Talk:Wen Wei Po

Untitled
Actually, the paper is not anti-democracy.As you can see from 24 th October,2003 The government actually don't want to interferne so much in order to give more freedom. So the Wen Wei Poa is not really anti-democracy.

Reply
However, the authoritarian and China-friendly standpoint of the newspaper towards the Article 23 was revealed in its editorial on 3-7-2003. The editorial stated that the legislation of Article 23 should not be delayed in other to preserve the "one country, two systems" demand, while the Beijing only showed a non-intervention attitude to the Article 23 at that time.

An article about Wen wei po 's editorial on 3-7-2003:
 * http://news.yam.com/cna/china/news/200307/200307030042.html

Reply
Anti-democracy means they may criticize any democratic movement in Hong Kong, such as more direct-elected legislators, but it doesn't mean Wen Wei Po is funded/owned by the government.

Gp1Jacky

-discussion--- Do we need to add more evidence such as the news or statistics rrather than just write the things on it? I think that will be convincing if evidences are added.

Gp1 Wendy

Fair use rationale for Image:Wenweipo.jpg
Image:Wenweipo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm.
It looks like the article is focused on destroying Wen Wei Po's credibility simply because it does not follow certain political "guidelines" "free" newspapers all follow.

Stuff like "Its reports on issues other than politics and China are considered as more reliable" and "Wen Wei Po gained a mean of 4.68 mark, where the maximum mark is 10, among local media organizations" is not backed up by any recent statistics (1996? Really?), and is nothing more than libel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.158.81 (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)