Modern Chinese characters: Walt Yoder ( talk ) 03:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and China .  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 03:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not ready for mainspace Meh it's fine where it is .  It's not clear what constitutes a "modern Chinese character" (no mention of obselescence horizon).  This reads like a very mild POVFORK and has entirely empty sections consisting only of headers.  Some concepts are mentioned without being introduced (who is Professor Su?).  It's not clear why the author chose to create this article in mainspace rather than contribute to existing articles.  It seems like the author has put a lot of good faith effort into this article, and once it is finished it could serve as something like Introduction to Chinese characters , or split into bits and added to existing articles.  I don't think the content should be deleted, but rather draftified or userfied.  All the sources are reliable and as far as I can tell, all claims pass WP:V .  Folly Mox ( talk ) 04:14, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The article won an excellent score at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_China/New_articles .  "Modern Chinese characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs | tools) by Ctxz2323 (talk · contribs · new pages (7)) started on 2023-07-15, score: 100"  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 13:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] User:Ctxz2323 , I think you have a really good start to an article here, and frankly I would have loved it if such an article had existed back when I first started learning Chinese.  The "score" of 100 you're seeing is based on the text of your article matching regular expressions listed at User:AlexNewArtBot/China .  What it means is that the article is 100% likely to be a Chinese topic, not that it is 100% excellent.  I think you should consider moving the article into your userspace until you're finished with it.  Folly Mox ( talk ) 13:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Professor Su can be found via the citation [16].  He is a professor of Peking University, teaching "Modern Chinese Character".  " According to Professor Su's estimation, the total number of modern Chinese characters (in Mainland China) is about 10,000 and a bit more. [16] "  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 13:44, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Agree that the article is not complete.  But isn't it true that even a stud article may be published and grow on wiki?  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 14:16, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep for lack of a valid rationale .  Even the commenter who suggest it is not mainspace-ready sees potential in it.  I am not seeing the WP:FORK here, and there are two book sources primarily about Modern Chinese, enough to indicate independent notability for an article on the topic.  This article has TWO significant issues: uncited statements, and the fact that it occasionally feels like an essay if it broke the rule of not using the word "you", but AFD is not cleanup.  User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 16:27, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The 2 "you" s in the article are in the first paragraph: According to the latest data of Ethnologue, "Mandarin Chinese (the modern standard Chinese, also called Putonghua) is the largest language in the world, if you count only native speakers. If you count both native and non-native speakers, English is the largest (with Chinese being the 2nd largest)."  And Chinese is written in Chinese characters.  They all appear in a direct quotation from the Ethnologue citation source.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 01:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you all for the informative discussion.  Now I agree to move the article into my userspace to make it more complete and mainspace-ready.  But, I have just got a message from User:Hey man im josh - Wikipedia, telling me that "the page Modern Chinese characters has been reviewed" (sent 12 hours ago).  Does it mean it should stay in the mainspace now?  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 00:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Walt Yoder and Hey man im josh : what do yall think?  Mainspace development definitely isn't the norm anymore, but the article in progress here only has one incoming mainspace link, from Standard Chinese .  I'm feeling overall meh about what namespace the article should be completed in.  There aren't inaccuracies, just missing sections and some duplicated content.  (And for the non-specialists, one source cited heavily in this article – Qiu Xigui (2000).  文字學概要 [ Chinese Writing ].  Translated by Gilbert Mattos; Jerry Norman.  – is the number one best and most authoritative English-language source on the topic) Folly Mox ( talk ) 14:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The main reason why I moved it out to Mainspace before it was completed is: "Modern Chinese characters" is a big topic, and it keeps branching out new articles, (some of which are already reviewed, some got hundreds of visits already).  And it seems it will take one year at least to have it and the sub-articles completed.  However, if you prefer to have it moved to some other namespace to be completed in, it will be ok for me.  By the way, I was the subject teacher of "Modern Chinese characters and Information Technology" in a university for over 10 years before my retirement 5 years ago.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 04:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Another reason: the first 5 sections of the article, including the Top, are completed.  And there are cases where some volumes in a series of books are published before the others.