Talk:㈠

RFV discussion: November 2017–July 2021

 * See Talk:㊀.

RFD discussion: July 2021–September 2022
Changed from RFV to RFD. 1. These are usually written out as three character rather than one ligature character. 2. There is no need for bracketing to indicate the day of the week. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 00:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

— justin(r)leung { (t...) 01:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I've never used this form before. I'd say delete. To me it's just Chinese characters in parentheses. The dog2 (talk) 17:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If ㈭ etc. is retained for Thursday etc., then we should keep at least the Japanese half of the ㈰ entry for Sunday. How useful any of these are I don't know (the practical utility would be that they have the width of one character rather than three), but there may be contexts where the meaning will not be obvious. kwami (talk) 08:52, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note that circled ㊀ etc. do not have entries, but that ㊍, ㊐ etc. do. But if ㈠ is only understood as "one in parentheses" by The dog2, rather than as "Monday", then perhaps that's an argument to keep. Assuming we can verify use for days of the week? kwami (talk) 09:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure. For most people, "SHUT UP!" is just "shut up!" in all caps, but for others, it represents "shut up!" being shouted. The question is whether the parentheses are a graphical style that's used for day-of-the-week abbreviations, or something neccessary to distinguish a day-of-the-week abbreviation from a number, and lexically part of the term. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:10, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * They are indeed just ligatures, used in typography for convenience of having just one character that clearly means the corresponding weekday (they make it easier searching them in a document because they're different from general numbers, they're easier to replace/update when needed, easier to the reader, who connects them immediately with the day, etc). We can keep the entries, but explain better what they are, what they are used for. — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 13:10, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The fact that this series is included in Unicode as ㈠ to ㈩ (and ㈰ is part of the "Japanese" days of the week series) suggests that this is not intended to be for Chinese days of the week. I'm not sure if there's a good way to verify ligature usage (as opposed to the three-character versions). — justin(r)leung { (t...) 15:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Justinrleung: Oh, right. To be honest, I was indeed thinking of Japanese when I wrote that. If they are just numerals with parentheses, then I guess they can go. What about a hard redirect to the number entry? Someone might copy-paste them and try to look them up anyway, so at least they get the meaning of the number. — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 16:38, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Justinrleung @Sartma @Kwamikagami These have been in Unicode right from the beginning (i.e. 1993), so I have no doubt they were imported from an older Japanese encoding standard. Back then, characters like these would have been important for things like signage etc. due to technical limitations and uniform character widths. That doesn't necessarily mean it has any special lexical significance, though, just as many ligatures don't. Theknightwho (talk) 16:44, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hard redirect all of them. Theknightwho (talk) 15:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If we can't confirm ㈠ ㈡ ㈢ ㈣ ㈤ ㈥ as days of the week, then I agree a hard rd would be appropriate, without any further explanation.
 * But if we hard redirect ㈰ to 日, how is the reader to know that it means specifically 'Sunday', and not 'sun', 'day' or even 'Japan'? If we now need add clarification under 日 of what ㈰ means, it would be simpler to leave it as a separate entry, and just delete the Chinese definition. kwami (talk) 19:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)


 * RFD deleted and hard redirected ㈠ ㈡ ㈢ ㈣ ㈤ ㈥ to the respective numbers. RFD deleted the Chinese section of ㈰. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 23:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)