User talk:Wargaz

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Wargaz!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 15:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


The new file you uploaded is basically a duplicate of File:㝵-oracle.svg. I think it should be reverted to the previous version, which is also found in the oracle bone script. Justinrleung (talk) 06:05, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Sure. Sorry I overlooked that... --Wargaz (talk) 06:12, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Liushutong and "great seal"[edit]

Hi, thanks for your work on the ancient Chinese characters project, especially your bold move of including more than one form for each category. I just have one concern about calling Liushutong forms "great seal". I've brought this up with User:Micheletb before, but it didn't really go anywhere. It really bothers me that we are calling anything from Liushutong "great seal". First of all, Liushutong is a collection of various styles of seal inscriptions, not necessarily specific to any era. Second of all, "great seal" could mean anything before the small seal script, so the name itself is kind of an umbrella term for the oracle bone script, bronze inscriptions and other scripts around the same era. What are your thoughts on this? Should we even keep these as "great seal", or should we rename them to "Liushutong" forms? Justinrleung (talk) 07:48, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I certainly agree with you. Great seal is an ambiguous term which was already abandoned by mainstream Chinese grammatology. It would be better if scripts from Liushutong have their own category. I personally prefer the categories of Xiaoxuetang, and those scripts from Liushutong may under the category of "transcribed (chuanchao) ancient scripts". For example, the "great seal" of 高 is pretty much identical to several transcribed ancient scripts from Xiaoxuetang. In chronological order, Shouwen was published between about 100-121 AD, and Liushutong was published about 1627–1644. The time gap between Liushutong and pre-Qin period is huge, which means scripts from Liushutong can't reflect the original graphic form of ancient scripts. Currently, Liushutong scripts are one of five priorities on the ancient Chinese characters project. I suggest that they can be put aside for a while, and Qin bamboo and slip scripts, staging of bronze scripts and categorizing of Shuowen scipts like Zhou, Ancient and Odd can be added to the Han etym template. Qin bamboo and slip scripts are one of newly emerged subjects of ancient Chinese characters along with Chu bamboo and silk script. They are critical, because they are the least practical ancient scripts with characteristics of both clerical scripts and ancient characters. The staging of bronze scripts is recommended for bronze scripts existed in a large time span including Shang, Western Zhou, Spring and Autumn and Warring States period. The bronze scripts of Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn are probably similar, but Shang bronze scripts and Warring States bronze scripts are differ widely. Moreover, Shang bronze scripts and bone oracle scripts are alike, and Warring States bronze scripts and Chu bamboo and silk scripts are alike. The categorizing of Shuowen scipts also important, and Simplified Characters and Shinjitai may use those variants like 礼 (ancient), 无 (Odd). I updated Chinese and Japanese Han etym template, and I hope they can be a reference to the future Han etym template. --Wargaz (talk) 09:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
By the way, I uploaded file:學-_oracle-v3 and file:學-_oracle-v4 with an extra space in the names, can you do me a favor and move them to proper names? Thanks. --Wargaz (talk) 09:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll try to incorporate the new file name system into English Wiktionary soon and deal with the Liushutong situation similar to what's done on the Chinese and Japanese Wiktionary. I can't move files, but I've requested a move to the correct names for those files. Justinrleung (talk) 09:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Category refinements for ACC[edit]

NB : This conversation should eventually be moved to Commons talk:Ancient Chinese characters.

