User talk:Verdy p

Talk archives: 2006 · 2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019: Jan–Jun, Jul–Dec · 2020: Jan–Jun, Jul–Dec · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 · 2024 · 2025 · 2026–

---

For contacting me by email, please see also fr:Utilisateur:verdy_p, or use my talk page at fr:Discussion Utilisateur:verdy_p (on my home wiki): I don't want to monitor changes in all wikis, notably with emails formatted in various languages depending on the source wiki, or from unadministered small wikis harvested by spammers, or dummy "welcome" messages sent by bots). You can write me on my talk page of any Wikimedia wiki, I'll be notified from any Wikimedia wiki (because I'm connected with a SUL-enabled account) even if you can't send emails from all wikis. You should still be able to send emails from my home wiki (preferably in English or French if you can, but you should try to use some automatic online translators for your posts).
Thanks are always welcome: many users forget to do that. But this helps proving that our work is appreciated, and that we just try to do cooperatively our best on this wiki, hopefully without breaking, cancelling or blindly reverting all the patient work made by us or by others, and that some of our possible errors or disagreements can be fixed or negotiated easily, without causing major troubles with a few intolerant Wikimedia users (who forget the community rules, and "overreact" for what is a minor issue or just a disagreement of personal opinions on specific topics). There should always exist a way to coexist even in case of disagreement. So don't forget the neutrality and politeness rules of Wikimedia (see for example Category:Wikipedia policies and guidelines).
Please sign and date your posts on my talk page (so that they can also be archived correctly):
Just add four tildes ~~~~ at end of your message, and it will look like this signature (with your linked user name and the date of your new message): verdy_p (talk) 01:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Category:Paganist_funerals_in_art

Paganist funerals in art has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

DNocterum (talk) 04:38, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Paganist_funerals

Paganist funerals has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

DNocterum (talk) 04:40, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Islands in Indonesia

Hello! I noticed that you moved this category from Category:Islands of Indonesia. Can I ask why? Because all other categories use "of <country>" format, and I'm not sure what is the reason for this inconsistency. Deltaspace42 (talk) 14:40, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

That was 4 years ago(!) apparently the naming scheme was reversed, but at that time, "Islands in country/region" were more common than "Islands of country/region", and the two categories for Indonedia were just merged; There's no problem to reverse the redirection. verdy_p (talk) 14:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the reply. I'm going to move it back to Category:Islands of Indonesia to maintain consistency. Deltaspace42 (talk) 13:45, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Make UCB symbols and pictographs extended A and supplemental Symbols and pictographs

Update miscellaneous symbols and pictographs ~2026-98159-9 (talk) 21:03, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm busy since some times in reviewing the Tangut script and its composition, as part of Unicode 17.0. I know that Unicode 18.0 alpha preview is started and a few other characters will be added there. Anyway on your request I created File:UCB Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A.png (see also its talk page about how I created a snapshot PNG version from HTML with CSS and existing fonts, there will be the need to complete some new characters with SVG images, before we get updated fonts). The next block will come soon. verdy_p (talk) 23:54, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

File:UCB Miscellaneous Symbols And Pictographs.png

Fix glyphs quality ~2026-98159-9 (talk) 09:00, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

They are VERY accurate, coming from an actual serious free font (Noto Emoji). This table is NOT using color version as such table is only to show the characters in text style. But if you want I can produce a second image with Noto Emoji Color. The rendering is to match other tables in the same collection of HD tables. Nothing to do here (see File_talk:UCB_Symbols_and_Pictographs_Extended-A.png for the HTML+CSS version from which a wide screenshot was taken). verdy_p (talk) 09:04, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

coming soon in 2 hours ~2026-98159-9 (talk) 10:53, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Fixing my categories

Whenever i make my own categories, you always fix the description. Thank you. Qawerasersa (talk) 16:36, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-98159-9 and Qawerasersa: Once again stop adding things for Unicode versions that are still not scheduled. There's not been in formal decision by the UTC and the WG2 to allocate additional blocks or characters for Unicode 19.0. The Unicode Pipeline is just a long term development process. Only those that are approved by the UTC and "deemed appropriate for encoding" (and with a decision to enter the public review stage) are suitable. All others can be postponed (and this has happened frequently in past versions) or encoded differently, in other blocks (because other unrelated blocks took the place, or because the encodign model was still not finalized and approved, with different proposals, possibly different character counts, with more or less provisionnally assigned UCS columns). All proposals in the Unicode Pipeline take many years to complete, frequently because there's the need to get support from many experts or working groups, discuss many important issues, ambiguities, the proposed characters may be disunified, or unified as variants, so the repertoires of these proposals are very unstable.

Only Unicode 18.0 is suitable for now as it is being finalized with an open public review (where character codes and names are now fixed, even if some characters may be dropped from the final Unicode 18.0 and rescheduled to Unicode 19.0! This complex process takes considerable time to coordinate the efforts. Mixing things here in Commons just creates confusion (and in fact various blocks that you anticipated for Unicode 19.0 may not even be located where you put them, they are not even "drafts", many discussed documents contradict each other about their proposed encodings. So STOP these attempts. All that can be done in Commons is to create categories for images, but without assuming ANY UCS encoding. What you do repeatedly just creates a maintenance nightmare and many confusions, these 'invented additional encodings are fake, completely unsourced.

You've been blocked repeatedly for these fake additions, because you caused troubles to many people with these fake unsourced (and contradicting) additions. verdy_p (talk) 12:29, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Never knew this. Thanks for telling me. Qawerasersa (talk) 20:51, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

This is explicitly written in the description at top of categories that you constantly modify: don't pretend you did not read that, and you've been warned multiple times under your previous multiple banned accounts. Do not anticipate your desires, this does NOT help any one, it just slow downs the work which is needed for reviewing and stabilizing the content, where we don't want unstable and data that can change at any time and that still don't have any stable source and multiple possible alternatives that will take years to resolve and review by independent experts working worldwide, and seeking for more information to find the best solutions and solve ambiguities, disagreement/conflicts/errors and technical problems in proposals: Unicode and ISO will only encode something that is considered stable and agreeds by their many experts and working groups, and after they both vote to approve their inclusion in the repertoire of the next UCS release, and then start preparing that release for public review. verdy_p (talk) 21:08, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

That was probably the other person, this is my only account. Qawerasersa (talk) 23:50, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

All this stuff is true Qawerasersa (talk) 14:27, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

“𠀇”

GlyphWiki just uploaded a new version of this image ! Can you replace the current version of this image with new version of this image? ~2026-11717-20 (talk) 03:15, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

I did that, but that was not really needed, these are very minor adjustment for another prefered default variant (the Chinese one, instead of Kanji that is still referenced in Glyphwiki and in Unicode charts), not even very recent. You don't need me to perform such imports if you feel it is really useful. So please don't ask me again the same thing, assume your work yourself. verdy_p (talk) 03:58, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Cracking face “🫫” (U+1FAEB)

Could you upload Glyphwiki version of https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u1faeb -- ~2026-98159-9 (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Done (with a category and Wikidata entry), but as you see it is unstable, made for Unicode 18.0 (alpha draft). verdy_p (talk) 07:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Unicode 1DB00-1DBFF Miscellaneous Symbols and Arrows Extended

