Template talk:Chinese name

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Template	This page is a Template and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this template... NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Similar templates 2 What's the point? 3 Deprecation 4 Use of this template

[edit] Similar templates

• Template:Chinese Emperor
• Template:Chinese
• Template:Chinese name
• Template:Chinesename
• Template:chinesename koreanname

[edit] What's the point?

What is the point of this template? It seems to be nothing but duplicate clutter of the already enormous biographical infoboxes that inform exactly what the family name of the article subject is. Peter ^Isotalo 21:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

An article with an info box that already conveys this information does not need this template. Many do not have infoboxes yet. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 05:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deprecation

Can we deprecate this already? I think it should be a well-known fact by now. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 05:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

While it isn't that well known... I do feel it contaminates the encyclopedia.--58.105.47.107 09:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

A good template that conveys approximately this information may be feasible, but this is counter-wiki style: such a template should support in-line lks, not this distracting obsession with Chinese onomastics. I stripped its transclusion out of Feng Boyi, providing more info w/ less distraction.
--Jerzy•t 19:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of this template

Please refer to the tfd debate. This template does not exist to present redundant information. This template exists solely to clarify situations in which it may not be immediately clear, from the article text itself, whether the surname of the individual is the first or the second (or the third) name given. In cases such as "Sidney Lau" or "Richard Li" it is obvious that the surname is not "Sidney" or "Richard." In other cases, such as "Sun Yat-sen", the surname has already been provided explicitly in the article itself and the article does not warrant this intrusive template.

I would also extend this to implicit references. If the article mentions one's father/grandfather/children/etc. then it is clear in context what is and is not a surname.--Jiang 03:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

This seems to make sense, but does not take into consideration Wikipedia users who wish to learn more about the person's family name. This, however, as you say, may not have been the original intention of the template. Badagnani 03:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It is possible to link to the surname article where the surname is rendered in pinyin in the lead section. but most of our family name articles are still quite crappy. I prefer how theyve done it for biographies of Japanese, eg Junichiro Koizumi. --Jiang 03:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Again, if the surname already comes last, then there's no room for confusion. Our readership will only fail to realize that surnames can come first, not that they can come last. In cases such as Tsung-Dao Lee, it is obvious to the Chinese reader (or anyone who is aware of Chinese name rendering) that Lee is the surname. --Jiang 03:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, you are knowledgeable about Chinese things and you are just wrong that there will be no confusion in such cases. Yes, most of the surname articles are still crappy, but WP always gets better and better, according to the knowledge and effort that are invested. Badagnani 03:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Just who would see Tsung-Dao Lee and be confused over whether Lee or Tsung-Dao or Tsung is the surname? The target audience here is a non-Hungarian Westerner who is unaccustomed/unaware of surnames appearing before given names. In such cases, their false assumptions lead them to the right place.--Jiang 03:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you be somehow unfamiliar with surnames such as Nangong/Namgong/Namgoong/Namkoong, or A-chang? Further, names are often romanized in forms such as Tsung Dao Lee or Jie Bing Chen. You are knowledgeable about Chinese things (a fluent Chinese speaker/reader, is that correct?) and thus can be forgiven for not seeing how there could be confusion among those with less knowledge. I do agree that for Iris Chang it would be clear to most; however, not all English Wikipedia users would even know that Iris is a Western given name; that's an assumption you are making, but not all of our readers are from the West, or very familiar with Western names. Furthermore, someone wishing to find information about the person's family name are able to easily do so with this template (and not easily able to do so after removing it). Badagnani 03:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If we want to account for all cultural persuasions (e.g. people thinking Iris is a surname) then all articles would have to carry such notices. George W. Bush would say "This is an American name, family name is Bush." since a Chinese could possibly assume that the surname is "George" (not unheard of). Whose confusion are we trying to clear? Who is the audience? If people already knew about Chinese name rendering, but was unable to read Chinese, the context (Dr. Lee, not Dr. Tsung) would be more than enough to demonstrate that the surname is Lee, not Tsung.

