Talk:Peter Hessler

Unsourced and poorly sourced material removed
Per Wikipedia guidelines, "Material that fails verification may be tagged with or removed. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons should be removed immediately and not tagged or moved to the talk page." I have removed the "Biography" "Career" and "links" of this page. Mr. Hessler or the fans who created this page had plenty of time and fair warning to add sources and citations to the material, but they did not, so we must follow Wikipedia rules and immediately remove the self-serving information that previously constituted a majority of this entry. As the statement below says, this was not Mr. Hessler's personal homepage and should not appear as such. External links to Hessler's speeches and book reviews were especially self-serving and do not belong on Wikipedia. None of the biographical information was sourced and appeared to be written by Hessler himself. Saying his books are "well known" in the very first paragraph of the entry without any citation to this claim was also a bit self-aggrandizing. I would have just moved this data to the talk page to be edited later, however Wikipedia rules state "not...moved to the talk page" so I did not. if someone has a problem with this, then redo the page according to Wiki standards and not just because you are a fan of Hessler's books. User:Hopechina
 * I stumbled upon this article when I was patrolling recent changes, because you haven't mentioned your rationale for content removing in edit summary while removing substantial portions of the article, so I have not much to say on this problem, with the exception of following:
 * a)As a biography of living person, this article certainly should be referenced more thorouhly;
 * b)Removing of large portions of fairly neutrally written text is not a way to improving article under pretension of wp:BLP policy, because informations on family life, studies and jobs, as given here, are hardly controversial or contentious in any sense.
 * c)Removal of material of such kind would be possible, in my opinion, only after it fails verification.
 * Removal of whole sections on Biography and Career is hardly justifiable, when not previously specifically challenged - the right way is to tag which claims in the article are supposedly contentious, and then remove them - not a wholesale blanking of section content.

--ja_62 12:37, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Then while you were here you should have deleted all those external links to Hesslers speeches and book reviews. This article is a massive link farm, and I have no idea how anyone was able to even add all those links in the first place without setting off some alarms (unless a certain Wikipedia editor is a Hessler fan himself), since external commercial links that serve no purpose are not allowed in Wikipedia. So since you are so high and mighty on reverting my edits, why don't you clean this article up since obviously the fans who created it are unwilling to after so much fair warning. Hopechina (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Hopechina


 * WP:EL - Just trimming would be enough, perhaps, in my opinion this is not a example farm, as the links are illustrating his work as an author/pundit on China issues. As I stated previously, I just stumbled on this article by chance, when I was patrolling recent changes. (And I'm still wondering how can anyone perceive information on his private life and books he authored so dangerously contentious that only complete blanking was just enough).--ja_62 13:06, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

One or two links would be fine, but friggin' 20 links is bordering on spam. You of all people should know that. The Hessler article was indeed a link farm by definition. Hopechina (talk) 13:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Hopechina

Is this Peter Hessler's personal web page?
Sorry, but this entire Wikipedia entry reads like Hessler's own personal web page or some fan's blog rather than an encyclopedia. There is one single source cited for the entire entry! It's loaded with external links. There are so many other violations of Wiki guidelines it's not funny. Look at the number of editors who keep this page updated, yet not one of them has pointed this out. Clearly they are fans. I propose either the people who created this page (Hessler himself?) get back here and add inline footnotes and parenthetical references, or trimming the Hessler page down to what is sourceable. The same for his wife's page (which I personally don't think should even be on Wikipedia just because she is Hessler's wife and has published one book). In the meantime, I have added Refimprove and No footnotes banners. Oh0000 (talk) 07:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Why are some people so intent on cutting Hessler's page?
It's importnat to follow wikipedia's guidelines and clearly some information needs footnoting, but the "citation needed" lines here are pedantic in the extreme. You really want footnoted where his mother teaches? I'm surprised you didn't challenge his Chinese name. That probably should be footnoted too. The fact is that most of the facts are footnoted to reliable online biographies. You could pedantically insist on footnoting every single sentence, or, as is usual in academic articles (which wikipedia imitates) put the footnote at the end of the paragraph. That would be a simple solution, if the critics were interested in a sensible solution. Instead, the nasty tone of the criticism, reflected especially in the gratuitous attack on his wife, makes me think that we are not dealing with someone interested in improving wikipedia, but with one of the many critics, who for whatever motivation miss no opportunity to criticize Hessler. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halsmith (talk • contribs) 16:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems that guy is well hated by the Chinese commies. A prolonged attack by "several" newly created accounts (who are not otherwise contributing to the Wikipedia constructively) tells a lot. 78.128.177.216 (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * For Halsmith and 78.128.177.216: I enjoyed reading your comments. They were both very funny. I know you did not intend them to be funny, so I will explain why they are:


 * 1) Peter Hessler's article was originally created by Khw, also a "newly created account" with absolutely no other contributions on Wikipedia before or after. A Hessler fan? A Hessler family member? Hessler himself? Who knows. But your "tells a lot" remark can certainly be attributed to Khw as well, yet you conveniently failed to point this fact out.