Why is the website link tangut supplement? Qawerasersa (talk) 12:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Because there's a Tangut symbol in that block: "Tangut iteration mark" (not an ideograph and not a Tangut component) and it's not in the Symbols supplement block you weakly indicated! verdy_p (talk) 12:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

There was no iteration mark it is lebneizian operators. Rugio Valerio (talk) 21:07, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Beware, there's a recurring abusive user (permanently blocked) that is still causing havoc (using anonymized temporary IP connections, without account) and inventing additions about Unicode and many scripts, on Commons and multiple editions of Wikipedia or Wikitionary, inventing characters, pretending they are standard, changing their history (including notably in wellknown scripts like Greek or Cyrillic, but as well inventing Latin characters, making false representations of their properties or usages), deleting accurate sources but not adding any one for his inventions. He has been blocked in many wikis. This may explain the confusion you saw (but thanks you reverted most of its recent changes). verdy_p (talk) 13:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Note that there's four Unicode blocks exclusively for Tangut (two for ideographs, two for components), but the additional symbol is in a generic block. All blocks are properly linked. verdy_p (talk) 13:40, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand now: I fixed the link to the draft chart in Category:Unicode 1DB00-1DBFF Miscellaneous Symbols and Arrows Extended, which used the wrong starting codepoint, going to an Tangut draft chart update instead of the expected draft chart for the new block. Next time, please be clear about the page, include a wikilink in your message. verdy_p (talk) 14:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok Qawerasersa (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

File:UCB Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A.png

Add support for unicode 18.0 Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 19:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I have no font available for the new Unicode 18.0 (alpha public review draft) emojis. I'll update the table when I find a suitable font for them. verdy_p (talk) 07:03, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Add all files in Category:Unicode 3D000-3FC3F Seal. Why is the files in Seal script Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 07:27, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

The script is being encoded in the UCS, in a new block. There are still no font available but characters exist and we already have resources for many of them in Commons. This is in preparation for many glyphs to be uploaded soon. The script is quite large, but encoded differently then CJK unified ideographs that inherited (partially) from them, with many modifications that cannot be unified with the modern CJK script. It is being encoded since many years, the proposals have stabilized, and we are nearing the time of the end of the alpha period at end of March (where the repertoire is now fixed, but glyphs are being actively reviewed, the next step will start in mid-April to set and review the final character properties, for a final publication in September). For now it is a work in progress, we have to make our own local review in Commons (just like with all other pending Unicode 18.0 additions in active review and finalization). I'm jsut preparing the structure to help the next step, effective uploads will be properly ordered and categorized with this common structure in place. verdy_p (talk) 08:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Upload 𣅼-seal.svg, 昧-seal.svg, 暏-seal.svg, 昭-seal.svg Using https://hanziyuan.net/ Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 09:12, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry if you want them, make your own work (using available data sources, with appropriate open licences). I have other goals, and do not take explicit orders to do work for your own desires or expectations, that's not the way Wikimedia works. Yes, this means passing time to search, develop, draw, test, and this requires patience and investment with your own ressources (notably in terms of time, cerebral reflection, and sometimes physical resources and money that you can donate to the project). I'm already heavily involved in the Unicode 18.0 review (but also with existing work to fix Unicode 17.0 that has not been completely reviewed, which requires also using means of contacts to document your review as precisely as possible). verdy_p (talk) 10:09, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

And please do not manage my talk archives. That's my talk pages, I archive when I want, when the talk page becomes overlong and when sufficient time has passed so that no late responses are expected. Archives of user talk pages made by others without authorization by that user are NOT welcome, they cause havoc and unjustified notifications. Your attempt is a loss of time, as I had to control what was done, by recovering from a known state; there was no emergency to archive 2025 talks in this page, archives may span irregular periods of time. verdy_p (talk) 10:47, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

I will work these Category:Seal radical 231. Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 11:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

UCB Latin Extended-D.png update for unicode 18.0 file outdated Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Done. verdy_p (talk) 16:58, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Update File:UCB_Symbols_and_Pictographs_Extended-A.png

• https://files.catbox.moe/8rlq6b.zip

I tell to add files of u18.0 in UCB Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A.png Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 17:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

I cannot use external files without a valid licence. The table is generated in HTML with most accurate fonts, otherwise using some good image sources with valid licences, otherwise by manual composition in the PNG. This file has a talk page describing the source for regenrating it with the correct metrics, this HTML table can be tuned when new fonts are available (with a coherent style) to render it completely. This will come soon with Noto Emoji updates (work is pending and is already in progress to update the Noto Emoji fonts that should contain them, but for now it is not ready). You have already asked that above and I replied. There's no emergency for now for these new emojis, no one use them on any supported platforms (MacOSX, iOS, Windows; Android and Linux, as well as many social platforms have builtin support for Noto Emoji, Microsoft is quite long to update these emojis in its proprietary font that we cannot use to derive SVG images, but whose usage in isolated bitmaps embedded in documents is permitted). I don't need your zip file which just contains existing screenshots. verdy_p (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Convert pdf https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-18.0/U180-1FA70.pdf into svg and i need you to use inkscape please Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 18:25, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

I am not building any font. Fonts are made by more talented typographs, and for Emojis, they are managed by each supporting platform, in their dedicated project (e.g. on GitHub for Noto Emoji fonts), who also decide about their apparence/style. These developers also work already in cooperation with the Unicode UTC and submit their own review, compare their work, discuss with social plaforms needing to interchange them. Emojis have a very special development; glyphs currently in the Unicode charts are very basic, and may not pass the current review. There's a Unicode PRI about this review for Emoji 18.0, which is separate from the rest of Unicode 18.0. We don't need to anticipate, there are already many serious people working on this (and get sure that we'll see updates for Emoji 18.0 very soon after the Unicode 18.0 release, provided by OS vendors and on open projects like Noto, supported by Google, the Linux Foundation, and the Wikimedia Foundation (that are already active plain members of Unicode). GitHub is already active but the early drafts for Emoji 18.0 are not suitable for now (and legally, we cannot extract someting from Unicode charts without violating the Unicode licence and terms of use; and even the use of glyphs in Unicode draft charts is not fully licenced for general use, their purpose is limited to the temporary review process). If you have comments about this you an follow the PRI 536 (main specification) and 537 (emojis) and its existing issues (https://www.unicode.org/review/pri536/ and https://www.unicode.org/review/pri537/), and you can submit also your own review on the Unicode contact form (https://www.unicode.org/reporting.html). Note that even for now the repertoire for Unicode 18.0 is not completely stable (it will be stable in May during the beta review, where essential properties will be finalized and names will be permently fixed and not reassigned to something else). There are also other sites working on Unicode 18.0 (including notably Glyphwiki for CJK related-scripts like Tangut, Jurchen, and CJK Unified Ideographs extensions). Designing new emoji glyphs are clearly not a priority for now, we can stick on the documentation and comment them, as Unicode may change the representative glyphs (this has occured frequently in the past for Emojis, while implementations and deployements in social apps progressed). verdy_p (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

download font: https://github.com/Losketch/UnicodeFontSet-magisk-module/blob/main/module/system/fonts/UFSTempAlpha.otf Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 19:16, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