Hi everybody.
1/ I do know that "great seal" is a very disparate bag content, they obviously correspond to very different styles, but the main problems are "references" :
  1. Given a "great seal" character (found in, where are the reliable sources for better classification of all those character forms? There was none when the project started, hence the choice.
  2. Are there reliable references for such or such sub-category? Is the sub-category description sufficient so that any old character can indeed be found in that form, or is it just a sparse sample?
This being settled, which are the categories that are suggested for a better description of the "great seal" series (or for the "bronze" one)? and which are the time series that they represent?
2/ The main idea with these character series is not to be exhaustive but to present series that enable encyclopaedia readers to understand character evolution, because that is the only use so far. So the problem is not really to know whether such great seal character is of such or such kind, the only assumption is that the chronological evolution is "oracle > bronze > great seal > silk > small seal > present", which enables an automatic reconstruction of the evolution series with templates. The character representative of each series have been chosen so that the array do suggest how things have evolved, whatever the "real" period of each character.
This is how the classification has been used so far. Having different "great seal" (or bronze, or silk) character from different periods might confuse the scheme, which is not desirable : which character would be representative of an evolution? If because of a change the templates are unusable and the evolution has to be reconstructed by hand on every character, this is not an improvement... Will you volunteer to clean up the resulting mess?
If a proposed change results in a general disorganization of the present organization, with no realistic solution proposed, it cannot be allowed and must (and will) be vetoed.
3/ The point of a naming convention is to allow for automatic (template) processing ; if no such processing is needed the name is irrelevant. If the point is just to be specific as to which kind of style the character really is, a supplementary field may be added to the character description in the commons file to state its exact style and period - that is easy. Would that be enough?
What would be the usage of a different approach in the encyclopaedia or dictionaries? If there is another problematic that needs to be automatically processed in articles, alternative character series may be named using different sub-categories conventions, that would not interfere with the "character evolution" problematic. And in that case, having the same picture under two different names is not a problem.
But the point is, you can't expect the same naming convention to support two different problematic.
Michelet-密是力 (talk) 11:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
1/ My reference for such categories is The chapter of The Evolution of the Shapes and Styles of Chinese Characters in Chinese Writings by Chinese historian, palaeographer, and professor Xigui Qiu. (The English version was translated by Gilbert Louis Mattos and Jerry Norman.) In the book, he classified ancient scripts as Shang script, Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn script, six states script and Qin script. There are Chinese websites refer his classification like Chinese-linguipedia and Xiaoxuetang.
2/ The idea of presenting the character evolution is great, but the problem is the scripts from Liushutong is not belong to this chronological evolution. As I mentioned above, the historical chronological evolution would be "Shang script (bronze and oracle) > Western Zhou script (bronze and oracle) >Spring and Autumn script (bronze) > Warring States (bronze and silk for six states, bamboo and seal and slip for Qin) > (clerical script >standard script which are modern forms)'". In those brackets, the first ones are believed to be proper and formal form of their time, and the second ones are handwriting, vulgar and informal form. As you can see, scripts from Liushutong don't belong any stage of the chronological evolution, and the term great seal was invented by people of Han Dynasty. XIgui Qiu also suggested that "In order to avoid misunderstanding, it is best not to use this name." in Chinese Writing. Great seals for , , , , , , , , , , etc. prove that neither scripts from Liushutong are prior to seal or they are proper or vulgar form of any given period of ancient scripts.
As I replied to Justinrleung, Xiaoxuetang and I consider that "transcribed ancient scripts" is a better name for scripts from Liushutong. I don't mean to say that Liushtong isn't important, and it just has a less priority.
As I implemented in Chinese and Japanese Wiktionary, -bronze are still the classical, typical Western Zhou bronze scripts, and every functions from old template are still present. It just have ability to detect -s, -sa, ,-w (Shang, Spring and Autumn and Warring States bronze), -slip (Qin bamboo and slip), -zhou, -ancient, -odd (Shouwen Zhou, ancient, and odd script). The CHinese Han etym template and English one operate in the same way when there are no additional svg files. Therefore, almost no additional work need to be done on previously files. I won't ask English Han etym template to change much, and it just need a few tweaks:
    1. Recognize files with -s, -sa, ,-w and automatically display them in Bronze inscriptions section;
    2. Recognize files with -zhou, -ancient, -odd and automatically display them in Small seal script section;
      1. Maybe rename that section to Shouwen script or just Shouwen;
    3. Recognize files with -slip and maybe replace great seal on main display area.
    4. Display -bigseal file along with other scripts from Liushutong in Large seal script section, and perhaps rename the section to transcribed ancient script or Liushutong.
    5. In the future, maybe set -shang and -oracle in the Shang script section and so on like the following example:
Historical forms of the character X
Oracle bone script Bronze inscriptions Bamboo and silk script Bamboo and slip script Seal script
Shang script
bronze inscriptions
oracle bone script
Western Zhou script
bronze inscriptions
oracle bone script (for example )
Spring and Autumn script
bronze inscriptions
Six States script
bronze inscriptions
Chu bamboo and silk scirpt
Qin script
bamboo and slip script
Shouwen script
ancient script
Zhou script
seal script
odd script
Transcribed ancient script
Liushutong script

Without additional files, the template can work like before:

Historical forms of the character X
Oracle bone script Bronze inscriptions Bamboo and silk script Seal script
Shang script
oracle bone script
Western Zhou script
bronze inscriptions
Six States script
Chu bamboo and silk scirpt
Shouwen script
seal script
Transcribed ancient script
Liushutong script
/3 Yes, of course it is enough. I just want some small tweaks on the template and never intent to cause any disorganization. With several tweaks the template can present a more historical and realistic chronological evolution. --Wargaz (talk) 00:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

OK :

  • I understand that for practical purpose, may be used as "the" reference for assigning detailed categories to Ancient Chinese Characters in the project. Is that correct? Is it always possible to refer to that database?
  • The array is a good idea but is incomplete in its present state. What is the exact list of categories and sub-categories you intend to use, something like (1) name, (2) conventional suffixes for the ACC project, (3) classification according to xiaoxue ((甲)西周 = ???, and so forth), (4) chronological interval concerned, (5) kind of support (oracle / bronze / silk / bamboo / whatever) (6) cultural origin (Shang, Zhou, ...) (7) "default" classification for simplified templates.
  • The templates used in .zh and .ja seem to work, but should be pretty-printed and translated avoiding Chinese characters in the variable names, for better readability (at least for me!).
  • Since "bigseal" does not refer to any historical period, it should be altogether avoided in that template.

