Template talk:cmn-verb

Usage: {{cmn-verb|(form)|pin=|tra=|sim=|tas=|pint=|rs=}}

First parameter is the symbol representing form of the headword (pagename):

• t traditional Chinese
• s simplified Chinese
• ts both traditional and simplified
• p Pinyin

Other parameters are:

• tra= traditional form (optional, use if not t or ts)
• sim= simplified form (optional, use if not s or ts)
• tas= traditional and simplified form (if p)
• pin= Pinyin (optional, use if not p)
• pint= Pinyin with tone numbers (e.g. ci2dian3) used for category indexing
• rs= radical/additional strokes for category indexing, e.g. 辛12, stroke count must be 2 digits (required if not p)

Therefore, for the definition of the traditional character 愛 to love

{{cmn-verb|t|pin=ài|pint=ai4|tra=愛|sim=爱|rs=心09}}

For the definition of the simplified character 爱,

{{cmn-verb|s|pin=ài|pint=ai4|tra=愛|sim=爱|rs=爪06}}

For the definition of the pinyin transliteration ai,

{{cmn-verb|p|pin=ài|pint=ai4|tra=愛|sim=爱}}

Note the shortcoming of the pinyin version: it should display the accented form of the verb, but it does not.VNNS 09:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I find the template confusing, as it currently stands. The reason: several things are given all in one line, creating confusion, particularly among novice users. First, following the character it states whether the character is simplified or traditional, then the pinyin is given, without even being separated by a semicolon. Then, again without being separated by a semicolon, the alternate form is given. The attempt to fit all of this into one line makes things very confusing. I recommend that the character be given, then the pinyin in parentheses. On a separate line, the form can be given (whether simplified or traditional. Finally, on another line, the alternate form (called "simplified form" or "traditional form" rather than simply "simplified" or "traditional," for maximum clarity) can be given. This could also be prefaced by the text "Alternate form." If in the end it is decided to keep all of this information on a single line (which I believe to be confusing), semicolons should be used to separate the discrete bits of information. See any Wikipedia entry on a Chinese topic and you will see that the format used there is much more clear. For example, see the first line of http://en.wikipedia.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Yunnan -- and see how the discrete bits of information are separated by semicolons in a very clear manner, without italics. Badagnani 07:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)Reply