Talk:Portia Li

Overblown claims
the overblown claims to which you refer are direct quotes taken from the reliable secondary sources used to create content for the article. Many of these are in quotes. Since the overblown claims are not of my own creation I'm not exactly sure how you want them to be handled. I thought such overblown claims were quite notable and so included them. I don't intend on any reversions, I'm just trying to understand what you're thinking and how you edit. I think the article is in better shape now since you've done your editing and appreciate the time and the effort that you put into making this article better.
 *  Bfpage &#124;leave a message 14:11, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Bfpage, the WSJ is behind a paywall in Europe (beyond the first paragraph). Given the misuse of the other sources (outlined below), I would need a specific quote from the WSJ that supports the claim she "was credited for having a major part in freeing the physicist", not simply the quote "'Portia was way out in front,' stated Policy Director of Chinese for Affirmative Action Ted Wan." Way out in front in what way? For example, another article on the subject in The New Republic credits her pieces in the  World Journal as playing a part in raising awareness, along with pieces in another Chinese-language American newspaper by other reporters, but also credits many, many other people and organizations and indeed suggests that others played a far more important role in getting him freed. The phrasing the WP article did not reflect that.


 * I would also need a quote from the WSJ that explicitly supports the contention that her reporting and her reporting alone prompted FBI investigation into San Francisco gang extortion. That was the clear implication behind a section titled Prompts FBI investigation into San Francisco gang extortion.


 * An entire section with the title "Firebrand" journalism is simply padding. The upshot is that 14 years ago a columnist in the WSJ characterised her as one of the firebrand journalists who were helping the Chinese-language newspapers increase their readership and advertising revenues.


 * As I pointed out at the AfD discussion, the section entitled Receives recognition from Hillary Clinton was an even worse example of this kind of padding, exaggerated claims, and excessive quotation. In that minor snafu over press credentials, Clinton apologized to the three newspapers involved and their editors-in-chief and reporters. Li was simply one of the three reporters mentioned.


 * The cited source "What To Do About Bird Flu" does not remotely support the claim that "She was recognized by the Chinese community as taking the lead in reporting on the SARS (bird flu) crisis.".


 * Finally this source is simply a notice about a conference in San Francisco at which she was one of the speakers, not "the featured speaker". Voceditenore (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I am inclined to agree with Voceditenore. I tried searching for "Wen Ho Lee" and "Portia Li" together. I didn't find evidence that Li played the key role ascribed to her. Note that I feel that she is suitably noteworthy for inclusion, without the overblown claims. M.boli (talk) 01:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, even if this article survives the AfD, which it may well do, it does a disservice to the article's subject to write an article full of overblown claims and empty padding. I have copyedited the recent addition about her coverage of the Ellen Pao trial. First of all, I made it clear that it was Li herself who made the made the claim about the number of hits for the Ellen Pao story, not a third party. Secondly I moved the preceding sentence about Li being "active in highlighting the issue of Chinese ethnic discrimination to Chinese communities" to the previous paragraph. The Ellen Pao case had nothing to do with ethnic discrimination. It was a gender discrimination suit. Finally, I have removed the non-event that Li was in the courtroom every day of the trial. So what? That's what reporters do. There is nothing notable about her doing the job she is paid for, and it's just empty padding. Voceditenore (talk) 06:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)