Jump to content

Talk:Automatic conversion between simplified and traditional Chinese

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Al12si in topic POV?

May we make some general page about transliteration with links to specific languages? General principles from Chinese transliteration should go into general page... --Millosh 12:41, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)



For the main page being translated, the alphabetical index is not translated well. Is there any way we can solve the problem? (e.g. tranlation in block, or can we use the language block function?) -- Tomchiukc 17:41, 5 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Possible to use conversion in an English Wikibook?


We have a debate in the Chinese Wikibook over whether we should have a split or combined textbook. One side says it was too confusing/intimidating/cluttered to have both scripts in addition to pinyin and the English translation. The other side says it will be too hard to keep the two versions in sync now that it's split. To an extent, they have, but it will be a growing problem as the book expands.

Is it possible to set it up so that changes in a en Wikibook are carried over, just like in the zh Wikipedia? I know normally no English portal gets the extra conversion tabs, but could we insert an exception? It would be really great if we could, and save some headaches for both contributors and students.

Everlong 07:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Where is the documentation how to use this ?


And the LanguageConverter.php in MediaWiki? 06:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Different conversions in different Chinese Wiki sites


Chinese Wikipedia needs conversions of regional compounds. Chinese Wiktionary may need it, but Chinese Wikisource converts traditional and simplified characters only without converting compounds for regional variations. There is now an argument at Chinese Wikipedia to add Singaporean Chinese tab at w:zh:Wikipedia:馬新簡體標籤顯示民意調查.--Jusjih 15:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • Note that the Malasia-Singaporean variation already exists. The discussion is primarily about whether to add the tab for the convenience of readers who have not registered. Alongside there is a more fundamental discussion: how to seperate the character conversion from the phrase conversion.--Hillgentleman| 22:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Phonetic version


Is there any project to allow conversion into phonetic (pinyin). Then, conversion table between phonetics are available for further possibilities. Yug (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Add a "how to" section?


Is it possible to add a section telling individual users how they can access the automatic conversions? In other words, right now when I view Chinese-language Wikipedia pages, I am seeing a mix of simplified and traditional characters, based presumably on how they were originally inputted. I want to see the pages rendered in traditional characters using the automatic conversion that is described in this article. What settings do I need to adjust to be able to achieve that? I honestly don't know and I can't figure it out by reading this page. The Interloafer (talk) 18:21, 22 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

British English/American English


I have no clue where else to put this, but this sort of function would be fantastic for English Wikipedia between American and British English spelling differences. Just putting it out there. Thanks y'all! --Invokingvajras 22:21, August 13, 2019 (UTC)

How does it really work?


What modules and technology does automatic conversion use? How to create automatic conversion in Mongolian: cyrillic, latin and traditional script? BatlaaTs (talk) 06:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply



The article claims the system “has been generally received well by the community there.” I’m not really sure. I, for one, have now abandoned the Chinese Wikipedia because it just feels like the “Simplified Chinese Wikipedia”; we users of traditional characters are simply not valued.

I did work in a newespaper and so I do have something to say about automatic conversions: it doesn’t work because simplified-to-tradition is a one-to-many mapping. It is the cause of typographical errors and there are errors that people familiar with these systems know are indicative of automatic conversion. Al12si (talk) 22:04, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply