This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
That 45 should have been 54- still not the same, but closer. I dropped some on the ma and the changs. ;( HenryFlower 12:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Biang didn't make it into Unicode 5. :-( 81.236.185.9 16:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't make it?! I'm so disappointed...but is this really the most complicated character? What about "Dragons moving?" (In Japanese thats pretty complicated...) Anyway, maybe I'll learn bing2 just for fun.. --Charizardpal 23:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It has been submitted (not yet accepted) to the IRG for Extension D. Extension C is next, which will be post Unicode 5.1. Bendono 08:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are referring to U+9F98 龘 [1]. However, there is the more complicated U+2A6A5 𪚥 [2] as well. While does have more strokes (64), it is much simpler to write due to the repetition than biáng. It means "many words" (due to the many strokes). Bendono 13:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did this character get added into Unicode? --Voidvector (talk) 21:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, not yet. As I wrote above, it is part of Extension D which is still being finalized by the IRG. Expected completion is sometime in 2008, but then it needs to go through formal balloting etc. which will delay it even longer. Expect Extension C first. Bendono (talk) 01:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is in this report. Marked as UTC00791, noted as "Submitted for Extension E". It doesn't have a codepoint assignment yet. --Voidvector (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, why are there two identical images? One says stroke order, are there supposed to be numbers?
Kleptosquirrel (talk) 00:54, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Biáng-order complete.gif is an animated GIF, but it contains 608×538×58 = 18,972,032 total pixels, and with the current Wikimedia parameters, images with more than 12,500,000 will not be displayed as animated when resized as thumbnails... AnonMoos (talk) 10:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 3 external links on Biangbiang noodles. 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: 18 January 2022).
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.
I have just modified 3 external links on Biangbiang noodles. 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: 18 January 2022).
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.
CC-BY-SA declaration; text in this section removed from the article by me because it is miles off-topic; in an article about a food item, a short section about the etymology of the name is acceptable but we don't need an extended section about it. Per WP:WEIGHT and WP:COATRACK essays (yes, I know essays are not policy but they do make sense). If the subject is notable, it should be spun off into its own article, say Etymology of biangbiang noodles. I'm leaving it here in case its removal breaks any references. Baffle☿gab 00:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
American singer and TV personality in China Slater Rhea (帅德) writes and explains a biáng character on Xi'an TV.
There are many variations of the character for biáng, but the most widely accepted version is made up of 58 strokes in its traditional form[Note 1] (42 in simplified Chinese), and the Chinese character for biáng is one of the most complex Chinese characters in modern usage,[1] although the character is not found in modern dictionaries or even in the Kangxi dictionary.
The character is composed of 言 (speak; 7 strokes) in the middle flanked by 幺 (tiny; 2×3 strokes) on both sides. Below it, 馬 (horse; 10 strokes) is similarly flanked by 長 (grow; 2×8 strokes). This central block itself is surrounded by 月 (moon; 4 strokes) to the left, 心 (heart; 4 strokes) below, and刂 (knife; 2 strokes) to the right. These in turn are surrounded by a second layer of characters, namely 穴 (cave; 5 strokes) on the top and 辶 (walk; 4 strokes[Note 1]) curving around the left and bottom.
Both the traditional and simplified Chinese characters for biáng were encoded in Unicode, on March 20, 2020, for Unicode 13.0.0. The code point is U+30EDE for the traditional form (𰻞) and U+30EDD for the simplified form (𰻝).[2]
Until that point, there were no standardized ways of entering or representing them on computers. Both traditional and simplified forms had been submitted to the Ideographic Rapporteur Group for inclusion in CJK Unified Ideographs Extension G.[3] As the characters are not widely available on computers (and not supported by many fonts), images of the characters, phonetic substitutes like 彪彪面 (biāobiāomiàn) or 冰冰面 (bīngbīngmiàn), as well as the pinyin, are often used instead.