That temporary font does NOT install properly, it is probably made specifically for MacOS, or is not conforming to the OTF standard. You can preview it, partially, but the table of glyphs is broken, and probably does not have a suitable glyph mapping, or is missing the suitable licencing requirements in its metadata. Report the bug to its creator, who is likely working on it and has still not released it (its last release is for Unicode 17 only). In my opinion it failed to build properly. Before posting random links here, please test it first yourself. verdy_p (talk) 19:24, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Redone font https://files.catbox.moe/jt14v4.ttf Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 19:49, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Also the "Unifont" is a poor one, made using bitmaps at low resolution. It may only be useful as a generic fallback font to display a default glyph (instead of jsut some tofu), and does not have any OTF feature required for most scripts that require these features. It's most likely the reason that the temporary build cannot be installed, but is only usable within some unspecified font editor. verdy_p (talk) 19:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Stop sending fake links to non working files. Your "redone" font is worse than the last one. It is completely broken (0 bytes downloaded, filtered probably because of embedded malware: CHECK YOUR PC, it's possibly heavily infected) and does not have even any preview. Do not use temporary work fonts, especially coming from a personal GitHub fork, where the file is evidently marked as "temporary" (meaning work in progress). I would prefer using the original Unifont project, which reviews the submissions made in forks and reject many failed attempts. Once again, do your homework first, test, do not send your fast creations. And reread; Unifont is not suitable for any represenative glyph or script. It is just a fallback font with very poor bitmap resolution. I won't use it for an Unicode chart due to its poor quality and characters that are extremely hard to distinguish reliably. verdy_p (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

https://files.catbox.moe/bzq58j.png upload this for unicode 18.0 Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 20:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Once again, infected by malware. Your PC needs serious cleanup. I will no longer trust any one of your shared files from your personal cloud storage provider. Your files will be rejected as well by GitHub. Clean your PC, try forking the GitHub project you want to modify, and upload your modifications in your GitHub fork. You'll see waht GitHub will reply you, it will reject your uploaded files as long as you've not cleaned up your working environment and secured it. If you can't clean it, try making a backup of your own data files on a separate drive (but they may already be infected), and make a full clean reinstallation of your OS and all its application. Then scan and clean your backup archives before reusing them. verdy_p (talk) 20:25, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Make UCB Latin Extended-E.png, UCB Latin Extended-F.png, UCB Latin Extended-G.png Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 05:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Please back Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 07:51, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Please don't send orders. I have other things to do, and there's no emergency. I perfectly know that these images are msising in the related category, and there are others (already listed there); recently I made Cyrillic Extended-C and completed a few others. Note: do not use "F" templates in section headers, they break the navigation with incorrect anchors from the TOC or after editing messages. verdy_p (talk) 08:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Update File:UCB Transport and Map Symbols.png for outdated Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 09:12, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Update this file for unicode 18.0 https://files.catbox.moe/yatoi7.png Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 09:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I won't use files from your untrusted private storage, given the security issues you have on your PC, very likely infected by malwares as demosntrated above. Also I don't need any one of your files (I trust the existing Noto source repository on GitHub for that collection of glyphs). verdy_p (talk) 09:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

edit: but upload without catbox.moe Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 10:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I just tell to upload Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 10:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I've used "Noto Emoji" for Unicode 17.0, and manually drew the additional LIGHTHOUSE character (U+1F6D9) for Unicode 18.0. verdy_p (talk) 11:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Upload symbols and pictographs extended a for unicode 18.0

using files [https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/141835174/560459844-2480e5fe-f945-443b-a0ec-2a33c358d15e.png?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3NzMwNzkxNDAsIm5iZiI6MTc3MzA3ODg0MCwicGF0aCI6Ii8xNDE4MzUxNzQvNTYwNDU5ODQ0LTI0ODBlNWZlLWY5NDUtNDQzYi1hMGVjLTJhMzNjMzU4ZDE1ZS5wbmc_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjYwMzA5JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI2MDMwOVQxNzU0MDBaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT05OWYyZjc0N2E1MjJiZjEyYWIyOTM2ODFlMmNjYWY4ODBjNWU4N2IyMjBkODk4YzE2NzYzODJkNzUwYjI3NmFiJlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCJ9.vmQHi1Zto4NECdtoR1wii8JBKYiLIwzryt_mZERI7DM text], [https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/141835174/560459862-2f4372ff-d8a7-4152-aba8-11390fbcc816.png?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3NzMwNzkxNDAsIm5iZiI6MTc3MzA3ODg0MCwicGF0aCI6Ii8xNDE4MzUxNzQvNTYwNDU5ODYyLTJmNDM3MmZmLWQ4YTctNDE1Mi1hYmE4LTExMzkwZmJjYzgxNi5wbmc_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjYwMzA5JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI2MDMwOVQxNzU0MDBaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT0zOTk5MTkzY2RhNmEwNDRhZjk5YTA1NWExYTgyMGM4YTI2NGQ4ZTc3Yzk5NzVjZGU5ZmQyNjVmYTY3OTM4MDU0JlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCJ9.Ar5ZuTy9IzyOIDJ6GRiMgrtqSGblwnmznVH4b-mqi4g color] Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 17:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

please back Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

The text version is already done and complete for Unicode 17&18 and your links are invalid (error 404, they were deleted by GitHub, probably infected by malwares, or GitHub does not allow to share these "private" images without a strong authentication with your account, your files were rejected there; once again, cleanup your PC, reinstall your OS completely!). verdy_p (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

And stop spamming this talk page with new topics for the same thing. If you continue, I'll report you for abuse and repeated harassment (in addition to your attempt to send dangerous malwares, that have for now have systematically failed, thanks to secirity measures taken by other providers and by this wiki). verdy_p (talk) 19:01, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Update File:UCB Miscellaneous Symbols Supplement.png. Fix U+1CEF1-EFD Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 20:27, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Please back Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 05:05, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Add files from Category:Noto Emoji 17

Files upload link: github.com/googlefonts/noto-emoji Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 15:27, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

I have already Noto Emoji 17, they were already used in those charts you mentioned earlier. I have also included one new Unicode 18 glyph (for the lighthouse) in one file in the precedent thread. So nothing else to do for now, and I'm busy on something else, you don't "help"me at all here. I really wonder how you perform your checks... Anyway I know that there are other chart files to update, and I do that when I have time, in my own schedule, don't send orders, I'm not at your service. verdy_p (talk) 16:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

make file of ucb symbols and pictographs supplemental and color Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Fix File:UCB Geometric Shapes Extended.png.

Remove cat-a-lot Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

What??? It's nowhere in wiki pages (except in your preferences): this is a standard optional gadget, used by lot of users. verdy_p (talk) 21:57, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Make UCB Sidetic...

