Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Hanja

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Hanja Wikipedia

main page Requests for new languages (Wikipedia Hanja)
submitted verification final decision
Process-stop.svg This proposal has been rejected.
This decision was taken by the language committee in accordance with the Language proposal policy based on the discussion on this page.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

This request does not conform to the language proposal policy, specifically the requirement for a distinct language code. Wikis are only created for distinct languages, not writing systems. —{admin} Pathoschild 14:07:02, 03 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal summary

§ N means a native speaker of Korean who can read and write mixed script of Hangul and Hanja.
1. He or she is not a native speaker but can read and write mixed script of Hangul and Hanja.

Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.
  • Speakers: 48 million+ total (Hanja are still taught as courses in South Korean middle and high schools. In Korean language and Korean studies programs at universities around the world, a sample of Hanja is typically a requirement for students. Becoming a graduate student in these fields usually requires students to learn at least the 1800 basic Hanja.)
  • Location(s) spoken: Korea and Korean communities living in Japan, China, United States, Canada, etc.


Before 1970s, there are many book and informations written in Hangul and Hanja mixed characters. But after 1980s, the major written system was changed to Hangul only by changing Korean law and policy. These days, there are still exist minor people who write information to use with Hanja in university and society. The first reason why we want to make new Korean Hanja Wikipedia is; We want to write theirs knowledge, which is written with Hanja, in Wikipedia.

And Hanja is still educated to middle and high school student. But most of them not good at Hanja, Because they cannot meet Hanja in their daily life. In fact there are no good site for student which is written in Hanja mixed system. The second reason is; We hope that this Wikipedia help them to good at Hanja. (Likes current Latin Wikipedia, Classical Chinese Wikipedia and Simple English Wikipedia does.)

For this, we try to introduce automatic converting system to Korean Wikipedia. But most of Korean Wikipedian oppose to introduce automatic converting system. The three main reason are, first the edit page and some system pages doesn't converted to Hangul only system. And second reason is some vocabulary and orthography of two system is quite different. The third reason is major Korean Wikipedian don't need the system and they don't want to be involved about manage the system. After we discuss few months, we made conclusion that to introducing the automatic system is impassable.

So we want to make Korean Hanja Wikipedia as independence Wikipedia.

Arguments in favour

  • Support --Yes0song 02:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Reservation --Yes0song 09:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Simple votes will be ignored in accordance with the Language proposal policy. —{admin} Pathoschild 18:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support -- (en) If it is impossible to make an automatic conversion system hanja to hangul, I support making ko-hanja Wikipedia. If possible, I oppose making ko-hanja WP and support adding the automatic hanja->hangul converter to ko:.
    (ko) 만약에 한자→한글 자동변환기를 만들 수 없다면 ko:와 별도로 ko-hanja WP를 만드는 것에 찬성합니다. (만약에 자동변환기를 만들 수 있다면 ko-hanja WP 생성에 반대하고 ko에 변환기를 다는 것을 지지합니다). --Yes0song 13:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support – Same as what Yes0song wrote above. Wikipediatrician 06:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. However, per Yes0song, I suggest adding hanja converter to existing Korean Wiki but not a separate site. Some technical issues have yet to be solved. Please see also my discussion below.--Jusjih 14:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Support I've been waiting for this! It's a good way to get Korea to embrace its history!