Michelet-密是力 (talk) 11:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

  • It is possible to refer that database. Each character has its own number in the database. For example the number of 一 is 1. The oracle database is [1] , and the website use "?kaiOrder=" to call the character.
oracle for 一 ?kaiOrder= 1
bronze for 一 ?kaiOrder= 1
silk for 一 ?kaiOrder= 1
slip for 一 ?kaiOrder= 1
seal for 一 ?kaiOrder= 1
transcribed for 一 ?kaiOrder= 1
  • If the files which uploaded before need more references, I will fix them. I can also try to add function to refer Xiaoxuetang to the ACClicense template. On Zhou oracle, you did have a point. Maybe -zy or -zhouyuan would be possible suffixes? Zhouyuan was the the historical site where Zhou oracle was found. The English Wikipedia doesn't have a page for Zhouyuan, so this is its Chinese Wikipedia page. In Dutch and Svenska WIkipedia, they use its Pinyin Zhouyuan as the title. Those oracles are often referred as Zhouyuan oracle in Chinese academia (周原甲骨, "Zhouyuan Shell-bone"). I believe as long as suffixes don't conflict with each other and can be distinguished, it is okay. Moving all -bronze or -oracle file also requires too much work, we can always use the old name which may not be accurate and give the file an accurate description in the template. (On dynasty name, I prefer to call it time period rather than cultural origin.)
  • If you need a English version of Chinese or Japanese template, I will definitely translate for you. Maybe I will put it in my user page here. Those template were intended to be used by Chinese or Japanese native speakers, so I understand they are unreadable to you. My original thought was the English template can just have some tweaks and it doesn't need to be replaced.
  • Although scripts from Lishutong isn't a part of character evolution, Lishutong is still kind of special. It collected every transcribed ancient scripts after Han dynasty. When ancient scripts are no longer official used, they are transcribed for two thousand years. In the process, some of them changed, and Liushutong recorded the changes. Liushutong would not be updated anymore, maybe wikifying it is still important (just not as important as unearthed ancient scripts). Therefore, maybe we can put them at the end of the template as the epilogue of ancient characters. --Wargaz (talk) 21:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Middle (Naming convention)[edit]

See also Template:Chinese characters naming.

Hello Wargaz. I'am doing light exploration to strengthen the Wikimedia's coverage for Kangxi radicals, frequent characters (?) and useful ones. Today I completed a bit the Template:Chinese_characters_naming with 中 in Kaishu, Xinshu (semi-cursive) and Songti. LiliCharlie uploaded the Kangxi (thanks to him!). The ACC project don't really focus on these post-Christ styles since fonts are generally available, but I think they are needed on Wikimedia for key characters and educational purposes (radicals at least). This is still exploratory and with very low coverage, so I added them in a section "New (2018)". Also, I noticed your effort on more subtle grouping for ACC. Also, feel free to complete this Template:Chinese_characters_naming with 中 images from your uploads. This page is one of our root documentation, so to include and visualize our subcategories and naming conventions to follow.

As for naming convention, previous naming conventions are based on principles :

  1. contain an human friendly hint of the style (not the period)
  2. for SO images and computing reasons :
    • the suffix-hint would be better to avoid {t|s|j|k|h} at its first letter. It's true for -order.gif, -red.png, -bw.png (black and white).
      • the -sbs.gif and -sbs.svg never took-off so we never picked a long term name.

Your work is adding information by precising the period of production. I'am not sure how to handle that. I would encourage you to use the Chinese_characters_naming page adding into it your -w.svg, -s.svg, and then consider an overall naming convention system more human-readable. It could be interesting to have some model such -{style}-{period}-{version}.svg, so images can be found by both style and period. As for the root images such as {zi}-oracle.svg, {zi}-bronze.svg, {zi}-bigseal.svg when many versions are actually available, our initial thought was to select the ones being the missing links between the picture and the traditional character, so it serves has elegant educational material (even if we are aware of the biases selection).

