User talk:BabelStone/Archive 2020

番國寶錢

Has there ever been a Tangut coin produced with this inscription (番國寶錢 / 番国宝钱)? According to this website it was, but I am not sure if this is an archaic translation or inauthentic. --Donald Trung (talk) 21:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know that there are different possible readings of Tangut characters, so I wonder if this is another reading of an earlier identified Tangut cash coin. --Donald Trung (talk) 23:29, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Donald, it is a type of coin reported to have been found in Ningxia a few years ago. It is discussed here (Zeno #148574) where I give an exact translation of the Tangut transcription. BabelStone (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khitan scripts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diela (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BabelMap 13

Hello, the “previous plane” and “next plane” buttons seem not to work any more since the addition of the tabs. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:43, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "<<<" and ">>>" buttons now have different functions ("go to start of plane" and "go to end of plane"), but I have not yet updated the documentation. (You can now use Ctrl+P and Ctrl+Shift+P to cycle between tabs.) BabelStone (talk) 00:08, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ʼPhags-pa script

Is there a UniCode version of ʼPhags-pa script? And if not, is there a chance that it will ever be developed? It would actually be handy to use in some articles related to the Mongol Empire. --Donald Trung (talk) 07:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Donald Trung: See Phags-pa (Unicode block). 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@1234qwer1234qwer4:, thanks. --Donald Trung (talk) 12:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I have time I'll add Phags-pa script to Yuan dynasty coinage where appropriate. BabelStone (talk) 00:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you in advance. --Donald Trung (talk) 07:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PA

Your edit here contained an uncivil WP:PA, and I have noted that I perceive it as such. However, you have not addressed it while editing otherwise [1]. I strongly suggest that you correct your edit regarding this. After that, the discussion can continue & be more productive. -DePiep (talk) 09:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep article-related discussion on the article talk page, and do not come to my talk page to whine. BabelStone (talk) 09:57, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scripts encoded in Unicode has been nominated for deletion

Category:Scripts encoded in Unicode, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:45, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode core specification

I noticed that you seem to be one of the maintainers of the Unicode chart templates, and I had a thought that it would be a good idea to include a link to the chapter of the Unicode core specification that applies to each block as well as the link to the Unicode code charts themselves on each of those templates. Just a random thought as I was trying to lookup information on the "Ribbon" half form of Devanagari Sha and had to track it down through the Unicode.org website. Van Isaac_WS^cont 11:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really actively editing Unicode stuff any longer, so best to either ask Drmccreedy or raise at Module talk:Unicode chart. BabelStone (talk) 13:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest putting it in the Unicode section of the various articles instead of the chart templates because it's likely to be repetitive. Using Devanagari#Unicode as an example, three block templates are used but they're all covered in the same chapter of The Unicode Standard. Adding a parameter to the "Infobox writing system" is a possibility but you'd have to check with other people for that. I'm unenthusiastic about keeping it up-to-date with each new release though. DRMcCreedy (talk) 01:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew!

I didn't know you edited here too. Small world, huh?

Thanks for those factual corrections. I kind of want to try to get Unicode Consortium up to a GA. I think that enough big media have weighed in on them that it might even be possible. I have other stuff to do first though.[2][3]

I missed the Script Ad Hoc Group deadline, which is honestly fine because there are a lot more details to consider than I thought, so I really do need more time. I've been up for around 24 hours at this point so I'm about to hit the hay, but just wanted to say hi.

By the way, sorry about this tweet, my sense of humor is indeed incomprehensible to even myself the next day. Can't believe I thought that was funny.

