Talk:Chemical elements in East Asian languages

Periodic table template; and check needed

I have moved the periodic table into {{Periodic table (Chinese names)/sandbox}}, and redesitgned the formatting (Hans character=big in top etc).

I note that there are differences between this table and the wikidata list of characters ([[:Tempalte:Infobox element/symbol-to--overview-IDs|this list from Wikidata). -DePiep (talk) 11:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Double sharp: -DePiep (talk) 11:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@DePiep: The wikidata list on our Template:Infobox element/symbol-to--overview-IDs uses Traditional Chinese characters (used in Taiwan, HK, Macau), whereas the PT template just made uses Simplified Chinese characters (used in Mainland China, also Malaysia and Singapore). Hence the difference.

I think the sandbox table is a great idea (giving both varieties). However, in this case we need some multiline pronunciations because some element names differ in pronunciation between the two. The complete list for Mandarin dialect (T traditional, S simplified):

• ₁₄Si: T xì, S guī
• ₂₇Co: T gū, S gǔ
• ₄₃Tc: T tǎ, S dé
• ₄₆Pd: T bā, S bǎ
• ₅₀Sn: T xí, S xī
• ₅₁Sb: T tì, S tī
• ₇₁Lu: T liú, S lǔ
• ₈₄Po: T pò, S pō
• ₈₅At: T è, S ài
• ₈₇Fr: T fǎ, S fāng
• ₉₂U: T yòu, S yóu
• ₉₃Np: T nài, S ná
• ₉₇Bk: T běi, S péi
• ₉₈Cf: T kǎ, S kāi
• ₉₉Es: T ài, S āi
• ₁₀₇Bh: T pō, S bō

All others are pronounced the same in both (even if the character looks different). Double sharp (talk) 12:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

From two different scripts then. I note that our {{Infobox element/symbol-to-zh}} is a hardcoded copy (Feb 2021) of the (live) Wikidata Property Unicode character (P487). Will try to wikilink to WD.

What do you propose? 2 rows of pron per cell? BTW, if it pronunciation or transliteration (Romanisation)? If pronunciation, we should drop them altogether here; and link the character to wiktionary. -DePiep (talk) 12:33, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@DePiep: It's Pinyin romanisation. But of course, romanisation does give a pronunciation guide, so I used the wrong word.

I'd propose two rows labelled S and T for simplified and traditional, yes. But perhaps only for the sixteen elements I listed which have differences (as the other 102 would look quite repetitive). Double sharp (talk) 12:40, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

If we show two characters, it is starting to defy the whole intention, and the PT becomes out of overview. Maybe a table in the article body could solve this. Then about Pinyin: is it true that it leads to two Romanisations, depending on pronounciation? I thougt that the whole concept of transliteration was to stick to the script not the speech. This too would make the PT useless and out ofg place (we are not a Chinese dictionary). -DePiep (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI, this option: wikt:氬 wiktionary link for argon. -DePiep (talk) 13:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Pinyin reflects the pronunciation (but is usually called Romanisation anyway).

It's also OK IMHO to keep it the way it is now, because Simplified Characters are by far the more common. The the cases where the characters (and sometimes pronunciations) are really different are all already at the Notes section, so there's not much loss of information. (In all other cases, the Simplified/Traditional differences are pretty predictable.) Double sharp (talk) 13:41, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Notability

There was a template at the top of the article, saying the article may not meet the guidelines for notability. I removed it, on the grounds that there was a discussion, starting in June 2006, over whether the article should be kept, and the decision was "keep". Also, i would hate to see this article deleted; it is a significant subject; after all, how do you name elements in Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese, languages spoken by ~1/5 of humanity (if you count all forms of Chinese, not just Mandarin)? And Wikipedia has articles on many other things which seem to be less notable. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 08:29, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Please review WP:N. "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The article doesn't have such source yet. (If it is notable simply because it mention naming of something in CJKV languages, then thousands of articles can be created on how anything are being translated into these languages and would make little senses.) C933103 (talk) 08:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Why do you imagine these are "translated"? Do you think that elements themselves speak English, then foreigners have to work out different ways of saying them? Anyway, your claim seems to be false: the article has references to real sources such as the China National Committee for Terminology(...). If you want to get rid of some junk, try List of gairaigo and wasei-eigo terms‎, which is a pretty indiscriminate list, unlike the present article. Imaginatorium (talk) 09:21, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Sources from like China National Committee for Terminology are primary sources, and thus doesn't count as "sources that are independent of the subject."

As for why I imagine these are translated? Because I speak the language. And the article also talk about it if you don't speak the language. C933103 (talk) 09:36, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I added several sources that I believe are sufficient to meet WP:GNG, so I removed the tag. I would appreciate a ping here if anyone feels the need to revert. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 05:49, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Order

It said, “For example, 鏷 (protactinium), 鈹 (beryllium), 鉻 (chromium), and 鑭 (lanthanum) are obscure characters meaning "raw iron", "needle", "hook", and "harrow" respectively.” I edited it lightly, so that the four elements ar ordered by atomic number: beryllium, chromium, lanthanum, protactinium. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 08:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)