Varieties of Chinese. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:54, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
I wouldn't consider your talk-page logorrhea reason for a block in itself, but you do seem to have been recently making edits to the dictionary solely for the purpose of scoring debating points, and that's not good.
At any rate, the unified treatment of Chinese on Wiktionary is for practical reasons- there are plenty of full Min Nan and Dungan entries, for instance, while Mandarin headers seem to be solely for romanization soft-redirects, (and holdovers from the pre-Unified-Chinese days). And, actually, our coverage of the the other Chinese languages is much better now. I remember when most of the content was under the Mandarin headers and there were mostly "rfdefs" for everything else- if we had a header. Oh, and as to your point about the unfairness of treating Han-script Chinese under the same language header but not Latin-script languages: look at the translation tables for water and try to imagine how you could unify eau, aqua, agua, acqua, apă, aua and aba under one spelling, then compare that to , фи, , , , , , , , and . Chuck Entz (talk) 15:37, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Given the current wiki infrastructure, treating the Chinese languages under a single header is protecting the varieties of Chinese. When Unified Chinese proposal was proposed, there were 20,467 Mandarin nouns, 317 Cantonese nouns and 10 Wu nouns. Now the proportion becomes 86,593 versus 66,827 versus 5,246. --Dine2016 (talk) 17:39, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
@Atitarev, Chuck Entz, Dine2016 I understand your arguments and criticisms. Over the next several months, I plan to thoroughly explore the question of whether or not dividing the languages of the Chinese macrolanguage by their own headers (like 'Old Chinese', 'Middle Chinese' 'Standard Chinese' 'Cantonese' etc.) is 1) reasonable, 2) useful, and 3) moral and I will get back to you with my conclusions in late October. I'm not trying to score points so much as my conscience demands me to acknowledge the reality that we don't wish to see. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:21, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

TESTEdit

@Atitarev, Chuck Entz, Dine2016, Justinrleung, KevinUp, Suzukaze-c, Wyang I'm thinking that something like what I am proposing below could be a more morally appropriate move for this website given the fact that all languages that have a independent Wikipedia version also have a separate language header on English Wiktionary. While I am (appropriately) blocked, I will keep thinking about the issues and get back to you all later. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

CantoneseEdit

Cantonese; Guangdong
 
speech; language; dialect
speech; language; dialect; tell to
trad. (粵語)
simp. (粤语)
 
Wikipedia has an article on:

PronunciationEdit


NounEdit

Geographyinitiative

  1. Yue; Cantonese language

SynonymsEdit


GanEdit

Cantonese; Guangdong
 
speech; language; dialect
speech; language; dialect; tell to
trad. (粵語)
simp. (粤语)
 
Wikipedia has an article on:

PronunciationEdit


NounEdit

Geographyinitiative

  1. Yue; Cantonese language

HakkaEdit

Cantonese; Guangdong
 
speech; language; dialect
speech; language; dialect; tell to
trad. (粵語)
simp. (粤语)
 
Wikipedia has an article on:

PronunciationEdit


NounEdit

Geographyinitiative

  1. Yue; Cantonese language

MandarinEdit

Cantonese; Guangdong
 
speech; language; dialect
speech; language; dialect; tell to
trad. (粵語)
simp. (粤语)
 
Wikipedia has an article on:

PronunciationEdit


NounEdit

Geographyinitiative

  1. Yue; Cantonese language

SynonymsEdit

Derived termsEdit


Min DongEdit

Cantonese; Guangdong
 
speech; language; dialect
speech; language; dialect; tell to
trad. (粵語)
simp. (粤语)
 
Wikipedia has an article on:

PronunciationEdit


NounEdit

Geographyinitiative

  1. Yue; Cantonese language

SynonymsEdit

Derived termsEdit


Min NanEdit

Cantonese; Guangdong
 
speech; language; dialect
speech; language; dialect; tell to
trad. (粵語)
simp. (粤语)
 
Wikipedia has an article on:

