Jump to content

Talk:Catty

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Origin

[edit]

Was this unit really date "from the European colonial times"? I was under the impression that it was a traditional Chinese unit. Ironfrost 12:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malaya Origin

[edit]

It may be true that its origin is 'Malaya', but the unit was widely used in South-East Asia, until the advent of the metric system. --Novelty (talk) 05:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just note

[edit]

that no one in China actually calls this the "市斤" any more than Americans measure distances by "international miles". It's just the "jin" in both Chinese and in English expat use. Not sure how you'd go about proving that it's fully replaced "catty", however: too many other Jins are going to get in the way of the search results. — LlywelynII 14:49, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't

[edit]

The PRIMARYTOPIC of "catty", though. Passive aggression is. — LlywelynII 14:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About referring to Han characters as "symbols"

[edit]

I changed the introduction, to try to clarify that 斤 is simply the Chinese name for this unit, read a jin in Chinese (or kin in Japanese, or similar in Korean). Several Chinese units, which were used (with varying values!) across the Sinosphere, in CJK, had Malay names, by which they were known in the West. I'm not sure the new wording is ideal, so welcome suggestions... Imaginatorium (talk) 13:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "斤" is the original Chinese word for this mass unit. I prefer the Chinese names rather than the Malay names, too. The reasons are given in the next section. Ctxz2323 (talk) 12:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

imp 斤？

[edit]

"Conversions (imperial) 1 imp 斤 in ... ... is equal to ...".

There is no imperial 斤 in Hong Kong. The 斤 used in the market is the Chinese Sima 斤 (司马斤）. Ctxz2323 (talk) 10:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ctxz2323, I can't help but notice you've created Jin (mass), which seems to duplicate the topic of this article, Catty (indeed, zh:斤 is linked to this article rather than your newer one).
I actually came here to propose merging that article into this one, but seeing as you're the most recent contributor to this talkpage, I thought I might ask first:
  • what distinguishes the topics sufficiently to warrant two articles?
  • what content from your article do you feel would be most important to merge into this one?
  • what are all these undefined references supposed to point to?
Folly Mox (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It might be more appropriate to merge Catty into Jin (mass) instead. The reasons include:
  • The contents of article Jin (mass) is much more comprehensive;
  • The weight unit originated in China, and China still has the largest user population of it;
  • The traditional Chinese name of the unit is "斤", which is pronounced "jin" in Chinese Mandarin, not Katty in Malay;
  • The weight-unit meaning of Catty is very rarely used, not even appear in the Catty entry of the "Oxford Advanced Learner's English-Chinese Dictionary" (year 2023);
  • "Jin" in is a Pinyin transcription of 斤, and according to article Pinyin, Pinyin is the most common romanization system for Standard Chinese.
  • Some users on this Talk page also use (and maybe prefer) the English translation of "jin", as one can see from their words.
  • "Jin" is consistent with many other Chinese units of measurement such as Chi (unit), Cun (unit), Zhang (unit), mu (land), sheng (volume), etc, all written in English in Pinyin.
Ctxz2323 (talk) 12:54, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Q: what distinguishes the topics sufficiently to warrant two articles?
A: Article Catty is much older while Jin (mass) is much more comprehensive and consistent with the term 斤. They represent a Chinese-based version and a Maly-based version of the weight unit. The co-existence of Chinese characters, Kanji, Hanja and Chữ Hán is a good example. Ctxz2323 (talk) 13:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Q: what are all these undefined references supposed to point to?
A: I don't think you means ALL the references are undefined. However, I will check more closely. Some of them came from other wiki articles. And we can not expect all the links always work correctly, you know. Ctxz2323 (talk) 13:45, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Too much a rush for the merge!

[edit]

Hi, Artoria2e5 (talk · contribs), don't you think it is too much a rush, and rude, to have Jin (mass) merged here before the discussion has come to a conclusion? And without giving your reasons? Please read the present Talk:Catty page carefully. Ctxz2323 (talk) 12:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is this thing called WP:BOLD: you don’t own the page and I do not need your permission. In the case of Catty vs Jin, the two page split is causing serious problems with Wikidata page mapping. Considering the Catty has always referred to some kind of Chinese-derived unit (unlike the situation we have with tael), a merger is more than justified for maintaining a workable ontology (in the database sense). —Artoria2e5 🌉 15:05, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that our conflict is mostly about which page to merge to, not the merge itself. In that case we have requested moves. I decided to make the catty page the main one because it (1) has the unit templates already set up and (2) has a more coherent lede. Artoria2e5 🌉 15:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I know we are all working for the betterment of Wiki. And will accept it even if the discussion result is to merge Jin (mass) into Catty. But what you have done is too impolite.
"Merge" is a big move, and it deserves a discussion beforehand.
BTW, the word "merge" is not found in WP:BOLD:, it is not ordinary editing. Ctxz2323 (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is WP:BOLDMERGE for that. Викидим (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as previously noted below (07:58, 31 May). Full disclosure: the text at that link has been there for ages, but the shortcut BOLDMERGE was just added as a result of this conversation and did not exist when Ctxz2323 made that comment. Mathglot (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please allow me to play peacemaker and cheerleader, here. I am clearly the least knowledgeable person regarding the article topic, but I am quite familiar with Wikipedia guidelines, so perhaps I can contribute that way. Guidelines with respect to WP:MERGEs are somewhat in tension or conflict with each other, on the one hand advising editors to be bold:

