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 is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong articles
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
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
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.
Why was this article moved without any discussion first? Where is the evidence this romanization is more common? Badagnani 23:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1. Wikipedia:Be bold and if there is other voices. Then discuss. 2. The romanisation is hard to recognise it even native speaker. — HenryLi (Talk) 23:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, that's one way of doing it. The better, way, though, is to propose a page move, then do some searches to show the relative predominance of various romanizations. For Cantonese dishes there may be up to 10 or more romanizations, with one usually being the most common. Let's have that for this item. Badagnani 23:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, let's go for it. — HenryLi (Talk) 00:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I could find very few websites (only about 5) that gave a romanization for this dish. Is it a very rare item and not usually appearing on dim sum menus? Badagnani 01:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many websites say that this dish can be cooked with pandan (a green leaf). Can this be added to the article? Badagnani 01:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
