Talk:老番

No Cantonese romanization
If this is a Cantonese term, Cantonese romanization should be given in the entry. 204.11.184.222 13:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree that Cantonese romanisation should be given. We haven't come up with a solution to cater for Cantonese without creating separate Cantonese entry but there will be in a unified Chinese approach. might disagree. The Jyutping transliteration of the term is "lou5 faan1". How should we add Cantonese transliteration? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Like this:

Wyang (talk) 23:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks but that will be implemented when we move to unified Chinese, right? Should allow regional pronunciations in the interim? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:01, 21 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Not with, otherwise it would be renamed ... :) That being said, we should finish off the discussion at Beer parlour/2014/March, and get started on the work there as soon as possible. Wyang (talk) 00:08, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you need anything from me at Beer parlour/2014/March? I personally only disagree on minor things and there was no opposition, otherwise, just questions and comments. Perhaps, you need to ask for help in implementation, ask for the re-introduction of "zh" as the language code for templates and translations and ==Chinese== as the L2 header, so that User:KassadBot and patrollers didn't pick up them as erroneous. I mentioned that. Minor issues can be resolved later. It's a big job, you probably know better what to do. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:19, 21 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Would a vote still be necessary, considering the support in the discussion was basically unanimous? There was no formal vote to impose the abolishment of the code 'zh' (Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:zh), just a couple of discussions which successively resulted in the transition (Beer parlour archive/July 06, Beer parlour archive/2007/April, Beer parlour archive/2007/April, Beer parlour archive/2009/May). Wyang (talk) 00:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It would be safer to have the vote (it has a very good chance to pass now (considering that even non-Mandarin Chinese speakers support the change) but there may be people who will just want to troll :)). Then "zh" and ==Chinese== would be set in stone and you may get more people working on the solution and helping. Although there was no vote, it's a set current policy (About Sinitic languages) after long discussions and has been an established practice, reflected in a number of templates, categories and modules. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, I will draft a vote if no other major comments are posted there. The downside with votes is that they tend to attract attentions from people who are generally less involved with the topic. Wyang (talk) 01:04, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * In my opinion and experience, it's still better to have wider public. It was very frustrating with some votes but the eventual outcome was still better. 加油！ --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I shall throw in my lubricants as well. Well done buddy. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 01:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Nothing is well done here because a Cantonese-only term is currently listed under the heading "Mandarin," which is ridiculous, and no Cantonese reading is given. This should be corrected! 204.11.184.222 16:26, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Be constructive rather than nagging. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 21:19, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

佢哋:

Wyang (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I guess we'll have to wait for the unified Chinese approach. Since these are examples, not the actual entries. 204.11.184.222 is complaining that there is no Cantonese info in the entry. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)