Template talk:Infobox Chinese/Archive 1

Section lines go through template
Take a look at Sino-British Joint Declaration. At the time of this comment, the lines dividing the sections of an article go right through the template. I've tried to fix it to give the template a solid background, but my fixes did not work. Someone more familiar with the template, please fix it so that it has a solid white background. - Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Template
This template is horribly unattractive in its font, spacing, font size, and color. Could it be made just like the Korean name (or Chinese name template, but just with a slightly different color? Thank you,  Badagnani 08:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Postal Map Romanization
I have changed "Postal system pinyin" in the template to "Postal map spelling", which will redirect to Chinese Postal Map Romanization. For any questions regarding this change, see Talk:Chinese Postal Map Romanization.--Niohe 19:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Template conflict
This template should be avoided in articles where it comes into conflict with other templates. This is especially true for Template:Language, which already carries information included in these templates.

Peter Isotalo 17:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Can you give some examples? Template:Language redirects to Template:Infobox Language, which I have a hard time imagining conflicting with this (except perhaps in articles that are specifically about a language/dialect of China). But maybe you meant Template:Lang? -- Visviva 05:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I meant the infobox. I forgot that they moved it...
 * The problem is that they both go in the top right corner of the article. See this version of Cantonese (linguistics) for a good illustration. The current state of Zhejiang also looks quite awkward. There are tons of infoboxes and series templates which all take up the upper right corner space, so there's plenty of instances where the templates could clash with one another.
 * I understand that the motivation behind this kind of template is to clean up the lead, but I would rather insist that editors prefer to simply cut down on the amount of transcription trivia (the postal version are especially pointless) rather than trying to transfer it to these kind of templates. Try to keep in mind that the vast majority of our intended readership can't read either of the transliteration systems, let alone Chinese characters, simplified or not. And I'm saying this as a former student of Chinese, so it's not just a complaint about what I don't understand.
 * Peter Isotalo 17:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I will abstain from the general discussion, because my understanding of templates is limited, but I'd like stress that it is not pointless to mention postal map Romanization in a template on Chinese. This was the form of Romanization that was used to transcribe Chinese place names for generations and it is used in almost any English language work on China before 1979. By comparison, Legge romanization, Gwoyeu Romatzyh and Latinxua Sinwenz, may have their scientific merits, but they are far less commonly used.--Niohe 19:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Can we standardize and combine features from the templates??
It would be best to just combine the best feature of all three. Benjwong 19:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * There is the current Template:Chinese which can do Chinese names but not Japanese or any other names. But it can do multiple names.
 * There is Template:Chinesename which can do simple language names, but not multiple names. It can switch between traditional or simplified displays.
 * There is Template:cjk which can do Chinese, Japanese etc. But not multiple names.

I am afraid that is not entirely correct. Alan 22:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Template:Chinese can actually display names in Japanese and a lot of other languages. For example, the parameter "jpn" is for Japanese, "kor" for Korean, "por" for Portuguese, "rus" for Russian, etc. Notice that the three-letter name of the parameter is simply the ISO 639 code for the language, instead of some random, arbitary names.
 * Template:Chinesename can display the names in both traditional Chinese characters and simplified Chinese characters, but so can Template:Chinese and Template:cjk.
 * Template:cjk cannot do multiple names in one language. But the template is intended for displaying multiple languages. As long as there are already many languages in the list, I am afraid that it would make the list too long if we enable it to display many names for each of those many languages.


 * The color scheme of cjk doesn't look very good, though it might have potential. Chinesename and Chinese are similar; I support adding extra languages to "Chinesename" rather than using "Chinese" (the colors and layout of this one are strange too). Badagnani 20:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * On one hand you said that "the colors and layout of this one [the "Chinese" template] are strange"; on the other hand you said that "Chinesename and Chinese are similar". In that regard, the two templates - "Chinesename" and "Chinese" - are equally strange. :-P - Alan 22:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I apologize that I have nothing overly constructive to contribute, but I would definitely support the creation of an effective template for this. The more features in a single template, the better. It compartmentalizes things nicely, and avoids the problem of multiple templates vying for the same space. (I rather like Template:Cjk, if the colors were changed, and the ability to do multiple names were added.) LordAmeth 21:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I am glad that you like Template:Cjk. However, I believe that we should worry more about whether the templates are informative, clear and systematic at this point, instead of putting too much attention on the colour scheme. Aesthetic is something subjective and arbitary. While some people would like colour scheme A better, some people would like colour scheme B better. It would be an endless discussion to talk about which colour "looks nice". But overall, the color scheme is something that can easily be modified in the program code. Perhaps we can ask around and find out the colour that most people like, and then switch to the new colour scheme. That shouldn't be too big of a problem to worry about. Alan 22:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * One very serious problem is that the template syntax of cjk and Chinese are extremely complicated, something that is not true of "Chinesename." And cjk takes up a lot more space, being less economical in that regard.Badagnani 21:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

In terms of the template syntax, I don't think "Chinese" and "cjk" are a lot more complicated than "Chinesename". All three templates make use of tables. Their codes have similar formats. I would say that the three templates are more or less equally complicated.

