Module talk:zh-cat

Sorting order for traditional forms

(Notifying Wyang, Kc kennylau, Tooironic): This module sorts traditional forms using radicals, the old method of "rs=" parameter. I don't think this what we agreed on, ages ago. We decided to used numbered pinyin, didn't we? E.g. in the new category (easier to use smaller categories for demonstrations) Category:zh:Russia 萨哈林 is under S and 薩哈林 is under 艸. They both should be sorted by "sa4ha1lin2". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

(Notifying Wyang, Atitarev, Tooironic, Jamesjiao, Bumm13, Meihouwang): Why use Mandarin to sort Chinese? --kc_kennylau (talk) 03:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The problem is in using ANY method for sorting. Either entries are sorted phonetically or by radicals. I understand that you may feel that Mandarin is used as a higher priority in this case but what's the difference between simplified and traditional? Why simplified entries are sorted differently from traditional? If we don't choose Mandarin pinyin for sorting, what do you suggest we use, jyutping, radicals, something else? Users will be disadvantaged if we don't use a phonetic method. Cantonese speakers are likely to know pinyin as well but not Mandarin speakers don't know jyutping. It is possible to find entries without sorting but it's much harder with many thousands of Chinese entries to navigate through categories without ABC. I'm not a beginner in Chinese but I seldom use radicals for anything. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:51, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Open any Chinese dictionary. Go to the first page. Isn't the sorting method by radical? --kc_kennylau (talk) 04:06, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

(Notifying Wyang, Kc kennylau, Tooironic): I am not denying that radical sorting exists in dictionaries but all Chinese dictionaries also mainly use a phonetic sorting (piyin, zhuyin, jyutping, etc.) along with the radical lookup indices. As for the original discussion, please see this page where the decision to eliminate rs= was made. It was mentioned here as well. Well, that was for Mandarin and the first discussion was without your participation. We can revisit it, since now it's Chinese. Maybe you guys could develop something, which would allow multiple sorting (sort1=|sort2=|...), like look up boxes on top of category listings? In any case, both simplified and traditional forms shouldn't differ. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Kc kennylau Kenny, I am not forcing my opinion, can we discuss this? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Atitarev Well, I do not oppose any method. --kc_kennylau (talk) 06:51, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

What is the user doesn't know how a character is pronounced? Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 00:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

(There are still the usual ways of finding entries by the search window or adding to URL). The original Mandarin sorting was numbered pinyin for simplified and radicals for traditional. I found it strange. Why were they treated differently? If a user doesn't how to pronounce it, then they should be able to enter it, anyway. Whether we choose phonetic or radical sorting, users still need some prior knowledge to get to the entry they want. What we need is multiple ways to help users to find what they want. It may hard to achieve, though. Pls take a look at Category:Mandarin_nouns_in_traditional_script for remaining unmerged Mandarin entries. Now that rs= value is eliminated, entries are sorted by pinyin but the tables above are supposed to help finding entries by radicals (it doesn't work now, since rs= is not there any more). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Should a vote be set up for this? --kc_kennylau (talk) 02:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to know what's possible first. If it's possible to add indices/lookups, alternative sorting for radical, jyutping, POJ. For making pinyin the default sorting, we may need a vote. I don't want to be accused for promoting Mandarin over other lects, though. If we use radical sort as default, it should apply to both simp. and trad. forms then. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Existing sorting methods: cangjie, wubi, pinyin, radical, four-corner, strokes. --kc_kennylau (talk) 02:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I mean can multiple sorting/lookup methods be applied here, at Wiktionary? My preference is to have it like Category:Mandarin nouns in traditional script - sorted alphabetically (defaulting to pinyin, as standard and most well-known Chinese romanisation) and with possible additional lookup tables at the top. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад)

(Notifying Wyang, Kc kennylau, Tooironic, Jamesjiao, Bumm13, Meihouwang): I wonder if a suggestion to make both traditional and simplified sorted the same way will be met more positively. Can we make radicals the default for both forms then, if we can't have both? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

@Atitarev Yes if one more person agrees. --kc_kennylau (talk) 04:13, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I feel sorry for my own time always adding "|sort=" in all contexts and topical categories but it's worse to have two systems sorted differently. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I prefer the most parsimonious approach (radical) - using no manual sortkey at all and let the system sort itself out. Wyang (talk) 04:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

This module sorts by radicals but the (system) default is character itself, so letting the system sorting itself out is not the best way either. Take a look at the 2nd part (default sorting) of Category:Cantonese_Chinese. The headings are not radicals but characters themselves, would be very bad on a very large list of entries. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

We can let the sort key for zh in Module:languages/data2 be done by Module:zh-cat. Wyang (talk) 04:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

If this is going to work, OK. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Radical sorting is good. We have pinyin entries... so that serves as a lookup system as well. Beside even when a pinyin entry hasn't been created, if the character entry exists then a search system should yield character/compound pages that contain the pinyin anyway. Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 04:30, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't referring to the ability to find entries but to the sorting of entries in categories. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

• Atitarev pinged me about this discussion, but since I have little to no IT skills I'm afraid I can't contribute much. If you want my opinion, the trad and simp forms should be put in separate categories as this could be useful for users wanting to only search one form. As for whether we should use radical sorting or Mandarin pinyin sorting, I wonder if we could have both options? That being said, pinyin sorting as it stands now is not as useful as it could be, since users cannot actually view the pinyin for each entry when looking through a category. Maybe this is something that no one has realised before, but if you think about it, it would be much more useful to have the pinyin visible next to the characters when browsing the categories. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:54, 27 August 2014 (UTC)