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 06:54, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The following information just got from wiki might be useful for your consideration: "curprev 13:36, 15 July 2023‎ Ctxz2323 talk contribs‎ m  18,374 bytes 0‎  Ctxz2323 moved page Draft:Modern Chinese characters to Modern Chinese characters: Publish page to mainspace undo" "Modern Chinese characters · 7/14/2023 - 7/24/2023 · 322 pageviews" "322" visits in 10 days.  Does it mean wiki readers are interested in this article?  If yes, then we should be more careful with it.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 02:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I totally agree with the idea that "Mainspace development definitely isn't the norm anymore."  And understand that if an article is to be published incomplete, it must be exceptional and supported by sufficient reasons.  In the case of article "Modern Chinese characters", the reasons include: Out of the 7 articles I have published on Mainspace so far, "Modern Chinese characters" is the only one published incomplete, and there are reasons: If we are going to present a somewhat in-dept introduction to "Modern Chinese characters" (a big title), it will take at least one whole year to write, I am afraid.  The article has already branched out 5 child and grand-child articles in the mainspace, 4 of which are already reviewed.  If we refuse the grandpa/mum a seat while the children and grandchildren are sitting there, will it sound ridiculous?  In the article, 5 sections with substantial contents are already completed.  The file size is now at 24,455 bytes.  It is not an empty article.  The article "Modern Chinese characters" has recently been reviewed, if then be immediately deleted, will it bring a lot of why's from the readers, and be a laughing matter on our "wiki review work"?  Data from wiki: "Modern Chinese characters · 7/14/2023 - 7/24/2023 · 322 pageviews" "curprev 13:36, 15 July 2023‎ Ctxz2323 talk contribs‎ m  18,374 bytes 0‎  Ctxz2323 moved page Draft:Modern Chinese characters to Modern Chinese characters: Publish page to mainspace undo" 322 pageviews in 10 days, does it means the readers are quite interested in this new article?  Sorry, I might have talked too much.  But my intention is to provide you more relevant information.  Thanks for your patience.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 03:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] User:Ctxz2323 , I pinged the nom a few days ago and they haven't responded.  From me, I personally withdraw any objection to article namespace .  Thanks for your contributions; keep up the good work.  Folly Mox ( talk ) 14:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Many thanks!  Do I understand that the article is kept in the mainspace?  I WILL try my best to make it better and better.  Thank you all again!  Thank God!  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 22:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] AfDs usually run for seven days, so there's still a possibility that people will show asking the article be moved into your userspace, but given the level of participation so far that seems unlikely, so the article will probably remain in mainspace.  Judging from the relief evident in your post immediately above this one, this conversation seems to have caused you some stress.  If that is the case, I'd like to apologise for my contribution as a stressor.  Happy editing!  Folly Mox ( talk ) 01:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You are right!  Having a Deleting label at the top of your article is stressing!  Thanks for your understanding!  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 07:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: This became a two person discussion and the nominator didn't withdraw their nomination.  The article creator volunteered to move their article to User space and I'd like to hear from other editors on whether or not this should stay in the main space or be relocated.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I prefer that the article stays in the main space, of course, instead of moving to my user space.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 07:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Let me reiterate the reasons why I prefer the article to stay in the main space, with the data updated: Out of the 9 articles I have published on the main space so far, "Modern Chinese characters" is the only one published incomplete, and there are reasons: If we are going to present a somewhat in-dept introduction to "Modern Chinese characters" (a big title), it will take at least one whole year to write, I am afraid.  (having teaching this subject for over ten years in a university in Hong Kong)  The article has already branched out, or spined off, 7 child and grand-child articles in the main space, 4 of which are already reviewed.  If we refuse the grandpa/mum a seat while the children and grandchildren are sitting there, will it sound ridiculous?  In the article, more than 5 sections with substantial contents are already completed.  The file size is now at about 24,000 bytes.  It is not an empty article.  The article "Modern Chinese characters" has recently been reviewed, if then be immediately relocated or deleted, will it bring forth a lot of why's from the readers, and be a laughing matter on our "wiki review work"?  Data from wiki: "Modern Chinese characters · 7/13/2023 - 8/2/2023 · 819 pageviews ", "curprev 13:36, 15 July 2023 ‎ Ctxz2323 talk contribs‎ m 18,374 bytes 0‎ Ctxz2323 moved page Draft:Modern Chinese characters to Modern Chinese characters : Publish page to mainspace undo".  819 pageviews in 18 days since the page was moved to main space on July 15, does it mean the readers are quite interested in this new article?  