I come today with lot of feedback due to my recent discovery of your work and I may be out of touch for a big part, my sincere apologize if / where I do. Overall, thanks for your uploads. Yug (talk) 19:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Should we come up with better naming?
Present Improved
-s -bronze-shang
-sa -bronze-spring
-w -bronze-warring

--Wargaz (talk) 01:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

By the way, it should be xíngshū or semi-cursive. I am afraid -xinshu isn't a good naming, either. I also suggest to rename -kaishu as -standard. In this glossary, Kaishu is translated as "standard script". It's just more fit in with clerical script, orcale script, seal script and so on. --Wargaz (talk) 01:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello Wargaz, thanks for the pinyin correction, I didn't practice Chinese for few years.
Your 3 improvements sound good to me. It would be better to wait a bit for thinking, we then should be able to set up a sprint on those renaming Face-grin.svg. I'am in.
For Kaishu and Xingshu's coverage, they barely have files. The policy so far for those was "this is not the priority as fonts are available", so migration can be quite straight forward.
I for the question of name changes, I personally like the pinyin as it sounds more specific. « kaishu » sounds more meaningful (Chinese sounding, then when you know more "kai+style" or "Chinese standard style") compare to « standard » which don't carry any Chinese meaning. I also liked shorter names when possible. I here explain the former thinking, I also admit it's not consistent. I went to en:Chinese calligraphy but it was a mess as well (we actually are more consistent than them XD). I'am not fan of standard, too blur. Do we have alternatives.
For cao => cursive, let's go for it (if not yet).
For xing => semicursive, or an alternative. I want to avoid a 2nd « - » in the name, we use them as separator.
We can as of today add them on the summary table, to think about it in coming days and few weeks. This page needs further clean up on the ref section, namings (our talk), and maybe adding 1~2 colums and/or 1~2 category or page link by row. Yug (talk) 11:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I'am not sure, because it date back to 2007 (!), but I think we got pinyin names for modern shapes (songti, kaishu, xingshu, caoshu), and basic-english ones for true ACC. I have a vague memory of that... Were we willing to signal a separation ? no idea. Yug (talk) 11:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I am cool with semicursive and cursive Face-wink.svg. Certainly, most characters don't need a Kaishu ACC, and I think Songti are redundant, too. They can be input easily, and the defefault font for Unihan characters is Songti if I recall it correctly.
The text <span style="font-family:楷体;">我</span> will display the character 我 in Kaishu: (Unfortunately, it doesn't support traditional Chinese, and I feel sad about it.)
Similarly, <span style="font-family:宋体;">我</span> will display the character in Songti :
I suggest that we can use this function, and no extra ACCs are needed. --Wargaz (talk) 11:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I would like toconsistently cover the Kangxi radicals in these styles at least, for teaching purposes. Can be helpful for books and web{sites|pages|apps}, so they don't have to fight on both battlefronts (images and fonts). Some other meaningful characters as case studies as well. (PS: at work, can't edit further) Yug (talk) 13:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
As for your code for modern glyphs, please note that the call to the font family doesn't work on many computers.

