Template talk:Chinese

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Templates for deletion This template was considered for deletion on 2008 April 27. The result of the discussion was Speedy keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Template:Chinese page.
Archives: 1
Archive
Archives
/Archive 1 (9-2006 to 7-2007)


Contents

[edit] Bopomofo and Xiao'erjing

What's wrong with adding Xiao'erjing and Bopomofo? They are Chinese writing methods. 132.205.44.5 21:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

We are still in the middle of standardizing templates or trying to here. Please avoid any new parameters and language adding for the time being. Thx. Benjwong 15:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems discussions are through? So can these two be added to the template? 132.205.44.5 22:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Do these count as separate languages (blue), not romanizations under Chinese (green)? BTW you can also use Lang1, Lang2, Lang3 without any code added. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Bopomofo and xiao-erjing have been added to mandarin. Dungan has been added as a language and to mandarin (dialect of), as it's both, depending on who you ask. Xiao-erjing is also used for Dungan... 70.55.202.250 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alphabetical order

This is the English Wikipedia, and thus I STRONGLY recommend placing Cantonese under "C" (not Y), Mandarin under "M" (not "G") Hakka under "H" (not K), Shanghainese under "S" (not W), and so on. Maximum usability for everyone in the world is very, very important. Badagnani 04:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

No, as this will introduce inconsistency. We are classifying Chinese dialects by their top-level linguistic classification, and not by the common English name for sub-level dialects. For example, Shanghainese is a sub-dialect of Wu, and should not be interpreted as similar. Mandarin and Cantonese in the common sense of the word actually refers to a variant of the Mandarin and Cantonese dialects respectively. Are we going to change "Min" as "Hokkien" next, despite its obvious technical inaccuracies? Since there are only seven entries, I fail to see why users will somehow have major difficulties finding the correct classification, since "Mandarin", "Hakka" and "Cantonese" are also added to aid the English user.--Huaiwei 05:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Font size for Chinese characters

When Chinese characters are displayed on Wikipedia article pages using this template, they are just big enough to be read clearly by those not thoroughly familiar an east Asian language - provided one is using a Windows browser. If a Mac browser is used, the Chinese characters are too small. I already corrected this on several Wikipedia article pages, but those corrections were undone when this more sophisticated template was put in place. For the sake of the 5% who use Mac browsers, please consider bumping the font size of just the Chinese characters up one notch. -DoctorW 17:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

If one notch means going from the current size of 95% to 100%, it is do-able. Anything higher, is probably a bad idea. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Why? What would be wrong with 110% or even 120%? As it is now it is simply too small on Mac browsers. They should be easily readable. -DoctorW 05:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great work, two suggestions