PronunciationEdit


NounEdit

Geographyinitiative

  1. Yue; Cantonese language

CommentsEdit

Why not just change the ==Chinese== header to ==Chinese languages== or ==Sinitic languages==? --Dine2016 (talk) 11:05, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  OpposeSuzukaze-c 16:38, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Your format will ruin the minority languages in the long run. Suppose that there are a languages and b definitions. For the common vocabulary, the current format requires (a + b) effort while your format will unnecessarily require (a × b) effort. Please note that "dignity as a language" does not imply separationism. You're like someone removing a tree from a good forest, one in which the tree will grow better, in the name of defending the tree's dignity as a tree and not as a forest. --Dine2016 (talk) 00:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  Oppose. In addition to the exponential amount of effort we would need to put, one thing this kind of formatting ruins is the dialectal synonym tables, which is one of the best ways we cover the varieties of Chinese. There are certain dialects that are hard to classify using the Wikipedia languages (i.e. those identified by ISO). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  Support. @Atitarev, Chuck Entz, Dine2016, Justinrleung, KevinUp, Suzukaze-c, Wyang I am sorry for my recent outbursts. The reason I exhibited unruly and bad behavior was that I was doing a reevaluation of my moral beliefs (ongoing). I am deeply in support of the move proposed by Dine2016. To label all the dialects and historical forms as "Chinese" can only be called deeply prejudiced because it gives the impression that "it's all one thing really"- that "Chinese" is on the same level as something like the Võro language. In fact, there are probably fifteen or more dialects and historical forms that "Chinese" could be divided into. My proposal above may be impossible for the moment, but I believe that calling the dialects "Chinese languages" or something similar is the bare minimum morally required of us. If they are all one thing, why are there nine Wikipedia versions? That's my personal opinion. I don't think the Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China would necessarily disagree with this move- they are taking active measures to protect the varieties of Chinese. I am motivated by the facts as I understand them. I don't look down on the site or any of the users as 'fascist', but I do think that ten plus languages should not come under one header without some kind of label that lets you know what's happening. "Chinese languages" lets you know that Old Chinese, Middle Chinese, Cantonese, Standard Chinese, Hokkien, etc etc etc are all under one roof. It is respectful of the fact that there are Hokkien users who consider Chinese another language. There is definitely scholarly debate over whether or not the dialects full-fledged languages. To say "Chinese" and then put Mandarin at the top because it is the official language of the PRC and ROC seems prejudiced against the other forms of Chinese from my new perspective. I agree that it would be very hard to do the split like I am proposing that should be done in an ideal situation. But the wording "Chinese" is not 中立 neutral in my opinion. 'Chinese languages' is way more neutral. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:30, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Comment: I think we could work more on the following: KevinUp (talk) 14:28, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  1. Creation of romanized entries for Min Nan, Min Dong, Hakka, etc. that are linked to hanzi forms so that Wikipedia readers could look up these words.
  2. Addition of qualifiers {{q}} for dialectal synonyms in Chinese thesaurus entries or qualifiers for dialectal synonyms listed under ====Synonyms====.
  3. Addition of labels such as {{lb|zh|mainly|Mandarin}}, {{lb|zh|Cantonese}}, {{lb|zh|Min Nan}}, {{lb|zh|Classical Chinese}} to the definition lines, which would categorize entries into Category:Mandarin Chinese (1250 entries), Category:Cantonese Chinese (5305 Entries), Category:Min Nan Chinese (5685 entries), Category:Classical Chinese (215 entries).
For example:
  1. 高興高兴 (gāoxìng) is used mainly in Mandarin for the meaning "happy; delighted".
  2. 開心开心 (kāixīn, hoi1 sam1) is used mainly in both Mandarin and Cantonese for the same sense.
  3. 歡喜欢喜 (huānxǐ, hoaⁿ-hí) is used mainly in Min Nan and literary Chinese for the same sense.
Anyway, it is unfortunate that "Mandarin" and "Chinese" are often confused with one another. Mandarin is a variety of Chinese while Chinese can refer to Mandarin, Cantonese, Gan, Hakka, Min Nan and a few other varieties. KevinUp (talk) 14:28, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Ah, I lament the fact that we cannot automatically share senses and example sentences between different pages like hoaⁿ-hí and 歡喜. If Wiktionary used Wikidata item-like entities instead of MediaWiki pages for dictionary entries, then not only can we synchronize senses and examples between hoaⁿ-hí and 歡喜 (because they are one entity behind the pages), but we can also use Unified Chinese internally and present the entries to the reader as different languages, like this:
Internal representation:
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Traditional: [歡喜]                                                        |
| Simplified: [欢喜]                                                         |
| Mandarin: [huānxǐ]                                                         |
| Cantonese: [fun1 hei2]                                                     |
| Min Nan: [hoaⁿ-hí]                                                         |
| ...                                                                        |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                     Mandarin    Cantonese    Min Nan   ... |
| [ adj. joyful; happy; delighted ]     [✓]         [✓]         [✓]         |
| [ v.   to like; to be fond of   ]     [ ]         [✓]         [✓]         |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
When the reader searches "歡喜":

