Talk:陽光

Wuhan
Is 阳光社区 in Wuhan really necessary?
 * Thanks for your inquiry. Compare this entry to . As of 2011, there were 240,000 persons in Guanshan District. Guanshan district is divided into 28 社区 . The PRC has a universal, top-down, muti-tiered system of breaking up the country into smaller divisions, and this isn't even the lowest division- there are even lower divisions that can get three cites for the terms. By the law of averages, excluding recent Wuhan coronavirus deaths God bless their hearts, there are probably 8,500 souls in Yangguang Residential Community. Loving County, Texas has a total population of sixty-four (counting only humans that is- including cattle into that total would reach a far higher number). So the answer is yes, I believe the Chinese character term of 陽光 Yangguang residential community would really be necessary if Wiktionary were to reach a completed form of itself, because it is an official administrative division of the PRC that can probably get three cites on some level at least in Chinese characters. That is my viewpoint. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you Geographyinitiative for providing your viewpoint. As a native of PRC I do understand the significance of "小区" (or "residential community"). However, hereafter are the reasons why I am confused:
 * 1. Since you have created entries for xiaoqus such as 阳光社区 and 剑桥春天 on Wiktionary, does it mean that the name of every sizable residential community within PRC shall be included on Wiktionary? That could potentially mean thousands of new entries. Although I live in a "small" city with a million people, there are easily 10 thousand people living in the xiaoqu I live in. The "天通苑" xiaoqu in Beijing houses approximately 500 thousand people, yet "天通苑" does not have its own entry on Wiktionary.
 * 2. Is it really necessary to include names of low-level administrative divisions of China on Wiktionary? Shouldn't that be covered by Wikipedia?
 * 3. What about low-level administrative divisions of other countries?
 * 4. What about xiaoqus that share the same name? One simple Google search shows that there are multiple "阳光社区"s in Beijing, Nanning, Changzhou, Yancheng, Yangquan, Shangyu, even Kashgar, etc. I am not accusing you of being Wuhan-centric, but it does pique my interest as to what Wiktionary's the standards are. JesusPiece (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Here's 
 * 1. "That could potentially mean thousands of new entries." YES, it does mean that, exactly that. Not thousands, but tens of thousands- a number beyond reckoning. Every minor geography on needs a page on Wiktionary (provided three cites are found, which they would be) and Wikipedia even more so.
 * There is an imbalance toward Hubei Province on Wiktionary because I started in that area. I interpret the imbalance as the present-day weakness of Wiktionary. I'd love to see MORE Beijing. Examples of other disparities (as of 4/28/2022): Category:en:Places in Ningxia (7 entries, 7 million people, 60,000 sq km), Category:en:Places in West Virginia, USA (534 entries, 1 million people, 60,000 sq km), Category:en:Places in Washington, USA (306 entries, 7 million people, 200,000 sq km)
 * 2. Criteria_for_inclusion "The following place names shall be included if they fulfill attestation requirements[...]Human settlements: cities, towns, villages, etc., Districts and neighborhoods of cities and towns"
 * 3. Yes, those are included, too. My linguistic skills kind of limit me to Mandarin-related location names (most English language stuff is pretty good already), but the minor towns of Luxembourg and the craters of Europa, as well as the Nepali and Portuguese translations for all those names, are all within the scope of the Wiktionary project. The PRC geography needs MORE representation, not less or curtailed representation.
 * 4. Yes, there are examples of situations where multiple locations have the same name, like Anping or Bakersville. All those need three cites minimum for each sense.
 * For clarification for future readers, here is an example of a community that I would very likely not create an English Wiktionary page for:
 * --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)