Wow. This is some fantastic work. The first suggestion is that all of the usage stuff go on the template page, usually talk pages are for discussion, only. The second suggestion is more detailed. It might be nice if alternate romanizations for Japanese were available. There are at least four that are relevant, Revised Hepburn and Traditional Hepburn (both covered at Hepburn romanization), Kunrei-shiki, and Nihon-shiki. Right now, the only field provided is "romaji", which sort of implies there is only one way to romanize a particular Japanese word, and a bunch of other languages have alternate romanization options, so I just thought, for the sake of completeness... Anyway, just a suggestion, thanks, Bradford44 17:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I know the is supposed to separate it. Still I am terrified of having instructions on the same page as the code. Especially when the current talk page calls the function for a demo, which can be modified all you want with no harm. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
About the extra Japanese romanizations, you might want to break it down real simple on the 4 to be added. Starting with some kind of standard iso codes for each romanization, assuming there is any? Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Romaji (iso code = romaji)
  • Shūsei Hebon-shiki Rōmaji (iso code = ?)
  • Hyōjun-shiki Rōmaji (iso code = ?)
  • Kunrei-shiki (iso code = ?)
  • Nihon-shiki (iso code = ?)
Ok, I'm not too familiar with iso standards, so I'm not really sure what information you're looking for (that is, your question gives me much more credit for translation/transliteration proficiency than I deserve). According to their respective articles, Traditional Hepburn (Hyōjun-shiki) gained international popularity since its mid-19th century invention, but has never been approved by the ISO. Revised Hepburn (Shūsei Hebon-shiki) is also not approved by the ISO, but has been adopted by the U.S. Library of Congress and is the most widely used in the world. Kunrei-shiki is ISO 3602; Nihon-shiki is ISO 3602 Strict. It should be noted that the significance of those ISO designations are lost on me. If you're asking me what I think the template parameters should be named, I suggest they be the following and in the following order (to replace the current sole parameter, "romaji", and not in addition to it):
  • revhep (for Revised Hepburn)
  • tradhep (for Traditional Hepburn)
  • kunrei (for Kunrei-shiki)
  • nihon (for Nihon-shiki)
I hope that provides the information you were looking for. Thanks, Bradford44 04:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
And now that I'm thinking about it, a parameter for both "kana" and "hiragana" is redundant as well. Because hiragana is a type of kana, it doesn't make sense to have them both. Perhaps parameters for both "hiragana" and "katakana", instead? Bradford44 17:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Here is a sample article. Maybe you can tell us if that is not hiragana, and is actually using katakana?? Isn't hiragana useful for historic stuff? I don't have a count on how many uses hiragana at the moment. About romaji, we should definitely keep it. It's already been used for hundreds of articles. It will require some hefty language-skills to move existing romaji romanization into revhep, tradhep, kunrei, nihon. Benjwong 17:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

That article was using only hiragana, just two different pronunciations. Hiragana are an inherent part of Japanese writing, but carry no meaning alone. Hiragana represent discrete syllables of sound, while kanji represent ideas, but whose pronunciation and meaning vary depending on context. One common example of the use of hiragana is to indicate the use and meaning of a particular kanji (such as its tense or meaning). Hiragana fulfill other functions as well, such as particles of speech. The only reason this is relevant here, is because writing in hiragana is the most accurate way to represent the pronuciation of a particular word. Katakana is a coextensive set syllables, but used more rarely, such writing foreign loanwords, or for emphasis like bold or italic text in English. I also want to make clear that "romaji" is a generic term. Technically, the four romanization systems I am proposing to be added are all romaji. You are correct however, that it should not be deleted, where so many articles already use it. Nevertheless, the way Korean is currently handled is exactly how I'm proposing Japanese be handled. A parameter for the kanji, a parameter for hiragana, and then a [show/hide] box labeled "transliterations", under which the main romanization styles are listed, in the order I previously indicated. I'll think about simply trying to implement it myself. Bradford44 00:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
I went ahead and made the changes myself, as described above, and it appears to be working fine. I did not remove "romaji" as a parameter, but it should considered deprecated for use until it can be phased out. I will start implementing the alternate romanizations on articles which use the template. Bradford44 17:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I believe that four romanizations is excessive and confusing. The "standard" romanization for a given word is just fine, and good enough for our users. Badagnani 18:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, four is how many major romanization systems there are. Korean is allowed its two, and the Chinese "transliterations" section has seventeen different fields. There is no "standard" romanization system in Japanese, and which one is the best is hotly debated. Revised Hepburn is used by the library of congress, and the one officially preferred by wikipedia, but widely criticized by linguists. Kunrei-shiki is the version propogated by the Japanese government, and adopted by the ISO, but criticized as very poor for practical use because it often utterly fails to reflect actual pronunciation of terms. The other two are variations on Revised hepburn and Kunre-shiki, respectively, and are often relevant for historical or other reasons. Note also that not all four need be listed in instances where multiple systems romanize a word the same way. Compare Qi and Soy sauce. Bradford44 19:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Should Historical kana usage be added as well? There are a few articles that might benefit from its inclusion (East Asian calligraphy, Chinese style name). PC78 08:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
For the sake of completeness, I suppose so, but I don't have a deep enough knowledge of the subject to answer authoritatively. You might ask around at WP:JPN, they tend to be very knowledgeable about Japanese. Bradford44 14:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Interference