You searched "歡喜". 11 words found.

+-----------------------------------------------+
| Cantonese                                     |
+-----------------------------------------------+
|  fun1 hei2      Adjective                     |
|    歡  喜         joyful; happy; delighted    |
| [Other forms]   Verb                          |
|                   to like; to be fond of      |
+-----------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------+
| Mandarin                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------+
|   huān xǐ       Adjective                     |
|    歡  喜         joyful; happy; delighted    |
| [Other forms]                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------+
| Min Nan                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------+
|   hoaⁿ-hí       Adjective                     |
|    歡  喜         joyful; happy; delighted    |
| [Other forms]   Verb                          |
|                   to like; to be fond of      |
+-----------------------------------------------+

...
When the reader searches "欢喜", the results should be the same as "歡喜" above except that the Simplified form is displayed by default.
When the reader searches "hoaⁿ-hí":

You searched "hoaⁿ-hí". 1 word found.

+-----------------------------------------------+
| Min Nan                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------+
|                 Adjective                     |
|    hoaⁿ-hí        joyful; happy; delighted    |
| [Other forms]   Verb                          |
|                   to like; to be fond of      |
+-----------------------------------------------+
--Dine2016 (talk) 04:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
@Dine2016: You might be interested to read this: (1) wikidata:Wikidata:Lexicographical data/FAQ (2) wikidata:User:Rua/Wikidata for Wiktionarians KevinUp (talk) 11:08, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
@Atitarev, Chuck Entz, Dine2016, Equinox, Justinrleung, KevinUp, Suzukaze-c, Tooironic, Wyang I am going to look over the material that has been sent to me on my talk page in the near term. However, I wanted to first make a clear statement that I have come to the conclusion that using the single word "Chinese" to summarize everything which is found in zh-pron is clearly insensitive and inappropriate for Wiktionary. I know it's a little wordy, but I think something like 'Varieties of Chinese' is going to be WAY, WAY, WAY more neutral. It's a little Orwellian and clunky, but then again so is the world we live in. It lets you know that there are people who consider things in the zh-pron box separate languages (Old Chinese, Middle Chinese, Cantonese, etc etc etc), but also doesn't come outright and demand that you call them languages or dialects (controversial words). Slapping "Chinese" on it is definitely not neutral. Also, if you are interested in what could be seen as a semi-controversial Taiwan-related edit [3], please look at this and send me your feedback on the Taiwan talk page. Here's another controversial area I am working on: Protection of the Varieties of Chinese. You are all great people, and if you don't agree with me, I understand. Talk to you later. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
I was "pinged" here but I know nothing about Chinese, I don't even understand the writing system, and I don't know why you called me. I think Chinese is fascinating and I bet there are all kinds of political issues but I don't have the first clue. Just saying hi because you called me. Bye. Sorry I can't help. Equinox 03:28, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
@Equinox On Wikipedia, I have encountered about four major instances where my account was in trouble, with two bans. On Wiktionary, I think this is the first ban I have gotten. From those instances, I learned two major rules which I (at that time) wrote as follows below. What I'd like to know is: as an experienced editor what rule should I write for myself about the situation my account is in on Wiktionary? I'd appreciate any help- if you don't have the time, forget it. Here's the wording (directly from my English Wikipedia talk page) if you are interested:
My Personal Rules for the Wiki-world
1、 Occasionally I have been accused of engaging in an edit war, as with the George Washington and Jaggi Vasudev pages. After the first formal accusation is made against me, I will unwatch the page and never edit the page in question ever again. There are so many interesting things to do on wikipedia and I'm happy to engage in debate with other users. But I'm not willing to participate in a debate where my account's future is put in jeopardy. In doing this, I'm learning from the example of User:Lieutenant of Melkor who was a great contributor to Chinese geography articles, but was brought down by allegations of edit warring, etc (probably mostly true). In the end, nobody cares about those silly so-called edit wars and fights of yesteryear. But I can see so clearly that the contributions User:Lieutenant of Melkor could have made over the past several years would have been tremendous. The banning of that user was a big loss for Chinese geography articles on wikipedia. For these reasons, I have resolved to take this special measure to avoid danger to my account and thereby be able to keep making good contributions long term.
  • 2、 If in the future I ever want to have a discussion about a punctuation or typography problem again, I will first find an administrator / more experienced editor and get their opinion on the issue. Nobody wants to waste time on this issue- the copyeditors are just following policy. This way I'm not just one crazy person on the internet crying about punctuation. If they disagree with my proposals, think whatever issue I am bringing up is not important or if they prove me wrong, then I won't bother the whole website with my one-man apostrophe revolution. I fell into the same "apostrophe trap" twice already with the curly apostrophes from Taipei Times articles and the written form "50's".

--Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:51, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I need to tell you that you have been blocked for your unilateral actions despite warning, failure to cooperate with other editors, pushing your agenda and "fascist" comments. I don't think you're learning or improving. You can, of course turn around the vote on Chinese unification, if you make your own vote, which passes. You will only do a disservice to all the dialects that have been thriving under unification. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:00, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
@Atitarev What I have realized is is that I have been an internet troll. From now on, before I make any post on Wiktionary, I will ask myself the following question: "Is the post I am going to make 100% appropriate within the context of the feelings of a for-fun volunteer website community like Wiktionary?" If I can't answer "yes", then I will not make the post. This is not about right and wrong. This is about having a good time while participating in making an useful resource for others. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:40, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Edit

@Justinrleung, KevinUp, Suzukaze-c, Wyang Hey, I noticed a problem with the Wade-Giles on the page- should be ti4 not tih4- (see [4] for details). I just wanted to let you know. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:43, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

This should be fixed now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

GeographyEdit

If you are still, as your name suggests, focussing on geography, I've come across some placenames that have so many potential definition lines that I haven't wanted to add them myself. A prime example is 北山 (Běishān). If you're interested, I can let you know when I come across others like that. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:49, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge Yes absolutely, I can do that. Send me anything you want and I will give it a shot. A preliminary glance at Mandarin Chinese Wikipedia showed at least eleven towns and townships with that name. My username is pretty dumb but I haven't thought of a better one. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge I did the easiest ones to find already but there are undoubtedly at least thirty more lines that could be added. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:43, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! The one in Xinjiang that inspired this request (courtesy of Peishansaurus) is still needed. And, as you note, many more — but I wouldn't know how to find them. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge Here is my thinking at this time. 'Peishansaurus' is mentioned in the table of contents of Birger Bohlin's book on page 3 under the location heading 'Ehr-chia-wutung'. The map on page 4 of this pdf: [5] doesn't show Ehr-chia-wutung, but the English Wikipedia article mentions that the fossils were found at 'Ehr-chia-wu-t'ung'. The Hanyu Pinyin form of this is likely 'Erjiawudong'. I haven't found anything matching up with 'Erjiawudong' yet, but the map has a location labeled 'Ehr-chi-wu-l'ung'. The location of 'Ehr-chi-wu-l'ung' in the map is near to 甘肃北山 a name for a chain of mountains in the area which are pretty close to the modern-day border between Gansu and Xinjiang. If I could see page 67 of that book from 1953 it would probably make everything crystal clear, but the people who made the pdf only cared about the second part of the book. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

多能 in 一專多能Edit

Is the term 一專多能 really decomposable into the 112 formation, thus leading to the entry for the term 多能? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 08:49, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