Regards, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 13:58, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be very difficult to get Unicode Consortium to GA as there are very few reliable and accurate 3rd-party sources about the Unicode Consortium. Almost everything written about it in the press nowadays relates to emoji encoding, and usually wildly misrepresents what the Unicode Consortium is and what it does. With regard to the tweet, it seems from one of your recent edits that you should be apologising to Richard Cook not to me! (gentle hint, his Tangut proposal was the first proposal but ultimately was not successful, and Mojikyō had no direct involvement in encoding Tangut beyond the fact that the Mojikyō Tangut repertoire is based on the repertoire in Li Fanwen's 1997/2008 Tangut-Chinese dictionary which itself was the primary source for encoding Tangut in Unicode) BabelStone (talk) 08:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question about your edit

So, one thing I didn't think of when I wrote the above is the matter of the Japanese government's input into Unicode. You say they they don't affect Unicode directly. Does this mean that there are actually two avenues of augmenting the UCS? That is to say, while almost all changes to the UCS happen because of a document in the UTC register, does Unicode sometimes add characters due to changes made by ISO to the UCS? So is it actually a two way street? If so the article should definitely clarify this. I guess that would apply to emoji as well? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 05:58, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The UTC and the ISO committee SC2 (and its working group WG2) work in parallel and are closely coordinated (e.g. the editor of ISO/IEC 10646 is a vice president of the Unicode Consortium, and the Unicode Consortium hosts the WG2 website). Organizations and individuals may submit a document to either the UTC document registry or the SC2/WG2 document registry, and if it is an encoding proposal the document will be automatically posted to the other registry as well. Most individuals submit documents to the UTC, but national organizations such as JIS for Japan generally prefer to work within the ISO framework, and submit documents to WG2, which are then reposted to the UTC registry if necessary. To get encoded, any proposed character or set of proposed characters have to be accepted both by the UTC and by SC2 (the latter involving ballots of ISO member bodies such as JIS, ANSI, BSI, etc.). It is also important to remember that the UTC has very strong representation on WG2, and a voting voice at SC2 via the US national body, so in practice SC2 will never be in a position to force the UTC to encode something it does not want to; nevertheless there have been occasions when the UTC has reluctantly accepted the encoding of a new character from the SC2 side in order to break a stalemate (e.g. U+A78F LATIN LETTER SINOLOGICAL DOT). Note that ISO does not propose additions to the character repertoire itself, but only acts on documents submitted by individuals and organizations, so any conflict occurs if the UTC rejects a particular proposal but WG2 accepts the same proposal (or vice versa). Emoji are a whole different kettle of fish, and a source of contention between the two committees in recent years: basically the UTC fast-tracks emoji into the Unicode Standard, forcing the ISO side to accept the emoji additions in order to keep synchronization between the two standards. (Caveat: the above is my take as a lifetime individual member of the Unicode Consortium and as an expert on the WG2 working group for 15+ years, but should not be used as the basis for any Wikipedia edits) BabelStone (talk) 08:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BabelStone: Thank you very much for this detailed reply. I'm sorry I got some of the facts wrong, once again, I just thought that the article could very much use expansion as for most of the public, (including me apparently, who thought I knew more than I did!) the operation of Unicode is a complete mystery.

Also don't worry, I had Dr. Lunde's permission to use his tweets as sources for Mojikyō, I would never imagine citing something to a talk page anyway, no matter how much of a subject matter expert the author, especially if they didn't want me to.

Cheers, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 10:20, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Khitan scripts

This edit simultaneously added a maintenance banner saying "The present disambiguation page holds the title of a primary topic, and an article needs to be written about it. It is believed to qualify as a broad-concept article. It may be written directly at this page or drafted elsewhere and then moved over here. Related titles should be described in Khitan scripts, while unrelated titles should be moved to Khitan scripts (disambiguation)." and converted the former broad-concept article into a disambiguation.

There are no unrelated titles.

I don't understand what you're getting at. wbm1058 (talk) 12:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Which of the two Khitan scripts is the Jurchen script derived from? 3family6 says small, can you confirm? Hmm, per Jurchen script § Jurchen small script "According to the History of the Jin Dynasty there were two different Jurchen scripts: a "large script" that was devised in 1120 by command of Wanyan Aguda, the first emperor of the Jin dynasty; and a "small script" that was created in 1138 by the Emperor Xizong" – wbm1058 (talk) 14:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:EngvarO spelling

Template:EngvarO spelling has been nominated for merging with Template:British English Oxford spelling. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for reminding me! I am pleased that I am still here, although I have not been very active recently. Looking forward to the next ten years! BabelStone (talk) 08:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]