In Adobe's Source Han Sans and Source Han Serif font these IDS sequences do not display as IDS sequences, but display the actual glyphs for the character.[5][6]
After the discussion with Lee Collins through emails, John Jenkins has submitted an application of "" since 2006[7]. However, its IDS is too long at that time[8] and "radical 心 (heart)" is missed in this character shape[9]. It can be moved into the meeting WS 2015 lastly.
At this time, Ming Fan (范銘)[10] submitted an application to Unicode Consortium. After that, in the meeting WS 2015, the traditional character has a code "UTC-00791" while the code of its simplified character is "UTC-01312".[11]
However, the evidence for this character does not fully match the character shape. For UTC-00791, "radical 刂 (knife)" has disappeared from the dictionary which is used as evidence.[12] For UTC-01312, "radical 刂 (knife)" has swapped into "radical 戈 (dagger-axe)" in the academic paper which is used as evidence.[13] Members of the Unicode Consortium argued for the character shape.[14] Moreover, Toshiya Suzuki suggested for adding a new block "CJK Complex Ideographic Symbols", set "" as a basic shape, unify the variation and even admit "" as a variant form of this character[15][16].
At last, the traditional and simplified forms of the character were added to Unicode version 13.0 in March 2020. The characters are located in the CJK Unified Ideographs Extension G block in the newly-allocated Tertiary Ideographic Plane.[17] The corresponding Unicode characters are:
Animated GIF showing the stroke order of the Traditional character for biáng according to the mnemonic, not according to the principles of stroke order.
There are a number of mnemonics used by Shaanxi residents to aid recall of how the character is written.
Leave a hook (刂 'knife') for Matang (Mahua, Fried Dough Twist) to hang low,
坐着車車逛咸陽
坐着车车逛咸阳
Zuòzhe chēchē guàng Xiányáng
On our carriage, to Xianyang we'll ride (radical: 辶 'walk').
Note that the first two lines probably refer to the character 宀 (roof), building it up systematically as a point and a line (river) with two bends.[improper synthesis?]
A Xi'an biangbiangmian restaurant. The Traditional character for biáng is combined with the Simplified character for miàn.
The origins of the biangbiang noodles and the character biáng are unclear. In one version of the story, the character biáng was invented by the Qin Dynasty Premier Li Si. However, since the character is not found in the Kangxi Dictionary, it may have been created much later than the time of Li Si. Similar characters were found used by Tiandihui.
In the 2007 season of the TVB show The Web (一網打盡), the show's producers tried to find the origin of the character by contacting university professors, but they could not verify the Li Si story or the origin of the character. It was concluded that the character was invented by a noodle shop.[clarification needed]
One hypothesis is that there was no such character or meaning for this word in the beginning, and the word actually came from the sound people make from chewing the noodles, "biang biang biang".
A legend about a student fabricating a character for the noodle to get out of a biangbiang noodle bill also is a commonly-believed hypothesis about the origin of the character.[18]
According to an article on China Daily, the word "biang" actually refers to the sound made by the chef when he creates the noodles by pulling the dough and slapping it on the table.[19]
Biángbiángmiàn in Traditional characters. With exception of the fourth and fifth strokes, the variant of biáng used is the same as the third variant on the list.
Seventeen variants of the Traditional character for biáng, having between 56 and 70[Note 2] strokes:
^ abThe radical辶 has only three strokes instead of four according to Mainland Chinese rules, so the traditional character is written with only 57 strokes there. This is reflected in the graphics of the Song style character and the stroke order animation to the right.
^The radical辶 has only three strokes instead of four according to Mainland Chinese rules, so the variant with 70 strokes is written with only 69 strokes there. This is reflected in the graphics of the characters below.
