Talk:List of cuneiform signs

message: Note that the Borger number given is from Borger 1981. Borger 2003 uses a completely different numbering scheme, including 907 signs. This list should, in the long term, be expanded to list all Borger 2003 signs and give a concordance of Borger 1981 to Borger 2003. dab (ᛏ) 17:25, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am working on this over at Unicode cuneiform. This list may be re-generated from there later. dab (ᛏ) 15:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Borger

message: Why does adding "sortable" to the table classes not make them sortable?  It would be extremely helpful to be able to look up by OB pronunciation.  --Aquatiki (talk) 17:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sortable 

message: The Unicode names are really pertinent, because they ar only describing the composition of the sign. My problem were the sign names: DUN3 with gunû is the average sign for Shekel (giĝ4, conventionally GIN2), cf. PSD: sign-names D "DUN3@g" (g=gunû) versus tun3(ax), DUN3 alone, without gunation: 𒂅. 
The sign MIR=DUN3 gunû gunû, aga/niĝir: "crown", "tiara"  has no reading gin2, see also Volk, Sumerian Reader, page 73 "giĝ4", "aga3" versus page 63 "niĝir". The signs are distinguished also by Picker Old-Babylonian, see "GÍN=DÙNgunu=𒂆" and "MIR (DÙNgunugunu) 𒂇" --Edfyr (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  DUN3gunû(gunû): Disambiguation 

message: ...in addition to inclusion of the images, the unicode glyphs need to have a separate column from their U+ numbering and the glyphs need to be wrapped with  tags or ~ links to their Wiktionary entries. — LlywelynII 22:05, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: At some point...

message: The headers for all but the first table are:
# MesZL
# ŠL/HA
# aBZL
# HethZL
# [blank column, for no apparent reason]
# Sign Name
# Unicode Codepoint
# Unicode Name
# Comments
However, the first table differs on the third- and second-to-last headers:
# MesZL
# ŠL/HA
# aBZL
# HethZL
# [blank column, for no apparent reason]
# Sign Name
# Script/Cuneiform Codepoint
# Script/Cuneiform Name
# Comments
Is this just an oversight? babbage (talk) 02:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancy in header of first table? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of cuneiform signs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100723140931/http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/wiki/doku.php/sign_lists to http://cdli.ucla.edu/wiki/doku.php/sign_lists
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:09, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The shapes shown here look more like UR III than like Neo-Assyrian (cf. here, but the introductory paragraphs in the article seem to be claiming the opposite.--79.100.144.23 (talk) 02:02, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I see now that the paragraphs actually say that the signs are arranged according to their Neo-Assyrian shape, not that the shapes displayed are Neo-Assyrian; I suppose that the arrangement can indeed be based on the Neo-Assyrian shape even while the signs themselves are displayed in an Early Babylonian, Ur III or Early Dynastic shape, although, of course, that makes the arrangement far less helpful for actually finding a sign. However, it would still be useful to point that out and to specify which period and area the actually displayed shape originates from.--62.73.69.121 (talk) 15:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ur III or Neo-Assyrian? 

message: When Dr. Rykle Borger originally built his comparative table, which was adapted to this Wikipedia entry, Cuneiform block wasn't completed yet. Since then, several signs were added, and a entire new block (Early Dynastic Cuneiform) was created. Some signs that appear lacking in his table gained equivalent unicode characters, but the table was not updated to include them. Here they are:
67 | U+1237F | KA TIMES ASH3
156 | U+1238D | MUSH3 TIMES ZA
224 | U+12370 | AB TIMES NUN
243 | U+12376 | DUB TIMES SHE
254 | U+1219A | KAM2
265 | U+12290  & U+1219A | RAB & KAM2
269 | U+12217 & U+1219A | LUGAL & KAM2
278 | U+12377 | EZEN TIMES GUD
282 | U+12378 | EZEN TIMES SHE
334 | U+1252A | NINDA2 TIMES U
335 | U+1252B | NINDA2 TIMES U PLUS U
355 | U+1253A | TUM TIMES GAN2 TENU
385 | NA4 (NI.UD) | U+1238E | NA4
386 | DÀG (NI.ERIM) | U+12374 | DAG3
408 | 257 | U+1237A | GA2 TIMES ASH2
436 | U+1224C & U+12111 | NI PLUS GISH
439 | U+12056 & U+121A8 | DAG PLUS KISIM5
518 | U+12389 | LU2 SHESHIG TIMES BAD
520 | U+1251E | LU2 TIMES TAK4
524 | U+1238B | LU2 TIMES SHU
532 | U+1238A | LU2 TIMES ESH2 PLUS LAL
615 | U+1226D & U+12016 | NUNUZ PLUS AB2
616 | U+1226D & U+121A8 | NUNUZ PLUS KISIM5
640 | U+1212D & U+12041 | HI PLUS BAD
831 | U+1222B  & U+1230D | MIN & U U U 
886 | U+12390 | NIN9
887 | U+1238F | NIN
Sairjohn (talk) 20:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table Update