If the need for a merge is obvious, editors can be bold and simply do it.

which is probably what Artoria2e5 was recalling. But right after that, it says:

Articles that have been separate for a long time should usually be discussed first,

which is probably the part that Ctxz2323 remembered. So, in a way you are both right. I think you (we, all of us) have the same goal, which is the best outcome for the two articles, which appear likely a merge of some sort. So, now the question is, what is the best way forward from here? If I can help in any way, I would be glad to; please lmk. Mathglot (talk) 07:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I agree with Ctxz2323 that both should be merged. Which title, I am not sure. As a native Mandarin speaker I feel that jin (mass) is more familiar (as Ctxz2323 has suggested as the destination), but it is totally possible that "catty" is the better match for WP:COMMONNAME (which, combined with the better shape of the lede, is why I chose catty with my merge). In any case, I do hope that my changes after the merge get kept. Artoria2e5 🌉 14:18, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Artoria2e5.
WP:COMMONNAME proposes using commonly recognizable names. How can you prove that Catty is more commonly used than "jin" as an English translation of Chinese "斤"? I have been living in Hong Kong for more than 30 years, and don't feel that way. Ctxz2323 (talk) 14:42, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, how you can prove either one is more common is the crucial point. I am working on some advanced ngrams queries and will report back soon. Mathglot (talk) 17:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have not found any convincing statistic data yet. But here is an indirect proof by Google Chinese-English translation.
Source Chinese text:
3斤2两,
一斤三两猪肉,
稻谷亩产1000斤。
他出生时重5斤5两2钱。
1担有100斤重。
English Translation output:
3 jin 2 liang,
1 jin 3 liang pork,
1000 jin per mu of rice.
He weighed 5 jin 5 liang 2 qian when he was born.
1 dan weighs 100 jin.
All the 斤s have been translated to "jin" instead of "catty" (And the other Chinese measure units are also translated to their Pinyin names).
We know, Machine Translation are now statistic-based using large corpora of texts from human society. And that means "jin" is more commonly-used in both machine translation and the human society. Ctxz2323 (talk) 12:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ctxz2323, thank you for your efforts. Please re-read WP:AT. Unfortunately, these translations as well as all usage of the two terms in Chinese have no bearing on what title should be chosen at English Wikipedia, only sources written in English do. I will have some good data for you showing trends from English sources presently. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the Good news! Ctxz2323 (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Google Ngrams [1] show that currently (and for most of the time in history) jin is slightly, but noticeably, more popular than catty. On this basis I would suggest for the name of the merged article to be "jin". BTW, Google ngrams take the capital letters into account, so the much more popular "Jin" (like in the dynasty) is not included into the comparison above. Викидим (talk) 17:06, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good! And thanks again.
It may be safer to use "jin (mass)" or "jin (weight)", because there are many Chinese characters or words sharing the sound of "jin" (including the 4 tones: jin1, jin2, jin3 and jin4). And according to the tradition of Wiki, the first letter of the title is normally in uppercase.
I searched "jin" in Wikipedia, and was brought to Jin, the disambiguating page. Typed "jin (mass)", and I was brought to jin (mass) directly. Ctxz2323 (talk) 00:25, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course. I meant that most other uses of jin are proper names, capitalized differently and not counted by Google. §·Викидим (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. If it will not get confused with the existing Jin, which can be reached by jin as well. Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:04, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Google Ngrams experiment is well done, indeed! BTW, by "jin (mass)" or "jin (weight)", I was recommending some candidate titles for our future merged article. If "jin" works well, it will be perfect! Happy editing! and thank you all! Ctxz2323 (talk) 12:54, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, user:Mathglot. Let's have a discussion on "what is the best way forward from here?". For the convenience of our discussion, I have restored the article Jin (mass). Ctxz2323 (talk) 14:28, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From the Page information of the 2 articles, you can see that:
Jin (mass) has been rated "C", and Catty "Start", though much older. Ctxz2323 (talk) 14:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have started the formal merge discussion below. For the avoidance of doubt. I have no preferences regarding either name or merge direction. Викидим (talk) 17:51, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]

I propose to merge Jin (mass) into this article. These are clearly two names for the same thing. This article was created much earlier, so "Jin" is a (good-faith) duplicate (or WP:CFORK). Please note many arguments already made in previous threads on this page. Викидим (talk) 08:52, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
you can mark your votes here...