If you want a template to be able to do lots of different things, you can't avoid the complexity in its syntax. This is the price that you have to pay. :-) Fortunately, a lot of Wikipedians know programming. As long as the source codes are well organized, a lot of folks should be able to understand.

But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter, because it is a template. As long as whoever writes the code makes it simple for people to apply the template to articles, who cares how complicated the code is. :-) I beleive this is also a very important purpose for having a template. With the template, we only have to write the complicate code once, and make our life easier when we apply the template to articles.

You also mentioned that "cjk" takes up a lot more space. I am afraid I don't entirely agree with that. The "cjk" template initially hides all the transliterations. It doesn't display the information (namely the transliterations) that most readers don't care unless the readers ask for them (by clicking on the "[show]" button). By hiding some information, "cjk" actually takes up a lot less space than "Chinesename".

Alan 22:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, well, I have very little experience in coding, so whatever others think is good should be fine. I think the key thing is to make sure the template is flexible to represent as many different languages and different scripts as may be needed on any given article. LordAmeth 22:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I am ok with changing to Template:Chinese if it can do the Japanese and the many languages like Template:Cjk. The problem is that I am not much of a wiki coder. Let me do a comparison chart. I will print result here.  Hang on. Benjwong 22:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, we are not really "changing to Template:Chinese". Notice thatTemplate:Chinese has been existing, and has been widely used, BEFORE another Wikipedian wrote the additional template, Template:Chinesename. Also, as I mentioned above, Template:Chinese can display names in Japanese and many other languages. - Alan 22:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Template:Chinese still looks very strange. Better than when it had the dark blue highlighting on top, but still strange, non-standard. Badagnani 22:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned above, aesthetic is something subjective and arbitary. You think Template:Chinese is strange. But a lot of other Wikipedians might actually like it. I think Template:Chinese is actually pretty colourful and attractive, while Template:Chinesename is rather dull and unattractive. Alan 22:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not just the color, but the design (such as the fact that Chinesename is more economical of space). And the syntax of the template is very, very complex. Any number of new languages can be added to the Chinese name template, so that's not a problem. Badagnani 23:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, I don't believe the transliteration should be hidden, as in Template:Chinese. Badagnani 23:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The idea of hiding the transliteration was a consensus of a long discussion started by Hong Kong Wikipedians long ago. But no one figured out how to write codes that does that until recently. The rationale behind hiding the transliteration was that there are just too many transliterations to be shown (e.g. Hanyu Pinyin, Tongyong Pinyin, Wades-Giles, Jyutping, Yale, POJ, and a lot more...). These transliterations take up a lot of space and are not something that most readers would be interested in. You were complaining that the template took up a lot of space, but now the transliterations are displayed "on demand", and the template now takes up a lot less space than "Chinesename". I don't think it makes much sense to complain that "translierations should be hidden". - Alan 23:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Comparison charts are coming. Hang on. Benjwong 23:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