In Solar terms, this template interferes with {{Template:Solar terms}} which may be a problem with the latter template. However, even when I remove the Solar terms template, this Chinese template still interferes with remaining table—the text from both tables overlay each other transparently, especially when the text size is increased. Although {{-}} prevents the interference, excessive white space is then generated. — Joe Kress 21:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Further experimentation shows that the problem only exists in Firefox 2—no interference exists in IE 7. The two templates don't interfere with each other, but both interfere with the article's table in Firefox. I found that {{clearright}} does separate the two templates from the table with minimal whitespace, provided that {{clearright}} is not used between the templates, forcing them to exist side-by-side. But this also moves the right margin of the table to the left of the Chinese template, squeezing the table's contents. I ultimately decided that {{clear}} offers the best compromise. In summary, experimentation with the various clear templates is needed if interference exists in any browser. — Joe Kress 01:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I want to say solar terms is a unique page. It has two big templates, followed directly by another table. None of them make way for one another. If you try another language template, it'll likely have the same effect. So {{clear}} is a good quick fix. Template:Chinese do stack with most templates. See Shenzhen article for example. I am open to any solution really. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heading

This template looks great - I know people have been working hard on it the last few weeks, and you've all done a fine job. I wonder, though, if there's any option to alter the heading, so it doesn't read "Chinese". Most of the topics I'm working on are not primarily Chinese topics, so it would be great to have a language template where Japanese, Vietnamese, or Okinawan can be the primary language listed, with Chinese coming later - in these cases, having "Chinese" as the header at the top of the template doesn't really work. This template could be quite useful not only for CJKV languages but also for all the world's languages - but in order to be used that way, the "Chinese" heading has to go. Thanks. LordAmeth 13:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it doesn't make sense. I don't know why it was changed from the template Template:Chinesename, which reads "Chinese name" at the top, which is more logical. The color blue signifies it's a primarily China-related topic, purple is Korean. I believe the Chinese template ought to say "Chinese name" at the top rather than Chinese. Badagnani 14:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks; I agree with you that Chinese name is more logical than just Chinese, I guess. But actually, I was looking for a template which would allow the editor to choose the heading. I've been working on and off on various topics related to the Ryukyu Kingdom; I'd like to be able to represent the Chinese, Japanese, and Okinawan versions of the kingdom's name, but with Okinawan first (and most prominently), not Chinese. Even a neutral heading like "Native name" or "In other languages" would be preferable to "Chinese" or "Chinese name". I understand that this template is originally intended for Chinese usage, and I do not mean to be obnoxious or anything, but I just think it would be useful if the heading were more flexible. Unfortunately, I don't know much at all about template coding syntax, so I won't hazard to "be bold" and change the template myself. LordAmeth 23:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much, if you are looking for a universal language template, there is none right now. This template displays mostly in alphabetical order. It so happens conveniently that Chinese began with a "C". You can certainly add Ryukyu and other languages using "Lang", though I agree it won't come first. Benjwong 17:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] North Korea

I've added a switch to the Korean name fields which can be used to adjust them to a North Korean context. To activate the switch, use northkorea=yes. This feature can be seen in Sino-Korea Friendship Bridge. PC78 03:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diacritics?

An anon user has removed diacritics from some of the name fields, stating that we "don't use them" in this template. Is this in fact the case? I can't see any discussion above or in the archived talk to support this claim. PC78 10:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The editor also made a whole lot of other edits to the template, as you can see from the template's history. I don't know if there was a previous consensus to not use diacritics, but I assumed he removed it from the singular instance of usage because they were not used anywhere else on the template. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
diacritics are a bad idea, it hurts usability in parameter names. (unless you mean actual text, and not parameters?) 70.55.202.250 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Have some people got their priorities completely mixed up?

