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 Macau, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to Macau.MacauWikipedia:WikiProject MacauTemplate:WikiProject MacauMacau articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
Latest comment: 11 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
I saw this message from a user who argued that the article is "May contain too many 'opinions' but may need more encyclopaedic information." - The problem is that opinions often are encyclopedic information--if they are "notable" opinions or opinions covered in reliable sources.
When starting articles I often use Google Books as I can get sourced information. Often that sourced info includes opinions and interpretations from scholars.
Yes, I agree that "harder facts" are needed here, but "opinions" should also be covered. Also a lot of these "opinions" are research, and not merely regular "opinions"
WhisperToMe (talk) 17:02, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I understand what you mean, but there's probably a lot of literature and you should probably decide which opinions to include. Right now, the list looks rather 'random'. Maybe you can divide the page into several sections first, then add in the opinions when necessary. Cheers, Kayau(talk·contribs) 00:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
There are some more pieces of literature I found, so I'll try to add stuff from it. I'm not sure how to categorize it, but maybe the more things I find, perhaps possible sections will become self evident WhisperToMe (talk) 06:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Suggestion: Maybe you can take a look at other slang-related articles to decide how to structure this one. Kayau (talk · contribs) 06:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC) 06:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
That's a good suggestion! I'll take a look WhisperToMe (talk) 06:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Alright, I've separated lots of content WhisperToMe (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply