Talk:汕尾

"Swabue" is of historical interest, and might be useful if some fellow wants to check 汕尾#Chinese and verify that 汕尾 = "Swabue", but ultimately it's still obsolete. In addition, this same fellow could also check Swabue#English and find that "Swabue" is "x form of Shanwei#English. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:40, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c, Tooironic NOT OBSOLETE. I am a native speaker of the English language who reads books. This location has more than one name in the English language, period. The official policies of the governments of the USA, the PRC, the ROC, Great Britian or anyone else do not change the fact that 'Swabue' is still being used in English. The word is only obsolete from the perspective of the people who believe that Hanyu Pinyin as the de-facto "Chinese", and that that notion should control the words we use in English. 1) It's not and 2) it doesn't. No disrespect implied to anyone, but I have to stand up for the reality of the situation as I see it- what else could I do? Thanks for your time and work. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

This pushy Hanyu Pinyin-only policy is one of the things that is holding back English Wikipedia's coverage of China. We are being forced to use Hanyu Pinyin rather than choosing to use it. I can barely stand this shit. Hanyu Pinyin is a great system, but it's not the de-facto Chinese. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Be sensitive to the fact that Mandarin and Hanyu Pinyin is in a majority and a power position, and that the other romanizations and dialects with their romanizations are being bullied. The situation is WAY more complicated than, "oh, Swabue is obsolete bro". No sir, no sir, not at all. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:14, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

You may think my position is "disruptive". In truth, it is your position that's disruptive. How much more evidence do you need that people are still using this spelling in English? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

I want specific proof that "Swabue" is obsolete. If it's true, let's see the evidence. If there's no evidence, then why are we writing 'obsolete' next to words without evidence? I contest the claim that "Swabue" is obsolete. No more bullying- sources needed. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Being in a minority or even an extreme minority doesn't mean you don't exist, are not important or that you are obsolete or worthless. No sir, not by any means whatsoever. No! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for reading my comments here. Please keep in mind we're all just trying to do a good job here, even me and even you. We all bring our own perspectives to the issues. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:31, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

There are probably some transliterations of this location name that would qualify for 'obsolete' status. But not Swabue. People are still using it in some situations. That's what makes it alternate, not obsolete. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

news (compare) books scholar trends ngrams

and quotes of historical documents or analyses of documents regarding 19th century missionary activities should be discounted as modern usage, obviously. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 17:14, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: Please provide solid evidence of the currency of "Swabue", i.e. CFI-compliant quotations at Swabue, before writing paragraphs based on personal experience without substantial evidence. It's easier to prove currency than to prove obsolescence, so please do your part for people to be convinced. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative, Suzukaze-c: I've added five quotes at Swabue. AFAICT, in the more recent quotes, Swabue seems to be restricted to a historical context, not referring to the modern city. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

That is to say, Swabue may be referring to the former town of Swabue (汕尾鎮) rather than the modern prefecture-level city (汕尾市). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your time. I know I have written a lot of material. I feel very passionately about the issues, and I'm not good at debating. Logic doesn't necessarily come easy to me, and I have never been schooled in formal debate methodology. I'm not really used to being challenged in my ideas either. But I do want to be reasonable and rational, so I will give it a shot.

The claim has been made that the term 'Swabue' is 'obsolete'. As all claims do, that claim needs supporting evidence. I'm not writing "lb|en|current" next to the word- I'm writing "alternate", which I think is sustained. I include 'Swabue' as a t2 (not "t1") on this page because the term is still being used in books and websites for this location. The argument about the term referring to two different locations is beyond my ability to understand at this moment because I am not familiar enough with that aspect of the issue- maybe a second definition needs to be included here.

I am in a minority position, and this word is in a minority position. But minority does not equal obsolete. That's my argument in a nutshell. Sorry for causing disruption. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Postal romanizations are not 19th century missionary stuff. Postal romanizations were standardized in the early 20th century and used for more than half a century as the standard and some of them are still used in some contexts in English. This is one of the postal romanizations that is still used in English- see my references in the history of the page. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

The statement has been made that "It's easier to prove currency than to prove obsolescence,". Who cares what's easier to prove and what's not easy to prove? Just prove what can be proven. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: What I meant was that obsolescence cannot be proven definitively since it is proving that a word is no longer in use - it requires arguing from absence of proof of current usage. However, if we find something in current usage (let's arbitrarily say roughly within the last 20 years), it would be definitive proof of currency. This means we can only definitively disprove obsolescence, which seems to be what has been done with the quotes, especially the one from 2017. That being said, as I have said above, the quotes seem to show that its usage is restricted to referring to the historical town rather than the modern (prefecture-level) city. If you have any examples of current usage referring to the modern city, please let us know.

As to whether we should label it as simply "alternate", I'd say no. First of all, it's not a usual label we use. In most cases, we'd use {{alternative form of}} or {{synonym of}}. However, this is not the only reason I would not use "alternate". It is clearly dated or historical based on the quotations we have collected so far. "Swabue" has also shown significant decline in the past decades, especially since the late 1980s, and has been taken over by Shanwei, as seen in the Ngram Viewer. (This matches quite well with the establishment of Shanwei as a prefecture-level city in 1988.) — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:06, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

It's still used online, that's all I'm saying. The reason Swabue shows up on Baidu Baike is because Swabue is preferred in some contexts. It's cultural. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: All I'm asking for is solid evidence, even if they're websites. From a quick glance from Google, I just see usage related to the historical 汕尾, not the prefecture-level city as we know it today. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Does what was historically referred to as 'Swabue' exist today? Is it a 区 of the 市? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:13, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: AFAICT it refers to downtown Shanwei, which would be 鳳山街道. It used to be a town (鎮) in Haifeng County, Huizhou Prefecture (fu). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I didn't add "Swabue" to the lead of the Shanwei page- someone else did: [1] in 2012. That's proof of something. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:40, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: It's only proof of its existence, which no one should be debating, evidently proven with all the quotes at Swabue. It doesn't prove currency though. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:42, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I gave those. This is a minority usage. What else do you need? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

By those, do you mean Baidu and Wikipedia? I want actual usage, not mentions, so Swabue in running texts. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not proving "t", I'm proving "t2". http://html.rhhz.net/WHDXXBXXKXB/html/20171221.htm 华南沿海地区海啸影响数值模拟与分析 "It costs 3.6 h to get to Qiongzhou Strait and the south of Fujian Province, and the maximum wave can reach 1.5-2.0 m. 2.6 h later, the region of Hong Kong, Macao and Swabue of Guangdong Province can detect the lead waves, and the maximum wave in this region is about 2.5 m. 8.9 h later, the wave travels to the Beibu Gulf, and the wave amplitude is less than 30 cm. " --Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: Yeah, this is probably good enough evidence for t2. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Don't let me win 'em all-- I'm just a crazy person on the internet. Keep protecting this website. Thank you. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: Don't worry, bud. Thanks for your passion for making this a better dictionary! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)