When I came upon this template at Nanking Massacre I almost balked. This is an infobox intended to present linguistic aspects of the name of the article, yet it takes on the guise of a general infobox in its full splendor! I find this horrible. I urge you to downscale the appearance of this template. I am going to AfD it if something drastic isn't done to accomodate this grievance. __meco (talk)

This template is designed to be both an general way to present the linguistic aspects of the name of the subject as well as take on the form of an infobox. If you wish to change this template, I suggest that you start a civil discussion and refrain from threatening to do this or that or demand that something be done immediately. nat.utoronto 19:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Though I can sympathize with your reaction finding the announcement of an AfD a drastic measure, I am in earnest, and I do not think I am being uncivil. I contend that this infobox, as it takes shape in the article I mentioned, is a monstrosity. I stand aghast at its immodest layout and that it takes on the appearance of regular infoboxes. __meco (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Can someone explain what the user means by downscale the appearance? Like change colors? Benjwong (talk) 19:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The user means particularly the size, that is correct. If that change proves insufficient, I would consider looking at other features of its layout to make it less ostentatious. This may be a little "labour of love" that has gone somewhat amok, and I must hasten to emphasize that I find it very appealing. However, that's the problem. It steals the show, and an infobox outlining various spellings in different scripts should not be an article's main attraction. For one thing, there should be no image option in this template. That is way outside the scope of such a template. __meco (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The box works well at articles for subjects such as Tofu, with similar names among many Asian languages. However, the colors are horrible and the fact that the romanizations are hidden is unnecessary and problematic. Badagnani (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, that example makes me even more convinced that this template is a bastard that needs to go unless the changes I have demanded are put into effect. This is not Wiktionary, and making an article present the spelling of the name the most prominently featured aspect of the article is significantly lowering its quality. __meco (talk) 03:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Chinese

Template:Chinese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — meco (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Template was speedy kept. 70.55.84.13 (talk) 06:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hopefully you are going to do something about the issue which was the reason for my nominating the template. __meco (talk) 06:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I have no problem with the template the way it is. Your suggestion would be that we create a wiktionary entry for every article, is it not? Personally, I think that _every_ article on Wikipedia should have a section listing what the topic is called in other languages. (And interlang links don't cut it, since those articles need not be equivalent, nor would they exist in every alternate wikipedia) Wiktionary won't accept such information for every article, since they're not always words. Such information is important, and encyclopedic, and will help people using Wikipedia for school work, or to look up references in foreign languages if they know what its called. 70.55.84.13 (talk) 06:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
If you'd actually be very clear and specific about which things you'd like to be changed (other than deleting the template), that would be great, because it would allow us to consider and make those changes. Badagnani (talk) 06:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
If you read my argument, you see that I do not object to any of the information being presented. I propose that this template is presented as collapsible auto-hide except for a title heading. __meco (talk) 07:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I would have to oppose this, as the Asian names (as well as photo and caption) are crucial to the Asian-themed articles in which the names appear. Badagnani (talk) 08:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
What do general images related to the subject have to do in a linguistics infobox in the first place? __meco (talk) 08:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm beginning to see that you have difficulty dealing with what you perceive to be irreconcilable items: in this case, a photograph and various names. That's fine; we all deal with our data in different manners. However, as you've seen from the discussion earlier today, other editors do not. In my opinion, at Chopsticks or Tofu I do want to know, in a single box, what the item looks like and how it is called in the nation that invented it (in this case, China), and the nations nearby that have related, or different languages (in this case, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, etc.). Badagnani (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
And as I've attempted to relay a couple of times already I do not (at least not for the time being, although I might want to take issue with that aspect as well) protest the availability of this information. It is the way in which is being presented that I so strongly object to. Anyway, I have invoked the attention of et wikiEn-L mailing list on this, so we'll see if some people who aren't completely entrenched can provide some fresh perspectives. __meco (talk) 09:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I honestly don't understand what the fuss is about. I honestly don't really care, either. Johnleemk | Talk 10:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I came to take a look after seeing the post on wikiEn-L, and I too honestly don't understand what the fuss is about. --Stormie (talk) 00:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question about showflag command

I like the template - it declutters things a lot but I have a question: if I get this right, showflag= will add a transliteration to the automatically displayed section. So showflag=p adds Pinyin, showflag=pj adds Pinyin and Jyutping. But for some reason I cannot get showflag=y to work to display Yale rather than Jyutping. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong please? Thanks! Akerbeltz (talk) 14:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)