--Mark O'Higgins 05:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Support I also suggest Hanja-Hangul converter. Save the Hanja script from extinction ;) --schroedi unsigned by 13:16, 14 February 2007.
  • Support Hanja wiki is a very good idea because the uses of Hanja help us to clear up ambiguity there are too much homophones words (written in Hangul) within Korean language in addition to that i will also support a Hanja Wikitionary. Korean language at first is a very easy language with ingenious alphabet but due to homophones words it becomes very difficult to understand (documents, articles, website written only in Hangul) which is not case of Japanese. Beside to this Hanja are less and less uses in documents, the uses of Hanja decrease at the dawn of the 20th century Whlee 14:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strongly Support I think it is very hard to make convertion system and invite it in korean wikipedia, because of two big reason first, there are no programmer to make this system in korean wikipeia, and secound, many user in korean wikipedia oppose to invite this system. So I think, It will be better to make new wikipedia. And in future if many person want to request convertion system, we can put together korean wikipedias that time. By the way, I think we need to discuss about the official name of this new wikipedia. I don't like the name "ko-hanja", I personally prefer "ko-hani" instead of. --Masoris 14:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - I agree Yes0song's opinion. LERK 01:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - I think creating an automatic conversion system hanja to hangul is difficult yet. Therefore I change my opinion and support to open this new Wikipedia. --Yes0song 15:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - This Korean-hanja wikipedia will make new aura on Korean wikipedia. - Ellif 02:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - You intend...a...fair use korean wikipedia...right?? :) I Support...I Support fair use -- WonYong (talk contribs count logs page moves block log email) 01:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Since:
  1. The result of the debate debate here was that the auto-matic conversion tool is impossible to be implemented - summarised.
  2. Three Hundred good quality articles have currently been created on the Incubator project.
  3. The Interface System Messages have been translated here. --Jose77 00:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - I do not understand Hangul-only Korean; however, if Hanja were mixed into the script, I could get at least a basic understanding of the text, since I understand Chinese characters (the use of Chinese characters also gives me limited understanding of Japanese text). TML 00:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Very strong support This is good. We should allow the creation of this wiki for it is the Korean Language itself written in a different script. It is dying, and a Wikipedia can help it survive since most Koreans prefer using Hanggul instead of Hanja. -- Felipe Aira 11:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
    • I have some reasons why should one not oppose.
      1. Yes, it is Korean but it would be pure biase if only hanggul will be let.
      2. Again opposed to Hanggul only a few write it. So it would be very beneficial to the script.
      3. Don't oppose because it won't reach a wider audience unlike Korean Hanggul Wikipedia. It is not sole information that Wikipedia's goal is, but also preserving a language.
      4. It would also be bias if Meta will not let this since we have Wikipedias like Esperanto, Volapuk, Ido, Interlingua, be-x-old, and other Wikipedia language editions that are written in a variant script and may not reach a wide audience. Again their goal is also to preserve the language.
    • -- Felipe Aira 11:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Arguments against

  • isn't Hanja = Chinese?
    so isn't most close related language is chinese??
    No. The project's name is a bit misleading. As far as I understand, it is not about using Chinese characters exclusively (we've already got zh-classical, zh, zh-yue, wuu for that), but a mixed script: The language is more or less normal Korean, but most or all Chinese-derived sememes are actually written using Chinese characters. The rest is written in Korean (including allmost morphemes that could not possibly be considered nouns, such as suffixes and auxiliary verbs). I guess editors would also use as little not-Chinese-derived sememes as possible. BTW, if it were Chinese characters only, then we could simply use ISO 15924's ko-Hant (or ko-Hani?) instead of an invented ko-hanja. Wikipediatrician 06:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    Korean written in Hanja is more vernacular compared to Classical Chinese. They are not the same. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs 05:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Several hanja characters are corresponding with one Hangul characters. If this Wikipedia uses auto converter, the converter can't convert one character to various characters in other scripts due to technical reasons. to that, hanja characters are hard to write. for that reason, I oppose this request. -- Alpha for knowledge (Talk / Contributions) 16:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[Edited: 03:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)] -- Cancelled; see this (in Korean) and the comment below -- 14:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

