Talk:Michael Yeung

Merge completed
The merge that achieved consensus at Articles for deletion/Michael Yeung Ming-cheung controversies has been performed on a selective basis. All the non-BLP-violating content from the source article was included. As many of the editors there, myself included, noted, the text on the source article Michael Yeung Ming-cheung controversies was heavily weighted towards NPOV and other violations of the Policy on Biographies of Living Persons. Many of the "controversies" were actually about other persons or organizations that were tied to Bishop Yeung on slim grounds. Others were sourced to articles that credited the criticisms to "some people" or other such anonymous sources. None of this was merged. To comply with the BLP policy and active Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions, please do not add any of the other prior material without gaining consensus for its inclusion here. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 04:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Splitting proposal
I propose that the section named Public stances be split into a separate page called Michael Yeung controversies.

If immediate splitting is not advisable or otherwise goes against consensus, I alternatively propose that split take place at the end of a six-month period that starts from 3 January 2019. This is a timeframe that is prescribed by WP:BLP.

The content of the new page should contain contents restored, wherever appropriate, from the page Michael Yeung Ming-cheung controversies, which was merged into this page following a debate that began from 6 November 2017, and ended with a consensus to merge on 12 November 2017.

The previous AfD debate that ended in a consensus to merge occurred while Yeung was still alive, and subject to BLP rules. Yeung passed away on 3 January, 2019, and since there are multiple, reliable sources confirming his passing, the 115-year period listed for applicability of BLP is moot. Indeed, BLP violation was brought up as a major factor in getting rid of Michael Yeung Ming-cheung controversies. Other, more minor arguments for merging the page include statements that Yeung's controversy reflect actual Catholic sentiments. Whether that is true or not is irrelevant, as we are not here to uphold the Catholic doctrine (or any doctrine, for that matter). Kiteinthewind  Leave a message! 07:26, 3 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose - The comments left by wikipedians at the discussion Articles for deletion/Michael Yeung Ming-cheung controversies established that the page you once created violated several Wikipedia policies, and BLP rules were only part of the violations. In short, splitting contents from a short article is an act of Content forking. That said, even if you want to add the 'controversies' to the existing article, it has to be done in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines. --Jabo-er (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose – This isn’t material sufficient to justify a standalone WP entry. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 02:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. PPEMES (talk) 08:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: not enough material. &mdash; Javert2113 (Siarad.&#124;&#164;) 14:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)