This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Epoch Times article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Frequently asked questions Q1: Should this article describe The Epoch Times as far-right?
A1: Yes, the "far-right" descriptor is
amply and reliably sourced. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
Falun Gong, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The Weidong Guan article was blanked and that title now redirects to The Epoch Times. The contents of the former article are available in the redirect's history. |
First hyperlink shows neo-nazis marching. This is a highly misleading entry. If ET is far-right then NY Times is far-left, but of course they're painted as mainstream. ET is conservative, you could even say 'ultra conservative,' but what you've posted is a lie. Neither is it authoritarian--quite the opposite, if you've ever bothered to read its articles. Taking sides with the Chinese Communist Party, which actually is authoritarian, makes me wonder who runs this site and who they're placating to. This and other skewed articles is why I've quit contributing to Wikipedia, although I used to every year. Martyrw ( talk) 16:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Simply by increasing the plurality of voices in the diaspora Chinese-language public sphere, The Epoch Times is playing a progressive role, even though the community’s pariah status limits its impact.It is also conceivable that an organization like The Epoch Times could evolve into a more mainstream publication while retaining its critical independence and moral watchdog mission." Thank you. Path2space ( talk) 23:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per my conversation with Firefangledfeathers above, the following sources do not support the use of the term "far-right" as applied, or have other fundamental problems. I cordially suggest them as candidates for removal.
[16]https://fortune.com/2020/08/07/this-moon-landing-video-is-fake/: unrelated article, segment in question appears in the margins/not written by listed authors
[11]https://newrepublic.com/article/155076/obscure-newspaper-fueling-far-right-europe: does not apply far-right label to TET
[12]https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/02/guo-wengui-steve-bannon-hunter-biden-conspiracies-disinformation/: wording--"Many of the most potent claims have roots with anti-CCP and far-right actors, including the Falun Gong-backed Epoch Times"--open to interpretation whether TET is anti-CCP, far-right, or both.
[15] https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/12/21254184/how-plandemic-went-viral-facebook-youtube: The Verge is not what you would call a political heavy-hitter--
"There is broad consensus that The Verge is a reliable source for use in articles relating to technology, science, and automobiles"
Oddly similar wording between
[4]https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503630611-003/html and
[10]
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/technology/plandemic-judy-mikovitz-coronavirus-disinformation.html: "she has become a darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and The Gateway Pundit" vs. "she became the darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and Gateway Pundit". Recommend keeping one or the other.
ClifV (
talk) 20:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
Based on the previous discussion of trimming sources and input from the protected edit request, I'd like to re-present the following sources as candidates for removal:
[16]https://fortune.com/2020/08/07/this-moon-landing-video-is-fake/: newsletter summarizes another article which does not apply the label "far-right"; additionally, Fortune magazine not listed as a perennial source for politics, reliability unknown
[7]https://doi.org/10.1515%2Ffjsb-2020-0040: specific to German publication and should be attributed as such
[9]http://www.chinafile.com/reporting-opinion/media/german-edition-of-falun-gong-affiliated-epoch-times-aligns-far-right: specific to German publication
[11]https://newrepublic.com/article/155076/obscure-newspaper-fueling-far-right-europe: does not apply far-right label to TET, also specific to German publication
[12]https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/02/guo-wengui-steve-bannon-hunter-biden-conspiracies-disinformation/: wording--"Many of the most potent claims have roots with anti-CCP and far-right actors, including the Falun Gong-backed Epoch Times"--open to interpretation whether TET is anti-CCP, far-right, or both.
[15] https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/12/21254184/how-plandemic-went-viral-facebook-youtube: The Verge is not what you would call a political heavy-hitter--
"There is broad consensus that The Verge is a reliable source for use in articles relating to technology, science, and automobiles"
Oddly similar wording between
[4]https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503630611-003/html and
[10]
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/technology/plandemic-judy-mikovitz-coronavirus-disinformation.html: "she has become a darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and The Gateway Pundit" vs. "she became the darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and Gateway Pundit". Recommend keeping one or the other.
ClifV (
talk) 20:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Tried to keep the formatting/numbering accurate as it corresponds to the article, apologies for any misnumbers.
ClifV (
talk) 04:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
In regards to previous protected edit request and associated list of sources--
First, some established points:
Second, some points on which I'd like to establish consensus:
ClifV (
talk) 05:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Epoch Times article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Frequently asked questions Q1: Should this article describe The Epoch Times as far-right?