  • This is not true; you forget that the Hangul alphabet has some letters to allow writing the small phonetic differences are needed to preserve the distinction between two nearly-homophonic distinct Hanja ideographs.
    You're right! The Hangul alphabet also has some diacritics (Japanese too for Hiragana and Katakana; the same is true for the similar Bopomofo script used for writing Chinese phonetically and to help reading Han characters) to make additional phonetic distinctions, notably for middle vowels or for tone distinctions. These diacritics are most often not needed in modern Korean, but they do exist even if most often they are not marked. Verdy P 14:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    You seem to assume that the Hanja script is restricted only to the modern simplified Hangul alphabet. However this alphabet has some historic letters, plus some letters and diacritics added to adapt the orthography when needed (these extensions are quite similar to the many extensions found in the Latin script: if you don't use the additional letters and diacritics in the Latin script, you have distinct but nearly-homophonic words whose distinctions are lost in the conversion).
    Anyway, there are Han ideographs still used in modern Korean today and widely used, and they are far from disappearing just because of their prevalence (expecially in wellknown proper names). With a converter, you would loose distinctions that are needed to preserver differences in propernames, soIwonder if this is really a good idea to implement such Hanja-to-Hangul automatic converter.
    What is true is that the reverse conversion is impossible to do. So articles needing Hanja characters will need to becomposed with Hanja, and they may evenutally be read using such converter (this could be done also in Chinese to convert Han ideographs to Bobomofo, as an assistance for Han beginner readers, or in Japanese to convert Kanjis to Hiragana or Katakana, or for occidental beginner readers to convert Han ideographs to Latin, like in the Ban-lam-gu wiki). Verdy_p 20:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose per my understanding of Meta:Language proposal policy#Requisites, specifically nos. 2, 3, and 4. Hanja is not a distinct language and has no native speakers; it is simply an alternative way of writing Korean. Thus, while it does have an ISO 15924 code, it does not have the ISO 639 code required by the LPP. Note that the only difference between a KO article and a KO-KORE (?) article would be the script in which certain words are written. In terms of language content, there is less difference between mixed-script Korean and hangul-only Korean than there is between (for example) US and UK English, or the Seoul and Pyongyang dialects of Korean... More generally, this proposal seems to conflict with existing Wikimedia practice; I am not able to locate any other cases of projects separated by writing system only. Even in extreme cases of languages written in two or more completely different scripts (such as Kurdish), a single Wikipedia is maintained. ... It is unfortunate that the Korean Wikipedia community has not chosen to pursue an autoconvert solution, but if mixed-script is going to be allowed at all, some way must be found of including it within KO WP. -- Visviva 15:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
    I agree the proposal conflicts with no. 3, and perhaps no. 1.
    I wouldn't say it conflicts with nos. 2 and 4. The Korean language has ISO-639 codes, and there is enough of a “viable community” to have set up a test project. The Tarashkevitsa Belarusian Wikipedia conflicts with no. 2 at least as much as ko-Kore would, yet it is allowed. A couple of Wikipedias are very close to conflicting with no. 3 (Bokmål and Galician, for example) or have clearly violated it (Cyrillic Moldovan/Romanian).
    I fail to see why there shouldn't be exceptions to 1 and 4 if alternative orthographies turn out to be impossible to integrate into existing projects because necessary free software does not exist. If we must follow the rules to the letter, I withdraw my conditional support. Wikipediatrician 20:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Other discussion