Yug (talk) 10:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Template:Chinese_characters_naming's table partially updated, so we visualize our current vision of names and improve it if needed.
Changes not implemented yet (no file moved).
A comment section.
It's 1am, continuing in next days. Yug (talk) 00:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello there.
Thanks for your push on the table. I just added the File:中-caoshu.svg so the list is complete. It's quite impressive. I never realized we were covering that much.
I start to have a more global view. It indeed appears that MCC use pinyin while ACC use basic English. I have vague memories of a talk about it but can't recall on which page or which year.
I'am not pushing for name change as of now, need to cool down. Files renaming may also have negative impact on wiktionaries, I'am not sure the redirect will fill the gap.
Also, thinking via the {zi}-{style}-{period}.ext naming scheme :
  • I noticed that we have "styles" which are generally defined by material tools and constraints in ACC. Then we have "periods" and/or "area" which thus carry some local (as in time and space) variation. Kangxi actually is a variant of Songti/Mingti, so -songti-kangxi.svg makes more sense if we want to be occurate and embed that fact into files' names.
  • Last but not least, I'am starting to think that "bigseal" and "seal" actually are a same graphic style, the earlier being pre-imperial with multiple local variants, the later being imperial with Li Shi's standardization / unification. But both are the same style, same tools, same constraints. Thus, "bigseal.svg" would be better renamed "seal-preimperial.svg" and "seal.svg" either "seal.svg" or "seal-imperial.svg". But this would be a BIG BIG change in term of impact for the ACC project as 5000 files are in these chategories.
This is still exploratory, but it's clearly tickling me. Yug (talk) 10:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
It's also (unwillingly / unanticipated !) getting back in line with Chinese 6~7 traditional styles : Oracle, Bronze, Seal, Lishu, Kaishu, Xingshu, Caoshu.
We also have Bamboo and silk which are lesser know material supports and styles, but 9 with subsets on Commons VS 6~7 in traditional sources is cleaner than 17 on commons VS 6~7 in traditional sources. Yug (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I made a rapid assessment of the most needed categories and datasets, via the first column of the template. Assessment for the SO and MCC categories is done. I made a draft assessment on the ACC categories, but I think you are more relevant than me for those, as I barely new of bamboo and silk scripts few weeks ago.
Also added quantification and links to associate categories. Links to tutorials are planed. We now have a comprehensive dashboard for the various projects. This now can be used as the basis for further internal discussion with active users.
When sorting and naming is solidified for ACC and MCC, I will move back to my own centers of interests Face-grin.svg. Yug (talk) 10:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for you contribution! I have been busy about other things recently, so I didn't rely on time. Sorry about that. I also suggest we should consider about Zhouyuan oracle (as I mentioned above), the oracle bone scripts of West Zhou Dynasty found in Zhouyuan. I propose "-oracle-zhouyuan" as their name. --Wargaz (talk) 05:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello Wargaz, you have an higher expertise for this period. If you think it fit, let's go for it, add it to the naming conventions page. Also, i shared the page and new naming scheme with LiliCharlie, so he can kind of review it and pinpoint short comings with fresh eyes. I worked so much on it that I don't really read its text anymore. Needs fresh eyes to push the last polishing. Yug (talk) 22:22, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
"I propose "-oracle-zhouyuan" as their name."
How do you handle variants of the same
character from
? Do you baptise such files "{Unihan Hanzi}-oracle-zhouyuan-1/2/3...", "{Unihan Hanzi}-oracle-zhouyuan-a/b/c...", or otherwise?
And how do you handle
characters from
that have no corresponding Unihan Hanzi? — Cf. Unicode's Roadmap to the TIP and note that what I call Unihan Hanzi here (e.g.
) are not Unicode characters for pre-Hàn Chinese characters, which will be encoded separately. —LiliCharlie (talk) 23:32, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Zhouyuan oracle are just a few, and we just need to handle those cannot be found Shang oracle like "". Unicode for ACC is a distant work in the future, and we don't have to use the corresponding character for each one. For example, as you say, the bronze, silk, and seal for "日" was fairly different from the MCC, for it was round like "☉". When ACCs are introduced to Unihan, it would have something similar to "☉". However, there are already variants in oracle and slip which are same as the modern "日" such as this one and this one. Even in bronze, you can find similar one like this one from late Shang and this one from mid Warring States. If we follow the rule that the name must correspond the form, it would create many file names which are not consistent and confusing. The ACCs I listed above prove that even in the system of ACC, square, rectangle and round are replaceable. "☉" and "日" are the same character, and a character can be less pictographic for writing or carving purpose. There are some very corresponding Unihan available now, but we didn't choose them as file names. For example, "𤰃" is the more corresponding one for ACC of "用", and "𠄞" and "𠄟" for "上" and "下". Beside the reason above, the more realistic reason for not choosing them as file name is file name on Commons don't support characters from Extension B, C, D, E, F. You can try to upload a file with tile that contains "𤰃", "𠄞" or "𠄟" via Upload Wizard, it will warn you that "Please choose a different, descriptive title (more info)." (and I cannot open the "more info" link). When Unihan supports ACC, I don't know it would take how long for wiki file titles to support them. I hope this could explain your questions. --Wargaz (talk) 05:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello LiliCharlie, Hello Wargaz
For a little background explanation, the ACC project was initially designed as an effort to illustrate encyclopedic and language learning entries of current Chinese characters [in unicode] with a selection of their respective ancient styles. The tag phrase could be : « For each current [unicode] character and for each ancient style, one hand-selected svg illustration with predictable filename and format ». Going back in time and with the eyes of the initial ACC (2007!), the unicode 中 and Commons files 中-{style}.{ext} are not seen as referring to a graphic glyph, but rather seen as referring to the semantic concept of « middle », so both 中-shaped and non-中-shaped oracles glyphs documented as used with meaning en:in the middle of; zh-2018:中 by our sources could end up in the ACC project under 中-oracle.svg or 中-oracle-{idCode}.svg. As for death glyphs, we hadn't expected them to come up.
The ACC project was just not initially designed for the total complexity of countless variants in one given style (ex: Oracles for ), nor was it designed to handle dead signs or concepts. Handling this complexity is truly a new, 2017-2018 question. We had punctual cases before, but we really face this question since Wyangbot's mass upload, and since both Wargaz and yourself brought this expertise in. If by interest you decide to handle these cases as well, the naming conventions is either to use 中-{style}-{idCodeByYourSource}.svg or a new conventions of your creation. <Troll:> Will we come up with a DCC Dead Chinese Characters project ?</endTroll> Face-grin.svg Yug (talk) 13:31, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Ok, should we move forward with "-oracle-zhouyuan" ?
Together with the understanding that ACC was initially designed for teaching purposes of nowadays unicode characters, so a system must be proposed for atypical cases as rightly exposed by LiliCharlie. Yug (talk) 11:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Sure! I definitely agree. I will add -oracle-zhouyuan soon. Face-wink.svg --Wargaz (talk) 12:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Please note that the root {character}-oracle.svg « bucket » should always be uploaded first, by a glyph being an elegant « missing link » between the current traditional character and the archaic image or realistic drawing. When more variations exist, the overflow then fill in the more specific namings such as {character}-oracle-{period}.svg. --Yug (talk) 14:33, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Wikislow ! I'am entering a wikislow. I need to focus on other real life matters in coming weeks. But thanks for the collaboration, was very fun ! :D --Yug (talk) 16:04, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
It's okay. I understand. It was fun to me, too. :) I'm looking forward for next collaboration. --Wargaz (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
It seems there are light differences between mingti and songti. I added a source about it :
Will update naming convention accordingly. --Yug (talk) 09:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
We start to have something* pretty net I think. (* = the naming conventions)
I added them to the project home page.
May deserve JS accordion, to hide by default, and display if needed. Not sure, bottom of page is already hiding it a bit.
My global objective is to provide a super net place so new comers, with coding skills or graphic skills, can take over one axe and attack quite quickly, with right info on home page.
Seems we are on good way. Yug (talk) 09:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The Songti, Mingti, Songti-kangxi deserves more attention. I'am not sure Songti-kangxi is song anymore. And maybe we should just get one. Yug (talk) 09:56, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Also may lower them 3 to one dot. Yug (talk) 10:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Image without license[edit]


