Talk:Kangxi
Latest comment: 8 years ago by -sche in topic RFV discussion: May–August 2015
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Rfv-sense
Does anyone really refer to the Kangxi Dictionary as "Kangxi", or 釒 as a "Kangxi"?
- It is common to refer to radicals in the Kangxi Dictionary by “Kangxi radicals”. The noun sense should be deleted. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:30, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- (OP) I removed the request for verification of the "dictionary" sense. —suzukaze (t・c) 05:46, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
For reference, in diff two senses were tagged with rfv-sense:
- A dictionary and cross reference of Chinese characters, first published in 1716 at the behest of the Kangxi Emperor, and used to the present day.
- One of 214 modern Chinese radicals, as organized in the Kangxi dictionary.
I think the recent addition of "Abbreviation of Kangxi Dictionary" and "Abbreviation of Kangxi radicals" to the senses should be undone; I do not want to see e.g. "Abbreviation of vocative case" in the definition line of vocative. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:17, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've adjusted the formatting of the entry, and deleted the "radical" sense as RFV-failed. The other sense is uncommon (most Google Books hits for e.g. google books:defined "in Kangxi" follow it with dictionary); it has only two citations at the moment. - -sche (discuss) 03:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC)