Talk:Learning kanji

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chinese character "Book" This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Japan To-do:
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 1 November 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.


Contents

[edit] Updates

I have updated the Learning kanji page with a more realistic introduction and referenced my amendments as such. This is just a start and hopefully a whole revamp of the article will follow. caught_redhanded

This page should really be merged with and redirected to either Kanji or Joyo kanji. Exploding Boy 18:36, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Why? The article on joyo kanji should tell people about what the joyo kanji are, not about how to learn them or myths about learning them. In fact the "myths" stuff is completely extraneous to the joyo kanji page. It's not myths about them, it's about learning them. The links, again, come from the kanji page. They are all extraneous to the topic "kanji", they are links for learners of kanji. There is no reason to clutter up either the joyo kanji or the kanji page with information for people learning the characters. The purpose of the joyo kanji and kanji pages should be to explain what joyo kanji and kanji are, not about how to learn them, a completely separate topic. --DannyWilde 00:07, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure this article is really appropriate at all to be honest. The best thing in my view would be to incorporate the information given under the Myths about the joyo kanji section into the Joyo kanji article and delete this page. Exploding Boy 03:19, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

I half agree with you. I agree that the information about "learning kanji" probably isn't appropriate for Wikipedia, but the point is that the contents were stuff which was never actually appropriate in Wikipedia at all. I put it here instead of just deleting it. Do you want to just delete it all though? The links to flashcard programs for people learning kanji do not belong on the kanji page, which is already over size. The kanji page should be there to explain what kanji are. The several "learning kanji flashcard program" links are totally bogus from that point of view. They can only go here or be deleted. The myths about joyo kanji are ropey stuff. They could be rewritten into something which belongs on the joyo kanji page, but in the current form, they don't belong there; the page's goal should be to explain what "joyo kanji" are, not sell some point of view or speculations about myths for learners. If you want to rewrite the myths stuff so that it actually fits into the joyo article, fine - otherwise this page should remain as basically a junkyard for this stuff until someone moves it into e.g. wikibooks learning Japanese or something.

--DannyWilde 05:19, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

They could be rewritten into something which belongs on the joyo kanji page, but in the current form, they don't belong there;
This is the key point. You admit the stuff belongs there but not in its present form. Therefore you should leave the material there. Either fix it yourself or wait for somebody else to do it. Don't move it to some inappropriate backwater article. Mdchachi|Talk 21:19, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
No, I don't agree that this point of view stuff belongs on the joyo kanji page, or I wouldn't have moved it off there. I'd be quite happy to delete it completely, if you have no objections. --DannyWilde 23:53, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

The more I look at this article, the more I think it should probably just be deleted. Perhaps some of the information could be merged somewhere into other kanji-related articles or into the Japanese language article which (I think still) has a section on learning Japanese. Oh, and a small request: could you leave a space between the post before and your new comments? It makes it easier to read them when editing. Thanks. Exploding Boy 16:17, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Although I said it might be deleted, I don't agree with you any more - the material is not very high quality but the general policy on Wikipedia is to move things somewhere else rather than delete them. This material might be useful for someone. Also there are other pages like the "List of Japanese learning resources" similar to this one. The myths stuff is a little POV I think and should be edited to sound less like a rant, but hmm I've got other things to do at the moment. --DannyWilde 01:11, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

move things somewhere else rather than delete them -- I believe that's what I said. The information can be merged, but this article deleted (or redirected, if you insist, though I can't see many people searching for "learning kanji"). Exploding Boy 02:02, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

If the page is properly linked and categorized, I see no reason why it won't be just as accessible as some other pages. Further, as I said, the stuff about myths about learning kanji really should not be on the joyo kanji page - the central theme of the paragraph is "learning kanji", and how that relates to joyo kanji. So it belongs here I believe.
I also believe "Learning kanji" is an important topic for some people, and it deserves to have its own page on Wikipedia. For example, the kanji learning methods of Heisig and others such as Henshall are very frequently discussed on web forums. There should be space for an objective discussion somewhere. The links for kanji learners also do NOT belong on the kanji page. The focus of the kanji page should be on explaining what kanji are, which is a different issue from how to learn them. Putting them together dilutes the focus of the kanji page. Also, "contents are low quality" is not a valid criterion for deleting an article, otherwise half of the articles on Wikipedia would be deleted. I suggest putting our combined writing efforts into improving this page into a useful resource rather than squabbling about merges and renames. In the time I've taken writing this reply to you alone, I could have added some useful information to the page. --DannyWilde 03:40, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm certainly not squabbling; I'm discussing. Sorry if you find it boring, but that's how things are done here. Please try to take a less imperious tone with other editors. Moving on, I find some of your new suggestions interesting. I think the best way to approach this is to come up with a topic/title and work from there. The kanji learning systems you mention are certainly worthy of inclusion, but how do we do it? Are we limiting our discussion to kanji alone, or including Chinese characters generally? (probably a better idea and more encyclopaedic). Are we limiting our discussion to non-native learners or including native learners as well, and if the latter, is there much more to say about how most native learners learn Chinese characters and does it belong in this article? The "myths about the Jōyō kanji" section isn't encyclopaedic as it stands, so the information in it will have to be worked in in some other way. Also, can this article be linked in some meaningful and useful way to other language learning/Japanese language/Asian language learning articles on Wikipedia, or indeed, can other articles be merged with this one or vice versa? Exploding Boy 18:28, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
Added: having had a quick look around, there don't appear to be any equivalent articles; for example, the Japanese language article appears to be one of the only ones to have a section on learning Japanese (the Korean, various Chinese, the English and a few others don't have equivalent sections). Again, this brings me back to the issue of theme or title. What is it we actually want to write about here? Exploding Boy 22:00, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Link dump

[edit] Delete?

A year later, this article still strikes me as unencyclopaedic and worthy of deletion rather than keeping. It's still really nothing but a small collection of links to kanji learning resources. Anyone want to disagree? I'll probably list this article for deletion otherwise. Exploding Boy 06:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The only reason this is on my watch list is because I haven't gotten around to AfDing it. I will vote to delete if you post it. Dekimasu 11:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
It should probably be transwikied to Wikibooks for the Japanese learning project, but it may just be redundant with what's already there. — Gwalla | Talk 04:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New idea

All right, there was no strong consensus on the recent AfD, although the keep votes were in the minority. But now the title is still wrong, and the page is still a spam magnet, and the content still targets self-learners. How about merging any useful parts of this article to Kyōiku kanji, redirecting this there, and then splitting off the kanji themselves into List of kyōiku kanji? It seems like there would be a net gain of encyclopedic quality in that process. Dekimasu 16:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't really see what parts of this article qualifies as useful. The few items that might be worth merging into another article are unsourced (and should therefore be deleted anyways). The whole article simply needs to be deleted. Mordrid52 22:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Rewritten, merged, and redirected to Kanji#Kanji education. If the unsourced portions are deleted there, so be it. Dekimasuよ! 05:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)