Talk:Bàng-uâ-cê

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

China Mid‑importance

	China portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Someone replaced the IPA letter "œ" by a plain "oe"... Well, that's incorrect. GnuDoyng 18:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite[edit]

I have rewritten much of the text to make it more readable and to improve the flow in English. In doing so I have tried to avoid changing any of the substance of the previous version. Taffy U|T|E 07:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Foochow Romanized[edit]

@Yue: A quick Google search led me to this page on Wikisource, which is from a dictionary that uses BUC. I think it's safe to say Foochow Romanized is what it has been called by users of the romanization. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That dictionary is from 1902. "Amoy Romanized" was the historical equivalent for Pe̍h-ōe-jī, and is similarly archaic and grammatically incorrect. A proper modern translation may be Foochow / Fuzhou romanisation or Foochow / Fuzhou romanised text, but neither of these are popularly used. Recent scholarship often uses the abbreviation you used, i.e. BUC, or leave 平話字 unromanised / untranslated.

Example: "The once popular form is the BUC system (Bàng-uâ-cê 平话字) designed by missionaries in the 19th century."

Pe̍h-ōe-jī and Pha̍k-fa-sṳ have gradually gained currency in the English language; I see no value in maintaining a century-outdated exonym. Yue🌙 01:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yue: It may be archaic, but I don't know why it would be grammatically incorrect. The system was devised and in most common use around the late 19th, early 20th century by these people who edited the dictionary I cite, so I don't understand why their work would not be valid/valuable. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @GnuDoyng and Michael Ly: for their opinions on this. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:05, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]