User talk:Dokurrat

User talk:Dokurrat/Archive 1

---

deletion of derived terms

Why did you remove the derived terms from 中華 and 中華民國? ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Tooironic: I don't think these terms comply with WT:CFI. Do you have any reasons for inclusions of them? Dokurrat (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

I think you're right. Sorry for bothering you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:59, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Tooironic: No problem. Dokurrat (talk) 14:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Difference between several templates

Hi, what's the difference between {{zh-alt-inline}}, {{zh-alt-lb}} and {{zh-also}}? When should we be using which template? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 10:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: There is no intentional difference between {{zh-alt-inline}} and {{zh-alt-lb}}. I was just exploring different layout options. I don't use {{zh-also}} (I think). Dokurrat (talk) 03:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: Then we probably should stick to one of {{zh-alt-inline}} and {{zh-alt-lb}}. {{zh-also}} might have broader usages, so it doesn't have to be merged with the other two. @Wyang, Suzukaze-c, KevinUp, which do you guys prefer? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the first two, I am not sure. But I think that {{zh-also}} is too vague. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

We should unify the display with other inline post-definition templates like {{zh-syn}}, and try to get a consensus for the usage of these. Wyang (talk) 06:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I've been using {{zh-alt-lb}} more often than {{zh-alt-inline}}, because I've always assumed that {{zh-alt-inline}} is the inverse statement of {{zh-alt-form}}. For example, 蜚 (fēi) is listed as 通 「飛」 in 《漢語大字典》 while 蜚 (bèi) is listed as 同 「琲」 in 《漢語大字典》 so I used {{zh-alt-form}} for Pronunciations 2 and 4 of 蜚 but I haven't actually added inverse statements containing {{zh-alt-inline}} to the entries for 飛 (fēi) and 琲 (bèi) because usage of {{zh-forms|alt=}} (mainly used for variant forms 異體字／异体字 (yìtǐzì), ie. characters with same meaning and pronunciation but different in appearance) would be more suitable compared to {{zh-alt-inline}}. Meanwhile, I would recommend using {{zh-alt-lb}} or {{zh-alt-form}} for situations that are much more delicate, as in 須／须 (xū), which has alternative forms 䇓／𰩧 (xū) and 𩓣 (xū) that can only be linked with the sense of "to wait" but not with the other meanings of 須; or 适 (kuò, guā) which has an alternative form 𨓈 that has the same sense of "swift" but does not have the sense of "surname" as 适. Technically, {{zh-alt-lb}} and {{zh-alt-inline}} are both the same but I find {{zh-alt-lb}} to be much neater compared to {{zh-alt-inline}} which can be easily confused with the variant forms listed under {{zh-forms|alt=}} Note also that although《漢語大字典》 mentions 蜚 (fēi) as 通 「飛」 , inverse statements such as "飛 has an alternative form (或體／或体 (huòtǐ)) of 蜚" is usually not taken note of in most Chinese dictionaries. Anyway, it is up to you whether you prefer {{zh-alt-lb}} or {{zh-alt-inline}}. KevinUp (talk) 17:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

The Pinyin for 得過

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: Roger. I've removed the space there. Dokurrat (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: See Template:zh-x#Tricks :) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:01, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Removal of cited Ext. D character article readings

I'm just curious as to how citing zdic.net counts as "unattested" or "unverified" regarding the readings for CJKV single-charcter articles in Extension D that you removed? Bumm13 (talk) 10:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bumm13: Because such claims made by zdic.net are unverified. No proof was found. Dokurrat (talk) 13:57, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: I'm curious as to what makes you think zdic.net is less reliable than, say, a random IP editing one of the articles in the CJKV Extension ranges, such as 𬽡. You haven't given a real answer to my question. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 00:22, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bumm13: I've replied your question. I'll say it again. No proof was found for such zdic.net's claims. Dokurrat (talk) 02:30, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: Good job on removing these claims. Keep up the good work. KevinUp (talk) 20:53, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bumm13: I think that zdic.net is not suitable as a primary source of reference because definitions provided often lack proper citations or references. When editing CJKV entries it is best to use references that are reliable, well-documented and attestable, such as those listed under the {{Han ref}} template. Other excellent work of references can also be found here: Wiktionary:About Chinese/references. For characters with vague origins we would need to refer back to the IRG (Ideographic Rapporteur Group), which submits prospective CJKV characters to the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2 working group for consideration/approval before the characters can be encoded by the Unicode consortium. Here is an example: [1]. I think it is good practice to list references for Chinese characters, especially those using the {{zh-see}} template to prevent IP users from adding unverified statements. KevinUp (talk) 02:41, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Pinyin for 好好先生

