Talk:𤈎

RFD discussion
Just because Unicode has it doesn't mean that we have to. We don't include every codepoint imaginable (or do we...? Well, we shouldn't). I'd rather that somebody spent their time creating 㶷, the real character which this attempts to duplicate. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If it's correct that this is a mistaken duplicate, then hard redirect IMO. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That will only work if someone creates the page for it to hard-redirect to (see my comment above). --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I see two possibilities, if this is actually used as a mistaken encoding for 㶷 then we should redirect there (when it exists) and explain that. If this is a mention-only term, only ever mentioned as a mistake or in lists of characters, then we should delete it. No need to catalog every error by every organization. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * If 𤈎 is an exact duplicate of 㶷, how can you tell which is wrong? - -sche (discuss) 04:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Because one of them is widely supported, and the other isn't. It would fail RFV &mdash; should I post it there, too? --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Create 㶷 and redirect there. bd2412 T 05:04, 19 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Moved. - -sche (discuss) 21:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Then this is done. Striking. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)