User:Mat0329Lo

Chinese

• 中國共產黨 should be called the Communist Party of China, not the Chinese Communist Party.
• 著 is the superior form of 着.
• Simplified Chinese is worse than Traditional Chinese and should be destroyed immediately.
  • For practically every subject in “Debate on traditional and simplified Chinese characters”, the arguments in favour of Traditional are more numerous and more detailed.
  • The literacy arguments in favour of Simplified are outdated and proven wrong by the existence of Hong Kong and Taipei.
  • The speed of writing in Simplified should not impact the proper script. Simply because the number 1 is commonly written with a straight line does not mean that the official and proper form should reflect that. Simplifications in handwriting should remain in handwriting and not ingrained into the actual character.
  • Simplfied Chinese raises unnecessary ambiguities, such as 韋后 ‘Empress Wei’ being written the same as 韋後 ‘after Wei’—both as 韦后. This is unnecessary, and some of the changes make no sense, such as simplified Chinese: 只; traditional Chinese: 隻 being written the same as simplified Chinese: 只; traditional Chinese: 祇 when they are only pronounced the same in standardized, corrupted Beijing Mandarin Chinese.
  • In the eleventh G20 summit held at Hangzhou, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, Xi Jinping, 農（农） ‘agriculture’ as 衣 ‘clothing’ in 輕關易道，通商寬農 ‘lessen the tariffs [and] ease the way (bureaucracy), open business [and] leninent agriculture’, a perfectly fine piece of governance advice, although the “lenient agriculture” part was read as 寬衣 ‘broaden clothes’, used as an honorific way to refer to doffing one’s clothing. All of this nonsense could have been avoided if China-Beijing had simply used Traditional Chinese.
  • 将 is an atrocity, and 将, as which 将 is commonly and erroneously rendered, is even worse. 將 is superior.
• Standard Chinese should not have any 兒化, and 一會兒 as an adverb should be avoided at all costs.
• To please the Northerners, the Nanjing dialect should have been chosen as a compromise candidate for Standard Chinese.
• For the romanization of Standard Chinese (which it must be called, and its vulgar form called Beijing Mandarin), Gwoyeu Romatzyh should be used if there is any need to be clear, Wade–Giles if there is any want to look as if one were writing in the twentieth century, EFEO for the nineteenth, and Yale if there is any want to be clear to English speakers. Hanyu Pinyin is acceptable for everyday use, but I have opinions.

• Zhuyin is superior to Hanyu Pinyin.

• For the romanization of Cantonese, Barnett–Chao should be used for clarity and simplicity, Jyutping for actual use, Government for the twentieth century, an ad-hoc mix of Meyer–Wempe and Standard for the nineteenth, and Yale if there is any want to be clear to English speakers. Other than the diacritics of Yale (which must only be used in very specific scenarios, but which I otherwise enjoy), I dislike but tolerate it. Sidney Lau is out of the question.

English

• Logical quotation is the superior form of quotation, but I shall continue to use double quotation marks.
• The distinction between shall and will is funny and should be kept. It is by similar logic that I do not complete sentences with prepositions, but split infinitives are far too useful to proscribe.
  • A previous version of this page had this heading listed as “Weird Hills I Will Die On”, and I shall repent and atone for my sins.
• Curly quotation marks are better than straight quotation marks, and it is for this reason that I have abandoned the Manual herein in this regard.
• Oxford spelling is the best, and Oxford commas better still.
• Charles is His Majesty The King, Camilla is Her Majesty The Queen, and Elizabeth is Her Majesty the Queen, not Her Majesty The Queen as she was when she was the Monarch. Buckingham Palace is wrong, and calling her The late Queen is erroneous, as The Queen only refers to the reigning Queen, and The late Queen would imply that the present Queen is dead.
• Dates should be written out as 1 January 1970, and numbered as 1970-07-01. I do not care that this is contradictory. Writing should be in little-endian form, as in everything else in written English, and numbers should be in big-endian form, for ease of sorting. If someone absolutely needs to write a date as January 1, 1970, a comma must follow the date if the sentence continues. For example, “Sun Yat-sen served as Provisional President of the Republic of China from January 1, 1912, to March 10, 1912.”
• The term for a fraction out of one hundred should be written as per cent (no-break space) instead of percent.

Miscellanea

• Chemistry teachers should really pay attention to IUPAC nomenclature. It is “alumiunium”, “sulfur”, and “caesium”, not “aluminum”, “sulphur”, and “cesium”. CuSO₄·5H₂O is also written as “copper(II) sulfate”, not “copper (II) sulfate”.
• The first year of the Republic of China began on 1 January 1912, and the second year, when using the Chinese calendar, began on 18 February 1912. I do not care that the Republic of China officially uses the Gregorian calendar, and this is the most inane possible way to use the Republic of China dating system in the Chinese calendar. It is possible to interpret 1912 as the first year of the Republic, in which case 18 February 1912 would begin the first year of the Republic in the Chinese calendar, but that would just be less entertaining.
• Either stay permanently in standard time, or shift the time for the summer. Permanent daylight saving time is abhorrent.