Automatic Conversion

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I'm not technically opposed to using hanja (in fact, I'm glad there are people who want to keep it alive on the internet :)), but I do have one concern: hanja is just another way of writing the same Korean words, correct? I'm concerned that the hanja project would just go mostly unused because there's already a much more established Korean Wikipedia. I did find Automatic conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese which seems to be a similar thing, one language, two scripts, perhaps something like that would work? --Nikki 06:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Such a conversion tool would be very difficult to create due to the existance of homophones which lead to ambiguities.
Just take this example: The Korean hangul word "수도" (sudo), could mean:
  1. 修道 "spiritual discipline"
  2. 受渡 "receipt and delivery"
  3. 囚徒 "prisoner"
  4. 水都 "'city of water'" (e.g. Hong Kong and Naples)
  5. 水稻 "rice"
  6. 水道 "drain"
  7. 隧道 "tunnel"
  8. 首都 "capital (city)"
  9. 手刀 "hand-knife"
--Jose77 23:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
What Jose77 said above says nothing about hanja→hangul conversion. A fully automated conversion of current ko Wikipedia content to mixed script is of course impossible (a 5% error for hangul→hanja might be difficult to achieve and still too high), but perhaps automated conversion in the opposite direction is bearable for a Wikipedia project since, unlike kanji→kana conversion, each hanja can be unambiguously mapped to one hangul block in most cases. zh Wikipedia also allows input in either version which readers can choose to downgrade for reading. Perhaps the current Korean Wikipedia can be tweaked to allow editing in either script (already possible) and allow reading in a user-preferred version (this would need a dictionary-supported conversion similar to zh Wikipedia). If many editors can't be bothered to use mixed script, the same holds true for zh Wikipedia editors who don't use traditional characters when editing articles there, which I don't think has been too detrimental to its quality. Allowing user-preferred output at the Korean WP (probably with "hangul only" as the default for readers who aren't logged in, except in situations where the current WP already uses hanja) might avoid a lot of the double work two separate projects would cause: Instead of manual conversion of "hangul only" articles into a new Wikipedia, editors could use the same effort to convert the existing article's source to mixed script leaving it where it is – it would still be seen as hangul only except for users who have chosen "mixed script view" in their preferences or in a button à la zh WP. Articles or individual paragraphs that don't have any hanja information included yet would be displayed in hangul only (still better than not having them at all, as would be the case at a separate mixed script edition) – what happens at zh WP if content is created using only simplified characters? I haven't really thought about this, so there might be some major obstacles, and perhaps mixed-script supporters will still prefer to build at a separate site. Wikipediatrician 21:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Yes0song/ko 자동변환기 (written in Korean) is my scheme of the Automatic conversion between Hangul and Hanja. I think if MediaWiki will support the auto-converter, ko-hanja WP is unnecessary. --Yes0song 09:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Yes0song/Automatic conversion in Korean language is its English edition. --Yes0song 13:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Wikipediatrician 06:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, why did you and Pathoschild incorrectly reformated my own text, which really was correctly formatted (and was indented because it was a reply).
So ask to Pathoschild why he did use such ugly HTML formatting to my correct wiki syntax, and why he thinks he must reformat everybody's discussion the way he wants (and often in incorrect ways, so that discussions appear signed by different users)... Verdy P 14:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment: (en) Now in Korean Wikipedia, opinions which oppose introducing of automatic conversion system (hanja→hangul) is more than one which support it. ko:위키백과:사랑방/2006년 12월#다양한 표기법 지원 모임 공식 입장 :(

(ko) 현재 한국어 위키백과에서는 한자→한글 automatic conversion system 도입에 반대하는 의견이 찬성 쪽보다 더 많습니다. :( --Yes0song 13:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Automatic character converters are already used in various Chinese Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikisource, and similar sites to convert traditional and simplified characters without splitting into separate subdomains. When I used Chinese Wikipedia several years ago, there were many arguments as how to accommodate not only traditional and simplified characters in one site but also different compounds in different Chinese-speaking areas, i.e., China, Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan, and Singapore. This is now somewhat solved as I have seen while administering Chinese Wikipedia.
When Wikisource was multilingual, Chinese articles could not be automatically converted, but when I, an admin there, requested Chinese Wikisource, I specified opening ONE Chinese site with an automatic converter but not separate traditional and simplified sites. There was once a movement to open a separate traditional Chinese Wikipedia when most users of Chinese Wikipedia have been Mainland Chinese, but that site has closed. When adding hanja converter, there may be needs of conversion tables for words and compounds. Case-by-case manual adjustments may also be needed as in Chinese Wiki sites.--Jusjih 14:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

(Copying from User talk:Yes0song/Automatic conversion in Korean language#Legal database for the converter) Wouldn't there have to be a free (that is, non-proprietary) converter, along with a free database containing hangeul values for all hanja? Note that the legality of the hanja database that is Wiktionary may be challenged sooner or later; see wikt:Wiktionary:Beer_parlour_archive/October_06#Han_characters_2. Wikipediatrician 04:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it is impassable to invite converting system to Korean Wikipedia. because of those reasons.