Make UCB Sidetic, UCB Old North Arabian, UCB Manichaean and more brahmic scripts Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 05:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I know that, this is waiting for long in the category listing the HD tables. But there's still no emergency. Stop sending orders. I have more urgent things to do, espcially for the Unicode Consotirum that has instructed me to progress as fast as possible on the Unicode 17.0 review where I have already sent issues. nicode and the Script Ad Hoc Commitee are waiting a comprehnesive reports on large ideographic scripts that have lot of issues notably in the Unicode 17.0 review that was not finalizedwhen it was released last year (this comes even before Unicode 18.0, we have more time). Small scripts or extensions of wellknown scripts don't have severe issues. verdy_p (talk) 08:01, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

optimize File:UCB Alchemical Symbols.png Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 16:08, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I remade the snapshot of the HTML table with a complete updated font, making precise capture at full resolution (this requires assembling captures vertically in an image editor, keeping metrics), ensure it was purely back&white with no color fringes, and saved with a better PNG compressor, preserving all details. verdy_p (talk) 19:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Fix size File:UCB Alchemical Symbols.png Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 07:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Why are you making requests mine??? Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 07:13, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

What? you even pretend in a revert that you optimized it, when in fact the metrics were not correct, you recorrected it, and the optimization was lost. I don't understand what you mean just in "Why are you making requests mine?" which makes no sense. And why then do you need to repost this thread? you don't need to spam here the same request with the same message heading, you just pollute this page. verdy_p (talk) 17:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

HTML table request for File:UCB Bamum.png, File:UCB Meetei Mayek Extensions.png, File:UCB Coptic Epact Numbers.png, File:UCB Old Permic.png, File:UCB Osage.png, File:UCB Sidetic.png, File:UCB Old North Arabian.png, File:UCB Manichaean.png and File:UCB Miscellaneous Symbols and Arrows Extended.png Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 19:25, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Improve glyphwiki seal

• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d001 弌
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d002 元
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d003 天
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d004 丕
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d005 叓
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d006 丄
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d007 𠄞
• https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/unstable-u3d008 上

Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 20:54, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Don't assume that Seal ideographs are the same as CJK ideographs with which they have a weak informative mapping. Seal iodeographs are not designed using standard CJK strokes, but derived as logographs. Seal ideographs are just used as informative etymologic references, but CJK ideographs have many differences and are not used the same way, and have different readings. Seal is a separate script, more distant for example than between Latin and Greek, or between Hebrew and Arabic, or between Devanagari and Brahmi. verdy_p (talk) 07:18, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Make Unicode High quality table templates Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Stop sending orders! I know what I have to do and when I'll do them. verdy_p (talk) 15:28, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

File:UCB Seal 3D000-3D7FF.png Using images Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 06:24, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I won't use images, there are no stable and comprehensive sets available, and no font. Their development is just starting with only very few letters for initial design testing purpose only, essentially as isolated SVG for a few letters, but that still need huge improvements. Stop your impatience. It would make no sense creating an image with most glyphs not rendered at all in the chart. What he currently have in Commons is a small subset of ideographs (those for the 540 radicals are complete, almost all the rest is missing for the 11k+ ideographs, this is just less than 1%!). verdy_p (talk) 07:12, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Please draw more glyphs 10 https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/Group:CodeChart-Seal1 Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 14:48, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not an expert to draw historic Seal ideographs in GlyphWiki, which uses a complex syntax for strokes that do not match the modern Han ideographs. A few characters have been drawn there, only as a test, but works will be completed later (there are too many of them). For now I've only prepared the index pages for Seal in Glyphwiki.Glyphwiki has better experts there to draw them; as well there's still no font available using the new Unicode 18.0 mappings; the script is in review and the draft fonts that were used to produce the Unicode charts in PDF only will be updated later with the release. Then we'll have some free fonts (Noto *, or others). I basically created the indexing category structures in Commons (using their documented radical number), and started adding characters in Wikidata with character properties. There's no immediate need to create glyphs (Commons has glyphs for all Seal ideographs used as radicals, but many ideographs are missing). It will take a very long to time to properly categorize Seal (using the "Ancient Chinese characters" in Commons), just like it will take many years for the many modern CJK ideographs (Hanzi, Hanja, Kanji, Chunom) in Unicode. That work requires patience. Don't ask me to complete this urgently, it's impossible. verdy_p (talk) 15:03, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

i just tell kamichi or kesuuko Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 15:07, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Note that they won't appreciate if you give them orders. They perfectly know that the Seal script is needed in Glyphwiki, but NOT urgently. They already manage many Han ideographs. They will not appreciate your impatience, if you talk them like you do here: don't send orders, just ask politely what they intend to do. They are also working voluntarily, and if you irritate them, they'll block you easily in Glyphwiki (which is not part of Wikimedia, they use their own local policy). I'm sure they'll work on that before Unicode 18.0 release, but I doubt it will be complete (and note again that the Mincho style used by CJK ideographs, does not match well with Seal ideographs, that don't use at all the same strokes, which were regularized only in CJK ideographs). Many Seal characters are much more pictographic. Seal is in fact considered a distinct script, not just a "style" of CJK ideographs, even if they have some informative approximate mappings from their studied etymology (but not fully certain, and not completely accurate: there are tons of differences, graphically and semantically for their usage). verdy_p (talk) 15:18, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Egyptian Hieroglyphs fonts

Add UnicodiaSesh here link: https://github.com/Mercury13/unicodia-sesh.git Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

The "unicodia-sesh" project features only a collection of individual glyphs in SVG format. It does not provide any Unicode-encoded font for now, even if that collection is being built possibly for that purpose, based on Unicode 17 data and ongoing additions for Unicode 18 (including the Unikemet database). So it cannot be added for now in the template of suitable fonts. This is a work in progress but nothing has been published there as a font. verdy_p (talk) 19:15, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

You busy please back Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 16:55, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

I had a few days of holidays at sea during all this weekend, under the first warm sun of Spring. Visits, restaurants, beach, forest, some good beers, barbecue, roasted chicken, mediterranean vegetables,... and a few friends. verdy_p (talk) 12:24, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	Make more UCB using Paint.NET Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Fixed File:Fruit-flavor-tier-list.svg

Fixed File:Fruit-flavor-tier-list.svg Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Upload more files!

Hello Verdy p, can you please upload , , , , , , , , all the way to ? Hillsilo (talk) 15:44, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

@Verdy p Where are you? Please back to upload more files! Hillsilo (talk) 08:59, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Make more UCB

Make more UCB pls Kenigtlm (talk) 09:46, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you add Category:𐻇 for Arabic letter yeh with four dots below (U+10EC7), used for Swahili?

Can you add Category called 𐻇 Kenigtlm (talk) 20:31, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Geomantic Symbols (svg)

move to unicode 17.0 codepoints ~2026-18865-81 (talk) 08:54, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Can you update File:UCB Arabic Extended-C.png

update to unicode 18.0 Kenigtlm (talk) 06:27, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you uploaded File

UCB Symbols for Legacy Computing supplement.png pls

Pls Muskaa20124 (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Update these

Can you add unicode 18.0 characters into File:UCB_Armenian.png Qawerasersa (talk) 22:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Done. verdy_p (talk) 07:21, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for all the requests, but can you make all ucb unicode photos into unicode 18.0? Qawerasersa (talk) 12:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

When I have time for that! I know what I have to do and what is missing, don't ask me to change my ongoing work. And I'm not paid, I do that along many other things (on this site or elsewhere, or just in my personal life at home, with friends, or to prepare a theater show with repetitions, or take a few days of vacations, or have medical rendez-vous, or prepare food, cleanup my house, various garden activities, listening music, looking at TV or films... And of course I need to sleep. No one can ask me the same times every few hours and insist. I do my best in my own ordered schedule. And I evaluate myself what is more urgent, or can be completed the most easily, or what can be prepared in advance, to ease the completion tasks later, facilitate checking, and to limit posible errors or and duplicate review work that will also waste my limited time. verdy_p (talk) 12:43, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