Discussion

[edit]
The discussion may appear here if you like, but it is important to emphasize that the choice of title will be based entirely on applying WP:Article title policy, and which of two articles was created first plays no role in that at all. Things like WP:COMMONNAME (and other things) do play a role, and I will have more to say about that. Mathglot (talk) 17:27, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the avoidance of doubt, I have no preference regarding the naming of the article. Викидим (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that You have no preference regarding the naming of the article. But when you proposed to merge Jin (mass) into this article, people may misunderstand that you prefer the title of Catty over Jin (mass). Ctxz2323 (talk) 06:42, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:REDUNDANTFORK is quite clear on the direction of the merge: the more recent article should be merged into the main article. Therefore, even though I do not have a preference personally, our guideline dictates merging Jin into Catty. This does not prevent us from changing the name of the merged result. Викидим (talk) 07:09, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.
There might be a typo in "This does [not] prevent us from changing the name of the merged result". Am I right? (I made many typos.) Ctxz2323 (talk) 07:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, fixed. Викидим (talk) 07:53, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I don't agree that Catty and Jin (mass) are "Pages of the same type on the same subject". Catty is mainly a Malaysia-type page on the mass unit 斤, and Jin (mass) is Global-typed, covering many more countries and regions, and history. Before the rush merge, Catty's content was very limited, including a Top and little more. Ctxz2323 (talk) 13:28, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is hard for me to accept the reasoning that the units of weight that are identified by the same Chinese symbol, have near-identical weights, and share the common history, are different enough to warrant two articles. The only convincing way to argue for the two articles IMHO is to show a very reliable single source (preferable multiple) that clearly explains the differences between catty and jin. Викидим (talk) 17:11, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. The 2 articles are on the same subject of mass unit 斤. And we all agree for a merge.
Sorry, maybe I did not make it clear for the meaning of: The contents of the 2 articles were more complementary than repeating each other. And they are not REDUNDANT FORKs. Ctxz2323 (talk) 00:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles recognize the historical fact that both "catty" and "jin" are English translations of "斤", a traditional Chinese unit of mass used across East and Southeast Asia. "Catty" is based on the sound in Malay-Javanese, while "jin" is based on the sound of Chinese.[1] Therefore, I prefer title "Jin (mass)" because it is more relevant to the source measure word "斤". Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:34, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another reason:
"Jin" is consistent with many other Chinese units of measurement such as Chi (unit), Cun (unit), Zhang (unit), mu (land), sheng (volume), etc, all written in English based on Chinese sound in Pinyin. Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:43, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
More information from the 2 articles, for your convenience of reference:
  • Jin (mass)
    • Size: 35,033 bytes
    • Date of page creation: 03:05, 21 October 2024;
    • rated: C-class;
    • logs: "08:45, 1 June 2025 Викидим talk contribs marked the article Jin (mass) as reviewed Tag: PageTriage; 06:30, 30 May 2025 DannyS712 bot III talk contribs marked the redirect Jin (mass) as reviewed Tag: PageTriage; 19:21, 17 January 2025 Dclemens1971 talk contribs marked the article Jin (mass) as reviewed Tag: PageTriage". (passed 3 reviews)
  • Catty
    • Size: 4,802 bytes bytes
    • Date of page creation: 03:30, 1 August 2005;
    • rated: Start-class;
    • logs: "No matching items in log." (not reviewed since creation)
Ctxz2323 (talk) 07:16, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not notice a previous proposal by Mathglot (there were no hatnotes), moving it here. --Викидим (talk) 08:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Talk:Jin (mass)

Having just been introduced to the terms Jin and Catty as a measure of mass in China thanks to this comment by Artoria2e5 at Template talk:Convert, from my beginner perspective it does seem like they should be proposed for merging, but I am not the right person to initiate that. I will leave it to others more familiar with the situation to decide how best to proceed. Checking the other article, it does appear that Ctxz2323 already alluded to a merge proposal in January. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 22:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; it wasn't a proposal, just an observation, really. Thanks for starting it. Mathglot (talk) 17:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Refs (merge proposal)

[edit]

References

  1. ^ "catty". Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved 2025-05-01.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catty&oldid=1293918693"