Talk:Chen Yonglin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Portal	Chen Yonglin is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Could we please take the dispute to the discussion page?

There might indeed be Chinese sources that should be reflected -- but the Chinese-language Wikipedia article seems more appropriate. I'm in favor of limiting this English-language page to information that can be confirmed by any English-speaking reader. If English readers cannot confirm the information, they'd be justified in thinking it was all propaganda. ...the English-language sources might be propaganda, too, but at least we can point to another source, to blame. :)

Adam 2 July 2005 02:37 (UTC)

Okay, this is certainly a start. I've removed the "Recently contact was made with an real estate agent of Lan Meng, who claimed that he spent time searching for a job and studying at the time he was allegedly kidnapped and returned to China." statement, as as far as I can see, it is still unsourced. I've rewritten the Hao Fengjun section, incorporating virtually all of your additions, as the whole section was badly in need of a cleanup anyway. I've also linked Bernard Collaery, Hao's lawyer - he's quite notable in his own right. Finally, I've removed the line about Chen's supporters as not neutral. Falun Gong have expressed support for his stance, but it was worded as if to suggest that he was their puppet, and the mention of the Australian Greens and Australian Democrats was dismissive of them and their role. Ambi 2 July 2005 09:38 (UTC)

[edit] Request unprotection?

This page has been protected for the past ten days. No discussion has occurred on the issues at all in the talk page. Are the issues being resolved and the disputed parties moving towards discussion? If there are no objections, I will request unprotection. Calwatch 00:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unprotected

Per request at WP:RFPP -- Samir धर्म 06:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems with article

I really don't think that the words "bloody supression" belong to an article. Also the claims of a spy ring should remain an allegation, as it was never proven.--PatCheng 14:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong with "bloody supression"? , and what would you replace the phrase by? Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 14:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I thinks something more neutral is needed, such as crackdown or jus supression. "Bloody" is overdoing it.--PatCheng 14:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Memorials of the protests are given not simply because Chinese citizens protested their government but because they were put down violently. That fact is ascertained most relevantly by the date chosen, June 4th. That this constitutes "suppression" is quite neutral, and that it was "bloody" is verifiable even in parsed footage and in every reputable account of events. What is not acceptable are words like "massacre" which, though appropriate and widely accepted in this particular context, are emotive and should be avoided when possible. It is also unacceptable to remove events from their context and neutralize information to give the reader a misperception. The link to the protest article was already given.

As for the spy network, the article is careful to attribute claims and the reader is not misinformed on this point. However, the question of the existence of a Chinese spy network is not seriously contested. What is contested is the size of it and who is operating under its auspices. --TJive 15:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

to me neutral doesn't mean nice or wishy washy it means factual. If a suspression involves bloodshed then it is a bloody supression. Crackdown does not mean the same thing at all. A school may decide to have a crackdown on bubble gum chewing for example. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 17:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The alleged live organ harvesting allegation Chen repeated is Falun Gong propaganda that has since been discredited by US State Department investigation, as well as anti-CCP activist Harry Wu, founder of Lawgai Research Foundation.

As this article is about Chen and not the substance of his allegations, the solution is to cut away all excess information that tries to confirm or refute them. To this end we can direct people to Falun Gong and live organ harvesting and leave that page as the site for discussing the validity of the claim. Likewise, we can refer to the "rally commemorating the 16th anniversary of the deaths in Tiananmen Square". "Bloody," I'd agree, has an emotional charge to it that we can avoid; "deaths" is no less true, and again it's best to hash this out on its own page. With these changes, there should be no problem with me removing the POV marker. Adam 03:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)