A1: Yes, the "far-right" descriptor is
amply and reliably sourced. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
Falun Gong, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The Weidong Guan article was blanked and that title now redirects to The Epoch Times. The contents of the former article are available in the redirect's history. |
First hyperlink shows neo-nazis marching. This is a highly misleading entry. If ET is far-right then NY Times is far-left, but of course they're painted as mainstream. ET is conservative, you could even say 'ultra conservative,' but what you've posted is a lie. Neither is it authoritarian--quite the opposite, if you've ever bothered to read its articles. Taking sides with the Chinese Communist Party, which actually is authoritarian, makes me wonder who runs this site and who they're placating to. This and other skewed articles is why I've quit contributing to Wikipedia, although I used to every year. Martyrw ( talk) 16:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Simply by increasing the plurality of voices in the diaspora Chinese-language public sphere, The Epoch Times is playing a progressive role, even though the community’s pariah status limits its impact.It is also conceivable that an organization like The Epoch Times could evolve into a more mainstream publication while retaining its critical independence and moral watchdog mission." Thank you. Path2space ( talk) 23:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per my conversation with Firefangledfeathers above, the following sources do not support the use of the term "far-right" as applied, or have other fundamental problems. I cordially suggest them as candidates for removal.
[16]https://fortune.com/2020/08/07/this-moon-landing-video-is-fake/: unrelated article, segment in question appears in the margins/not written by listed authors
[11]https://newrepublic.com/article/155076/obscure-newspaper-fueling-far-right-europe: does not apply far-right label to TET
[12]https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/02/guo-wengui-steve-bannon-hunter-biden-conspiracies-disinformation/: wording--"Many of the most potent claims have roots with anti-CCP and far-right actors, including the Falun Gong-backed Epoch Times"--open to interpretation whether TET is anti-CCP, far-right, or both.
[15] https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/12/21254184/how-plandemic-went-viral-facebook-youtube: The Verge is not what you would call a political heavy-hitter--
"There is broad consensus that The Verge is a reliable source for use in articles relating to technology, science, and automobiles"
Oddly similar wording between
[4]https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503630611-003/html and
[10]
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/technology/plandemic-judy-mikovitz-coronavirus-disinformation.html: "she has become a darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and The Gateway Pundit" vs. "she became the darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and Gateway Pundit". Recommend keeping one or the other.
ClifV (
talk) 20:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
Based on the previous discussion of trimming sources and input from the protected edit request, I'd like to re-present the following sources as candidates for removal:
[16]https://fortune.com/2020/08/07/this-moon-landing-video-is-fake/: newsletter summarizes another article which does not apply the label "far-right"; additionally, Fortune magazine not listed as a perennial source for politics, reliability unknown
[7]https://doi.org/10.1515%2Ffjsb-2020-0040: specific to German publication and should be attributed as such
[9]http://www.chinafile.com/reporting-opinion/media/german-edition-of-falun-gong-affiliated-epoch-times-aligns-far-right: specific to German publication
[11]https://newrepublic.com/article/155076/obscure-newspaper-fueling-far-right-europe: does not apply far-right label to TET, also specific to German publication
[12]https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/02/guo-wengui-steve-bannon-hunter-biden-conspiracies-disinformation/: wording--"Many of the most potent claims have roots with anti-CCP and far-right actors, including the Falun Gong-backed Epoch Times"--open to interpretation whether TET is anti-CCP, far-right, or both.
[15] https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/12/21254184/how-plandemic-went-viral-facebook-youtube: The Verge is not what you would call a political heavy-hitter--
"There is broad consensus that The Verge is a reliable source for use in articles relating to technology, science, and automobiles"
Oddly similar wording between
[4]https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503630611-003/html and
[10]
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/technology/plandemic-judy-mikovitz-coronavirus-disinformation.html: "she has become a darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and The Gateway Pundit" vs. "she became the darling of far-right publications like The Epoch Times and Gateway Pundit". Recommend keeping one or the other.
ClifV (
talk) 20:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Tried to keep the formatting/numbering accurate as it corresponds to the article, apologies for any misnumbers.
ClifV (
talk) 04:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
In regards to previous protected edit request and associated list of sources--
First, some established points:
Second, some points on which I'd like to establish consensus:
ClifV (
talk) 05:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)