This category is wrong

Some of the blocks for Category:Characters introduced for Provisional assignments are wrong and maybe you should check the pipeline. Qawerasersa (talk) 13:22, 19 March 2026 (UTC) And it has 7/16 blocks not all of it. Qawerasersa (talk) 13:25, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I am really checking them. To separate them from actual Unicode "drafts" (which were deemed mature, were accepted by the UTC and are much more stable, with ongoing public review targetted today for Unicode 18.0 only). Some blocks are listed because of additional characters provisionnally assigned in already existing blocks. I do not use the roadmap which cotnain many very unstable proposals but without provisional assignments. Another user added blocks from the roadmap that are not even provisionally assigned, and I will cleanup them in a distinct category for such very unstable roadmap. "Drafts" require active review and are more urgent; but drafts are still part of provisional assignments (the Unicode website will remove them as needed once the public review period is terminated and these provisional assignments become stable after the release in september; but there will remain many provisional assignements, possibly scheduled for Unicode 19.0 or later such as a Telugu character already accepted by the UTC but that is not part of the scheduled Unicode 18.0 version and which is still not in public review, as formal documents were not submitted in time for ISO WG2 balloting). verdy_p (talk) 13:26, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok Qawerasersa (talk) 14:03, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Now I will cleanup the provisional assignements invented by another user (that wanted them to be part of Unicode 18.0, but were never accepted or really provisioned, even if there are proposal documents in the UTC L2 registry; I have however serious doubts for several of them, such as the allocation in the "QMP", or newer CJK ideographs extension blocks, even if some UTC liaisons working groups have talked about them and wanted to have only a preview of how much they'll need in the UTC roadmap, these is just an early estimation, while experts are working on these documents and many characters may be reordered, unified or modeled differently, e.g. using variation sequences, or when there are opposite arguments in competing proposals, lack of clear reliable sources). In summary, this category is important for checking our own sources or make our own review in Commons (including when some early representative glyph images are wrong and need corrections, or when they are not propoerly categorized with the correct character, or to fix confusions and document them). This category is a tracking tool to know where we need work in Commons. verdy_p (talk) 14:17, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I made QMP but just to make a fanmade plane and if im not allowed to do that I won't do that. Qawerasersa (talk) 14:21, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Unicode categories are not for "fans". Many fans can work on their own proposals using the standard PUA blocks for activities in their workgroup or their personal needs. For now there's not even any Unicode roadmap for a new plane (it may take years before it comes, and in fact that Plane 4 will most probably be an ideographic plane, before we ever need another place for other non-ideographic scripts or for sets of emojis).

And in Commons, "fans" may have their own categories of glyphs, named using accurate topics, without needing or inventing any new code point assignments. These categories may then later be used to propose new encoding to the UTC/ISO, as they can store facsimiles of old documents, photos, research papers (as long as they are properly licenced and do not violate copyrights of others)... verdy_p (talk) 14:30, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Unicode characters on nude bodies

Category:Unicode_characters_on_nude_bodies has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Jmabel ! talk 22:46, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for this cleanup, I supported the downmerging, as these images were really polluting categories with unexpected contents that is offensive to many users and could have caused Commons to be blocked in many sites as reliable and useful for all audiences for such an important worldwide standard to support writing systems. This preserve the true "educative" merit of Wikimedia. In general, all "nudity" images are acceptable in Commons, but using appropriate tagging and categorization; here it was clear that these images were not at all representative, they were just used as "pseudo-decorative" (and non-essential) features, and the only interest of these images is the nudity they expose agressively that will only interest people that want to see that sort of nudity (and in fact don't care at all about these non-essential and non-representative decorations that are completely unrelated to the effective nudity topics, showing breasts, genitals and hasses of women only (that can also be analyzed as being very controversially "sexist", and probably "racist" as well), and with extremely poor artistic merit (even if there's some undeiniable level of creativity in the composition). Also I don't know any museum or exposition that have accepted to expose these degradant (pornographic) photos to a general audience (and supported by promotion or advertizing for such event if they exist). verdy_p (talk) 08:14, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

I can't edit pages on glyphwiki fix this

i can't edit pages on glyphwiki fix this Glyphwiki "unstable-u10efb" move into "u10efb"" -- Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 06:22, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

That's normal: it remains "unstable" as long as Unicode is not released in a final version that includes it. Do not do that now! Glyphwiki will handle the move itself when appropriate. verdy_p (talk) 06:29, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/u10efb Milan Szymon Szulc (talk) 06:49, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Don't insist! verdy_p (talk) 06:51, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Milan Szymon Szulc Well, as you can see see, I’m the temporary account working as “unicode2” from GlyphWki. Please see kamichi’s talk page where I listed you for re-editing your comment multiple times & spamming me with repeated orders on unicode2’s talk page. ~2026-22870-42 (talk) 15:48, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Also, the administrator, kamichi, blocks your account until May 2026. ~2026-22870-42 (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@"unicode2" Thank you. On Wikimedia Commons, there's already an Admin request about "User:Milan Szymon Szulc" (and several of his likely sockpuppets, to be investigated by IP-user admins, if needed). verdy_p (talk) 19:46, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you make all translations of Template:Allow_Overwriting

Using translation original language https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Allow_Overwriting/en Kenigtlm (talk) 17:59, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

No I won't translate to many ("all" really?) languages. Translations have to be done language by language, by actual good translators and writers of the target language. If you want you can create the Polish translation. Such translations may be still reviewed. They are in separate templates pages (e.g. using the "/pl" suffix to the template pagename for Polish. Respect the format, and make sure you indicate the correct value to replace "|lang=en" by "|lang=pl" in that translated template; make sure the wikisyntax is valid). verdy_p (talk) 18:11, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

use claude ai Kenigtlm (talk) 18:32, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

do French Kenigtlm (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Mass translation by IA is forbidden by Commons policy. Translation must be made and reviewed by humans that understand English reliably, and perfectly know the target language, its orthography and typographic rules (especially for generic templates that display a policy message), and as well have adopted a common terminology (IA translations never respect any terminology, so everything has to be rewritten). And I have already done French (manually, without any IA)! verdy_p (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Template:Number on object

I'm not sure but it seems like the template is broken. Looking at Category:Number 1 on objects, something is missing. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:35, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

It's trying to link "Number foo on objects objects" - "objects" is repeated. - 02:05, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Why not Rome (Italy) among the most popolous cities of the world?

@Verdy p Hi there, I just wanted to know why in this template (Template:Most populous cities of the world) there is Milan for Italy (1,2 mln people) but not Rome (2,7 mln)?

Can we do something at it? Where have you taken the info about the top 100?

Thanks. LucaLindholm (talk) 19:34, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

This may be explained by the source used for that list (which was then updated in 2021). I don't know how they count the population (at which definition of the limit for the urban area, or for the administrative boundaries of local authorities). May be that source used a smaller area for Rome than for Milan, so that it did not merge several bordering "cities" in the same area. I don't have that full list above the arbitrary limit of 100, to see if this explains the situation for Rome's urban area. verdy_p (talk) 21:03, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Not that this are not strictly the "city" population (using the administrative boundaries), but urban areas (defined geographically, independant of these admin boundaries). And the Milan's urban area is more populated (about 4 million) than Rome's one (about 3.5 millions), so Rome may fall below the threshold used for the "top 100" list (which was complemented to a bit more when the top 100 list of 2021 added some urban areas, the previously listed cities were kept even if they were now at higher tank above 100). May be we should use a more recent source for urban areas to see if other cities must be listed since 2021 (but then be prepared to see more urban areas appearing from China, India, or some other African counties with fast urbanization...). Note also that I did chose the source, I just upgraded an existing template to convert it using a module with Wikidata translations. Technically there's no limit to 100, but if we add Rome, then other urban areas should be added too and we can't list thousands of urban areas here to "satisfy" everybody. verdy_p (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Can i add this early?

