Talk:Judy Chu/Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 04:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Just removed unilaterally (with no discussion)
(Chinese: 趙美心; pinyin: Zhào Měixīn) Badagnani (talk) 03:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Origin
Is she of Cantonese origin? Badagnani (talk) 21:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Likely, but not sure. Mandarin "Zhao" is Cantonese "Chiu" which in the early days would probably be spelled "Chu". HkCaGu (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Confirmed. Both parents trace ancestry to Xinhui, Guangdong. See: http://www.singtaousa.com/052109/ss02.php HkCaGu (talk) 08:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Definitely changing the Romanization to Cantonese. It just makes no sense this way to people who know anything about Chinese languages, and it's probably kind of weird to people who don't. (Ejoty (talk) 03:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC))
 * Her origin does not mean what dialect should be chosen. The predominant dialect in her former and future districts is Mandarin. And the standardized way of Chinese romanization across Wikipedia is Mandarin pinyin, in addition to any relevant dialect. HkCaGu (talk) 12:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Update:a runoff election?
As far as I know, she now faces a runoff against her distant cousin Betty, as well as a Libertarian Paerty candidate on July 14...can you please correct this info?...thanks...Michaela92399 (talk) 02:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits
The infobox is appropriate because "Infobox Congressman" redirects to "Infobox officeholder". Also, date linking is deprecated and forcing the picture to a size disallows for individual configurations. Her Chinese name doesn't need to be featured in the infobox, she's American and not in the scope of Wikiproject China - however, she's in the scope of WikiProject Asian Americans and Wikiproject Congress, which I added. Hekerui (talk) 16:08, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

NPOV
The "Political Positions" section of this congresswoman's page reads as if it came straight from her website. It needs to be done impartially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.241.160 (talk) 18:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

WSJ
I'm new to wiki and have a question about this page. There was a section about her position on racial profiling for college admissions that was recently removed for NPOV and undue weight. For future reference, why can't opinion pieces that state basic facts be used so long as those facts are presented in a reasonable and objective way? For instance, if Chu's voting record indicates that she opposed measures to curb racially discriminatory practices in higher ed, what's the difference if I cite and OP-Ed vs. an actual news article if the information is the same? Thanks. Ocracoke72 (talk) 16:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There seems to be nothing wrong with the source. There's no blanket ban on opinion stories, especially if they are published by a reputable newspaper, which the WSJ most certainly is. I'm reverting.Starbucksian (talk) 19:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * In biographies of living people, yes there is a blanket ban on using op-ed pieces as sources for factual material (particularly when the section is written in the same non-neutral voice as the original). WP:RSOPINION notes this distinction.  Biographies are not the place to state your (or someone else's) opinion about the subject.  --Loonymonkey (talk) 21:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you point to the actual language? I looked it up and here's what I found.

"'Some sources may be considered reliable for statements as to their author's opinion, but not for statements asserted as fact without an inline qualifier like '(Author) says...'. A prime example of this is Op-ed columns in mainstream newspapers. When using them, it is better to explicitly attribute such material in the text to the author to make it clear to the reader that they are reading an opinion.'"

This Judy Chu mention doesn't seem to run afoul. Here's another example: "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces are reliable for attributed statements as to the opinion of the author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." I suggest we go to arbitration again or wait for an administrator to weigh in. Starbucksian (talk) 00:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm confused. You're quoting language that states exactly what I'm saying as your justification.  This is editorial commentary.  You are using it as a statement of fact.  They specifically say not to do that.  I don't see how it could be any more clear.  --Loonymonkey (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Did you read what I posted? "Some sources may be considered reliable for statements as to their author's opinion, but not for statements asserted as fact without an inline qualifier like "(Author) says..." The Judy Chu mentions works here. Starbucksian (talk) 02:57, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Then can we add that section back with the qualifier, "According to . . ."?

Ocracoke72 (talk) 13:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Nope. Then it's just undue weight, and we still don't have the factual material sourced to a neutral reliable source. This person's opinion is not a biographical detail.  I'm removing it per WP:BLP and the BLP noticeboard discussion.--Loonymonkey (talk) 16:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Political Positions
I am slowly adding in some of her political positions. Any suggestions? Ocracoke72 (talk) 15:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a good start. I would caution against conflating votes with positions, though.  The budget section is a good example.  There were a dozen or so votes on competing proposals, most of which took place along party lines, but they don't really say anything about the political positions of the individual members.  Also, the recent additions are a little too weighted on things she voted against rather than positions she's actually for.  It's always iffy to surmise a position based on a vote against a specific bill. Bills are voted up or down or lots of reasons, not all of which have to do with the sponsor's stated purpose of the bill.  For instance, a congressman can call their bill the "Protecting Children Act of 2011" but that doesn't mean it actually protects children (or that anyone who votes against it is against "protecting children").  --Loonymonkey (talk) 17:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There are a number of articles that speak critically of her opposition to eliminating racial preferences at universities and her recent visit to China. I've included them below.  Should we include a section describing this dispute?


 * 
 * 
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocracoke72 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The Power Act, supported by Chu, would extend temporary citizenship to undocumented people reporting crimes. I'm fairly new, actually very new, to editing and quite sure how best to format a political positions section.  Here's the article explaining her stance. Ocracoke72 (talk) 20:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * There really isn't any reason to include some attack editorial from Andrew Breitbart (which is just repeating an attack from another partisan source during that news cycle). Breitbart attacks pretty much every Democratic politician on a daily basis, that's how he makes his living, but it doesn't mean we need to mention it in their biography.  The rules for WP:BLPs are more strict than for other articles in regards to adding opinion. --Loonymonkey (talk) 21:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. What about the Power Act? Should we wait on that to see if it gains any steam? Ocracoke72 (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Judy Chu. 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/20130724194434/http://rules.house.gov/bill/hr-2397 to http://rules.house.gov/bill/hr-2397

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) 12:10, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Judy Chu. 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 tag to http://www.singtaousa.com/052109/ss02.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a49/biography.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150905192231/http://chu.house.gov/issue/immigration to https://chu.house.gov/issue/immigration
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606115126/http://chu.house.gov/2011/03/rep-chu-continues-fighting-to-protect-the-health-and-lives-of-women.shtml to http://chu.house.gov/2011/03/rep-chu-continues-fighting-to-protect-the-health-and-lives-of-women.shtml

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) 23:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Judy Chu. 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/20120328173626/http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_18639765 to http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_18639765
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111219230010/http://redistrictingpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Final-2011-Congressional-Spreadsheet.pdf to http://redistrictingpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Final-2011-Congressional-Spreadsheet.pdf
 * Added tag to http://redistrictingpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Final-2011-Congressional-Spreadsheet-2.pdf

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) 05:54, 2 December 2017 (UTC)