This page lists some simplified Chinese chars that i consider good or bad.
The following are based on older forms, getting rid of redundancy or making it more logical.
氣=气
殺=杀
雲=云
淚=泪
為=为 This is good because it's a abstract word. The traditional form makes no sense at all, especially with the misleading radical that's related to cooking.
麗=丽
聽=听
響=响
麼=么
random garbage simplications
穀=谷. 穀 is simplified to 谷, a very bad simplification. The rational for this simplification seems purely sound-based. The 2 character's meaning has nothing in common. 谷 means {valley, ravine, gorge}, while 穀 means {grain, cereal}.
葉=叶 This is one of the worst. Losing the grass radical, and adding a mouth radical. No added merit such as phonetic parts or ideographic morphology. It's a complete abomination.
夢=梦 Losing the grass radical is good, but the new char's radical of wood 木 is not so good. Better would be simply removing the grass radical.
關=关 This one, the new char does not make sense at all. It would be better to leave it as 门+关.
壞=坏
劃=划
寧=宁
農=农
聖=圣
鄧=邓
啟=启
聲=声
興=兴
豐=丰
適=适. e.g. “适用”; “能防止食用后不适”
Chinese 灵=靈; What's a Good Simplification?
灵=靈
This is another one-off simplification. I'd like to call it a abomination, a botched job, a bad simplification, as usual, but wait….
How do we define what's a good simplification and what's a bad one? Intuitively, to me, a good simplification is one that's derived from one or more of the following:
However, chinese chars, as ideographs, really isn't consistent or based on any system of char formation. Many complex chars simply cannot be simplified based on one of the above methods. The char 靈 seems to be a good example. So, if you want to simplify this char, you essentially have to invent a new char. Thus, it doesn't seem reasonable to consider all such simplifications as bad ones.
To a chinese person new to simplified char, the char 灵 may seem just too weird, thus a abomination, but only because it's new to you. To judge in more detail whether a simplification is well done, we have to go a bit deeper. For this char 灵, it's hard to say whether it is done right. I think, ultimately, you have to come up with a set of criterion (a yardstick) but there isn't really a absolute ultimate guide for a metric because chinese char's randomish nature.
Abomination of Chinese Simplified Character 讲=講
讲=講