@Lo Ximiendo Your edit ([6]) correctly identifies that the four character phrase can be broken down into two parts. I also agree that this is critical information that we should tell the reader. The problem is that our beloved Wiktionary's status quo standard for the orthography of Hanyu Pinyin is bent on the elimination of hyphens in four-character compounds, contrary my understanding of the current official PRC rules for Hanyu Pinyin (汉语拼音正词法基本规则 2012年10月 GB/T 16159-2012 page 7 6.1.12 成语和其他熟语 6.1.12.1 成语通常作为一个语言单位使用,以四字文言语句为主。结构上可以分为两个双音节的,中间加连接号。例如:fēngpíng-làngjìng (风平浪静) àizēng-fēnmíng (爱憎分明) shuǐdào-qúchéng (水到渠成) yángyáng-dàguān (洋洋大观) píngfēn-qiūsè (平分秋色) guāngmíng-lěiluò (光明磊落) diānsān-dǎosì (颠三倒四) similar to the 1996 rule 汉语拼音正词法基本规则 1996年01月 GB/T 16159-1996 page 6 4.8 成语 4.8.1 四言成语可以分为两个双音节来年的,中间加短横。céngchū-bùqióng(层出不穷)fēngpíng-làngjìng(风平浪静)àizēng-fēnmíng(爱憎分明)shuǐdào-qúchéng(水到渠成)yángyáng-dàguān(洋洋大观)píngfēnqiūsè(平分秋色)guāngmíng-lěiluò(光明磊落)diānsān-dǎosì(颠三倒四)). I and a few dictionaries would say yīzhuānduōnéng should be written as yīzhuān-duōnéng (现代汉语规范词典3 p1549 "yīzhuān-duōnéng"; 现代汉语规范词典1 p1539 "yīzhuān-duōnéng"). That would indicate the "two-partedness" that I think your 112 formation edit is attempting to convey. But 112 isn't really right here because 多能 is a sum of parts, not an independent phrase (unless that gets established later). The 多能 here is not the 多能 in 多能辭典 or something like that- 多能 isn't found in Xiandai Hanyu Cidian 7, Xiandai Hanyu Guifan Cidian 1, or Guoyu Chongbian Cidian. (Note- if this word were included in Taiwan's Guoyu Chongbian Cidian, it would likely be rendered as 'yī zhuān duō néng'. I think that form may once have been technically consistent with the PRC rules for Hanyu Pinyin orthography in dictionaries (I can't find the rule I'm thinking of), but then again Taiwan may have their own special rules.) You would probably make Suzukaze-c happy if you started advocating for these hyphens, but justinrleung is against it (as I remember). I personally take the more insane position that all officially endorsed or commonly-used forms of Hanyu Pinyin historically and etc. should be included on the website, but I don't know how exactly that would be implemented practically. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC) (modified)
At least I found the entry 多能 at the Chinese Wiktionary. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 09:51, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@Lo Ximiendo Yeah, you're right. It does feel like 多能 (meaning 'multi-purpose') is a modern phrase. But I don't think that's what it means in this chengyu. Sorry for unloading on you there. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Actually, you posted something, that I never heard about before. Also, I think I solved an issue by adding "|type=111" to the entry 中日韓. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:34, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@Lo Ximiendo: Please do not add "|type=111" or the like. It's entirely redundant. It's okay for entries to stay in CAT:Chinese entries with potentially decomposable titles (if this is the issue you're talking about). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

ethnologueEdit

Wiktionary:Language treatment, btw. —Suzukaze-c 01:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

m-twEdit

Hm, but the automatic label "Classical Chinese" is replaced with "Taiwanese Mandarin", which isn't very appropriate. I suppose the problem here is that the pronunciation of the text is being conflated with the language of the text. —Suzukaze-c 04:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

@Suzukaze-c I was using the wrong one- it was supposed to be cl-tw --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:50, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Oh, and you already used it too. Sorry for bothering you. —Suzukaze-c 05:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

The indef block you were givenEdit

@Atitarev gave you an indefinite block for your comments at Talk:外銷, which form part of a pattern. I am generally of the opinion that other admins' blocks should be respected except in rare, extreme cases. This is made even more difficult by the fact that I respect Anatoli and I have recently had a conflict with you again attempting to impose your views about some grand conspiracy on Wiktionary. However, I have chosen to unblock you.