It seems to me that the food item is largely notable because of its goofy name, so having an extended discussion seems entirely appropriate. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 12:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to agree that we should keep this in the article. Looking at other languages, zh:𰻝𰻝面 and ja:ビャンビャン麺, there is more to be said about how the dish is prepared and served, history, folklore, major restaurant chains that serve it, etc. I see another editor has already tagged this article as needing to be expanded with info from other languages, which is a more appropriate reaction than deleting a large amount of info without discussion and without moving it to a more appropriate location. Articles in all other languages give similar weight to the name and character, and I agree that the dish may indeed be notable in part because of its name. --Bigpeteb (talk) 23:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the information given here is notable and a popular topic of discussion; it easily warrants a separate article. That article should of course treat the multitude of record-breakingly complicated Chinese characters (incl. their calligraphy), their use in culture (advertisement, mnemonics, TV shows, etc.), encoding issues, and so forth. Perhaps we should also add that not only the written form is exceptional; so is the spoken syllable biáng/piɑŋ˧˥/ that is illegal in Standard Mandarin phonotactics because labials preceding -iang/-iɑŋ/ are not permitted, making miang/miɑŋ/, biang/piɑŋ/, piang/pʰiɑŋ/, and fiang/fiɑŋ/ highly unusual syllables. (Cf. Pinyin table.) I believe most of this (invention of characters for biáng, breaking phonotactic rules which might ultimately lead to phonological change) is an ongoing matter rather than one of etymology. Perhaps the simple Biang which currently redirects here is a better title. And 𰻝 as well as 𰻞 should become redirects to our new article. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 08:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am curious (being neither well-informed about Chinese food culture nor Wikipedia's policies on cuisine) whether the noodle itself is notable other than for its name.
The name itself is certainly notable, so this content shouldn't be removed. I would likely vote no, but are y'all proposing to split the article? That is a more sensible approach to the issue here than tagging undue weight. If splitting, I do not think that the other article should be one about complicated Chinese characters; we already have that as a section on Chinese characters article. Though I admit that it's plausible that the topic of absurdly complicated Chinese characters and their calligraphy may deserve its own article. Also, on 'biang' not being allowed in Standard Mandarin, that definitely ought to be addressed somewhere in the discussion of the name. I've wondered about it before and was disappointed not to find any info about it here. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 02:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO the dish in itself is quite notable, it's ubiquitous in Xi'an and there are "franchises" of the concept in places as varied as New York [3], Sydney [4] and Singapore [5]. The unusual name/characters certainly help in the marketing, but that's neither here or there, and I think it makes no sense to try to separate the character from the noodles, since that's its sole meaning. Jpatokal (talk) 08:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is this an article about the Chinese character of about the noodles?[edit]
The text about the Chinese character is by far longer than the information about the dish itself, which is restricted merely to the introduction. It does not make any sense. If the character is so fascinating I suggest moving all this info to a proper article referenced in this article. Lironcareto (talk) 15:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The character is a gimmick which has brought the noodles much more publicity than they probably otherwise would have had. I don't see any real reason to separate the two... AnonMoos (talk) 16:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, that does look like an April fools'. It also references this Wikipedia article, so even if it isn't, we possibly can't use it because of WP:CIRCULAR. — Jthistle38 (talk) 22:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article mentions the noodles are ‘long and belt-like’, but not such basic properties as their average dimensions or even what they are made of. At least according to Japanese Wikipedia, they’re made of wheat flour with added water and salt, and can reach as long as 1 metre. Are there English-language sources that can verify this? שונרא (talk) 20:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since the biáng character (or in fact syllable) is not used anywhere else in Chinese, I think it’s a hanzi equivalent of a nonce word and a link to that article should be added in “See also”. 122.213.236.124 (talk) 09:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
" since 2006[7]. However, its IDS is too long at that time[8] and "radical 心 (heart)" is missed in this character shape[9]. It can be moved into the meeting WS 2015 lastly.
" as a basic shape, unify the variation and even admit "
" as a variant form of this character[15][16].
.
.
.svg)
.svg)
.gif)
[Biang character with monkey inside][edit]