 * 2) "Commies"? Who are you, Joseph McCarthy? Is this the 1950s? Who even says "Commies" anymore? And what does the Communist Party of China have to do with Peter Hessler's tragically unsourced Wikipedia article? Or perhaps you were alluding to some kind of conspiracy theory that Hu Jintao himself has ordered his cronies to vandalize the Hessler Wiki page because Hessler is that important? Lol! The guy wrote some midlist books about teaching English in China; I think that the CCP (and the average Chinese person) couldn't care less.


 * 3) Re: Hessler's mother. No, I don't think where his mother teaches needs to be footnoted. I think it needs to be removed altogether. Please tell me what Peter Hessler's mommy has anything to do with his books, and what place she has on Wikipedia? Moreover, please show me one - just ONE - article anywhere else on Wikipedia, from Obama to Orlanda Bloom, that talks about where these people's mom's work. And who would even have access to that knowledge accept A) Hessler's mom, or B) Hessler himself?


 * 3) I myself have no interest either way in Peter Hessler. I was here editing another page about China when I stumbled upon this one. After reading it, I was slightly perplexed how it had turned into a linkfarm and autobiography over the years, and why no editors had stepped in. The way Hessler's article was written smacked of me-ism, and me-ism has absolutely no place on Wikipedia no matter how popular your book is.


 * If Peter Hessler wants to advertise his speeches and book reviews or talk about his mom's job, I assume his managers or whatever would be happy to pay the $9.99 Godaddy fee to start a little fansite for him. But really this page is abominable and need to be sourced or cleaned up asap, irregardless of your love for Hessler's books of your hate for "commies." Hopechina (talk) 09:14, 13 June 2010 (UTC)Hopechina


 * I don't hate commies and I'd like to apologize to you as well as to other representants of the People's Republic of China if you were offended (and I've not certainly meant Politburo of CPC nor ordinary Chinese people, only ordinary 50 Cent Party guys), but I don't understand what your objections against biographical and bibliographical data of Hessler are? If you think he is not worthy of an article, just do propose deletion of the article, but if he is encyclopedic notable enough, then basic facts about his family and work should be included. For your information, articles both on Obama and Orlando Bloom gives quite extensive information on their family background, including mothers (Obama's mother has even separate article:-)). These are just two examples you wanted to produce. And please stop with your smear campaign against Hessler, as you haven't produced any proof that he is the author of this page, has ever edited it, or is anyway connected with this page editors. You also haven't presented any case of alleged "me-ism", so it could be perhaps more convincing if you'd finally find some. Thank you.--78.128.177.216 (talk) 19:31, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Future plans?
As of 2006, he is working on another book about the rural villages and factories in China.

Does anyone have any evidence of this? I've actually heard Hessler speak in person twice, and the last time I heard him (spring 2006), he was saying that he thought he would be leaving China fairly soon to move to a different part of the world (I believe he mentioned India) and start writing there. I don't doubt that he might have changed his mind but a citation for this is needed. Terence7 00:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, since I have reason to believe this sentence is false, I'm removing it until someone can find a citation. Terence7 06:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't seem to find the article referenced in this sentence:

In his article published in the Nov. 6, 2007 issue of The New Yorker, Peter Hessler writes he is leaving China after 10 years.

Anyone have a citation? Kjemmett 01:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've seen the article, and at its conclusion he does indicate that he is flying back to the U.S. (though he doesn't specify why or for how long). He has another article in the New Yorker of 28 March 2008, which would seem to indicate that he has not actually moved out of China. Terence7 (talk) 04:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The Peter Hessler page is one big "Citations Needed"
Ja62, not sure why you arbitrarily reverted my edits, or why you think adding a few "citations needed" notations within the text resolves anything? This whole article is one big "citations needed". It has obviously been written by Hessler himself, and it clearly violates Wiki standards to the max. Saying "page blanking is not justified" contradicts Wiki guidlines that clearly state "contentious material about living persons should be removed immediately."

Ja 62, you have a tendency to arbitrarily revert edits. Please do not continue to revert the Peter Hessler page unless you are able to find reliable 3rd party sources for the info. We cannot let self published, unverified information exist indefinately on wikipedia. The info has been on the page for many months with a few requests for 3rd party sources and in the absence of those sources the info must go. I did try to find some but it appears that the data only exists on the organizations own website which does not meet wiki standards. Hopechina (talk) 12:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Hopechina


 * If you are not sure, read this. Yes, perhaps {citation needed} tags are not of much use, but still better than your arbitrary wholesale blanking under pretension that "something" in the article, which you failed to identify, is against wp:BLP policies.
 * Well, if you hadn't specify what is contentious with the article - again - your position is hardly tenable.
 * Which Wikipedia standards or policies are violated to the max? You again forgot to specify, seemingly. And don't get personal, please.
 * If you want to challenge his notability, you can - Proposed deletion - but do not remove uncontroversial content under not entirely correct pretensions of wp:BLP violations. --ja_62 13:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)