Talk:East Asian typography

Proposal to rename this article
As I read it, this article is about type design for East Asian scripts. It is not about typography, which about designing pages as whole. Typography includes layout, typeface selection, margins, illustrations and so on. So I propose to move the article to "East Asian type design". Does anyone have a reason why I should not go ahead? (I will leave this notice until 15 April.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


 * A similar proposal at talk:Thai typography has gained some feedback, which may be useful here. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Inversely, I think the article should be expanded to include the other aspects of East Asian typography, but if we prefer an immediate correction I'd be fine with this. Remsense  诉  08:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I quite like user:Paul 012's suggestion at talk:Thai typography to use the style AAAAAAAAAA typography and type design. It leaves open the possibility that someone will develop the page/book design aspect. It also avoids potential edit wars, given the de facto broadening in non-specialist use of the word typography, as has happened with the word font (xref font and typeface v computer font). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure! I'm for this proposal also. Remsense  诉  12:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Especially as I am (very) peripherally aware of a great tradition of top-quality design for typeset Japanese books and periodicals, so it the same must be true of Chinese and Korean too. The door is wide open here for someone closer to the subject to develop a section on it. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * A relatively well developed article that may even be a candidate for merger into this one is Horizontal and vertical writing in East Asian scripts? Remsense  诉  18:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * That one looks to me to be reasonably free-standing and much of it is about handwritten documents rather than typeset. A merge would be very difficult and I'm not convinced that it would be worth the effort. An exchange of See Alsos would be sensible, though, and I'll do that now. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)