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner) 09:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Recent template edits[edit]

Hello, Wargaz. I see you recently made edits to Template:ACClicense that resulted in changing the categorization of some files. In particular, two files (that haven't recently been edited) now appear in Category:橋. That category is a redirect to Category:Bridges, but the two images that are now populating that category do not appear to have anything to do with bridges. I do not read Chinese, so I have no idea whether it is the redirect that is wrong, or the categorization of the two files. However, it seems likely that one of them must be wrong. Perhaps you can help clear up the mystery. --R'n'B (talk) 16:49, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, R'n'B. I edited {{ACClicense}} recently, but it might not be the result of my editing. That is the way how the {{ACClicense}} works originally: it categorized a character's ACCs into its category. 橋 is the Chinese character for bridges, so it's a wrong redirect. Category:橋 should have its own page to contain ACCs and MCC of 橋. Thank you for reminding me, and I will fix this. --Wargaz (talk) 23:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Need mentoring on ACC[edit]

Hello Wargaz,

I'am interested to slowly push forward the ACC coverage for the list of characters in User:Yug/hz2. This list who come from the Chinese MOOC in French. I lost track of the ACC sources to use... I currently plan to use ChineseEtymology but maybe you can advice me on the best source to use as of 2018, or the specifics --strengths and weakness-- of each sources. Any thing I most know before to go forward ? Yug (talk) 21:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Yug, I'm glad that you got some free time. Good news! I just finished the renaming of the old convention. I suggest that you can try to use Sinica Database and Multi-function Chinese Character Database.
With Sinica Database, you can easily get 300px image or any other sizes. The UI is all Chinese, but you may use built-in translators which are available in many browsers. Sinica Database is funded by National Science Council of ROC Executive Yuan and developed by Department of Chinese Literature of National Taiwan University, Historical Language Institute of Academia Sinica and Institute of Information Science (About Sinica Database) It is more reliable than ChineseEtymology. The UI of Multi-function Chinese Character Database supports English, so it is much user-friendly to non-Chinese speakers. The drawback is their images is too small.
On ChineseEtymology, I thank Richard's work, but information on his website is really outdated. He uploaded decade-old versions of Collection of Oracle scripts and Bronze inscriptions many years ago, and many are still old Interpretations like oracle for 春 and 秋 in ChineseEtymology. The so-called "great seals" in your template, characters from Lishutong is not a process of character evolution and don't have teaching, historical and academic value. The real process in there is Warring States scripts which are mainly represented by Bronze, Chu Bamboo and Silk and Qin Bamboo and Slip in our project. Warring States scripts is the one of hottest topic in Chinese grammatology, and they are not represented on ChineseEtymology at all. Furthermore, most source of Chu Bamboo and Silk as well as Qin Bamboo and Slip are introduced and informative on English Wikipedia (all of Qin bamboo and slip of Sinica Database are from Shuihudi Qin bamboo texts, the Chu bamboo and silk are from Guodian Chu Slips, Shanghai Museum bamboo slips, Baoshan bamboo slips and etc. Those information can be viewed on the 出處表 source table of Sinica Qin script database and Chu script database), but the book Liushutong which is the source of most "great seals" of our project doesn't have a page on any version of Wikipedia, even the Chinese one. In contrast, Shouwen Jiezi is much more well-known than it, as well as on importance.
--Wargaz (talk) 01:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, thanks a lot for the sum up.
(1) The background solidity of Sinica is awesome. 2018 is great Face-grin.svg.
(2) I'am discovering the depreciated value of greatseal = bigseal (=LST if i remember well). It's unfortunate.
*-bigseal.svg (1,835 files) was one of the core styles and steps on the ACC's [artificial] evolutionary path for Chinese characters.
If bigseal is not relevant, I'am still confuse about what to do with it. Should we drop this bigseal style from the core ACC's evolutionary path / priorities ? Should we rather replace it and put focus on the -bronze-warring.svg ?
(3) We likely should create an entry for the Liushitong, even supershort as long as we have one source, but so we know and agree at less a bit what we are talking about here on the ACC.
PS: I will come back and reread your message to process it better. Yug (talk) 15:05, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Ok, according to Template:Chinese characters naming (ps: I love this page!), it seems we are phasing out focus on bigseal : only 1 dot in the priority column. Good to know !
Also, thanks for the files' migration. Face-smile.svg Yug (talk) 19:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for listening! I used to share my view on big seal with Micheletb, but it seems like he showed less interest. I know that maybe he left ACC project for a while. Sure, we should more focus on -bronze-warring,svg, as well as -slip.svg and -silk.svg, they are putty much reflect the diversity of Warring States script by geography and time. --Wargaz (talk) 19:53, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Renamed files[edit]

