Talk:List of Chinese Canadians

Suggest putting Lily Kwon back
I don't understand the reason for deleting fr:Lily Kwan. The edit summary from User:Bearcat was this list may not interlang to a person's article on another language Wikipedia as a *substitute* for an article on en -- not all or even most readers of en can speak or read fr. A requirement is that the person be notable, having a Wikipedia article is sufficient evidence of notability for purposes of this list. I'm not understanding the problem. And the this list may not interlang statement is just bizarre to me. Where does that come from? Furthermore we note that this is a list of Canadians, a country where you would expect that some of its notable citizens to be covered in French. I suggest we put this entry back. M.boli (talk) 20:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Cross-language links to other-language Wikipedia articles are not supposed to be inserted into Wikipedia articles as substitutes for articles in the language of this Wikipedia. It's not a question of whether an article would be expected in French or not, because if an article existed about her in English, then it could absolutely interlang to the French equivalent through the metadata template — but the potential readership of this article consists overwhelmingly of people who would get nothing out of clicking on that link, and learning nothing about her because they don't have the French language skills necessary to actually read it. If you want her to be included in this list, then write an English article about her already so that she can be listed — if she's that notable, then surely there's no reason why an English article couldn't be written. Bearcat (talk) 20:58, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I follow your reasoning. A reference in the same language is far preferable of course, but it seems to me we don't refuse to include a reference in another language if that is the one that is needed. This seems to me to be the same case. She is notable by Wikipedia rules, and the cross-language link is the best reference available. Maybe it would make sense to follow the convention of indicating the language next to the link? That convention exists to address your main point about a link being unuseful for many readers, no? M.boli (talk) 01:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The language of a reference is a different issue. Reading an external reference for yourself is an option that readers can choose to take or not take, in addition to reading the Wikipedia article that's already in front of them — and references don't have to contain URLs at all, so the reference isn't always even there for them to read for themselves unless they choose to track it down on their own time. And even if you can't read a reference for yourself, you can still read the summary of it that we've already provided here. But an interlang link being directly inserted into body text as an outright replacement for English content is not giving anybody any kind of option: it's not there as a supplement to English content, but as the only content being offered at all, so it literally amounts to "either learn to read a foreign language, or you get no information". And per WP:CIRCULAR, Wikipedia content can never be referenced to other Wikipedia content, so "it functions as a reference" can't be a reason for sticking an interlang directly into body text either. Bearcat (talk) 04:36, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Righto. I see your argument. You have described the very reason I became involved in this page! There were several score bare wiki-links absent any descriptions of the people listed. My contribution was to fill them in.
 * Was I am proposing to put back isn't a bare link. It is link plus a description (obtained from that link), plus an annotation that the language is French.
 * It isn't entirely "if you must know what this name means, cliquez ici." But if I haven't persuaded you there is a case for it, I won't pursue the matter further. I'm not wedded to the notion. Also, I do thank you for articulating these notions. I don't think I could have explained them. M.boli (talk) 00:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Chinese Canadians. 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/20101202071515/http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/mayorcouncil/councillor/chow.htm to http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/mayorcouncil/councillor/chow.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070102064202/http://newsserver.ccwb.net/html1/2006/12/7/f117491.shtml to http://newsserver.ccwb.net/html1/2006/12/7/f117491.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) 21:13, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Vincent Li
This edit removed Vincent Li from the List of Chinese Canadians. On the grounds that the editor doesn't think that a murderer made a positive contribution to Canada. But that argument is specious. And it is past time to stop edit warring and ask other editors what they think. M.boli (talk) 17:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 's removal of Vincent Li is still unexplained. The explanation This list is for people who have made the news because they have made contributions is not attested anywhere. And for a counter example the List of Chinese Americans has a section of criminals. I'm putting Vincent Li back. If there are objections, please put them here. -- M.boli (talk) 13:08, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Another revert removing Vincent Li on the specious grounds that criminals do not belong in this list article. The edit summary referred to List of Chinese Americans, which (as noted above) has a section for criminals. I pinged the editor above, I also left a note on the editor's talk page to discuss it here. We will see what happens. -- M.boli (talk) 12:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Once again (two and a half years later) @Nhk9 removed Vincint Li from this list. Li is on this list because he "committed famous murder." Those are the words in this article. However the editor says in the edit summaries that Li was not found "not criminally responsible" and thus not convicted of murder, see diff. This is specious for three reasons. It is disappointing that would come back after this talk section was open and engage in revert warring instead of talking. If we need the input of other editors, I can post notes at the appropriate wiki-projects. -- M.boli (talk) 17:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Li is Chinese-Canadian. He is notable. So he belongs on this list. Reverting Li from this list is plain wrong.
 * 2) Having been found "not criminally responsible" for murder does not mean that committed famous murder is wrong. As a matter of law (and logic) it is ludicrous, an absurdity, for a court to rule someone is not criminally responsible for the murder he didn't do. The court's ruling is predicated on Li's murdering somebody. That Li did this was not contested.
 * 3) Not being judged a criminal, for whatever reason, does not change the fact that he is known for his famous murder. Al Capone was convicted of tax violations, yet we include him in lists of gangsters.


 * Update a few minutes later: Having been reminded of the talk page discussion, @Nhk9 continued revert warring. It will be noted that the editor did not engage with the discussion two-and-a-half years ago when the issue first arose.
 * Now it is six times the editor has reverted Vincent Li out of the List of Chinese Canadians (3 in 2020, 3 now) without having ever engaged on the talk page. (And keeps repeating the same specious argument in the edit summaries.) -- M.boli (talk) 17:50, 9 February 2023 (UTC)