Can i add the unicode block(s) for 18.0 beta? Rugio Valerio (talk) 10:54, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

They are already all categorised in Category:Characters introduced in Unicode 18.0 (as alpha review drafts, the beta review is still not started, but the same target category will be used up to the final release in September). verdy_p (talk) 10:57, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Ok. Just asking because instead of bengali there is Bengali Supplement and no mongolian.Mongolian is now provisionally assigned. Rugio Valerio (talk) 11:07, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

for unicode 18.0 chars not the whole block (making that clear) Rugio Valerio (talk) 11:07, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I am already working just now for the additional Mongolian letter (and recategorizing all Mongolian characters in the two existing Unicode blocks). The basic Mongolian block is already listed in Unicode 18.0, and its category explictly list that single character; this is not different from other blocks that are extended with a few characters and that are also listed. verdy_p (talk) 11:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

File:UCB Latin Extended-G.png

File:UCB Latin Extended-G.png has been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:UCB Latin Extended-G.png This is a deletion request for the community to discuss whether the nominated page should be kept or deleted. Please voice your opinion in the linked request above. Thank you very much! If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:27, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Why is it still the same?

Why is the name for new bargiya ba the same category name? Rugio Valerio (talk) 18:16, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Nevermind. Rugio Valerio (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

This is the complete Unicode name (even if for now it is not linked by its encoded character directly). verdy_p (talk) 20:08, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Ok. Rugio Valerio (talk) 11:48, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

I made the links to characters themselves. verdy_p (talk) 17:30, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Edits to Template:House number

Your edits to Template:House number have made it functionally broken on many categories. Category:2423 (house number), for instance, does not need to be diffused; the vast majority of "foo (house number)" categories don't (looking at Category:House number signs by number I would say less than 30, and certianly less than 50, of nearly 3,000 categories require any diffusion). - The Bushranger (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

When I look at the categories, almost all of them (not less than 50... much more!) have subcategories to be diffused into. There's nothing "broken" as far as I see. And before the changes, these categories were alreayd overcategorized into other parent categories (such as "number N on objects"), this is no longer the case. But after your message I changed the display of the diffusion banner to be a bit more conditional (this was not a problem on the autocategorisation into parent categories that I had already fixed before your message). verdy_p (talk) 03:11, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

I admit "broken" might have been slight hyperbole; I was just a little socked to see the big honking diffuse message everywhere! So sorry about that. And thanks for the tweaks, it's all good now. Keep up the good work! - The Bushranger (talk) 21:53, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Can you work Category:Unicode 11380-113FF Tulu-Tigalari

Can you work Category:Unicode 11380-113FF Tulu-Tigalari Kenigtlym2 (talk) 07:53, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

This is scheduled, there's still a lot to do for Unicode 18.0, or categorizing characters existing scripts from Unicode 17.0 (which still needs fixes including in the standard itself), and Unicode 16.0, and also to map them to Wikidata elements with relevant properties. I cannot do all at once, as I make lots of checks to references, and building all the needed structures, templates and descriptions takes time. I am not a robot and don't use any one (so yes, this is coming slowly but I have tracked everything in relevant categories to facilitate the review and completion...). For now I am finishing the Telugu script. I have made categories and descriptions for almost all Unicode 18.0 additional blocks (but still not all characters for large scripts). I also create updated hi-resolution chart images for all Unicode blocks. verdy_p (talk) 07:57, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

@Kenigtlym2: I've started making the categorization; but there's still no open font available with Unicode mappings (plus the additional OpenType tables needed for the required contextual variants such as consonant conjuncts and for positioning or ligaturing the diacritics) to render these characters (at least in isolation for the navboxes or character charts), even if they were encoded in Unicode 16.0.

• Note that still today, there's no UCS assignments for digits and numerals (so they are still categorized separately in characters of the script). The UTC and ISO have postponed the encoding of digits and numerals, after a formal request from a Tulu authority, even if they are attested in Vedic manuscripts (digits 1 to 9, and old numeral 10), in old astrological/esoteric texts (adding old numeral 100), or in modern use (which adds digit 0 for the positional decimal numbers).
• Note also that the request to encode separately the modern forms for letters have not been accepted for now, as there's no demonstration that they are distinctive in texts (these letters are still considered as variants, to be handled by different font styles, rather than new characters). Their separate encoding as distinctive characters would significantly complicate the use of the script and would create encoding ambiguities and the numeric conservation or transmission of these old texts (notably Vedic texts), the alternative being to encode them using new "Unicode variation sequences" (like this was done for the traditional Mongolian or ideographic scripts).

In absence of a suitable Unicode-mapped font, I'll have to create a "HD table" image for this block using glyph images (preferably SVG images) rather than plain text encoding. verdy_p (talk) 12:16, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

@Kenigtlym2: I've finished categorizing the letters (independent vowels and consonants), controls, ligatured symbols; then I will add avagraha and will complete the diacritics, and the Wikidata items (only started); some work may still needed to classify the traditional digits and numerals; for clarity, I've linked these character categories with the Kannara characters using descriptive "see also" banners (useful given that many glyphs for letters had their filenames using the Kannada script, most probably because at upload time the script was still not encoded in Unicode 16.0 and there are still no open fonts available to render them with Unicode encoding mappings).

The next step will be to upload SVG images for the basic letter forms (possibly from legacy non-Unicode fonts if they are opensourced; there's some open font project in Github for them) in order to better match the representative glyphs shown in the Unicode standard charts (some existing letters only have old glyphs, which were not encoded separately in the UCS, they are perceived for now as stylistic variants and may be rendered by using different fonts). Finally I'll make a HD chart for the block (using these SVG glyphs, unless a free OpenType font with Unicode mappings can be used).

Finally, we'll upload additional SVG glyphs for head conjoined letter forms, subjoined letter forms, and possibly ligatures for consonant conjuncts or for consonants/conjuncts with diacritics which use special placements or glyph modifications (like those found in Noto fonts, but there's still no open Noto Sans/Serif Tulu-Tigalari font in development, also none from SIL.org, and no other proprietary fonts for specific OSes like Microsoft Windows, Apple iOS, or commercial font vendors; my opinion is that the OpenType specifications are insufficient and need some script-specific updates in order to allow Unicode-compatible text rendering engines using such fonts, so these renderers will also need their own updates; Unicode has started to standardize new properties for rendering Indic script without depending on OpenType or Apple's Graphite specifications, notably to support SVG fonts where W3C specification also need updates to use these new properties, but it is still beta and these properties are provisional and incomplete as well; all of this is lot of separate ongoing developments and works, but Commons and Wikimedia in general can help by documenting the usages).