{|class=wikitable ! width=10% | Template ! width=5% | Cjk ! width=5% | Chinese (2 means a 2nd alternate field) ! width=5% | Chinesename
 * Picture || pic || pic || image
 * Picture caption || piccap || piccap || image_caption
 * Context switch for simplified/trad display || ||  || s
 * Traditional/Simplified || c || c, c2 || st
 * Traditional Chinese || t || t, t2 || traditional
 * Simplified Chinese || s || s, s2 || simplified
 * Literal meaning || l || l, l2 || lm
 * Chinese postal map || psp || psp, psp2 ||
 * IPA || i || i, i2 || ipa
 * Cantonese Jyutping || j || j, j2 || ca
 * Cantonese Yale || y || y, y2 || cay
 * Mandarin Yale || ||  || may
 * Hakka || h || h, h2 ||
 * Hanyu Pinyin || p || p, p2 || py
 * Gwoyeu Romatzyh || gr || gr, gr2 || gr
 * Tongyong pinyin || tp || tp, tp2 ||
 * Wade Giles || w || w, w2 || wg
 * Taiwanese POJ/Min nan || poj || poj, poj2 || poj
 * Latin phonetic Shanghainese || lmz || lmz, lmz2 || sh
 * Teochew || teo || teo, teo2 ||
 * Korean generic || || kor ||
 * Korean Hangul || hangul || || kng
 * Korean Hanja || hanja || || knj
 * Revised Romanization of Korean || rr || ||
 * McCune-Reischauer || mr || ||
 * Japanese generic || || jpn ||
 * Japanese Kanji || kanji || || jpkanj
 * Japanese Kana || kana || || jpkana
 * Japanese Hiragana || ||  || jphiri
 * Romaji || romaji || || jprom
 * Filipino Tagalog || tgl || || fi
 * Malay language || msa || msa || ma
 * Manchu language || mnc || mnc ||
 * Mongolian language || mon || mon ||
 * Portugese language || por || por ||
 * Russian language || rus || rus ||
 * Thai language || tha || tha ||
 * Tibetan language || tib || tib ||
 * Uyghur language || uig || uig ||
 * Vietnamese language || vie || vie || vi
 * Zhung language || zha || zha ||
 * Additional language 1 || lang1 || lang1 ||
 * Additional language 2 || lang2 || lang2 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||
 * Korean Hanja || hanja || || knj
 * Revised Romanization of Korean || rr || ||
 * McCune-Reischauer || mr || ||
 * Japanese generic || || jpn ||
 * Japanese Kanji || kanji || || jpkanj
 * Japanese Kana || kana || || jpkana
 * Japanese Hiragana || ||  || jphiri
 * Romaji || romaji || || jprom
 * Filipino Tagalog || tgl || || fi
 * Malay language || msa || msa || ma
 * Manchu language || mnc || mnc ||
 * Mongolian language || mon || mon ||
 * Portugese language || por || por ||
 * Russian language || rus || rus ||
 * Thai language || tha || tha ||
 * Tibetan language || tib || tib ||
 * Uyghur language || uig || uig ||
 * Vietnamese language || vie || vie || vi
 * Zhung language || zha || zha ||
 * Additional language 1 || lang1 || lang1 ||
 * Additional language 2 || lang2 || lang2 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||
 * Mongolian language || mon || mon ||
 * Portugese language || por || por ||
 * Russian language || rus || rus ||
 * Thai language || tha || tha ||
 * Tibetan language || tib || tib ||
 * Uyghur language || uig || uig ||
 * Vietnamese language || vie || vie || vi
 * Zhung language || zha || zha ||
 * Additional language 1 || lang1 || lang1 ||
 * Additional language 2 || lang2 || lang2 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||
 * Uyghur language || uig || uig ||
 * Vietnamese language || vie || vie || vi
 * Zhung language || zha || zha ||
 * Additional language 1 || lang1 || lang1 ||
 * Additional language 2 || lang2 || lang2 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||
 * Additional language 1 || lang1 || lang1 ||
 * Additional language 2 || lang2 || lang2 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||
 * Additional language 3 || lang3 || lang3 ||

Ok here it is. Every template is missing something. Benjwong 23:33, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Replacing inline format
Please do not systematically replace the existing inline format for display of Chinese text and romanizations without warning or discussion. It is not necessary to have this box on every Chinese-related page. In any case there should be a consensus on the Manual of Style before this kind of massive replacement is done. &mdash; Kelw (talk) 23:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's continue the talk here. Benjwong 23:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Interference
In Solar terms, this template interferes with which may be a problem with the latter template. However, even when I remove the Solar terms template, this Chinese template still interferes with remaining table—the text from both tables overlay each other transparently, especially when the text size is increased. Although prevents the interference, excessive white space is then generated. — Joe Kress 21:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Further experimentation shows that the problem only exists in Firefox 2—no interference exists in IE 7. The two templates don't interfere with each other, but both interfere with the article's table in Firefox. I found that does separate the two templates from the table with minimal whitespace, provided that  is not used between the templates, forcing them to exist side-by-side. But this also moves the right margin of the table to the left of the Chinese template, squeezing the table's contents. I ultimately decided that

offers the best compromise. In summary, experimentation with the various clear templates is needed if interference exists in any browser. — Joe Kress 01:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I want to say solar terms is a unique page. It has two big templates, followed directly by another table.  None of them make way for one another. If you try another language template, it'll likely have the same effect.  So

is a good quick fix. Template:Chinese do stack with most templates. See Shenzhen article for example. I am open to any solution really. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

