Talk:Alex Chow

Age
? --Itu (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Move
I understand the rationale behind your move from Alex Chow Yong-kang to Alex Chow Wing Hong (good faith assumed). But He IS Alex Chow Yong-kang, NOT Alex Chow Wing Hong, as listed in many sources such as a committee under the Hong Kong University Students' Union Council (council.hkusu.hk/committees/uac). Please move back.--Jabo-er (talk) 05:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, my mistake. I realised that while I was going through news sources. I've requested a page move but it might take a while. Fuebaey (talk) 05:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alex Chow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150701164520/http://www.hkilang.org/NEW_WEB/page/dictionary to http://www.hkilang.org/NEW_WEB/page/dictionary
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141025085556/http://singpao.com/xw/yw/201407/t20140702_516380.html to http://singpao.com/xw/yw/201407/t20140702_516380.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141110044835/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=4&art_id=151221&sid=43333705&con_type=1&d_str=20141110&fc=1 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=4&art_id=151221&sid=43333705&con_type=1&d_str=20141110&fc=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:53, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Substance for discussion
It is to be noted that the proper place for discussions about disputed edits on an article is the Talk page to that article. It might also be useful to note that discussions are most constructive when they focus on the precise subject matter of the dispute. Exchange of substantive reasoning can result in an improved encyclopaedia. sirlanz 02:43, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Why do you delete my update - especially about the name of Pik Uk Prison where Alex Chow imprisoned?
Orginally posted to sirlanz's Talk page

Why do you delete my update - especially about the name of Pik Uk Prison where Alex Chow imprisoned? This is very important detail about subject of the article! I disagree again with your deletion as disruptive. You cannot delete endless time good verified text under pretext like: "WP not news site", etc. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Alex Chow. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. PoetVeches (talk) 02:16, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The primary point is that the material deleted is not even about the subject. The subject made no application to the court and was not, obviously, granted bail.  Nothing happened at all with respect to the subject.
 * The second point is that WP is not a newspaper; it is an encyclopaedia. WP is where we build a pertinent history of notable events/features of the subject.  When writing our articles, we must attempt to maintain a historical perspective, i.e. imagine what the text will look like years hence.  The matter of the bail (even if it was relevant to this subject, which it is not) is ephemeral.  It is was only ordered to continue for a matter of days.  It has no relevance to the ultimate outcome for the appellants.  Looking back even weeks or months hence, it will appear as an obvious minor detail of no particular relevance (even, as I say, if it was related to the subject, which it is not, in any event).
 * The third point is that the no-contraction rule has been breached and the grammar is defective.
 * There may be more but I think this takes us far enough. Over to you. sirlanz 02:53, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with admin who rejected to block your account, user:Sirlanz, because your edit is very disruptive: I try to read your edit and cannot figure out from where you got information and how you want this article about Alex Chow would look. First, You was writing about imprisonment, then you must start new section "Imprisonment". Second, when You start writing about Alex Chow enlisting in London University, then you must start new section "Education" or "Bio". Third, You posted some date in "After initially being sentenced to three weeks' imprisonment (suspended) on 15 August 2016 ", but I failed to find this " 15 August 2016 " in supplied by your reference. And fourth, there is nothing about " on appeal to the High Court by the government. " Do you mean probably "Hong Kong’s courts had been compromised under pressure from Beijing", -this is only i succeeded to find in your supplied reference https://www.hongkongfp.com/2017/09/01/democracy-activist-alex-chow-files-appeal-jail-sentence/ So, if you don't want to edit properly the article Alex Chow, why you delete my straightforward text about the Pik Uk Prison? I disagree again that Pik Uk Prison is not subject - this is place where subject Alex Chow imprisoned and there was reference on source. --PoetVeches (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

He is alive (mistaken identity)
Note - Hong Kong undergraduate Alex Chow Tsz-lok died  - beware of mistaken identity.  starship .paint  (talk) 14:50, 8 November 2019 (UTC)