Hi, I don't think it should be hyphenated as hǎo-hǎo xiānsheng. See 5.4 in the Basic rules of the Chinese phonetic alphabet orthography. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:02, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

tl=y

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:01, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: Definately no. I'm just doing this because the case 合同 is special. Dokurrat (talk) 07:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

撲稜蛾子

I'm pretty sure that it is pronounced pūlēng though, I might be wrong. Qhwans (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

@Qhwans: What makes you pretty sure that it is pronounced pūlēng? Dokurrat (talk) 14:22, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: Well, my Beijing friend/cousin(s) say it that way. Moreover 百度 and 汉典 says so (I know, not reliable, that's why the "pretty sure"). Qhwans (talk) 14:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

@Qhwans: I see. Dokurrat (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

挎籃背心

Does this refer to a tank top? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:01, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Yes, I guess I mis-defined this term. Dokurrat (talk) 03:19, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: My English is bad; are tank top and A-shirt the same? Dokurrat (talk) 03:22, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 03:36, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I've never heard of A-shirt either. Undershirt is probably too general since it could have sleeves. I've heard of wifebeater, but I'd tend to say tank top or vest. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:51, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative, Justinrleung: I modified the entries 挎籃背心 and 跨欄背心. Dokurrat (talk) 05:05, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung It's currently not technically possible to add kuàlánrbèixīnr to these two entries? Or is it just I didn't figured out how? Dokurrat (talk) 05:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

You can have er=2;4 to indicate where the erhua should go. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Ah, merci beaucoup! Dokurrat (talk) 05:12, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Pas de problème! BTW, are both forms equally as common? I think we should probably pick one be the main form if we can. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:13, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I think 跨欄背心 is more common per Google results. Dokurrat (talk) 05:17, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Shé

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:59, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: I think what you said is true for English as well. Plain nouns are capitalized in book titles. Dokurrat (talk) 06:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Spelling mistakes in edits

Hi, I've been seeing some spelling mistakes in your edits, and yes, English is tough, so I'd recommend maybe installing some sort of spellcheck on your browser if you can. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:56, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Done. Merci. Dokurrat (talk) 11:44, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 14:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

膦軟

You'll notice there's a module error with the message "Zhuyin conversion unsuccessful: "卐ruan3". Are you using a valid Pinyin syllable? Is the text using a breve letter instead of a caron one?". In looking for what changed to caused the error, since the entry itself was last edited in 2016, I noticed that this edit removed references to "卐". My first-year (1987, to be precise) Mandarin gives me no clue as to what to do, but that module error has been sitting there for a couple of weeks, and somebody needs to fix it. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 05:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: I'm a tech dummie. @Wyang, Justinrleung Do you have any idea what's going on? Dokurrat (talk) 05:18, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz, Dokurrat: It should be fixed now. I think @Mar vin kaiser used 卐 as a dummy character to give lìn for Mandarin and liǎn for Taiwan for the character 膦, which has another pronunciation (lìn-lín) already. I don't think lìn is used in 膦軟, so I've changed 卐 to liǎn. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Ah, I see. Dokurrat (talk) 05:23, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Indeed it is. Only one module error left. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 05:38, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Yeah, I did that long, long ago, because it seemed to me that lìn was the only valid pronunciation in the Mainland. Can you find liǎn in any Mainland source though? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser: It's in Hanyu Da Zidian. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

化學

Logically, because the concept of "chemistry" did not exist natively in China, and no attestations can be found in Classical Chinese. See the entry in 漢語大詞典 here. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:35, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

@Tooironic: That doesn't mean the word isn't coined in Chinese. The Japanese entry says that the Japanese word is borrowed from Chinese. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:42, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. I should find some good academic articles on these wasei kango to determine once and for all which are from Japanese and which were natively coined from within China. But it's a complicated topic as you know. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:47, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it's definitely hard to untangle the origins of words like these. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:52, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

structure of 兒化 words

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:38, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: I think it should be judged case by case. And sometime it can be hard to judge. I only edit the entries I am sure about. As for this specific page 年頭兒, I don't have an opinion (yet). Dokurrat (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: You're welcome. Dokurrat (talk) 15:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Dialectal Jin, dialectal Wu, etc.