I want you to take this as a serious warning. I think you have a lot to contribute to the dictionary, and I think you know how to do it right by now. You've been given excellent advice by several people, most notably Justinrleung. You've listened to it, if only briefly — the quote at the top of this very page is evidence of that. But you have continued to fall back into your old habits of long rants accusing everyone around you, demanding unreasonable things from others and wasting their time. The path has been pointed out to you, but only you can follow it.

I won't always be here to save you. If Anatoli objects to my action, I will not edit-war with him over your block. If you continue in this manner, I may eventually be the one who has to block you. You will not get many more chances if you do not change. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: I had longer issues with this user before his long political rants started about his uniliateral actions. He was blocked before and I don't think he has improved but I am OK to give him another chance, if you think he can. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
@Atitarev, Justinrleung, Metaknowledge I work on all kinds of very sensitive material, like the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Tajikistan, 1948 United States Senate election in Texas, the 1999 Russian apartment bombings, the Taiwan Strait and Xinjiang to name a few. I talked with educated people in Taiwan today and last summer about the meaning of 外銷外销 (wàixiāo), and there really does seem to be not only a political aspect behind it but also a question of taxation/tariffs in cross-straits interaction. Does that influence the comments being made here in which I am characterized as the bad guy? I think Atitarev and others are fine editors, but we just can't let opinions (and words, even if they are from Tongyong Pinyin or Wade-Giles) from Taiwan get snuffed out- that website is called Baike Baidu. All edits I make on Baike Baidu are subject to review and approval, which limits me to an extremely narrow range since government websites of Taiwan aren't allowed on that site, which Wikipedia and Wiktionary turn into if you shut out their opinions and viewpoint. Probably what is needed on the 外銷 page is a solid usage note. List the specific edit and the infraction, and I will avoid doing the same action again. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
I've even delved into In God We Trust, which was a hell hole of original research. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
My friends, they were literally going to make the Spanish flu page another name 100 years after the fact. It is wise to 'trust (the approved dictionary of China) but verify (meaning it might not be representative of all positions)'- that is really the point of Wiktionary and Wikipedia, and that's what we need on the 外銷外销 (wàixiāo) page. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
On Baidu Baike, they give you points for every edit you make successfully, and you have a percentage of edits that were approved out of the total edits you tried to make. If your percentage dips too low, you can't edit more important pages, and you have to make edits that get the approval of the censors. Luckily, there is an appeal process there and I have had several rejected edits reversed. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:01, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
In case you think I'm soft on Trump or something, I direct you to this page [7] which I created on Wikisource so there's a clear record for people who want to read the GAO report on the legal questions behind the Trump–Ukraine scandal. I linked it on the Trump–Ukraine scandal page. It was good that I did that and it is good that I raise questions about things like the definition for 外銷. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:12, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
@Atitarev, Justinrleung, Metaknowledge It was somewhat shocking to me to see that what I was saying could be thought of by others as sick or even some kind of political hate speech deserving of a permaban, because I see myself as presenting valid information or perhaps an alternative viewpoint to that which others present, devil's advocate maybe. I understand blocking people for rude obscenity or something like that, but what if I actually believe (or was thinking about) every crazy word I have said? There are limits of speech on Wiktionary to some degree, and why do I hit up against them all the time? It's a very interesting question for me, and I try to figure it out. Just like I have to 'negotiate' with censors on Baidu Baike to make an edit, on Wiktionary I have to guess what others are thinking about what I want to say, rather than directly present my point of view as is. That seems like a doubleplusungood trend right outta' 1984. It's an interesting experience for sure. I have got nothing against Atitarev and I know you are just trying to keep the website under control, but the way the system works now make me feel like I'm a silly internet troll; an illegitimate pariah. Anyway, to help myself avoid this happening again, I have come up with a new rule to help me, based on a suggestion on the 外銷 talk page: "Closely review all talk page posts before posting, especially if you are or have been responding quickly." --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding aksai chinEdit

You should remove all sentences lines with citation 27 on the wikipage aksai chin as they are disputed thank you. Eghjki (talk) 01:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Etyl templateEdit

Hey, thanks for creating Hsi-ning. Just a heads up: the {{etyl}} template has been deprecated. We now use {{derived}} as a catch-all etymological derivation template, with {{borrowed}}, {{inherited}} etc. for more specific cases. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 07:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Mandarin romanisationEdit

We are using pinyin for romanising Mandarin. You can include any others but they do not replace the standard pinyin. You're acting unilaterally yet again and violate policies and conventions. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:16, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Atitarev It's fine to include Hanyu Pinyin in some capacity, but quotation marks go way to far. In English, the concept of scare quotes means that terms singled out inside quotation marks are considered illegitimate or suspicious. I would ask you to provide an example of any other romanization system that has its romanizations put inside quotation marks. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:21, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Why are you scattering discussions all over the place again? You're not the first day here. We use standard transliterations per policies and conventions. No-one is denying WG the right to exist but it's not what we use for language code "cmn". The Korean 현대 (hyeondae) may be romanised before as "hyŏndae" but the current standard is "hyeondae" and that's what we use EVERYWHERE. This includes translations, etymologies, see also's, everywhere means everywhere. How can you make a dictionary when you mix up transliterations without advising users what it is. You did it before and were told not to and you're doing it again. I don't have time for your waffling. If users are only familiar with pinyin, how they are supposed to know what "hsi" is and how to pronounce it? @Justinrleung --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
@Atitarev: I think Geographyinitiative's edits are okay. It already specifies that the romanization is Wade-Giles. The pinyin is kind of irrelevant to the etymology anyway. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
@Atitarev, Justinrleung I have created a way to add Hanyu Pinyin on these pages-- see Yün-nan K’un-ming- probably not the best, but it gets the job done for now anyways. Let me know what you think. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:49, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
@Justinrleung: I don't find this satisfactory at all. WG and HP are completely different romanisations and we never mixed romanisations like this. A translation into Mandarin requires Hanyu Pinyin, this has been our standard since the first Mandarin entry was created. All others are shown next to it. All language romanisation policies at Wiktionary work the same way. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
In spirit of the wikidata initiative it would be appropriate to have a Gild-Willes in a template so that the mark-up is automatic. This would require the wiktionary:BP to agree on a solution, which I'm not sure about. It would be misleading to have incongruent transliterations that's clear. It might not be necessary to book-keep rare transliterations, but it's no rare at all. It might be preferable to have an optional parameter in the existing language code template, whereas creating a new language code is likely out of the question (See how Serbo-Croation is arranged for competing transliteration in every translation entry?). 109.41.0.10 13:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Contra: if Wade-Gilles is regular enough, having the additional info in Wikidate might not be needed. Then having extras in the template would only be a boon on processor time. I cannot estimate that. 109.41.0.10 13:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
I am sure you are right, and I look forward to seeing these things you are talking about. Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Taiwanese Hokkien EntriesEdit

@Geographyinitiative, Hi! I noticed that you're making a lot of Taiwanese Hokkien entries. I was wondering if you could put "tw" markers in your pronunciation, because I'm worried that some of these entries are unique in Taiwan, and when you just put a POJ romanization in, it gives you also Mainland Chinese Hokkien pronunciations, which implies that it's also used in Mainland China. If it is though, I'll put the markers myself. What do you think? Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser Certainly, I didn't know this option existed- can you do the edit with a specific word to help me see exactly what you mean? Love your work! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Geographyinitiative: For example, in an entry you just edited, 澹糊糊, the "tw" marker is already there. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Geographyinitiative: Also, with pronunciations leaning to Quanzhou or Zhangzhou, we use "tp" and "kh" respectively. It might be useful for your entry in 凡勢, which seems to be unique in Taiwan. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Mar vin kaiser Oh, I see what you are saying. I will add it from now on on everything I add from twblg.dict.edu.tw or Taiwan sources. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:30, 17 June 2020 (UTC)