This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 390 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Yuja Wang. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yuja Wang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:15, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
This is an admirably detailed and thoroughly cited article, however, it lacks narrative structure. In other words, it reads like a long list, which is tedious (at the age of x, at the age of y, at the age of z; in 20xx, in 20xx, in 20xx and so on). Is there a way to give some shape to the chronology, for example, to help readers understand what is significant, consequential, interesting, etc.? I'm not suggesting deleting anything (if anything, I appreciate how this may serve as a handy reference for online readers). This is especially true for the "Reviews" section, which would be improved if it mapped the critical landscape, providing some indication of how critical consensus - or key debates - have emerged over time. Aolivex ( talk) 20:14, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
As the only photo in this article dated back from 2012, I added a recent photo of Yuja Wang taken by myself during her concert at Carnegie Hall on July 23, 2017, where she played Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat minor with the National Youth Orchestra of China conducted by Ludovic Morlot. The resolution of my photo is not optimal, but it's better than nothing, and at least it shows her playing the piano, which is rather relevant to complete an article about a pianist, I think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClassicalMusic33 ( talk • contribs) 15:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I’ve just replaced a broken link in the article by a working one, but I’m not sure if I did it the right way.
Also, if there is a way to prevent such "link rot", I’d be happy to hear about it!
The old link was (I know it’s in the history, but just to make things easier): http://www.playbillarts.com/news/article/6110.html -- Geke ( talk) 23:58, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
The article previously included the line "Her clothing choices in performance have also attracted attention", sourced to the Washington Post. An IP editor removed it with the edit summary "Removed mysogynistic language". I recovered it, noting "not misogynistic, this has been widely reported. The reporting itself may be controversial, but that does not negate that it has been widely discussed in printed publications". Doric Loon re-deleted it saying "I agree with the IP user - this is not notable, and I doubt if it has been widely discussed in serious discussions of music. The Daily Mail and its ilk comment on the looks of all women in the public space, but that doesn't mean we should."
This has been very widely reported. I'm not sure where the reference about the "Daily Mail and its ilk" comes from: the cited source, the Washington Post, is in no way similar to the tabloid Daily Mail.
This has been widely covered in as diverse publications as:
These are not tabloids like the Daily Mail, which I agree should not be used as a source for such things.
Any article on Wang should at least mention it (although I don't think it should be in the lede, where it previously was; and we can likely improve the wording). Not only did it get substantial coverage, but it's ignited a debate about the coverage itself. It really shouldn't be ignored. TJRC ( talk) 22:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
This entire discussion seems to stem from a strange comment by Mark Swed in a review. The comment says more about Mark Swed than about Yuja Wang, so the part of the article starting "Wang has received attention for her eye-catching outfits ..." should be re-worded and moved to Mark Swed's Wikipedia page, if it is worth retaining at all. Sayitclearly ( talk) 16:38, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 390 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Yuja Wang. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yuja Wang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:15, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
This is an admirably detailed and thoroughly cited article, however, it lacks narrative structure. In other words, it reads like a long list, which is tedious (at the age of x, at the age of y, at the age of z; in 20xx, in 20xx, in 20xx and so on). Is there a way to give some shape to the chronology, for example, to help readers understand what is significant, consequential, interesting, etc.? I'm not suggesting deleting anything (if anything, I appreciate how this may serve as a handy reference for online readers). This is especially true for the "Reviews" section, which would be improved if it mapped the critical landscape, providing some indication of how critical consensus - or key debates - have emerged over time. Aolivex ( talk) 20:14, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
As the only photo in this article dated back from 2012, I added a recent photo of Yuja Wang taken by myself during her concert at Carnegie Hall on July 23, 2017, where she played Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat minor with the National Youth Orchestra of China conducted by Ludovic Morlot. The resolution of my photo is not optimal, but it's better than nothing, and at least it shows her playing the piano, which is rather relevant to complete an article about a pianist, I think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClassicalMusic33 ( talk • contribs) 15:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I’ve just replaced a broken link in the article by a working one, but I’m not sure if I did it the right way.
Also, if there is a way to prevent such "link rot", I’d be happy to hear about it!
The old link was (I know it’s in the history, but just to make things easier): http://www.playbillarts.com/news/article/6110.html -- Geke ( talk) 23:58, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
The article previously included the line "Her clothing choices in performance have also attracted attention", sourced to the Washington Post. An IP editor removed it with the edit summary "Removed mysogynistic language". I recovered it, noting "not misogynistic, this has been widely reported. The reporting itself may be controversial, but that does not negate that it has been widely discussed in printed publications". Doric Loon re-deleted it saying "I agree with the IP user - this is not notable, and I doubt if it has been widely discussed in serious discussions of music. The Daily Mail and its ilk comment on the looks of all women in the public space, but that doesn't mean we should."
This has been very widely reported. I'm not sure where the reference about the "Daily Mail and its ilk" comes from: the cited source, the Washington Post, is in no way similar to the tabloid Daily Mail.
This has been widely covered in as diverse publications as:
These are not tabloids like the Daily Mail, which I agree should not be used as a source for such things.
Any article on Wang should at least mention it (although I don't think it should be in the lede, where it previously was; and we can likely improve the wording). Not only did it get substantial coverage, but it's ignited a debate about the coverage itself. It really shouldn't be ignored. TJRC ( talk) 22:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
This entire discussion seems to stem from a strange comment by Mark Swed in a review. The comment says more about Mark Swed than about Yuja Wang, so the part of the article starting "Wang has received attention for her eye-catching outfits ..." should be re-worded and moved to Mark Swed's Wikipedia page, if it is worth retaining at all. Sayitclearly ( talk) 16:38, 22 July 2022 (UTC)