  1. These days there are few Koreans can read and write hanja. Maybe person who was students before 70s, or youth whose major is Korean, Japanese, Chinese, law or history can be read and write hanja. And most university student in these days, can’t be read and write hanja. It means, to invite converting system, the system should be perfect. Every page should can be read as hangul only. But converting system which is used in Chinese Wikipedia is not perfect, few pages and edit pages don’t have convert function.
  2. There are no converting system, and database which can be use in Wikipedia. It means, we must make it, and I think to make the system and database is not impassable, but we need voluntary programmers.
  3. To study or do major computer science don’t require ability to read and write hanja. It means very very few of programmer can read, write and interest in hanja. It means there are no (enough) programmer to make converting system. We can’t make it !

Because of those reasons, it is better to make hanja wikipedia individually. --Masoris 01:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The result of the debate was based on the Decision of 다지모 (Korean user group for automatic conversion system); We decided that we will make Hanja Wikipedia as a new Wikipedia. So we will add articles to incubator to approve this proposal. --Masoris 15:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Language Code Issue

See also #Language Code Issue 2
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I'm not opposed to create a Hanga Wikipedia, but the proposed code is not conforming to RFC4646. Hanja is an alternate orthography for writing the Korean language, so the language is Korean (ko), using the Hanja script which has been completely unified with the Hanzi (term used for writing Chinese), Kanji (term used for writing Japanese) and Chu-nom (term used for writing Vietnamese) scripts into a single unified Han script (whose code is "Hani" in ISO 15924).
Only in Chinese, it is sometimes necessary to make a distinction between two orthographies of the same language using the same unified Han script. That's why there are "Hans" and "Hant" codes in ISO 15924, but the main reason was that "zh" is not a single language but a macrolanguage encompassing lots of dialects with their own orthographies adapted to the local phonetics requiring additional distinctions different from the official Mandarin dialect of Beijing; such distinction is not needed in Hanja, Japanese/Kanji or in Vietnamese Chu-Nom, so the generic "Hani" code of the script is enough.
Using "hanja" in the language code is inappropriate; using RFC4646 rules, it would mean this designates a language variant, i.e. a distinct dialect. However "Hanja" is still the same language as Korean, as there's no defined dialectal difference. There is also no distinction between a simplified and traditional orthography in Hanja (and Chu-Nom),sousing "hans" and "Hant" codes is inappropriate.
There are dialectal differences within Korean, but these differences are not based on the two orthographic systems (Hangul and Hanja).
So I strongly oppose the use of "ko-hanja", in favor of "ko-hani" which fully conforms to RFC4646 rules!
For the same reason, I strongly oppose the use of "vi-nom" (using a non-standard "extlang" subtag according to RFC4646 parsing rules) in favor of "vi-hani" (using the ISO 15924 script code Hani for the Unified Han script).
Verdy_p 20:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
I oppose using “ko-hani”, as there is no such written language anymore since idu has fallen into disuse. I've already said above that “if it were Chinese characters only, then we could simply use ISO 15924's ko-Hant (or ko-Hani?)”, but we're dealing with a mixed script (Hang + Hani) here. Please also see User talk:Yes0song/Automatic conversion in Korean language#Short names (which was probably a bad place to post it, as it has nothing to do with the technical issues related to the required automatic conversion between mixed script and hangeul only).
Not ko-Hant. There's no orthographical distinctions between traditional and simplified orthographies in Korean Hanja. the Hantand Hans are codes for making orthographical distinctions between various Chinese cultures, and Hans is a modern creation, which has no sense in Korean. Hani must be used for the unified Han script. But the question remains open if a new ISO 15924 code would be needed for Hanja+Hangul, which is the current modern use where scripts are mixed; the historical Korean was written with Han characters only, all with traditional forms, so there is no "simplified" forms; even in the modern use of rare Hanja characters that remain in modern Korean texts.) Verdy P 14:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
To clarify again, the mixed script the requested project would use (국한문 혼용; language: ko; script: Hang + Hani) is different from Hanmun (한문; zh-Hant as used in Korea), from Idu (이두; ko-Hani) and from the current official standard (한글 전용; ko-Hang).
By the way, why don't you (Verdy_p) simply use a double return to make paragraphs? Wikipediatrician 04:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
I support ko-hani, because if a korean person heard "What is korean(ko) which is written with hanja(hani)?", most person answer "hanja mixed korean", not Idu. --Masoris 02:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I support ko-hani, too. The reason: ko:사용자토론:Ye0song/다지모#Yes0song의 의견 (written in Korean) --Yes0song 15:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Three person; Verdy_p, Yes0song, Masoris Support "ko-hani", And a person; Wikipediatrician Oppose "ko-hani". I will change code name ko-hanja to ko-hani, if there are no discussion any more. Because we should resolve code name, to be approved this wikipedia. --Masoris 18:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I changed code name to ko-hani. --Masoris 15:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Language Name Issue

