Jump to content

Talk:Meng Wanzhou: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Merger proposal: support counter proposal
Line 105: Line 105:


And here is a source to back that the confession is required as part of the deal for dropping criminal proceeding and extradition request. It's obvious hence my edit should go back. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58682998 [[User:MangoTareeface9|MangoTareeface9]] ([[User talk:MangoTareeface9|talk]]) 19:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
And here is a source to back that the confession is required as part of the deal for dropping criminal proceeding and extradition request. It's obvious hence my edit should go back. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58682998 [[User:MangoTareeface9|MangoTareeface9]] ([[User talk:MangoTareeface9|talk]]) 19:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


In obsessing over what she was obligated or needed to do you are trying to give the reader the impression that she was forced to give her consent. Incidentally neither the Washington Post or BBC sources use the words you’re using. Much, much better to simply drop the personal opinions aside and stick to what the sources say which is that she conceded to some of the accusations while pleading not guilty to others. [[User:Estnot|Estnot]] ([[User talk:Estnot|talk]]) 20:10, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:11, 25 September 2021

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 10 January 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sean0524 (article contribs).


Balance -- split off arrest&related to separate page.

{{split|date=November 2020|Meng Wanzhou|Arrest of Meng Wanzhou}} The warrant, 2018 arrest and court case should be a separate article. Right now, it looks like the biography is a footnote instead of being nominally the main topic of this article. Instead the arrest etc should be split off into a separate article, where it will be the main topic. A small summary of it would appear on this article, with a {{main}} linking to the the other article. -- 65.92.244.147 (talk) 20:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC) -- 65.92.244.147 (talk) 20:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 November 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Meng WanzhouArrest of Meng WanzhouWP:AT This article is nominally a biography of Meng Wanzhou, but the vast majority of this article is about the charges, her 2018 arrest, the subsequent court proceedings, and political fallout; and not about her biography per se. Thus this article should be renamed to match the main content of the article. The vast majority of the edit history is about this content. A biography can be split off after the move, if it is so desired. -- 65.92.244.147 (talk) 20:25, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly agree Smithereen (talk) 22:29, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't particularly matter to me. Most of the viewers of this page will be here because of the continued court proceedings anyways, so I don't see the point. However a dedicated page wouldn't be amiss either. Qiushufang (talk) 22:42, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Aftermath

Almost all of Meng Wanzhou is duplicate of Arrest of Meng Wanzhou

Under WP:MERGE, both pages are more or less duplicates constituting grounds for a merger: There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject, with the same scope. Overlap: There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept. For example, "flammable" and "non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on flammability. Everything after the Meng Wanzhou#Career heading is essentially a duplicate of Arrest of Meng Wanzhou. To resolve this, I am torn among 3 courses of action, with rationales for each:

  • Merge Meng Wanzhou into Arrest of Meng Wanzhou For the above reasons, a merger is an option. Since the vast majority of duplicated content is related to her arrest, court proceedings, and political fallout, another solution is to merge her bio page into her arrest page.
  • Requested move to Arrest of Meng Wanzhou This article is nominally a biography of Meng Wanzhou, but the vast majority of this article is about the charges, her 2018 arrest, the subsequent court proceedings, and political fallout; and not about her biography per se. Thus this article should be renamed to match the main content of the article. The vast majority of the edit history is about this content. A biography can be split off after the move, if it is so desired.
  • Reduce everything after Meng Wanzhou#Career into one heading linking to Arrest of Meng Wanzhou I noticed that a similar requested move was closed on November 2020. To reduce redundancy, I'm inclined to simplify everything after Meng Wanzhou#Career into one heading named "Arrest" with a link leading into the Arrest of Meng Wanzhou page.

I appreciate anyone's feedback, as I intend to follow through on one of the 3 courses of action I have detailed. Phillip Samuel (talk) 17:24, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing the sections in Meng Wanzhou about her arrest and courtroom proceedings would probably be the least controversial action. It all depends on how much you want to keep though. Merging would cause more problems than solve imo because there are already many links to Meng Wanzhou. Qiushufang (talk) 19:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Qiushufang: can you fix the problem you left on this page, when you failed to refactor this article in creating the new one? You said you would fix it next week back in November 2020 -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 17:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose to merge Arrest of Meng Wanzhou into Meng Wanzhou. I think that the content in the former article can easily be explained in the context of the latter, and the latter article is of a reasonable size that the merging of the former will not cause any problems as far as article size is concerned. Also my reasons in Talk:Meng Wanzhou#Almost all of Meng Wanzhou is duplicate of Arrest of Meng Wanzhou ~~~~ Phillip Samuel (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose if the arrest article should merge anywhere, it should merge into Detention of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, as it is an all combined international diplomatic incident. And I think the arrest and detention of Meng is a highly visible international incident of independent notability. If you want to merge the Meng biography article into the Meng arrest article, that might be possible, but not the other way around, since the arrest of Meng is the more important and notable subject, not the biography of the woman. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 16:55, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because many descriptions of people's legal troubles exist under their biographical articles. --Dan Carkner (talk) 23:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: I originally separated the articles because of a request/suggestion above that the article was getting too long and that it was mainly focused on one topic: her extradition/trial. However in view of recent events, her release, the Michaels' release, it no longer makes sense to have separate articles since the case has already been resolved and is unlikely to expand. The vast majority of the articles' contents are the same anyways, with the biography offering little that the other doesn't. Qiushufang (talk) 01:55, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • You shouldn't have separated the articles in the first place, since it was active request, and a rename request. This article should have been moved to the arrest article name, and thus why this should not have the arrest article merge into the biography article. It should be an arrest article and not a biography. It doesn't make sense for this to be a biography article at all. Instead it should merge with the Two Michaels article, to create an international incident article, and not some biography on some woman, who is not all that important outside of the international incident. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 03:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The arrest article contains lots of useful legal commentary that should be preserved - in particular the commentary from experts about the political nature of the arrest, as it provides important context into why the PRC's reaction was so incredibly negative. BrxBrx(talk)(please reply with {{SUBST:re|BrxBrx}}) 05:34, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The arrest is just as strongly linked to China–United States trade war, Criticism of Huawei and others, as it is to the biography of Meng Wanzhou. There is also the issue of weight, if 90% of the biographical article is about one life event, then perhaps it should rather be 'merge Meng Wanzhou into Arrest of Meng Wanzhou'. See for example in Schellenberg smuggling incident (This does not imply that the events are similar, but that the subject does not have enough notability to warrant a separate bio article) Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 08:22, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I support merging either this article or the other into one another. It doesn't really matter which. This is obviously not a biography as the vast majority of its content is related to the extradition incident anyways, and the article's existence would not be warranted without its inclusion. Qiushufang (talk) 15:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Being deputy chair of the board and chief financial officer of China's largest privately held company is definitely enough to warrant this article alright. Sure, this article is not a good Wikipedia:Biography of a living person right now, but that's mostly because of the unfortunate single event focus. CapnZapp (talk) 15:52, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This article was created *for* the extradition incident. She was practically unknown prior to it. If you look at this article's history, it did not exist before her arrest and was only created several days afterwards. It is for all practical purposes an article about her extradition. Qiushufang (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The biographical article on Meng Wanzhou (this article) is currently extremely lopsided to focus on a single event. Our article would come across as much more balanced if all the details on her arrest and the surrounding case were shunted to its own article (i.e. Arrest of Meng Wanzhou) and only briefly summarized here, so the short passages on her career, education and personal life aren't completely dwarfed by this single event. I do agree the current duplication is unfortunate. Therefore, let me counterpropose we make the move in the other direction instead. CapnZapp (talk) 15:47, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The "biographical article" is "extremely lopsided to focus on a single event" because it was created to cover a single event. There is no point in having a separate biographical article when 99% of the content has to deal with the extradition and there is little to no chance someone interested in her is searching for information about something unrelated. The biographical page should have never existed in the first place as the intended purpose was always to cover the extradition trial. Qiushufang (talk) 16:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Qiushufang and CapnZapp you both seem to be saying the same thing.VR talk 20:10, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Estnot

I wasn't the one reverting. So far, you reverted two of my edits whereas I have only clarified (not reverted) what the deal was. Meng wouldn't confess unless she gets something in return. That is how deals work. She gives something and gets her freedom in return. I propose the changes as below. It shows what she was legally obligated to do and what she got directly in return.

On 24 September 2021, the Department of Justice announced it had reached a deal with Meng to resolve the criminal charges against her and withdrew their extradition request against Meng Wanzhou after she entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with them. As part of the deal, Meng needed to concede that she helped misrepresent the relationship between Huawei and its subsidiary Skycom to HSBC in order to transact business with Iran but wasn't obligated to plead "guilty" to the fraud charges. In exchange, Meng would be released from house arrest in Vancouver and the Department of Justice will move to dismiss all the charges against Meng when the deferral period ends on 21 December 2022, on the condition that Meng is not charged with a crime before then. MangoTareeface9 (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And here is a source to back that the confession is required as part of the deal for dropping criminal proceeding and extradition request. It's obvious hence my edit should go back. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58682998 MangoTareeface9 (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


In obsessing over what she was obligated or needed to do you are trying to give the reader the impression that she was forced to give her consent. Incidentally neither the Washington Post or BBC sources use the words you’re using. Much, much better to simply drop the personal opinions aside and stick to what the sources say which is that she conceded to some of the accusations while pleading not guilty to others. Estnot (talk) 20:10, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]