North Korea
I've added a switch to the Korean name fields which can be used to adjust them to a North Korean context. To activate the switch, use. This feature can be seen in Sino-Korea Friendship Bridge. PC78 03:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Heading
This template looks great - I know people have been working hard on it the last few weeks, and you've all done a fine job. I wonder, though, if there's any option to alter the heading, so it doesn't read "Chinese". Most of the topics I'm working on are not primarily Chinese topics, so it would be great to have a language template where Japanese, Vietnamese, or Okinawan can be the primary language listed, with Chinese coming later - in these cases, having "Chinese" as the header at the top of the template doesn't really work. This template could be quite useful not only for CJKV languages but also for all the world's languages - but in order to be used that way, the "Chinese" heading has to go. Thanks. LordAmeth 13:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it doesn't make sense. I don't know why it was changed from the template Template:Chinesename, which reads "Chinese name" at the top, which is more logical. The color blue signifies it's a primarily China-related topic, purple is Korean. I believe the Chinese template ought to say "Chinese name" at the top rather than Chinese. Badagnani 14:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks; I agree with you that Chinese name is more logical than just Chinese, I guess. But actually, I was looking for a template which would allow the editor to choose the heading. I've been working on and off on various topics related to the Ryukyu Kingdom; I'd like to be able to represent the Chinese, Japanese, and Okinawan versions of the kingdom's name, but with Okinawan first (and most prominently), not Chinese. Even a neutral heading like "Native name" or "In other languages" would be preferable to "Chinese" or "Chinese name". I understand that this template is originally intended for Chinese usage, and I do not mean to be obnoxious or anything, but I just think it would be useful if the heading were more flexible. Unfortunately, I don't know much at all about template coding syntax, so I won't hazard to "be bold" and change the template myself. LordAmeth 23:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much, if you are looking for a universal language template, there is none right now. This template displays mostly in alphabetical order. It so happens conveniently that Chinese began with a "C". You can certainly add Ryukyu and other languages using "Lang", though I agree it won't come first. Benjwong 17:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Great work, two suggestions
Wow. This is some fantastic work. The first suggestion is that all of the usage stuff go on the template page, usually talk pages are for discussion, only. The second suggestion is more detailed. It might be nice if alternate romanizations for Japanese were available. There are at least four that are relevant, Revised Hepburn and Traditional Hepburn (both covered at Hepburn romanization), Kunrei-shiki, and Nihon-shiki. Right now, the only field provided is "romaji", which sort of implies there is only one way to romanize a particular Japanese word, and a bunch of other languages have alternate romanization options, so I just thought, for the sake of completeness... Anyway, just a suggestion, thanks, Bradford44 17:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I know the is supposed to separate it. Still I am terrified of having instructions on the same page as the code. Especially when the current talk page calls the function for a demo, which can be modified all you want with no harm.  Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


 * About the extra Japanese romanizations, you might want to break it down real simple on the 4 to be added. Starting with some kind of standard iso codes for each romanization, assuming there is any? Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Romaji (iso code = romaji)
 * Shūsei Hebon-shiki Rōmaji (iso code = ?)
 * Hyōjun-shiki Rōmaji (iso code = ?)
 * Kunrei-shiki (iso code = ?)
 * Nihon-shiki (iso code = ?)


