Talk:炖煌

RFV discussion: December 2017–January 2018
炖煌 seems to be the wrong simplified form of, where 燉 should not be simplified to 炖. 炖 is reserved for the cooking sense "to stew". — justin(r)leung { (t...) 07:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I've checked 简化字总表, 第一批异体字整理表 and 通用规范汉字表, I think there is no rules that officially simplifies 燉 as 炖. Dokurrat (talk) 07:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * RFV failed. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 23:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

谭世宝's quotation
, I think the word document is a draft. I just checked the PDF of 谭世宝's article (福利), and it actually uses 敦煌. Would you be able to find another valid quotation? BTW, thanks for your work on RFV! — justin(r)leung { (t...) 18:20, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I found another one. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 18:40, 1 February 2018 (UTC)