<p>Read right to left, top to bottom.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>富行揀選</p>
<p>樣券</p>
</blockquote>
<p>富行 was short for 雲南富滇銀行 (The Yunnan &quot;Fu-Tien&quot; Bank), 揀選 meant &quot;select, pick&quot;.</p>
<p>樣券 means &quot;banknote sample&quot;.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/52m8W.jpg" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/52m8W.jpg" alt="Sample" /></a></p>
<p>PS: Welcome to Chinese.SE. However, this kind of question is off-topic. Because</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Questions asking for translations are off-topic unless prior research effort is clearly indicated; we're here to help you learn, not provide a bulk translation service.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T02:47:34.640Z
Why then did you answer this off-topic question?
monalisa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T03:01:09.020Z
@monalisa my opinion on how to deal with a newcomer's off-topic questions is "to answer or not to answer is an alternative, but just vote to close." Because anyway few newcomers would read the regulations before asking a question (that is to say, closing a question doesn't teach any new-newcomer a lesson), I think answering it won't cause a flood of off-topic questions.
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T04:00:40.360Z
@Stan If few newcomers would read the regulations before asking a question, then it is even more important for those who know the regulations not to encourage any question that contradicts them. Answering off-topic questions sends a clear message that such question will, in fact, be answered even though they are against SE policy. I don't follow your logic in saying answering it won't cause a flood of off-topic questions. We are already experiencing a fair number of "request for translation" type questions. I am sure they will keep coming as long as someone answers them.
monalisa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T06:01:44.640Z
As an aside, if this is a bill from the 雲南富滇銀行, this cannot be a HK bill, as the OP said, right?
dda
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T06:48:11.487Z
@Maroon Thanks for the information. To keep this website "cleaner", I think high-rep users should check the "review -> Tools" more frequently to cast delete votes. But, actually, I think the "unless prior research effort is clearly indicated" point is a little vague and questions like this one are not asking for "**bulk** translation".
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T06:48:41.770Z
@monalisa By *newcomer* I meant "those who ask their first question". Of course, a second off-topic question from a not-so-new-comer should be suppressed. The logic is, if a *newcomer* doesn't read the regulations, and there's a ratio of newcomers posting "request for translation" type questions, then the appearance of that kind of questions (more or less) only depends on the total amount of *newcomers* multiplying the ratio (provided most *newcomers* don't know each other). Anyway I don't have statistical data so that's only conjecture.
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T06:50:21.457Z
@monalisa And I agree we should not encourage the off-topic, but for *newcomers*, a blunt shut-down would make them feel us kind of, condescending – that's not a good way to welcome newcomers. So, for this question that is not asking for **bulk** translation, I don't think it that bad.
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T06:50:53.643Z
@dda I don't know. Maybe it could circulate in HK back then.
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T18:55:04.467Z
Well, if any part of the regulations is not clear, then perhaps there should be a channel for us to lobby and get it clarified. As it stands, it is just open for interpretation. All I am trying to do is to uphold the policy of the SE community regarding prior research effort. Also, shutting down a question need not be condescending. It can definitely be done nicely and civilly.
monalisa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-18T02:26:29.153Z
2016-03-18T02:26:29.153Z
2020-06-17T09:50:11.587Z
Stan
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/gWBZG.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/gWBZG.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>I cannot translate, it would be great if you guys could. It's a stamp on a Hong Kong banknote from 1941.</p>

<translation><traditional-characters><character-identification>
Stamped Chinese characters on a banknote
# Stamped Chinese characters on a banknote

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-03-18)

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/gWBZG.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/gWBZG.png)

I cannot translate, it would be great if you guys could. It's a stamp on a Hong Kong banknote from 1941.

**Tags:** translation, traditional-characters, character-identification


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-03-18. Score: 7

Read right to left, top to bottom.

> 富行揀選
>
> 樣券

富行 was short for 雲南富滇銀行 (The Yunnan "Fu-Tien" Bank), 揀選 meant "select, pick".

樣券 means "banknote sample".

[![Sample](https://i.sstatic.net/52m8W.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/52m8W.jpg)

PS: Welcome to Chinese.SE. However, this kind of question is off-topic. Because

> Questions asking for translations are off-topic unless prior research effort is clearly indicated; we're here to help you learn, not provide a bulk translation service.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Why then did you answer this off-topic question?  
> **username_1**: @username_2 my opinion on how to deal with a newcomer's off-topic questions is "to answer or not to answer is an alternative, but just vote to close." Because anyway few newcomers would read the regulations before asking a question (that is to say, closing a question doesn't teach any new-newcomer a lesson), I think answering it won't cause a flood of off-topic questions.  
> **username_2**: @username_1 If few newcomers would read the regulations before asking a question, then it is even more important for those who know the regulations not to encourage any question that contradicts them. Answering off-topic questions sends a clear message that such question will, in fact, be answered even though they are against SE policy. I don't follow your logic in saying answering it won't cause a flood of off-topic questions. We are already experiencing a fair number of "request for translation" type questions. I am sure they will keep coming as long as someone answers them.  
> **username_3**: As an aside, if this is a bill from the 雲南富滇銀行, this cannot be a HK bill, as the OP said, right?  
> **username_1**: @Maroon Thanks for the information. To keep this website "cleaner", I think high-rep users should check the "review -> Tools" more frequently to cast delete votes. But, actually, I think the "unless prior research effort is clearly indicated" point is a little vague and questions like this one are not asking for "**bulk** translation".  
> **username_1**: @username_2 By *newcomer* I meant "those who ask their first question". Of course, a second off-topic question from a not-so-new-comer should be suppressed. The logic is, if a *newcomer* doesn't read the regulations, and there's a ratio of newcomers posting "request for translation" type questions, then the appearance of that kind of questions (more or less) only depends on the total amount of *newcomers* multiplying the ratio (provided most *newcomers* don't know each other). Anyway I don't have statistical data so that's only conjecture.  
> **username_1**: @username_2 And I agree we should not encourage the off-topic, but for *newcomers*, a blunt shut-down would make them feel us kind of, condescending – that's not a good way to welcome newcomers. So, for this question that is not asking for **bulk** translation, I don't think it that bad.  
> **username_1**: @username_3 I don't know. Maybe it could circulate in HK back then.  
> **username_2**: Well, if any part of the regulations is not clear, then perhaps there should be a channel for us to lobby and get it clarified. As it stands, it is just open for interpretation. All I am trying to do is to uphold the policy of the SE community regarding prior research effort. Also, shutting down a question need not be condescending. It can definitely be done nicely and civilly.  

---