In addition, there are some pending changes or additions in the Unicode standard for some missing characters (the numerals, stalled, and a few symbols and letters, but not the traditional letters that have been unified with existing basic letters): these may eventually be encoded next year in 2027 (for Unicode 19.0) or later (no warranty about that, these are just some early proposals in discussion with relevant linguist experts, librarians, and other local authorities and organized community groups). verdy_p (talk) 13:46, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

@Kenigtlym2: I've finished categorizing all characters in the Tulu-Tigalari Unicode block; I've linked them also to the characters in the Kannada Unicode block (which I completed too). Now It's time to upload the missing glyphs, and build with them a graphic chart for the block; Characters categories should also be linked to Wikidata items (that may need some additional properties). Maybe those glyphs could come from non-Unicode open fonts, or they can be drawn (preferably in SVG, and with coherent metrics), for the basic shapes (including diacritics with dotted rings), then additional glyphs for contextual forms, consonant conjuncts, or letters/conjuncts with vowel signs or other diacritics. verdy_p (talk) 13:57, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

@Kenigtlym2: I've just finished the HD graphic chart for the Unicode Tulu-Tigalari block: I could find a suitable opensourced font (beta version, still not completely Unicode-encoded) that displays the Academic glyphs, sufficient to build the chart (hoaver I have to manually draw a few of them, and add the missing "dotted circle" for the representative glyphs of combining diacritics in isolation; and fix a few layout problems); I tried using the existing glyph images in Commons, but their metrics and styles are too much incoherent for now to be usable. Some "Noto" fonts are in development (I don't know if there will be both a "sans-serif" font (for modern UI), and a "serif" font (better maching the caalligraphy of manuscripts and the Academic glyph styles).

A few characters in th Unicode chart PDF display minor variants, notably for some composite vowels, when comparing them to the Academic style (Unicode and ISO WG2 used another unknown font in their charts, probably proprietary, or built specifically for these charts; I did not copy it). That early beta font however is incomplete and not suitable for general use in multilingual contexts like our wikis, as it overrides Basic Latin letters and is still missing essential features (notably the OpenType features for the composition layout of conjuncts and for proper positioning and support for ligatures), but it already contains glyphs for decimal digits and numerals 10 and 100, that I have also categorized.

Two other Tulu-Tigalari characters are expected to be added in spring 2027 for Unicode 19.0 alpha review (possibly along with digits and numerals that are well attested but still not without any provisional assignment, even if these are evident from the chart and existing proposals that are still in discussion, with some additional researches to perform; but that may be provisionally assigned in fall, after the release of Unicode 18.0 and an international UTC meeting in Nancy, France).

Now the next step is to upload better glyph images on Commons (SVG preferred), with correct metrics (size, and alignment of baselines using the base line-height and correct left and right inner paddings to allow displaying text by just aligning glyphs all with the same height) and coherent styles, not mixing bold and text weights (the beta Academic font I found is suitable for that purpose, or the Noto fonts when they'll are completed). verdy_p (talk) 21:41, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

and

Since GlyphWiki just made a new version of these 2 files, can you update these 2 files, please? ~2026-35084-42 (talk) 11:59, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

File:UCB Bengali Supplement.png

File:UCB Bengali Supplement.png has been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:UCB Bengali Supplement.png This is a deletion request for the community to discuss whether the nominated page should be kept or deleted. Please voice your opinion in the linked request above. Thank you very much! If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Javidd (talk) 13:09, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Verdy p, can you please remove the redirect and upload the GlyphWiki version of it? Hillsilo (talk) 01:56, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Unicode 18.0

I fixed the description in Characters introduced in Unicode 18.0 and the website didn’t update character count for removing Mongolian. Rugio Valerio (talk) 21:35, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I had already removed the proposed Mongolian character and the new Chisoi block, which have been postponed for a later version during the public review (these are the only cases found for now during the Unicode 18.0 public review), so that it is reverted to status "provisional assignment" (no longer "accepted" like all other Unicode 18.0 Alpha/Beta Public Review additions), as seen in the Unicode Pipeline. There are a few other reports made bye me and others that are not blocking the encoding. verdy_p (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

The Unicode 18.0 beta site DOES reflect the new character count, it was updated by Unicode, and I had already added a hatnote for the Unicode Chisoi block category (I had already followed the recent UTC meeting). Unicode is now working on submitted reviews, fixing some texts, in preparation of the launch, for will compeltely do that after the final WG2 vote (whcih will also include a few additional non blocking bug reports that were received after the closure of the beta). Unfortunately as well, the proposed block for the Ranjana script has been postponed again (it was not part of the 2026 public review, and is still provisional, because the SEI workgroup has not finished its task with experts to produce their final report and an updated proposal that fixed issues reported about 2 years ago). The problem with the proposed Mongolian new letter is that some experts feel it is not needed and is jsut a variant; the problem with the Chisoi block is more serious (there's a lack of independent sources, and librarians across the world are searching in their catalogs, but many documents or artefacts have sill not been studied and there's visibly many variations and the unification process is problematic about the encoding model). However it does not block Commons to sort images of Mongolian Chisoi glyphs or documents, with useful names and descriptions, even if these characters are still not encoded using an codepoint, but only provisional names suitable for Commons (which could become known aliases/synonyms later). Next years we'll most probably have a new block for an extension of CJK ideographs, and a few other scripts which are alerady very advanced (for the new African scripts, they'll have to wait a few more years to reach their own stability). verdy_p (talk) 22:18, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Provisional assignments

Can I add the provisional assignments from UTC #188? Rugio Valerio (talk) 13:26, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Not before they are announced on the Pipeline page, and only as provisional (not for a scheduled version, as nothing is scheduled for Unicode 19.0 or later, as long as Unicode 18.0 is not finalized). Note that some characters that were initially accepted by Unicode and planned for Unicode 18.0 during the public review, have been postponed and returned to provisional state (this includes the pre-announced Chisoi block and one Mongolian character), due to insufficient sources, and some other ambiguities or unsolved technical problems reported during the public review (and so they could not be accepted as is by ISO WG2): the provisional state and even the acceptation by Unicode ("deemed mature for encoding" means that a formal proposal will be made to be vetted by the two commitees and that the characters can be tested by many reviewers and in many implementations) is not a warranty that the character will be released. Only the public review stage warranties that the codepoint is at least reserved and won't change later when it gets accepted as is by both commitees. Things that may block the release is normative properties (notably the general category, compatiblity and normalization, letter casing pairs, directionality, character name), and representative glyphs that must be distinctive in Unicode/ISO charts (with other existing characters where any need to change the glyph to exhibit more distinctions could cause severe dificulties that must be tested, or documented too), plus some properties that are needed for security purposes (notably those for IDNA compatibility).