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I personally don't like the name "韓國語 漢字". I think it can be confuse with 文言文. So I propose these names; "韓國語 國漢混用", "韓國語 國漢文混用" and "韓國語 漢字混用". "國漢文混用" is name in Korean dictionary, and "國漢混用", "漢字混用" are also frequently used between Koreans. --Masoris 13:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I propose "韓國語(韓漢混用)" (native name) and "Korean (mixed script of Hangul and Hanja)" (English name). The reason: ko:사용자토론:Yes0song/다지모#Yes0song의 의견 (written in Korean). --Yes0song 15:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I oppose "韓國語(韓漢混用)", because there are no 韓漢混用 in korean word, I just can found the word in very few of Chinese site, and no one in korean site. It is better that we choose a word between exist Korean words, than make new one. --Masoris 08:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
As modern Korean cannot be entirely written in hanja, "韓國語 漢字混用" would be much better than "韓國語 漢字". Again, any chance to retrofit existing Korean Wikipedia with hanja conversion or are you making a new Wiki site?--Jusjih 01:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
It is impossible for the following reasons:[1]. Therefore we are making a new Wiki site.

The following three names have been proposed as a much better alternative than "韓國語 漢字". We will put it to the vote then. The name with the most votes will be adopted to replace the current name of "韓國語 漢字".

  • Proposed name "韓國語 國漢混用".
    • Supported by:
    • Opposed by:
      1. '' means 'nation', especially in Korean, it can mean 'Korea'. It is not neutral. LERK 10:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
      2. Same with LERK --Masoris 10:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
      3. Same with LERK--Jusjih 01:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Proposed name "韓國語 國漢文混用".
    • Supported by:
    • Opposed by:
      1. Same reason as I said first LERK 10:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
      2. Same with LERK --Masoris 10:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
      3. Same with LERK--Jusjih 01:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Proposed name "韓國語 漢字混用"
    • Supported by:
      1. '漢字混用' means 'including Hanja (Korean Hanzi)', it is most neutral. LERK 10:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
      2. Same with LERK --Masoris 10:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
      3. Same with LERK--Jusjih 01:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
      4. Same with LERK. I changed my opinion. --Yes0song 15:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Opposed by:
  • Proposed name "韓國語(韓漢混用)".
    • Supported by:
    • Opposed by:
      1. I oppose "韓國語(韓漢混用)", because there are no 韓漢混用 in korean word, I just can found the word in very few of Chinese site, and no one in korean site. It is better that we choose a word between exist Korean words, than make new one. --Masoris 11:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

--Jose77 06:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The result of the debate was to change the name of Hanja Wikipedia from "韓國語 漢字" to "韓國語 漢字混用". --Jose77 06:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

English Language Name Issue

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

We also need to decide English Language Name. The current name is 'Korean (mixed script of Hangul and Hanja)' - I think it is longest English name in all wikipedias. Do you think it is best name, or have any idea? --Masoris 07:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I have a new idea. "Korean with Hanja". --Yes0song 08:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I suggest "Korean including Hanja." LERK 12:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
We also need to consider about the suffix "Wikipedia". "Korean with Hanja" will be "Korean with Hanja Wikipedia", and "Korean including Hanja" will be "Korean including Hanja Wikipedia" with suffix. --Masoris 13:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

My new suggestion: "Korean (with Hanja)" Wikipedia. --Yes0song 08:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I fix my suggestion: "Korean (including Hanja) Wikipedia" LERK 09:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
How about just "Korean Hanja"? Because we decided korean name as "韓國語 漢字"(Korean Hanja) not "漢字를 포함한 韓國語"(Korean including Hanja). So I think "Korean Hanja" is enough to describe this Wikipedia. So the Wikipedia name will be "Korean Hanja Wikipedia". --Masoris 15:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

We vote about English name in Korean Wikipedia.

