Talk:Erya

May 2006

The table of contents is useful, and the information that Eiorgiomugini (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) keeps removing is an important part of its usefulness) — but it does need to be presented differently, I think. Do we need the Chinese characters, for example (or even the Romanisations)?

Putting it in table form is possible, so long as an extra column for the description of contents is added. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

No, the information does not removed, I had been trying to edit it, but you keep reverting back. Eiorgiomugini 20:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, that's simply untrue, as the History shows quite clearly. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

No, I reverted it before any edit I make, as the history (I added the information through my next edit after you reverted it) shows quite clearly. Eiorgiomugini 22:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, would you considered this edits as acceptable? Eiorgiomugini 21:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

At both [1] and [2] you removed the information about the subjects of each chapter. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

You had disordered it, I made my revert here and a table after the reverting. I reverted your edits after you reverted back to his version and reinserted the info at here. With that added the subjects on here. I hope that gets through your head. Eiorgiomugini 22:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The page history shows the truth, so I can't see why you're insisting on this peculiar rewriting of history. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Which was why I shown you the turth, what do you think I was doing Eiorgiomugini 14:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Title translation?

Does anyone know who translated Erya as "The Dictionary of Terms"? I've found title translations of "The Literary Expositor" and "The Ready Rectifier" by James Legge, and "Progress Towards Correctness" by A. von Rosthorn, but not this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keahapana (talk • contribs) 22:41, 3 June 2006

Revert

As Eiorgiomugini reverted Keahapana's edits without explanation, I've rereverted until some reason is offered and discussed. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

His edition contain extraneous chacarters and templates. Eiorgiomugini 12:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Eiorgiomugini, I appreciate your contributions to this Erya article, but am curious about your apparent pattern of destructiveness. For instance, on 28 May, you constructively corrected my mistake of 主 in the 爾雅注 title with 注; but on 2 June and 4 June, you deleted the title altogether.

What you mean by "extraneous chacarters [sic] and templates"? The WP:MOS-ZH says: "It is usually helpful to add Chinese text to disambiguate Chinese terms that have been transliterated into English. Chinese words are often spelt inconsistently." Keahapana 19:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You had added too many templates over Chinese terms, not to mention all those c, wg and etc at the middle of the article. Eiorgiomugini 00:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't understand your justification. Templates like zh-cpw are explained in the Manual of Style (China-related articles)[3]. Have you read it? Do you disagree with it about inserting Chinese characters? Nevertheless, the last paragraph about Erya translations has neither templates nor characters. Why did you revert it? Keahapana 23:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Accroding to the MoS, the templates are clearly for the introductory line, I had no idea why did you added to the article, your last edition have templates and characters too. Eiorgiomugini 05:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Where does the MOS say that? It does say this: "However, if the term does not have an established translation (that is, has multiple translations or none), feel free to provide the Chinese characters, which will be useful to the content of the article. Proper nouns' Chinese characters should also be supplied, unless it is Wikified and the target article in the English Wikipedia contains the characters. … If, however, there is no article, then it is essential to insert traditional or simplified Chinese characters and full Hanyu Pinyin with tone-marks, as a minimum." Keahapana 20:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

You're right, but it doesn't mention anything with regard to the use of templates for the whole article. Eiorgiomugini 03:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The MoS isn't a list of what's allowed; it's not acceptable to remove something from an article just because the MoS doesn't mention it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Consider what you had done on Mozi, by removing whole bunch of information of other is more than just a correcting MoS to me, I would said yes to remove his un-MoS format. Eiorgiomugini 01:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I have no idea what you meant by that. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Then don't waste my time. Eiorgiomugini 06:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

彼嘗聞其有通假者乎

The character ěr (爾) in title ěryǎ has nothing to do with "you" and cannot be explained literally. It is a 通假字 (tōngjiǎzì) to 邇. Yao Ziyuan 13:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

It is sad and Wikipedia not even has an article for tōngjiǎ. Yao Ziyuan 13:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Missing reference

Hi Whiterussian. Thanks for adding the "Approaching Elegance/Refinement" translation by Alex Kolesnikov. Would you please add this publication information to the References? I can't find it with Google. Keahapana (talk) 22:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

"the Erya is the only Chinese classic that has not been fully translated into English"

This claim seems incorrect. Zhou Li (The Rites of Zhou), Gongyang Zhuan and Guliang Zhuan do not have full complete English translations either as far as I can see. Tooironic (talk) 15:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

History of where was it found/located?

Where was the text found? Jimw338 (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2023 (UTC)