This is a good point. Badagnani 04:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

This template was not designed to link to surname articles. Do so in the article. in the pinyin, as i suggested. --Jiang 03:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

You could have done so in your own edits. Why not? Badagnani 04:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't like this template and I nominated it for deletion, for which I have been accused of bad faith by some. I don't think my nomination is going to pass and I guess it is OK if it's kept for certain articles. But I completely agree with Jiang that it is complete overkill to add indiscriminately to every Chinese name. I see no reason why we should add it to names like Mao Zedong or Chiang Kai-shek.--Niohe 03:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Of course many users not skilled in Chinese think Zedong is the family name. I know it's hard for you to believe that, but the template will assist them in learning which is the surname. Badagnani 01:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Really? Give us a couple of examples.--Niohe 01:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Examples of what? I've already given an example. Some people don't know if "Mao" is a family name (in fact, I didn't until I studied Chinese) or "Zedong." The reason is because "Zedong" is given last, the opposite of the way names are generally given in the West. For an example of someone being able to instantly get to the person's surname by way of the template, if one links the surname within the template to the article about the surname, one will be able to immediately get to that article, and learn about that family name, its history, distribution in China and elsewhere, etc. It's a very beneficial and wonderful resource which I use frequently in my own research. Badagnani 01:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Who are these "some people"? Any examples of people misunderstanding?--Niohe 02:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

It's already in the article, hence no need to repeat at a space reserved for diambiguations. --Jiang 04:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

What is already in the article? I see no text added that says "(surname Chen)" or anything similar. It's not in the article, and it remains confusing for readers whether "Chen" or "Jiebing" is the surname. Badagnani 04:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Please actually read others' posts before responding. I gave myself as an example. Badagnani 02:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

We need to all arrive at a consensus on how to format these articles before proceeding. I think it is possible to incorporate the information provided by this template within the parenthesis, next to the Chinese characters/romanzations, in a way that would be much less obtrusive. smthing like what is done for biographies of Japanese, but in a more prominent manner.--Jiang 04:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If you prefer a different mode (I used to insert a parenthetical statement such as (surname Zhang), then use that rather than simply removing the template in instances when it is clear that there is still confusion over the surname. You have not addressed Chinese two-syllable surnames, of which there are many, as well as the simple benefit of the user instantly being able to get to an article about the individual's family name. I use this all the time in my own research. Badagnani 01:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The way the Japanese biography entries are done (with italics and reversed name) is very confusing because it essentially doesn't explain anything. I don't approve of that format at all. Badagnani 04:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

This is an alternative, clearer way of saying which is the surname: Jo Kondo (Kondo could link to a surname article if there were one for this surname). Badagnani 04:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The articles over which you and I have warred over are individuals with surnames already placed in the western order. As stated above, there is no room for confusion. If people already knew about Chinese name rendering, but was unable to read Chinese, the context (Dr. Lee, not Dr. Tsung) would be more than enough to demonstrate that the surname is Lee, not Tsung. If people did not, then their ignorance would not lead them astray.

What you are essentially doing is singling out all persons of Chinese ethnicity without Christian given names for use of this template: this is quite ridiculous. If this were the case, then the vast majority of biographies here would need that jarring template. No distinction should be made between Christian and non-Christian names. Please don't go there. --Jiang 04:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with religion, but with providing maximum clarity for our readers. In pinyin, even for Chinese, given names are often unclear (such as in names such as Wang Hong or Li Hao). If someone named Wang Hong came to the United States and used the "Western order" to give his/her name, I'm sure you see that it would still be unclear which was the surname and which was the given name. If the person was named Jimmy Wang it would be clear which was the surname but the addition of the template would still serve to clarify the exact surname, as there are sometimes 4 or more different surnames for a particular pinyin. In this case, I would not support eliminating the template for individuals with European given names *or* Chinese given names; I only abandoned reverting your template blanking among Chinese with European given names as a form of compromise. The fact (which has still not been addressed, after several mentions) that there are numerous Chinese surnames that are polysyllabic further makes it necessary to clarify for all our readers (though this is obviously not a problem for you, as you are knowledgeable in the Chinese language) which is the surname and which is the given name. Furthermore (which has also not been addressed, despite my bringing it up multiple times here) it is very helpful for readers to have instant access to know the exact surname of each Chinese individual, and to be able to go to the page about that surname; this is particularly helpful when there are multiple surnames for a particular pinyin. I use this in my research all the time and it is immensely helfpul to have such templates, as I can go directly to the family name. Why someone would wish to remove this information, or prevent WP users from gaining this information about the family names--especially someone who is apparently interested in Chinese culture and its proper documentation--is beyond me. Badagnani 04:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I, too, do not know whether Wang Hong is surnamed Wang or surnamed Hong. But if I see in the article that his father and children are surnamed Hong and the article repeatedly refers to the individual as "Hong" as is the case in standard English practice, then I can be certain that the individual is surnamed Hong. If I also know Chinese but cannot read it, I can be assured by the listing "pinyin: Hong Wang" in reverse order that Hong is indeed the surname. Yes, the romanized names are by themselves confusing, but in the context of the article, they are not.

