Talk:Chi Haotian

Untitled
Alleged speech removed - a self-admittedly unverifiable speech with so outrageous a subject from a newspaper that is known for outlandish claims about China (and one that admits to an anti-PRC bias) has no place here.


 * I think you may have an ax to grind. The Epoch Times has been awarded by International Society for Human Rights and Asian American Journalists Association, and received recognition during the National Ethnomedia Week in 2005 as a "strong defender of human rights and free democratic values". Are you sure you don't oppose the link just because it makes the PRC look bad? &#10004; Olaf Stephanos &#9997;  19:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

It's really quite incredible that you would keep that speech in there and not even give a source for it. Someone has an axe to grind, certainly... The Epoch Times, which is run by Falun Gong, of all people, is simply not a reliable source on this, and in any case, you haven't even bothered to cite it...  Let alone do you bother to cite the part about Chinese failure to address this alleged speech leaving "many people" to consider it authentic. This is trash writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.176.246 (talk) 21:00, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Must agree with the IP here. The Epoch piece seems a little silly. Clearly, clearly not a neutral source for this kind of subject. NickCT (talk) 18:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

There are 3 threads on this, but he's at it again. This page is continously being edited every time it is removed. Shinybrel (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Unverified link
this link have not been verified to be a real speech by Chi Haotian therefore it should not be listed as a link —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.210.34 (talk) 18:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

no i opposed to the link because anything that is not proven FACT should not be listed here. Especially information from a site like The Epoch Times, which is a falun gong funded news network and extremely pro west. its privately funded propaganda which truth seekers should not trust. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.210.34 (talk) 22:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think Epoch Times is extremely pro-China by being anti-CCP. The Chinese people need to wake up from this ridiculous 60-year nightmare. &#10004; Olaf Stephanos &#9997;  23:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Excuse me? a link to an article alleged to be by the subject, and published by a source known for its outlandish claims against the Communist Party of China? I think not. I agree it should stay deleted. Ohconfucius (talk) 03:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Look, the "speech" should be mentioned in the article, if for no other reason than to let Wikipedia users know that it was attributed to him. I would be amazed if the majority of Anglophones who've heard of Chi Haotian didn't first encounter his name attached to the text at  or posted elsewhere on the web. Personally, I have no credence in the authenticity of the "speech"; the diction is wrong, as if a native English speaker wrote it.Mang (talk) 05:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Knowing the stated goal of the Falun Gong is the downfall of the Chinese Communist Party, this preamble should sound very loud warning bells: "The following is a transcript of a speech believed to have been given by Mr. Chi Haotian, Minster of Defense and vice-chairman of China’s Central Military Commission. Independently verifying the authorship of the speech is not possible. " The emphasis is mine. Ohconfucius  ¡digame! 06:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we should just remove that paragraph all together. It's silly to toss in the allegation and then spend three sentences casting doubt on its credibility. NickCT (talk) 18:14, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, if you wouldn't mind doing the honours, because I'm no longer allowed to. And while you're at it, you could check out other articles where they two groups intersect. You might find more examples of the same problem. --  Ohconfucius  ping / poke 13:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Without going into specifics, there's a very obvious ideological battle going on between the Chinese Communist Party and Falun Gong. This article or articles adjacent to this keep being written, and I'm going to remove them - this keeps happening. Shinybrel (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Sensationalist Article
" He infamously described China's plans to kill 200 million Americans with biological warfare in a secret 2003 speech.[1]"

This links to a sensationalist blog article written by Epoch, which is funded by Falun Gong. This does not stand up to journalistic scrutiny especially considering the website in question advertises a book which characterizes the CPC/CCP as an ultimate evil. This is ridiculous and not sufficient evidence, and thus I will delete it.

I've been investigating this, seems like someone keeps posting this link or links like it (which aren't even a reliable news source, really only blog posts.)

This type of callous reporting only turns people against the accuser, and this is coming from someone whose ancestors did indeed have sacrifices and who did not like the CCP. This is probably going to continue in the future, but since similar articles have been deleted following 2012, any new articles referencing "biological warfare" and these unsubstantiated claims should be deleted ASAP. Shinybrel (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)