do you have any more files to add or process in batches? I'll help. Artix Kreiger (talk) 02:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Certainly! Thank you for helping me!
  • File:巴-bronze.svg
  • File:匋-oracle.svg
  • File:前-oracle.svg
  • File:乖-bronze.svg

The files above should be deleted, and I wait for a long time. --Wargaz (talk) 02:50, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

In addition:

  • File:包-bronze.svg
  • File:全-bronze.svg

Thanks again! --Wargaz (talk) 02:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Rubbing of the Inscription Ding of Dayu Tripod.jpg[edit]

File:Rubbing of the Inscription Ding of Dayu Tripod.jpg is precise and Copyright Free. I hope that more scholars and students use this image. --ReijiYamashina777 (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh, actually, all of images under Category:Rubbings of inscriptions on Chinese bronzes, because they are over 50 (~100) years old. I just edited File:Da Yu ding inscription.jpg. The characters on File:Da Yu ding inscription.jpg are clearer and more precise to me, and the image has higher contrast and resolution. What's wrong with that one? --Wargaz (talk) 01:27, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Rubbing of the Inscription Ding of Dayu Tripod.jpg is from the Shanghai Museum 1959 book. It may be more precise than File:Da Yu ding inscription.jpg from the Kao Ming book. I hope the more precise image be popular and you use that.--ReijiYamashina777 (talk) 01:35, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay. You are right about it. --Wargaz (talk) 04:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

We usually keep redirects of moved files[edit]

Hi. When a file has been at a location for a long period, and then moved, we would usually keep that redirect. If someone has linked to the file externally, we don't want to break that link, remembering that Wikimedia allows external pulls of our images.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:29, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I want to break that link, because its external pulls. All of "-bronze" in ancient character project are Western Zhou (1046–771 BC) bronze inscription characters, and all of "-bronze-warring" are Warring States (476 to 221 BC) bronze inscription characters. If you insist to keep the redirects, it would display this in all Wiktionaries:
Warring States (戰國) Shuowen (說文, 漢)

Bronze inscriptions

(小篆) Small seal



and I have to add "bronze=N/A" in the Wiktionaries in order to display like this:
Warring States (戰國) Shuowen (說文, 漢)

Bronze inscriptions

(小篆) Small seal



However, since English and French Wiktionaries' {{Han etyl}} don't support this function, they will display the wrong images. If you allow me to fix them, that won't happen. --Wargaz (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
I am not saying not to move the files, I am saying that we leave the redirects. If you have files that are being pulled after that by templates, then please fix the templates. If you have files that are being pulled by Wikidata links, then these should be resolved by the moves, though you should double check that they do update.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:36, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Please fix the templates at the wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:48, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst:No. English and French WIktionaries' {{Han etyl}} cannot be fixed in this way. --Wargaz (talk) 16:17, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
I find "can't" hard to believe, in my extensive experience with wikis and templates, however, if that is the case then replicate the alternate templates. This issue should be resolvable without having to delete the redirects.  — billinghurst sDrewth 16:32, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: English {{Han etyl}} has some functions which the alternate template doesn't have, and I don't know how to merge them. I don't speak French, and I honestly don't know how to modifier the French template. If you could, please help me to solve those problems. --Wargaz (talk) 17:44, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Nope. It is not Commons job to solve Wiktionary issues. Find those skills, or ask your questions at the appropriate forums. As been said, removal of redirects breaks any existing external linking to files, and that is not done casually, and not be speedy deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
As an administrator of this site I have explained to you what exists for the rules at Commons. Please stop nominating this file for deletion. My other options are to protect the file, or to block you, neither of which are worthwhile. Your sites' templates are the problem here, not the files, or the names, fix them!  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: The names are problems. In the Ancient script project of the Commons, -bronze files are for Western Zhou bronze images, and -bronze-warring are for Warring States bronze images. Please read this and this. 冰 do not have Western Zhou bronze but only Warring States bronze, so it should not have a -bronze redirect. I thought that I explain enough of this to you, but you still do not understand. I don't why. --Wargaz (talk) 03:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
You have explained that, and I have explained that, and that is why the rename was undertaken. Fix your templates, or directly link. I have explained why we keep redirects for long existing files.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: They cannot be fixed. They are not even my templates. I didn't create them, and I don't know how to modifier them. You just don't let wrongly named redirects go. Other users upload wrongly named files and created English and French templates, and you let me to fix everything that caused by their problems. --Wargaz (talk) 03:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Do not come and start blaming me for the issues that you face. I didn't request the files to be moved. I didn't write the templates. I denied your deletion request as it is outside the existing policy to speedy delete a file redirect, especially where the file has an extended history. If you wish to suggest a change to the policy/guideline, then you go for it.

