Talk:Combining Cyrillic Millions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Combining Cyrillic Millions redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 March 2008. The result of the discussion was No consensus (default keep).

Comments

I believe this page is relevant, given the 300,000+ Google pages containing the symbol. Because Wikipedia has a policy against original research I have refrained from documenting the source of the symbol on the article itself. It originally started as a small practical joke, and then somewhere it slipped out into the World of Warcraft messageboards, after which it exploded, so to speak. Although I can't really even claim 100% credit for it, because I actually stole the idea of attaching Unicode to a symbol from another website. I just think the truth surrounding the symbol and its supposed "properties" should be out there, because there's a lot of misinformation regarding the symbol. StarburstCreator 17:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)StarburstCreator[reply]

Example

The way the wikisource looks now is not really acceptable. There should be an example but the whole page after that shouldn't be backwards in the wikisource. I don't understand Unicode bidirectionality enough to fix it myself. Superm401 - Talk 07:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

Could someone please rename this monstrocity, as it utterly fails WP:NC (let alone screws up your screen like nothing else). I don't know what to name it as, so I won't myself: my guess is Combining Cyrillic Millions. The Evil Spartan (talk) 19:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode

The block quoted text beginning "%E2" is not Unicode. It is an URL-encoded representation of the UTF-8 encoding of a Unicode string. --Russ (talk) 10:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

is it ҋ or ҉ ?

the article seems to have at least two different characters that are supposed to be the symbol, one that looks like an upside-down N with some extra bits (I dunno what they are called)and the other looks like a cartoon drawing of the sun, with the rays only, but not the sun itself ( I'm talking about that style of drawign the sun where one makes a circle and adds the rays of light comming from it), which one is the right one? (I'm using Firefox, in WinXP, not sure if this has anything to do with the two characters not looking the same for me) --TiagoTiago (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

҉ is correct. It's a bit difficult to get this character inline with normal left-to-right text. I just edited this article to reflect the correct symbol. ҋ is not the right character.Peaceoutside (talk) 02:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic

This entire article is about a trick involving some Unicode meta-characters, and having nothing to do with the character mentioned in the title. It relies on a single chat page for references. Unencyclopedic in my opinion. But if you don't want to see it summarily deleted, you're welcome to split it all off to some other article. —Michael Z. 2008-05-14 07:29 z

I disagree. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%D2%89&btnG=Google+Search. 345,000+ results. Although the references might not be sufficient, the content of the article is indisputably encyclopedic. The article should be better referenced, not deleted outright.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.9.134.107 (talk • contribs)

It is trivia. Please see WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:N, WP:SOURCE. If you do disagree, then please find some references to back your opinion, and start a trivia section in the article “bi-directional text”. This content has nothing to do with ustav manuscript, or numerals in Church Slavonic, but we can add a “see also” link to this meme. —Michael Z. 2008-05-27 15:51 z

WP:INDISCRIMINATE does not apply here, nor does WP:N. This isn't a random tidbit of information, it's documenting a well-known internet meme. The fact of the matter is, the meme is not known for being a function of "bi-directional text". Rather, it is known and associated with the character ҉. The fact that it does not have to do with the original symbol is irrelevant. ";)" has nothing to do with a semi-colon and parenthesis, and yet it still redirects to emoticon. It does this because the new usage the symbol has taken is more relevant than the old one. That being said, I believe the current edit will hopefully be a decent compromise until we can find some proper sources. StarburstCreator (talk) 18:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)StarburstCreator[reply]

Notability applies to everything, and this subject doesn't have it: "substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines." Like I said, please show me the references.

";)" has nothing to do with a semi-colon and parenthesis: I'd say that's exactly right, and that's probably why emoticons are not covered in the articles “;” and “)”. Likewise, cute reversed-text tricks don't belong in an article about a scribal notation for large numerals. —Michael Z. 2008-05-29 00:48 z

The article fulfills all the criteria of being notable sans the citation of specific references. Again, the proper course of action here is not to summarily delete the article, but rather to FIND said citations.

Given that ";)" does redirect to emoticons, It seems acceptable that "҉" includes a partial redirect to the article about bi-directional text. The current incarnation of the article is most appropriate. StarburstCreator (talk) 11:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)StarburstCreator[reply]