To clarify the exact surname, you can link it in the pinyin. Pinyin is the standard system used to romanize Chinese; all articles with Chinese names will provide pinyin. The link has no place sharing a space with disambiguation notices when it should be part of the article itself.--Jiang 05:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I have to side strongly with Jiang on this. Badagnani, please do not add this template to every single Chinese, Chinese-American, etc. biography on the system, just where it is needed. Please see the TfD discussion. This template is not intended as a label, it is for disambiguation purposes. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 05:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I see that Editor:Jiang has hand-selected you, likely because s/he knows your view about this (i.e. it is congruent with his/hers), rather than putting the word out to all editors with an interest in this subject. That is telling in and of itself. I have already stated that I compromised in ceasing to re-add the template to the pages of Chinese individuals with European given names. In other cases, it is unclear which is the surname and which is the given name. If the infobox does not exist and there is no inline text stating which is the surname, it is needed. I have already brought up the issue of Chinese surnames with multiple syllables close to four times now, which you did not address, and neither has Jiang (do you even read and consider discussion by others?), nor have you addressed the great benefit of instantly being able to link to an article about the individual's surname. In fact, this is largely so beneficial because it disambiguates between surnames with the same romanization (for example, for a given spelling such as "Li" there are more than one different surname). So, in this case, it is a form of disambiguation in every case. Neither of you has seriously addressed these issues, which I am very sorry about, but I suppose it says more about your editing practices than mine. Allowing our users more easy access to information is better in this case, and I do find very perplexing the imputation that adding the disambiguation is somehow reflective of a certain view on religion, which could not be further from the case. Badagnani 05:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia works by general consensus, not compromises between individual editors.

I ask, again, in what specific cases where I removed the template is it "unclear which is the surname and which is the given name"? The information is already provided in the article text and does not need to be repeated. Please address my point that there is really no confusion in these instances and the template was really created to clear any confusion.

Chinese compound surnames are very rare, exist only a few select forms, and likewise, should be presented within the article text as should be done for every single biographical article. You dont need the template to do this for you.

As for the "disambiguation" of surnames spelt the same: this is primarily of interest to persons literate in Chinese and has already been done by providing the Chinese characters; if it is secondarily of interest to persons not literate in Chinese, then the link can very well be provided in the pinyin. Disambiguation in wikipedia exists to clarify article locations, not unclear terms used within articles.

There is no "great benefit." The surname of an individual does not occupy the level of importance to have it set off from the article text. Regular disambiguations need to do this since readers need to be directed to the correct location before reading articles, but here, the information is relevant in the article itself. Why mention it first? It's not like people need to leave quickly; they should find out as they read the article.--Jiang 08:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

And this is nothing about forcing users to "hunt and guess." It's about expecting them to use some common sense. If we refer to someone by a one of their names, it is common sense to assume that we are following standard English conventions. What is problematic is not people with surnames (unsurpisingly and expectedly) rendered last and happen be Chinese (read: Chinese American), but people with no surname at all. And nothing has been done about that...--Jiang 10:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Common sense for a native English speaker like me who does not know Chinese dictates to me that Mao Zedong's surname is Zedong, but that is not the case. Similarly, Gao Xingjian is not obvious at all to me. I might guess after reading the articles that given names are generally two syllables, but then I encounter names like Ha Jin, Wu Man, or Tan Dun. I need to examine the article closely to know what the surname is, but there are plenty of stylistically incorrect Wikipedia articles in which the subject is referred to using the given name, so even then I can't be 100% positive. I think that there are enough cases in which the ordering of a Chinese name is surname - given name that some explicit indication is helpful to the uninformed reader. I agree that the template is too obtrusive, but it provides useful information that should be incorporated into a parenthesized template in the article text. My recommendation is to replace the template with the parenthesized one containing pinyin, pronunciation, Chinese characters, and an indication of the surname, but not to delete the template until the surname is disambiguated. RosinDebow 14:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, we can't have templates for every single conceivable misunderstanding. And the mere fact that individuals on this list may have taken Zedong as Mao's surname is not a particularly good reason. I'd prefer that you come up with some hard evidence that people refer to Mao Zedong as Zedong. Otherwise, you are just speculating.