The problem does NOT lie with the filename, the problem lies with the template at whichever wikis that the problem exists. If you cannot fix the templates, then get the communities to fix them, it is their responsibility. It is simply untrue to say that the templates cannot be fixed.

It is truly unfortunate that there are issues, however, your simple solution to delete redirects causes other general issues for anyone externally linking to a file, and that is also bad. Your presented case does not meet the standard for me to step outside of the guidance, as there are alternate solutions.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Redirecting to ACC-... files[edit]

Hi. I don't think it's a good idea to redirect to these files, like File:亟-bronze-spring-2.svg to File:ACC-b18639.svg. Wouldn't it be better to move the ACC- names to something more meaningful? Also, if we do use redirect detection as a way to go around the bad redirect issue, then these redirects would not work. Justinrleung (talk) 03:38, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I thought about that before, but waiting for administrators to move is really waste of time. I think that we only need to delete bad redirects and keep the good ones. After all, if we do move File:ACC-b18639.svg to File:亟-bronze-spring-2.svg, a File:ACC-b18639.svg redirect is still needed for the Han Etym template on English Wiktionary. --Wargaz (talk) 04:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
No, the File:ACC-b18639.svg redirect would not be needed because it's not part of the template that relies on the naming convention. We just need to change the data modules for the dropdown part. Justinrleung (talk) 04:27, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay, that's a good idea, but the major problem is that means we need to rename thousands of files if we do so... There are at least two thousand bronze files with ACC- names and two thousand oracle files with ACC- names. Besides, I do know how to achieve this on English Han Etym template yet. --Wargaz (talk) 05:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
We don't have to rename all of them, just the ones that you think are suitable as the ones that display without clicking the dropdown. Justinrleung (talk) 06:08, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Then the amount of work will be reasonable. However, if we delete the redirects after we renamed those files, red links will appear in the hidden area just like this one. Do we just delete them in the glyph-data? --Wargaz (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you would delete these kinds of redirects since they're useful, but they do get deleted, we can change the glyph data to have the right file name or remove the name from the glyph data. Justinrleung (talk) 06:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. I misunderstood something. I would definitely keep if I could, and I will follow this as my new guideline in the future. However, how to delete those bad redirects like File:冰-bronze.svg and File:覺-silk.svg? The enthusiastic administrator just won't let me do anything about that. --Wargaz (talk) 06:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
FYI, this "enthusiastic" administrator is an experienced administrator of long-standing (and not solely at this wiki) who was elected by the community to uphold the policies as determined by the community. The purpose of the policies and guidelines is to attempt generate a consistent approach, not to react to demands of individuals who think of solutions for their limited subset of problems and may not be paying sufficient attention to issues that they may cause. If you don't like the policies/guidance as they are currently prescribed, then seek a new consensus for a change, and that will be the paradigm to which I will administer, until then ...  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
I feel speechless. I told before that redirects like FIle:冰-bronze.svg are incorrect according to Ancient Chinese characters project naming rules, and no one should refer File:冰-bronze-warring.svg as File:冰-bronze.svg. Currently, only our Han etym templates use those files, and we ARE fixing the links. In the future, if ANYONE who wants to refer File:冰-bronze-warring.svg, they should NOT refer it as File:冰-bronze.svg. Because according to ACC naming rules that is an incorrect named redirect. --Wargaz (talk) 17:10, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
I don't think we can do anything about these bad redirects under the current policy. What we have to do is find another way to deal with this from the Wiktionary side of things, which is what I'm trying to do on English Wiktionary. Justinrleung (talk) 18:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your effort, Justinrleung. --Wargaz (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)