Is it OK if the article suddenly disappears from their view?  More reference sources have been added and editing done according to the suggestions of the editors in this discussion.  Thank you for your attention and help!  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 02:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per above Brachy 08 (Talk) 04:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - seems to me that the topic is self-evidently notable and therefore deserves to be in mainspace.  That said, there does need to be better editing to make it encyclopedic and reduce the total size of the page.  My advice would be to work with relevant wikiprojects to clarify the topic and find a way to summarise the main points if there are to be other pages on related topics and subtopics.  JMWt ( talk ) 08:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and oppose moving to user or draft space .  The topic is clearly notable and the article is already a valuable contribution to the encyclopedia.  I entirely reject the idea that articles should be approaching completion before they appear in main space.  A gentle remark: it can be difficult for a subject matter expert to provide references.  For an ignoramus like me it is easy because everything I know on a subject is gleaned from current reading.  Make a huge effort to at least reference each paragraph.  Thincat ( talk ) 20:28, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Would you mind telling me where the POV (Point of View) fork lies in, so as to help improve the article?  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 06:31, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sorry I clicked [reply] to "A POV-fork, and also clearly not a completed article. Walt Yoder (talk) 03:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)", and it appeared here above.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 06:35, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify or weak keep - the topic is clearly notable, and the parent page Chinese characters is quite long so not a straightforward merge situation.  My reservation is that the article in its current state reads much more like a draft, especially with all the stub headings.  Personally I would prefer this article be fleshed out more in draft space before returning to main.  I don't see any reason to rush this into mainspace.  If kept, I agree with others that attention should be brought to the relevant WikiProject for prompt work.  StereoFolic ( talk ) 03:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Simplified Chinese , or Standard Chinese .  This is an article ripe for merging, and though its execution likely means it should be TNT'd , it's notable as evidenced by the previous comments.  Modern Chinese Characters as a single topic is best treated as one merged with Simplified Chinese characters given that the CCP under Mao modernized the language into removing all the necessary strokes for certain symbols, the character for fish (⿂ vs. ⻥) being one of the most glaring examples.  Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 03:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "Modern Chinese characters" covers a larger range than the characters in either Simplified Chinese, or Standard Chinese.  By the way, are you going to merge article Chinese characters into Chinese language ?  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 07:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would not recommend the merging of the two pages you proposed.  The characters are a subtopic to the language that is significant enough to warrant their own article.  I don't see how this fits into this discussion.  Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 02:08, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Modern Chinese characters include modern traditional Chinese characters.  How can you merge them into Simplified Chinese?  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 02:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Simplified Chinese is not the only modernized Chinese language.  Modern traditional Chinese is used in Taiwan and Hong Kong.  And many Chinese language users are not living under the CCP.  In fact, (⿂ and ⻥) are both modern Chinese characters.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 02:29, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sorry, maybe there is a misunderstanding.  You said "Merge into Simplified Chinese", and I understood your "Chinese" as Chinese language, not just Chinese characters.  Ctxz2323 ( talk ) 02:38, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Respectfully, User:InvadingInvader , the assertions equating simplified with modern , as well as those conflating language and writing system, are incorrect.  Having taken a more thorough look at the article as it stands now, I'm a bit more in favour of a rename, although I'm struggling with an appropriate target.  Dissatisfying ideas have included Modern usage of Chinese characters , Present status of Chinese characters , Modern Standard Chinese writing , Overview of modern Chinese writing , Current status and applications of Chinese characters , Chinese as She is Wrote , et al. I think a rename may be in order because the topic is not well defined: there are at least three authorities delimiting the set: the PRC State Council, Taiwan's Ministry of Education, and the Xinhua Zidian (leaving aside the Hong Kong pedagogical aide and authorities in Japan and Korea).  I don't think there's a suitable merge target, but I would kindly recommend to the author MOS:TONE , since phrases like the existing Wiki articles , the purpose of this article (and its branching articles) etc. don't quite fit encyclopaedic tone.  The remainder of the article after the lead seems pretty on point though.  Folly Mox ( talk ) 03:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep