Chinese name technicality....Edit
Technically, according to the guidelines of Chinese names, the last name comes first. So the title of the page, etc. should be Ping Po, not Po Ping. However, I have reviewed the same sources as you have (e.g. the "Art of" book) in which the film crew refer to him as Po Ping. Should we leave it as is, or at least put a note in the Trivia section? Lady_Crane Lady Crane strikes! 4:21, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
- We should probably leave it the way it is. But you're right - Chinese names (as well as some other names in other places) actually have the surname listed first. But because Kung Fu Panda is an American-made film, we follow pretty much most of the American rules. This would include name technicalities, as well as most grammatical and punctuation rules that I try to keep consistent throughout the wiki.
- So yeah, I hope that clarifies well enough. Even though there are a few Chinese aspects that we try to keep to (like listing some terms in Chinese characters), names are a bit too important to confuse other people with by switching the name order around. :) --§ροττεδςταr (talk • contribs) 4:30, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
The word "xiao"Edit
I thought this was talked about before, but I don't think "xiao" should be in the sentence about Mr. Ping naming Po since it's not clear that it's part of Po's name or just Mr. Ping calling him "little Po". Plus it doesn't make sense to mention it there when it's not even in the article intro for the character. VaporMist (talk • contribs) 21:13, March 23, 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think you're right. I guess I just wanted an explanation rather than seeing my edit rolled back as if it wasn't supposed to be there. I jumped to conclusions a little too fast - my bad. :)
- We did talk about this before, and I still remember the questions I got from other users who didn't know what "xiao" meant. I think that's why I felt like it should be included: I wanted it to clarify what Mr. Ping meant in that KFP2 scene and hopefully clear up that confusion. But if it's not necessary or lacks in accuracy, then I guess it would be best to leave it out. --§ρøττεδςταr(t • c • b • e) 22:26, March 23, 2013 (UTC)