 * Ok, I'm not too familiar with iso standards, so I'm not really sure what information you're looking for (that is, your question gives me much more credit for translation/transliteration proficiency than I deserve). According to their respective articles, Traditional Hepburn (Hyōjun-shiki) gained international popularity since its mid-19th century invention, but has never been approved by the ISO.  Revised Hepburn (Shūsei Hebon-shiki) is also not approved by the ISO, but has been adopted by the U.S. Library of Congress and is the most widely used in the world.  Kunrei-shiki is ISO 3602; Nihon-shiki is ISO 3602 Strict.  It should be noted that the significance of those ISO designations are lost on me.  If you're asking me what I think the template parameters should be named, I suggest they be the following and in the following order (to replace the current sole parameter, "romaji", and not in addition to it):
 * revhep (for Revised Hepburn)
 * tradhep (for Traditional Hepburn)
 * kunrei (for Kunrei-shiki)
 * nihon (for Nihon-shiki)
 * I hope that provides the information you were looking for. Thanks, Bradford44 04:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * And now that I'm thinking about it, a parameter for both "kana" and "hiragana" is redundant as well. Because hiragana is a type of kana, it doesn't make sense to have them both. Perhaps parameters for both "hiragana" and "katakana", instead? Bradford44 17:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Here is a sample article. Maybe you can tell us if that is not hiragana, and is actually using katakana?? Isn't hiragana useful for historic stuff? I don't have a count on how many uses hiragana at the moment. About romaji, we should definitely keep it. It's already been used for hundreds of articles. It will require some hefty language-skills to move existing romaji romanization into revhep, tradhep, kunrei, nihon. Benjwong 17:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * That article was using only hiragana, just two different pronunciations. Hiragana are an inherent part of Japanese writing, but carry no meaning alone.  Hiragana represent discrete syllables of sound, while kanji represent ideas, but whose pronunciation and meaning vary depending on context.  One common example of the use of hiragana is to indicate the use and meaning of a particular kanji (such as its tense or meaning).  Hiragana fulfill other functions as well, such as particles of speech. The only reason this is relevant here, is because writing in hiragana is the most accurate way to represent the pronuciation of a particular word.  Katakana is a coextensive set syllables, but used more rarely, such writing foreign loanwords, or for emphasis like bold or italic text in English.  I also want to make clear that "romaji" is a generic term.  Technically, the four romanization systems I am proposing to be added are all romaji.  You are correct however, that it should not be deleted, where so many articles already use it.  Nevertheless, the way Korean is currently handled is exactly how I'm proposing Japanese be handled.  A parameter for the kanji, a parameter for hiragana, and then a [show/hide] box labeled "transliterations", under which the main romanization styles are listed, in the order I previously indicated. I'll think about simply trying to implement it myself. Bradford44 00:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and made the changes myself, as described above, and it appears to be working fine. I did not remove "romaji" as a parameter, but it should considered deprecated for use until it can be phased out. I will start implementing the alternate romanizations on articles which use the template. Bradford44 17:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - I believe that four romanizations is excessive and confusing. The "standard" romanization for a given word is just fine, and good enough for our users. Badagnani 18:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, four is how many major romanization systems there are. Korean is allowed its two, and the Chinese "transliterations" section has seventeen different fields. There is no "standard" romanization system in Japanese, and which one is the best is hotly debated. Revised Hepburn is used by the library of congress, and the one officially preferred by wikipedia, but widely criticized by linguists.  Kunrei-shiki is the version propogated by the Japanese government, and adopted by the ISO, but criticized as very poor for practical use because it often utterly fails to reflect actual pronunciation of terms. The other two are variations on Revised hepburn and Kunre-shiki, respectively, and are often relevant for historical or other reasons. Note also that not all four need be listed in instances where multiple systems romanize a word the same way. Compare Qi and Soy sauce. Bradford44 19:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Should Historical kana usage be added as well? There are a few articles that might benefit from its inclusion (East Asian calligraphy, Chinese style name). PC78 08:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * For the sake of completeness, I suppose so, but I don't have a deep enough knowledge of the subject to answer authoritatively. You might ask around at WP:JPN, they tend to be very knowledgeable about Japanese. Bradford44 14:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Font size for Chinese characters
When Chinese characters are displayed on Wikipedia article pages using this template, they are just big enough to be read clearly by those not thoroughly familiar an east Asian language - provided one is using a Windows browser. If a Mac browser is used, the Chinese characters are too small. I already corrected this on several Wikipedia article pages, but those corrections were undone when this more sophisticated template was put in place. For the sake of the 5% who use Mac browsers, please consider bumping the font size of just the Chinese characters up one notch. - Do c  t  orW  17:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If one notch means going from the current size of 95% to 100%, it is do-able. Anything higher, is probably a bad idea. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Why? What would be wrong with 110% or even 120%? As it is now it is simply too small on Mac browsers. They should be easily readable. - Do c  t  orW  05:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Bopomofo and Xiao'erjing
What's wrong with adding Xiao'erjing and Bopomofo? They are Chinese writing methods. 132.205.44.5 21:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We are still in the middle of standardizing templates or trying to here. Please avoid any new parameters and language adding for the time being.  Thx. Benjwong 15:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems discussions are through? So can these two be added to the template? 132.205.44.5 22:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Do these count as separate languages (blue), not romanizations under Chinese (green)? BTW you can also use Lang1, Lang2, Lang3 without any code added. Benjwong 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Bopomofo and xiao-erjing have been added to mandarin. Dungan has been added as a language and to mandarin (dialect of), as it's both, depending on who you ask. Xiao-erjing is also used for Dungan... 70.55.202.250 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Diacritics?
An anon user has removed diacritics from some of the name fields, stating that we "don't use them" in this template. Is this in fact the case? I can't see any discussion above or in the archived talk to support this claim. PC78 10:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The editor also made a whole lot of other edits to the template, as you can see from the template's history. I don't know if there was a previous consensus to not use diacritics, but I assumed he removed it from the singular instance of usage because they were not used anywhere else on the template.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * diacritics are a bad idea, it hurts usability in parameter names. (unless you mean actual text, and not parameters?) 70.55.202.250 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Have some people got their priorities completely mixed up?
When I came upon this template at Nanking Massacre I almost balked. This is an infobox intended to present linguistic aspects of the name of the article, yet it takes on the guise of a general infobox in its full splendor! I find this horrible. I urge you to downscale the appearance of this template. I am going to AfD it if something drastic isn't done to accomodate this grievance. __meco (talk)


