I was intending to return to the page and properly reference the biographical stuff at the start; I think the lack of references there make the paragraph I added stand out, plus the lack of dates (which is odd; I think the years he served as mayor should at least be in there).
Frankly I was surprised to see he had a page; I gathered he did when I saw mention of pre-election edit-warring on his and the other guy's pages at ANI. I'm not sure he's notable enough, but reckoned that since he had one, it should be up to date and encyclopedic (dates, refs) and then the community could better decide whether it merits keeping. I noted that the reason the candidacy paragraph was deleted was lack of info on the election results, so . . . put in what I had that I had thought of adding, and started fixing the references problem while I was at it.
With regards to comparables, I recently edited Jesse Johnson (politician), the page of a perennial candidate who never wins. Someone whose blog I read had enthused about him and I'd never heard of him, so I looked him up; it was after the election but nobody had updated the entry to reflect that or removed the election tag, so I looked up the result and did. His entry has percentages, so I gave them for '08. I daresay it varies and the best solution for Otto Lee might be to fill out his entry with more info about the rest of his career, unless of course it gets deleted.Yngvadottir (talk) 20:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
100k CA city template
- That should be fixed by these edits. There seems to be some sort of purging problem that I do not understand. You may want to check with the help desk as to why the edits are not appearing.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- At Template:CA cities and mayors of 100,000 population it appears to be fine. I am not sure why the old version continues to transclude to the page you point to.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits
Thanks for keeping an eye on the article. In my opinion, if an anonymous editor repeatedly inserts information which is not verifiable to reliable sources and which fails WP:NPOV, he should simply be reverted without question. There shouldn't be any problem with WP:3RR or other such policies. Lap Tang's ethnicity certainly wasn't mentioned in the sources cited. Even after searching the internet for other sources, all I can really tell is that he has connections to both the Vietnamese and Chinese communities (e.g. a long time ago he ran a firm which dubbed Chinese TV shows into Vietnamese ), which might make him a Hoa (ethnic Chinese in Vietnam), a guy with both Chinese and Vietnamese ancestry, or any number of other possibilities. Cheers, cab (call) 04:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.