The result is;
  1. Korean Hanja Wikipedia : 9 votes
  2. Korean (with Hanja) Wikipedia : 5 votes
  3. Korean (including Hanja) Wikipedia : 4 votes

So we decided the official English name is Korean Hanja Wikipedia. --Masoris 17:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


There are currently 300 pages in incubator. And about 100 of those are made between recent a week. I expect it could be reach more than 400 pages before the end of this month. --Masoris 12:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

--Updated by --Jose77 00:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

System message file

I made the system message file for Korean-Hanja Wikipedia. The source code is here. --Yes0song


User:Jose77 ceased his position as proposer of this wiki because he cannot speak Korean[2]. We assign me, User:Masoris and User:LERK for new proposers because there is no proposer of this wiki. --Yes0song 08:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Notice: new solution for multi-writing systems

User:Bèrto 'd Sèra, a member of the Languages Subcommittee is visualizing a new solution. Its concept can be summarized as ONE WIKI and MULTI-WRITING SYSTEMS. He has a plan to merge two different writing system of Korean ("Only Hangul" vs. "Hangul and Hanja") into existing Korean Wiki as the solution, so approving of Korean Hanja Wikipedia is being delayed. --Yes0song 08:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Language Code Issue 2

ISO decide "Kore" as the code for mixed script of Hangul and Hanja in June 13, 2007.[3] Therefore we should re-discuss the language code issue. I think we should change ko-hani to ko-kore. Let's discuss it now.

ISO 639-1/ISO 639-2 (languages)
639-1 639-2 English name Nom français Local name
ko kor Korean coréen 한국어, 한국말, 조선어, 조선말, 고려말, 韓國語, 朝鮮語, 高麗語, etc.
zh chi/zho Chinese chinois 中文, 漢語, 汉语, 華語, 华语, etc.
ja jpn Japanese japonais 日本語, etc.
vi vie Vietnamese vietnamien Tiếng Việt, Việt ngữ, etc.
ISO 15924 (characters and writing systems)
Code English name Nom français Property Value Alias Date
Kore 287 Korean (alias for Hangul + Han) coréen (alias pour hangûl + han) 13 Jun 2007
Jpan 413 Japanese (alias for Han + Hiragana + Katakana) japonais (alias pour han + hiragana + katakana) 21 Jun 2006
Hang 286 Hangul (Hangŭl, Hangeul) hangûl (hangŭl, hangeul) Hangul 29 May 2004
Hani 500 Han (Hanzi, Kanji, Hanja) idéogrammes han Han 01 May 2004
Hant 502 Han (Traditional variant) idéogrammes han (variante traditionnelle) 29 May 2004
Hans 501 Han (Simplified variant) idéogrammes han (variante simplifiée) 29 May 2004
Hrkt 412 (alias for Hiragana + Katakana) (alias pour hiragana + katakana) Katakana​_Or​_Hiragana 01 May 2004
Kana 411 Katakana katakana Katakana 01 May 2004
Hira 411 Hiragana hiragana Hiragana 01 May 2004
Bopo 285 Bopomofo bopomofo Bopomofo 01 May 2004
--Yes0song 08:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I changed code name 'ko-hani' to 'ko-'kore'. because 'kore' is current ISO standard, and I cannot found any opposite reason at discussion before. If you opposite about 'ko-kore' or have any good idea about code name, Comment about your opinion here. --Masoris 04:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I undo code name to ko-hani, because I asked about code name 'kore' to Unicode. And they responded that the code 'kore' can use both situation not only Mixed writing system Hanja with Hangul likes this Wikipedia, but also major Hangul and some Hanja likes current Korean Wikipedia. 'kore' is just short cut of 'hang and hani'. It doesn't indicate how frequently Hanja used. --Masoris 20:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I redo code name to ko-kore after re-discuss with Masoris[4].
I think members of Unicode Consortium don't know well about Korean language and consider the code "kore" is useless if it can be used in both hangeul jeonyong (exclusive script of Hangul) and hanja honyong (mixed script of Hangul+Hanja). The feature of this wiki is using both Hangul and Hanja, so I think ko-kore is more suitable than ko-hani. Masoris also agreed my opinion, therefore I revert the code. If there are anyones who oppose my reverting, reply here please. --Yes0song 12:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed my opinion to ko-kore, because in current Korean Wikipedia, major writing system is Hangul and sometimes used Latin alphabet and Hanja, and in many article Latin alphabet is used many time than Hanja, in this situation if we put writing system code to current Wikipedia, it'll be better hang-latn-hani than hang-hani, but latn is meaningless. because it is not feature of this Writing system, in same reason hani also meaningless, So I think Writing system code should represent only major Writing system, i.e. in current Korean Wikipedia will be hang, and this Wikipedia will be kore(hang-hani). --Masoris 13:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't have any objection. - Ellif 05:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I support using the new code for the proposed Wikipedia, but why can't we use ko-Kore instead of ko-kore? The capital K would help to clarify that Kore is not part of a macrolanguage as in zh-yue and zh-wuu, but a writing system as in zh-Hant and zh-Hani. Please see Wikipediatrician 17:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I just confirmed all second-level domains are reduced to lower case when entered in the browser's location bar. It may be less confusing to use only lower case from the start, but it seems perfectly possible to use mixed case, too. Wikipediatrician 05:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Help for Hanja-Learners