 * This template is designed to be both an general way to present the linguistic aspects of the name of the subject as well as take on the form of an infobox. If you wish to change this template, I suggest that you start a civil discussion and refrain from threatening to do this or that or demand that something be done immediately. nat.utoronto 19:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Though I can sympathize with your reaction finding the announcement of an AfD a drastic measure, I am in earnest, and I do not think I am being uncivil. I contend that this infobox, as it takes shape in the article I mentioned, is a monstrosity. I stand aghast at its immodest layout and that it takes on the appearance of regular infoboxes. __meco (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Can someone explain what the user means by downscale the appearance? Like change colors? Benjwong (talk) 19:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The user means particularly the size, that is correct. If that change proves insufficient, I would consider looking at other features of its layout to make it less ostentatious. This may be a little "labour of love" that has gone somewhat amok, and I must hasten to emphasize that I find it very appealing. However, that's the problem. It steals the show, and an infobox outlining various spellings in different scripts should not be an article's main attraction. For one thing, there should be no image option in this template. That is way outside the scope of such a template. __meco (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The box works well at articles for subjects such as Tofu, with similar names among many Asian languages. However, the colors are horrible and the fact that the romanizations are hidden is unnecessary and problematic. Badagnani (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, that example makes me even more convinced that this template is a bastard that needs to go unless the changes I have demanded are put into effect. This is not Wiktionary, and making an article present the spelling of the name the most prominently featured aspect of the article is significantly lowering its quality. __meco (talk) 03:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Chinese
Template:Chinese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — meco (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Template was speedy kept. 70.55.84.13 (talk) 06:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hopefully you are going to do something about the issue which was the reason for my nominating the template. __meco (talk) 06:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with the template the way it is. Your suggestion would be that we create a wiktionary entry for every article, is it not? Personally, I think that _every_ article on Wikipedia should have a section listing what the topic is called in other languages. (And interlang links don't cut it, since those articles need not be equivalent, nor would they exist in every alternate wikipedia) Wiktionary won't accept such information for every article, since they're not always words. Such information is important, and encyclopedic, and will help people using Wikipedia for school work, or to look up references in foreign languages if they know what its called. 70.55.84.13 (talk) 06:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If you'd actually be very clear and specific about which things you'd like to be changed (other than deleting the template), that would be great, because it would allow us to consider and make those changes. Badagnani (talk) 06:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If you read my argument, you see that I do not object to any of the information being presented. I propose that this template is presented as collapsible auto-hide except for a title heading. __meco (talk) 07:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I would have to oppose this, as the Asian names (as well as photo and caption) are crucial to the Asian-themed articles in which the names appear. Badagnani (talk) 08:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What do general images related to the subject have to do in a linguistics infobox in the first place? __meco (talk) 08:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm beginning to see that you have difficulty dealing with what you perceive to be irreconcilable items: in this case, a photograph and various names. That's fine; we all deal with our data in different manners. However, as you've seen from the discussion earlier today, other editors do not. In my opinion, at Chopsticks or Tofu I do want to know, in a single box, what the item looks like and how it is called in the nation that invented it (in this case, China), and the nations nearby that have related, or different languages (in this case, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, etc.). Badagnani (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * And as I've attempted to relay a couple of times already I do not (at least not for the time being, although I might want to take issue with that aspect as well) protest the availability of this information. It is the way in which is being presented that I so strongly object to. Anyway, I have invoked the attention of et wikiEn-L mailing list on this, so we'll see if some people who aren't completely entrenched can provide some fresh perspectives. __meco (talk) 09:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I honestly don't understand what the fuss is about. I honestly don't really care, either. Johnleemk | Talk 10:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I came to take a look after seeing the post on wikiEn-L, and I too honestly don't understand what the fuss is about. --Stormie (talk) 00:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Question about showflag command
I like the template - it declutters things a lot but I have a question: if I get this right, showflag= will add a transliteration to the automatically displayed section. So showflag=p adds Pinyin, showflag=pj adds Pinyin and Jyutping. But for some reason I cannot get showflag=y to work to display Yale rather than Jyutping. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong please? Thanks! Akerbeltz (talk) 14:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The feature was hardcode added for a few of the commonly used flags. It cannot do all romanizations. Unless we find someone who can do it dynamically (if that is the word?) Benjwong (talk) 04:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Adding MPS2
I would like to add MPS2 to the template section for Mandarin romanisations - this was the official romanisation in Taiwan from 1986 until the implementation of Tongyong Pinyin in 2000. It's still used in Taiwan from time to time and is also found in reference to events during the period of its official use. As an example, the government website of Jhonghe City, an article I am working on at the moment, is www.junghe.tpc.gov.tw - the spelling of the name is in MPS2.

Any thoughts/objections? Taffy U|T|E 11:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Feel free. Please make sure it shows up in the document as well as under altname. Benjwong (talk) 04:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks! Taffy U|T|E 04:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

This should be renamed
This template is terrific. But it is weird to have it be called Chinese when it is sometimes being used for showing the Korean and Japanese versions of a name. It should be renamed to Template:Multi-language name. 70.17.185.94 (talk) 18:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Chinese is the primary name. It's not "multi-language" because the other languages are languages that are also from East Asia, many having some relationship with Chinese. Badagnani (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

POJ
The listings for "Min Nan POJ" should really be changed to "Hokkien POJ" as peh-oe-ji is only used for Hokkien (including Amoy, Taiwanes, etc.) and not for other forms of Min Nan. The romanisation for Teochew is listed under that name, although it is also a form of Min Nan - the same should be done for POJ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.109.170.213 (talk) 00:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hindi
I tried to edit 'Indian name' to 'Hindi name', as several other Indian languages are also used with the template (like Tamil, Urdu used at Aksai Chin). I did an edit, but it still appears as 'Indian name' at Aksai Chin. How to do? --Soman (talk) 13:00, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It appears as Hindi name ok. Your changes did work. Benjwong (talk) 04:47, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Combined templates broken
Templates such as do not work. They insert the three templates literally so that it reads simplified Chinese: ; traditional Chinese:  ; pinyin:. Please could someone have a look at this? Thanks,  J Rawle  (Talk) 22:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The template works fine. you just need to specify the character yourself when you use the template.  if you just type    you'll see the variable tags, like   , come through.  instead, you need to type something like   , where the 's=', 't=', and 'p=' parts assign the correct character to the variable.  wikipedia templates aren't smart enough to know which chinese character goes where on their own.  -- Ludwigs 2  22:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation. Now I see what I was doing wrong. I hadn't included the variable names. Is it now standard/preferred on Wikipedia to use variables in this way, rather than having arguments in a set order, e.g. ?  J Rawle  (Talk) 02:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


 * don't know if it's standard and preferred... using named variables has some advantages over positional variables, but there are times and places where positional variables are better.  some templates even allow both.  -- Ludwigs 2  04:15, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Please fix this template
OK, I see that there's some history here. I've just wasted a good hour attempting to investigate exactly what's going on with this template, but honestly I don't really care. I see the nomination for TfD, which seems to be an attempt (misguided?) to address what I'm about to bring up here.

I don't have an issue with the purpose or the existence of this template. I can see it's usefulness, regardless of whether or not I personally find it useful. The problem is that the template takes over the entire article, in every article that it is included in!

I find it hard to believe that the authors of this template didn't/don't see the problem with it in it's current form. It seem blatantly obvious to me that there is an issue with it, but assuming that some people will not understand what the issue is please see the article Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Compare that article prior to and after my simple edit commenting out the use of this template, please.

Ohms law (talk) 06:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I simply reverted the last change made to the template and it seems to be fixed now. Incidentally the TfD you mentioned looks to well predate the current issue.  -Amake (talk) 06:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I also left a warning on the guilty editor's talk page. -Amake (talk) 06:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see... Thanks for clearing up the issue so quickly. Now I need to fix the Tiananmen article that I "fixed" previously (oops!) I think that the whole TfD "incident" caused me some confusion here. I hadn't really had any exposure to this template prior to tonight (that I know of, at least), so coming here and seeing that whole mess seems to have created some misconceptions on my part as to what was occurring here. Anyway, Thanks for correcting the problem. Ohms law (talk) 06:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Protect this template
Administrator, please protect this template because the template is very difficult.

Triwikanto (talk) 00:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Pre-emptive protection is a bad idea. The template is fine as it is. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:39, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Transliterations
There seems to be a problem where a transliteration will appear under the wrong heading. For instance, on the article on the Fuzhou dialect, the alternative name given in Min-Dong BUC appears under Mandarin instead of Min. For some reason, this problem disappears when the Hokkien POJ transliteration is also given, and doesn't affect Cantonese Jyutping. --Freelance Intellectual (talk) 18:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅ I think I fixed it. check a few other pages to make sure nothing else got goofed up in the process, please.

Alt text
I don't think it's currently possible to add alt text to images contained within this template. Would it be possible to add such a feature? — tk tk  tk  01:33, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * can you explain what you mean by 'alt text', and what that might look like in the template? -- Ludwigs 2 01:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I should have elaborated a bit. I have no idea what the code would look like, but the result would be two parameters (something like |picalt= and |picalt2=), one for each of the two images that can be displayed with this template. They would simply allow alternative text to display when the cursor hovers over the images. — tk tk  tk  06:44, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * so, for a transclusion on a page like Fish sauce which has a picture in it, you want to be able to add a tooltip? tooltips are what show when you hover the mouse over the picture (they go in the picture's 'title' key); alt text is what shows on non-graphical browsers in place of the image.


 * assuming that's the case, it shouldn't be too difficult to do - I'd just want to make sure that it could be done without mucking up the very large number of pages this template transcludes onto. let me take a look at it.  -- Ludwigs 2  08:05, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The reason I asked was that the featured article criteria asks for "brief and useful alt text when feasible". So I meant alt text, but since alt text apparently displays as a tooltip in some browsers I didn't realize the distinction between the two. Currently what's in the "|pictooltip=" parameter also seems to be the alt text (at least it shows up under "Alternate text" when I click on an image's "Properties" in Firefox), so evidently your change did what I wanted it to anyway. Thanks for your help. — tk tk  tk  04:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * cool. glad I could help, even if it was a bit random.   -- Ludwigs 2  04:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Move Gan and Hakka
I would like to propose that the romanizations for Gan and Hakka are placed later, below Mandarin. Reason due to standardization; the "most significant" or "largest", so to speak, should come first. Suggestions/comments? --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 09:31, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This is alphabetical order according to archived discussion. Someone just moved Yue to Cantonese so it does not appear to be in order anymore. Benjwong (talk) 17:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I second the call for ordering the languages by "most significant" or by number of native speakers. Ordering alphabetically is counterintuitive and varies from one language to the next. This is compounded by the different dialects, names and spellings for each language (i.e. Mandarin/Putongua/Guoyu/Kuoyu/Beijingese/standard Chinese; Wu/Shanghainese; Yue/Cantonese; Min Nan/Hokkien/Taiwanese).