Unicode is currently very busy in finalizing Unicode 18.0 (but with many people taking summer holidays with unfinished work and no regular technical meetings before the last few days of August: I have recently sent reports to them and this took an unusual long time to get a response or just a basic acknowledgment of reception, even for just fixing minor typos in proposed texts or data), so don't expect any new addition before the release in mid-september (they have stronger priorities than adding new things). We have better work for now for checking that we are in sync with Unicode 18.0 as all the rest has still not been reviewed or really decided. verdy_p (talk) 13:44, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

The pipeline doesnt have links for the minutes but the website isnt a 404 anymore at https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2026/26151.htm so only Cjk components a and b are planned for unicode 19.0. The pipeline was last updated August 4th. Rugio Valerio (talk) 15:19, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Which is why i did that. Rugio Valerio (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

The pipeline displays this new status "provisional assignments" and the target Unicode 19.0 for the two "CJK Unified Ideographs components" blocks; other provisional assignments have no defined target (including the new Chisoi block and the additional Mongolian letter that were in the public review for Unicode 18.0); the minutes are cited (but without a link, this should appear soon). Because Unicode 19.0 is now officially planned, it has its own category marked like Unicode 18.0 (both versions are still drafts and provisional, but Unicode 18.0 is very unlikely to change now these assignments). The reason why the two CJK blocks are appearing earlier is that they have been approved by the IRG (one of the two "character coding agency" (CCA) for ISO, in charge of CJK, the other own being the Unicode Consortium for all scripts except CJK). Unicode TC no longer works and decides anything on the CJK standardization, and unless there are severe issues reported, the UTC MUST accept the two CJK blocks and include them in the next public review, along with the additional character properties needed for the Unicode standard (but not needed for ISO)!

This is the result of a recent procedural change, with the ISO decision to progressively dismantle its WG2 for the ISO/IEC 10646 standard (with help of new but temporary "had hoc group" AHG1 within ISO SC2 to make the formal transition of responsibilities between the various existing subcommitees), and instead institute two CCAs (IRG and UTC), plus a maintenance agency, which will probably be held by the Unicode Consortium on a dedicated web subsite, and a secretariat managed by the parent ISO SC2; the purpose of this change, decided in last June in Paris, is to accelerate the decision process for the ISO/IEC 10646 standard managed and coordinated by ISO SC2, avoiding duplicate works and costly meetings; this means that now CJK script has a single coding agency (the IRG), and all the rest is managed and reviews by Unicode technical commitees. And all is now coordinated by a single maintenance agency (which does not decide but will keep and publish the records), and supervized by a single ISO secretariat (which notably manages all legal issues related to the ISO 10646 standard and may act along with other ISO member standard bodies to take rare decisions, such as vetoes related to patents and copyright issues, and receives and verifies and records all necessary authorizations: the IRG and the Unicode Consortium will be requires to strictly follow that supervision, including in their standard publications that the secretariat and the general public must also be able to access freely and permanently, via the maintenance agency). This will also save lot of money and time for the Unicode Consortium, for the IRG, and for ISO, IEC, and other international standard bodies (like ITU, IEEE, W3C, European EN, or various UN agencies), which all experiment difficulties to finance their works and protect them legally. verdy_p (talk) 15:39, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Your work very appreciated by me and others. Rugio Valerio (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

"work is very" Rugio Valerio (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Love your work Rugio Valerio (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Removing {{DEFAULTSORT}} from Unicode char categories

Sorting by code value is drastically different from the typical alphabetical order and confusing when said value isn't visible. Since each Unicode block category already includes a character list in Unicode order, is there a reason we shouldn't remove {{DEFAULTSORT}} from the character categories? Ewpa (talk) 16:33, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

The character lists are made consistently by their own logic, it does not necessarily match the encoding binary order which is frequently broken in eacgh block. The lists are useful to find each character by some logical order (which is commented frequently, with usage notes). The categories per character themselves frequently do not match exactly the character names, so theu have varuous disambiguation), so category names are not relevant. The default sort makes sure the characters are listed in binary Unicode order, independantly of the logical order described in character list (with many efforts trying to make them readable). In addition, character categories are frequently renamed when needed (this should not affect the character lists displayed). The default sort is consistant for all Unicode character blocks and takes the form "Unnnnnn" in hexadecimal. Then chacters can be listed in other non-block categories to match other orders or organization and to find them. I maintain these defautl sort shuold be kept as is, without them, nothing is sorted at all in any consitant order, with it each Unicode block at least displays the expected character list in the way they were encoded (and it is stable across time). Other sort orders are still possible, but uising specific keys for other parent categories (and very frequently not always the same). And your assumtoin is wrong: the "alphabetic order" (as infered by category names) have NO consistency, they are not typical at all, characters even have many aliases, and depending on parent categories may change). Please keep these default sort keys in Unicode blocks, they are needed for completion and maintenance purpose. instead use specific different keys depending on other thematic parent categories. verdy_p (talk) 19:45, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I have given it some further thought, and while I can't disagree that category name sorting doesn't work well for non-English characters, I still believe code points are a bad default, as characters exist independently from Unicode and their assigned code points. I will leave everything as is for now. Ewpa (talk) 16:38, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

There are other ways to organize characters in categories NOT related to their code points. Adn this is extensively used, using other character properties. But names of categories or files in Commons are not relevant/coherent for such classification. Still the codepoints are non-equivoque and required within Unicode character blocks where theyr are expected. Other things are added by other parent categories, As well category descriptions for characters should display their real Unicode name (in English), and add other details to indicate their usage, and possible confusions. Other properties are also hold in Wikidata. Unicode codepoints are displayed in each cheracter categoty description (and in Wikidata Infobox descriptions)... ou should be. It's a long task to add all the relevant classifications and significant metadata. There's also not a single "alphabetic" sort order (in Unicode this is called "collation" and it is always language dependant). Commons tries to describe everything in many languages and only the codepoint can link everytging to a clear identity fo the character (when the "standard" Unicode name is sometimes even erroneous, and fixed by adding standard aliases in charts, as well as with annotations, that Commons and Wikidata will include as much as possible in its descriptions. verdy_p (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Unicode 18.0

I'm going to say that it's not a draft. Rugio Valerio (talk) 19:33, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

It remains a draft until the final publication on September 15 or 16 (there may be some corrections to take into account; I know that there are some pending issues, including several ones I submitted to the UTC; they are finalizing the documents to integrate the latest known fixes). I won't be available to perform the final review for a few days starting on the same date, but even Unicode may delay a bit some parts of the release. All we know is that the repertoire is fixed (but some character properties, notably non-normative ones, informative descriptions, annotations can still be added later by them, which won't block the publication. As well the charts in French for ISO may take some delays (there are known translations issues, and ISO has still not published any amendment since Unicode 16.0, even if they approved the basic repertoire). Representative glyphs may also be fixed after the final release, as long as it does not break the character identity and intended usage, if it helps solving ambiguities or better matches the best practices. So don't change the status before the publication is confirmed officially. There are lot of other standards that depend on this status for the UCS, and that do not accept using drafted versions (notably those that require stability and security); it's not up to Wikimedia to decide when and what is (or is not) part of the stable standard. But it's up to us to make thorough reviews, as much as we can, and submit bug reports (even after the final release: the UTC and its other working groups on the UCS is always open to receive them at any time!), the standard CCAs will then discuss and decide about them. There's absolutely no emergency in Wikimedia to publish such changes earlier (in fact the draft status of versions in Commons can help make a final comparison, it works as a useful checklist for the work we'll still need to complete; Commons has many other areas to complete relative to Unicode 17.0, 16.0 or even older (I tried to organize that work orderly, so that we don't forget things yet to be done in our own checklists, but various abusive users have repeatedly tried to introduce many fake data before we could consolidate our own data with all the needed links and references to help protect Wikimedia and detecting such abuses). In my opinion, Wikimedia should keep the draft status for at least one month, the time for us to consolidate important things. verdy_p (talk) 19:43, 7 September 2026 (UTC)