I propose to install a help system for users who don't know all the Hanja used. I guess, that a lot of people who are interested in the Hanja-Wikipedia have basic hanja skills, but not excellent skills as Hanja are not used any more in daily life in both Koreas. Therefore a technical solution that displays the Hanjas sound and meaning when needed would be very useful. Ideal would be a small box next to the mouse pointer that shows information about the Hanja character the mouse pointer touches. For advanced users it should be possible to switch this tool off.Stefanostrian 19:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

If you idea can be realized, showing the corresponding hangul of hanja will be very great, but if one hanja character has more than one pronunciation, then better ideas will be needed.--Jusjih 01:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
That wouldn't be a problem. The small info box could display all meanings and pronounciations together like '樂/노래 악/즐길 락(낙)/좋아할 요'. I think, there shouldn't be a full conversion of the text, just a hint for the case that you don't know a single character. This could be realized with a simple piece of javascript. An alternative would be to hyperlink every hanja to a hanja dictionary without highlightening it in blue. I personally would prefer the first solution although there are a lot of possibilities in a free hanja dictionary that's based on the wiki idea.Stefanostrian 18:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

English Language Name Issue 2

How about using

  • Korean mixed script Wikipedia
  • Korean (mixed script) Wikipedia or
  • Mixed script Korean Wikipedia?


  • They seem more accurate than “Korean Hanja Wikipedia”.
  • Even readers who don't know the word “Hanja” get an idea of what is meant.


  • They are slightly longer than “Korean Hanja Wikipedia”.

Wikipediatrician 18:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

How about "Korean Wikipedia with Hanja"?--Jusjih 01:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Nice. Can be shortened to “Korean with Hanja” wherever the Wikipedian context is obvious.
But why should we use the word “Hanja” which will be unfamiliar to many readers, when the term “mixed script” (two familiar English words) can be used instead? I know of no Korean mixed script besides Kore (= Hang + Hani) that has been in use during the last 100 years, so “mixed script” should be unambiguous enough. Wikipediatrician 21:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Then use one of your proposed names, but which one to pick will be another question. I prefer Korean mixed script Wikipedia when hanja will be widely used.--Jusjih 02:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)