 * A proposed order by number of native speakers (grouped by language family) is: Mandarin, Wu/Shanghainese, Yue/Cantonese, Min Nan/Hokkien, Min Bei, Min Dong, Xiang, Hakka, Gan, Dungan, Burmese, Tibetan; followed by Engish, German;  then Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian;  Arabic;  Hindi, Bengali, Marathi, W. Panjabi, Urdu, Gujarati, Nepali;  Russian;  Japanese, Korean, Turkish, Uyghur, Mongolian, Xibe/Manchu;  Javanese, Malay/Indonesian, Filipino/Tagalog;  Telugu, Tamil;  Vietnamese;  Thai, Zhuang.  This covers languages with over 50 million speakers, and some additional Chinese and southeast Asian languages. 75.150.168.6 (talk) 16:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

labeling problem
At Zhou Dynasty, the IPA for the Mandarin is used. However, it appears under Cantonese, despite no Cantonese transcription being given. Is there no way to distinguish which language the "i" parameter encodes? — kwami (talk) 23:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Zhuang name
I request that since we now have a Zhuang Wikipedia that the option to move Zhuang under the Chinese transliterations for non-Guangxi areas be allowed. The current format, which forces Zhuang outside of Chinese, is great for Guangxi, but if added to articles dealing with non-Guangxi areas, gives an implication that Zhuang is spoken in those areas. Yet I see few strong reasons not to include a Zhuang transcription. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 01:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Other than misleading people into thinking that Zhuang is Chinese? — kwami (talk) 07:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * well the flip side is that we would be misleading people into thinking that Zhuang is spoken in a particular area. I mean if people wish to seek further information then they should look into the Zhuang Language article... --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 11:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Collapse feature and navboxes
This puzzled me: at the bottom of these two pages we find the same navigation box on its own, but in the first one it's expanded and in the second it's collapsed. Why? Surprisingly, it's because the second one has this infobox at the top of the page.

Navigation boxes built with navbox default to showing the navbox if it is the only one on the page and collapsing it if there are more than one. However because this infobox is (optionally) collapsible, a navbox at the bottom of a page with this infobox at the top will be collapsed, which is surprising and, I think, unfortunate. Kanguole 23:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Correcting the template's code (1 variable for Mandarin Yale and Burmese)
This template's code needs to be updated to reflect that the variables for the Burmese name and the Mandarin Yale romanization are different, as they are currently one and the same. And all of the articles that use this template need to be updated to reflect this.--Hintha (t) 23:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Order of entries
This is the English Wikipedia, and thus I STRONGLY recommend placing Cantonese under "C" (not Y), Mandarin under "M" (not "G") Hakka under "H" (not K), Shanghainese under "S" (not W), and so on. Maximum usability for everyone in the world is very, very important. Badagnani 04:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, as this will introduce inconsistency. We are classifying Chinese dialects by their top-level linguistic classification, and not by the common English name for sub-level dialects. For example, Shanghainese is a sub-dialect of Wu, and should not be interpreted as similar. Mandarin and Cantonese in the common sense of the word actually refers to a variant of the Mandarin and Cantonese dialects respectively. Are we going to change "Min" as "Hokkien" next, despite its obvious technical inaccuracies? Since there are only seven entries, I fail to see why users will somehow have major difficulties finding the correct classification, since "Mandarin", "Hakka" and "Cantonese" are also added to aid the English user.--Huaiwei 05:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * As per Huaiwei's statement, this template is largely sorted by something like a linguistic classification. But which one, exactly? &mdash; Sebastian 19:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, upon further study, I realize that the current arrangement is in fact a mix between linguistic and alphabetic criteria. The latter are of course not well defined, either; sometimes the blue box name has been used for sorting (as in Tagalog, which appears between "Hindi" and "Japanese"), and sometimes the language abbreviation (as e.g. in Burmese, which appears between "mon" and "por"). &mdash; Sebastian 19:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, here's a table of all languages currently in this template, along with their family (For the purpose is not to assert classification, but merely to make it easier for readers to find simlarities. Therefore, I'm not worried about the current state of classification discussions here.), their current order ("order0"), and the order I would propose ("order1"). I'm sure there are better ways to arrange them; please add them as new columns to this table. &mdash; Sebastian 21:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Non-Chinese sorting?
In this context, I would like to raise the question what to do in articles that are not primarily Chinese. Malaysian ringgit, e.g., is such a case, where it doesn't seem appropriate to put Chinese first. Then again, in that article, it is questionable if this template is of any use, anyway. Searching further, I didn't actually find many examples; most are geographic terms which at least border present day China, such as Pamir Mountains. Maybe it's better, in the interest of peaceful coexistence, to not start discussing these. But my interest here is from a language point of view, and "帕米尔" clearly is not originally Chinese. &mdash; Sebastian 19:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)