I usually use these if terms are not used in the prestige/representative dialect within these groups, i.e. Taiyuan dialect for Jin, Shanghainese for Wu, Nanchang dialect for Gan, Changsha dialect for Xiang, Meixian/Sixian dialect for Hakka, Guangzhou/Hong Kong dialect for Cantonese, Jian'ou dialect for Min Bei, Fuzhou dialect for Min Dong. This is probably not ideal, though. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I see. Dokurrat (talk) 04:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

蜻蜻

Why are you so stubborn? I think you're doing it just to spite me. I want to know how this word is pronounced by Chinese speakers when I see it. Mandarin pinyin is very relevant here. Even if you ask for a verification of the pronunciation, it's better than to leave it out completely. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^:вклад) 05:20, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Atitarev: I respect you just like I respect everyone I met in my life. Please, don't regard me like this. Dokurrat (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Atitarev: I don't think Dokurrat has anything against you. They're a bit stubborn at times, but I do agree with them that we should be more careful with giving pronunciations for dialectal words where the dialect in question cannot yet be represented in {{zh-pron}}. For this particular word, it seems like it's used to refer to some kind of small cicada in literary Chinese (per Hanyu Da Cidian), so it'd be fine to include a Mandarin pronunciation if we do list that definition. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:45, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry if I overreacted but I think it has been a common practice to use standard pinyin for dialectal words. 蜻 is definitely a Mandarin word and the dialects using 蜻蜻 won't be too remote to have a significant difference. I think also, we should provide the default prestige dialect pronunciation. @Justinrleung. I posted in WT:Tea_room/2019/March#蜻蜻. Let's continue there. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

碼 & 馬賽克

(Withdrawn) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: “is there any kind of connection between 碼 (pixelization) and 馬賽克 (which is also pixelization)?” Yes, I see 碼 (pixelization) as a clipping of 馬賽克 (with glyph changed). “Does this count as synonyms or would this connection be good enough for a 'see also'?” I'd say synonyms. Dokurrat (talk) 12:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC) (modified)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Dokurrat,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wiktionary and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

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

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Dokurrat,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

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

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Dokurrat,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

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

硬剛

Hello, are you aware of the etymology of the word 硬剛／硬刚, which is currently not an entry? RcAlex36 (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@RcAlex36: Unfortunately not only I don't know the etymology of 剛 as in 硬剛 or 正面剛 but also I don't even know the pronunciation of this expression. Maybe ping some other Chinese speakers? Maybe they would know this internet neologism. Dokurrat (talk) 01:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

@沈澄心 Hi, do you happen to know this word? RcAlex36 (talk) 02:09, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

@RcAlex36 I've seen this word but don't know much about it's etymology… Maybe it's from 硬肛? 沈澄心✉ 14:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

軸

Would you consider adding the dialectal Mandarin senses of 軸／轴 (zhóu, “stubborn”)? RcAlex36 (talk) 14:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@RcAlex36: (Sorry for the delay, been busy for the last couple of days) Not really, I mean... I wouldn't come up with something radically or subtly different than "stubborn"; it's not really a word I use often. I'm not interested in dealing with this sense, at least for now... Dokurrat (talk) 05:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC) (modified)

老登

Maybe 老登 (lǎodēng) should be an entry. This term, originating from Northeastern Mandarin and recorded as 老燈（泡兒）in 哈爾濱方言詞典, appears to have gained popularity on the Internet in recent years. RcAlex36 (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

@RcAlex36: (Sorry for the late reply for being busy) Of course it should, just that me not interested in editing it for now... 😁 Dokurrat (talk) 05:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)