Talk:𠃑

Incorrect edits

 * (Notifying also with regards to recent bad edits)

, your recent edit here is somewhat problematic. Based on the link provided, 《教育部異體字字典》 considers  to be a, which means that this character is considered an orthodox character (main form). The dictionary did not state that is a variant form of.

Also, the pronunciation of 〈｜ㄣˇ〉 does not match that of  〈ㄋㄧˋ〉, so how can the former be a variant form of the latter?


 * Anyway, it seems that 《教育部異體字字典》 made an error. Based on the 形體資料表, the definition for (C00033) is the same as that of  (A04446-001), which is a variant of  (A04446).
 * itself does not appear to be a Shuowen character. On further inspection, I found that Shuowen considered and  as two separate characters, but the Kangxi Dictionary considered  (encoded separately in Unicode) as an ancient form of.


 * It took some time for me to find in a modern/historical dictionary. Eventually, I found it in 《中文大辭典·乙部·一畫》 (Character 169), which gave the following definition: 「𠃊之篆形見乚字. 」 while the definition of  (Character 168) is given as 「匿也， 隱之古字. 」, so my conclusion is to use  for this entry.

TLDR :, you are advised not to continue working on archaic or rarely used Chinese characters. Do not add or modify any definitions of such entries. Conversion of existing Mandarin or Cantonese sections to a unified Chinese section is fine though. KevinUp (talk) 08:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * OK got it, will stay within the confines of the Xiandai Hanyu Zidian from now on (my largest dictionary that I own in person). I'll try sending edit requests to you or Justin instead. Johnny Shiz (talk) 14:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You may also ping other editors on the talk page of an entry. In the mean time, do try to improve on your reading skills in written Chinese. KevinUp (talk) 08:54, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

P.S. While you're at it, mind fixing the definition on the template? I can't seem to do so myself. Johnny Shiz (talk) 14:04, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how to fix that. This is caused by  on the entry for . KevinUp (talk) 08:54, 11 February 2019 (UTC)