This is precisely why we should have disambiguation pages for common Chinese surnames, rather than spending time writing speculative and non-encyclopedic articles about the purported origins on every single Chinese surname.--Niohe 20:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not speculating, I'm giving another data point. Without any other knowledge I honestly don't know what the surname is for any of the names above. Some people on the list seem to think it is obvious. RosinDebow 20:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I miss your argument. First you say "Common sense for a native English speaker like me who does not know Chinese dictates to me that Mao Zedong's surname is Zedong". Okay, I agree. Then you say "Similarly, Gao Xingjian is not obvious at all to me". No, common sense for English speakers unfamiliar with cultures other than their own would dictate that Xingjiang is the surname and Gao is the given name. Hence my point that names already in the western name order don't need clarifying.

Articles mistakenly referring to a person by his given name are rare. I've seen it before, but not often. And it usually doesnt exist throughout the entire article. If this template is ever removed, the article should be thoroughly searched to remove such references.

I think we can all agree that there can be a replacement to the template.--Jiang 22:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The confusion occurs because many Westerners vaguely know that the surname is often given first. But from name to name, due to individual preference, the names are rendered in wildly different manners. I don't jiss RosinDebow's argument at all; you do, likely, because you are highly skilled in the Chinese language. I do not agree that there should/must be a replacement to the template; I think it works just fine, serves its purpose, and is not overly obtrusive. Badagnani 22:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I've addressed this. For persons with a vague idea, the indications are 1) repeated references to the person using the surname only as is the standard in formal English writing, 2) rendering of the pinyin name of the person in the same exact order, 3) linking of surname article in the pinyin field, and 4) references to family members sharing the same surname.

What's wrong with putting this information with the rest of the names next to the romanizations?--Jiang 23:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not exactly sure what the debate is about, so I'll just express my opinions on this template: I think this template distinctly notes the surname of the Chinese bio. However, it should be removed from Chinese bios with English names, because it is unlikely a Western reader would be confused by it (Charlie Soong, for example). It should also be removed from bios with a good info box and romanization that already states the surname of the person. (Like it was once added to Sun Yat-sen, but the family name was already noted in the infobox, so the template was removed).

I think this template should only be applied to confusing cases noted above (and in the TfD debate). In Chinese bios with English names, the inclusion of this template is potentially obtrusive. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 23:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The information provided in this template can be built into the string of entries provided Template_talk:Zh-c#Uniform_Templates. Wiki technology now allows us to consolidate all these separate templates into one. I don't see why the surname should be the first thing everyone sees; it's a name and should be listed with the names.--Jiang 23:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem I see with building the information into those existing templates is that they're already convoluted enough as they are, with all the different combinations of Trad/Simp, and all the different romanisations. We'd basically be adding X2 the amount of convolution in those templates if we have to say, "this is the surname, written in simp, here it is written in trad. This is the given name, written in simp, here it is written in trad. Now here is the surname in Pinyin..." Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 23:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm think more along the lines of adding an entry "Surname: XXX" to the very end, instead of splitting surnames, given names, and courtesy names (I considered this but don't think it will work). see [1].--Jiang 00:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow this has been a pretty long discussion. Excuse me if I don't read over what has been discussed so far. Needless to say, I'm glad the template was kept because I voted to keep it in it's deletion nomination. As far as the use of this template is concerned, I'm of the opinion that it should only be used when the surname/given name order of an article name uses that of "Surname GivenName", as in, when the surname comes first. I don't think this template needs to be used when the surname is already at the end like how English names are. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 23:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

In the absence of further discussion, I'm going to propose to add in the usage notes "Do not add this template to articles in which the surname is already rendered as the last name or is otherwise provided in the context of the article itself."--Jiang 21:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I would guess most speakers of the English language, and most users of the English language version of Wikipedia, are not "westerners". I would prefer to have some standard for Wikipedia, such as underlining or capitalizing the family names on the first line of biographical articles. A notice is redundant. Bear in mind in some cultures, such as Thais, Vietnamese, people are addressed with their given names instead of family names. The Prof. Tsung or Mr. Van rule does not help. - Privacy 19:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)