Open main menu

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; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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)

Community Insights SurveyEdit

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

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

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

Return to the user page of "Geographyinitiative".