Talk:酸素

I hope this ping works - sorry for the mass spamming. I would like to discuss the inclusion of references for Min Nan. At the moment many Min Nan entries contain references composed of templated external links to online dictionaries, e.g. . I am not sure we should include references to external websites when the words are easily verified in major dictionaries of a language, for example we don't use external links to Moedict or Zdic for Mandarin, or Cantodict and 粵語審音配詞字庫 for Cantonese pronunciations. Thoughts? Wyang (talk) 06:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


 * The ping didn't work for me.
 * I'm mostly neutral about the references, but I think that adding them on every entry is excessive, and perhaps they should be restricted to more interesting (?) entries. (like, I only add a link to the 粵語審音配詞字庫 when there's a bunch of variant readings that someone could easily doubt) —suzukaze (t・c) 06:40, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree. I've been on the liberal side providing the refs. It seems that most Japanese entries do ref, so I did not see the harm. But I think they could be pared down to the more interesting ones. The challenge with Min Nan probably is the words that are not easily looked up due to orthography issues, pronunciation issues, and lack of written material to begin with. Hongthay (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't get the ping either. I do agree adding references to every word is excessive. I usually add them to words with interesting etymology or orthography. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 18:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)