Talk:Taiwanese units of measurement

message: According to Chinese sources, one Li is equal to the area that one man with one head of oxen and one plow can farm. One Li is equal to five Jia. For example, see http://www.cles.tyc.edu.tw/longtan/longtangrou-1.htmTwocs 15:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "八張犁的由來，是由於當初的墾地有四十甲，按照當時的算法五甲為一張犁，所以換算起來一共有八張犁。" Seems to say 8 long-plows equals 40 kah, given there are 5 kah per long-plow.Hongthay (talk) 02:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

message: The final measurement of ping to square meters was in parenthesis and italics.  I felt that it should be changed to the same format as the others since that is an important conversion so that the rest of the world can understand the size.  I added the conversion to square feet as well.  I have also added more decimal places to both conversions because in a large real estate conversion, it could make a big difference.  The source was Google conversion. ("1 ping in square meters" & "1 ping in square feet")  —Preceding unsigned comment added by FinalNemesis (talk • contribs) 15:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  changes to ping 

message: There is at least one serious error in this article, hear me now believe me later. After all, my IP address is in Taiwan. However, because I've been treated so shabbily by the wikipedia editors, I'm not going to fix the error. And by the way, don't hold your breath for a donation from me...
I see that someone else from Taiwan undid my edit. If you're from Taiwan, why don't you correct the glaring and serious error in the article? Is it really better to erase my comments, so nobody knows that the error exists?
... 1 year later... Yes, the error is still there. And I still resent the way wikipedia's editors have treated me. Apparently I am not alone in this and wikipedia has received some well earned bad press. I have to say I am laughing quietly to myself about this glaring error. And how the all powerful all knowing editors are powerless to understand or fix it. Maybe you'll think twice about treating people so arrogantly next time. OK would you like a hint as to which section the error is in? Well, come back in a year sucka.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.57.135.232 (talk) 16:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if you don't say what it is, nobody is going to bother looking for it.  Jidanni (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  serious error reported 

message: For whatever reason, this article now uses Taiwanese romanizations to refer to units like the ping (now called 'pheng') or the cun (now 'chhun'). This is unnecessarily confusing to the majority of people who will never come across the Taiwanese names for these units. 
As an illustration of the preferred use of Mandarin romanizations for Taiwanese units of measurements in English, one can try a google search for '1 phêng in sq. ft.' which returns no answer, compared to '1 ping in sq. ft.' which returns '1 ping = 35.5831736 square feet.'  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.168.91.86 (talk) 11:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I recognize this is three years later, but I agree, and went ahead and changed it. Everybody in Taiwan speaks Mandarin, only a subset speaks 閩南語. siafu (talk) 08:53, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why use Taiwanese romanizations in the English article? 

message: Currently, the romanizations used the article are inconsistent between Mandarin/pinyin and Taiwanese/POJ, and some are incorrect in either system (e.g. "ping" with no tone mark). I have previously tried to align them all with Mandarin/漢語拼音, since that is the official language of Taiwan and the one most commonly spoken, but I think we could fit both if someone can provide verified POJ romanizations.  Since I only speak Mandarin, I can't produce Taiwanese POJ on my own. Right now, I'm going to change all of them to pinyin so that they will at least be consistent. siafu (talk) 04:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Would like to kindly inform that I have restored the POJ romanizations according to my understanding and with the sources including the MoE as well as the online translated version of the 1931/1932  by Ogawa Naoyoshi. Hongthay (talk) 22:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taiwanese/Hoklo vs. Mandarin romanizations