This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Persecution of Falun Gong 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, 4Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
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. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 October 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 20, 2014, July 20, 2019, and July 20, 2020. |
This article was nominated for merging with Organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners in China on 6 December 2022. The result of the discussion ( permanent link) was Not to Merge. |
I've noticed that the "Rationale" subsection of "Statewide Persecution" does not list any sources from China itself or its foreign offices which have covered this subject intensively. The Chinese government and the CCP has stated their rationale for banning Falun Gong multiple times to many different countries, however, the "Rationale" section does not include ANY of these translated Chinese sources. For starters a something should be added that states:
"The Chinese government and the CCP have stated that the persecution against Falun Gong is justified because the group denounces the use of science, denounces the ability of any government to rule, promotes the leader Li Hongzi to a messianic and infallible figure, and organizes its followers against the Chinese state apparatus."
This might be a bit condensed, but it reflects the accurate sentiment of the Chinese Communist Party on why Falun Gong is undergoing persecution. At the moment, the rationale listed in the subsection is something guessed at by "foreign observers". The "Rationale" subsection should contain the rationale of the Chinese Communist Party as they themselves state it and not the guesses of "foreign observers". There are multiple sources to back up the aforementioned statement as well, all sites are the official Chinese embassy websites for a variety of countries:
Though some of these pages are older, Falun Gong was outlawed in 1999 and the rationale presented in these articles is likely the same rationale used to ban the group and is likely the continuing framework that the Chinese Communist Party uses to justify its persecution.
Cincinnatin ( talk) 16:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
References
Fewsmith, Joseph and Daniel B. Wright. "The promise of the Revolution: stories of fulfilment and struggle in China", 2003, Rowman and Littlefield. p. 156
The purpose of wiki is to give information, it's ok to quote Hitler in an article about Nazi policies and viewpoints, how is this any different? Quoting CCP sources isn't suggesting they are right, it is just showing what they say and leaves space for what response has been made on those statements. Czarnibog ( talk) 04:43, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Isn't it possible to use the words The Chinese Communist Party Claims and summarize or paraphrase, surely there are third party statements out there. Refusing to even infer what CCP claims is a form of propaganda that puts Falun Gong in a strange position among fringe religious movements of being validated on exempt from any form of criticism. We don't have to justify any of the persecution to be free of bias, but outright refusing to cover part of the issue is extreme lack of impartial reporting.
Czarnibog ( talk) 17:41, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
They called it an "evil cult" and honestly, I am starting to see that too. It's funny how the allegations against the gov, are all deemed to be true despite the real world difficulty to prove such numbers especially when much of the evidence is hearsay. Yet according to many scholars [1] including even Ownby, Li indeed promises his practitioners that they can have supernatural powers and external youth by following him. And that he has supernatural powers. That sounds obviously like a brainwashing cult yet people can't even mention in Wikipedia that it's a cult due to political biases nowadays against China. Despite Wikipedia shouldn't take political sides and mention at minimum what the Chinese gov reasoning was for ridding Falun gong. ArrowSake ( talk) 01:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
I would like to connect some dots and investigate the legitimacy of Lewis's claims when it comes matters related to FLG and the Chinese Communist regime.
In this link, it shows that James Lewis is a professor at Wuhan University in China [2], and Wuhan University is under the leadership of (Communist) Party Committee secretaries [3].
What does this entail? It makes clear the agenda of Lewis’ narrative: his perspective must align with that of the Chinese Communist regime's, otherwise he would not have been able hold any position at Wuhan Univeristy, due to the Communist Party’s persecution and mass propaganda campaign [4], as well as the party's leadership of that University. These facts make Lewis's claims unreliable and our reference to him a violation of WP:SOAP.-- Thomas Meng ( talk) 17:26, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
@ Binksternet: Nice to see you again. Recently I've compiled some academic sources explaining Falun Gong's teachings. They all seem to contradict the Lewis-cited sentence in the background section. But let's first put that aside. The Lewis-cited sentence currently says that FLG practitioners are "instructed to lie" about their practice. Is there a specific sentence in the source saying this? Thomas Meng ( talk) 03:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, the rapid proliferation of Falun Gong websites and other online information supporting Falun Gong helped shape international opinion about the conflict. However, it should be realized that, with Li Hongzhi’s encouragement, practitioners intentionally left out certain essential information about the movement that paint a very different picture of Falun Gong and its conflict with the People’s Republic of China.
While definitely a note-worthy subject, it may be better suited to being a section, if not more than one on the already existing persecution page Heyallkatehere ( talk) 18:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose The subject of the Organ harvesting article is so shocking that it’s removal to part of another article cannot IMO be justified. If this was done, it would get lost in the other article. Not justifiable! Boscaswell talk 23:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose It's not just Falun Gong. China harvests organs from prisoners generally. [8] Adoring nanny ( talk) 02:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Victims of communism is a state sanctioned and biased source and is not reputable for this article. It’s an organization who’s explicit goal is biased reporting. 128.119.202.242 ( talk) 18:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The introduction needs to state the Chinese gov allegations. Other qigong and taichi groups, or Buddhism etc weren't banned in China despite they are spiritual practices and mass popular religions too. The Chinese government narrowly called Falun Gong as a cult. It was their official reasoning why they banned it and their reasoning why they put Falun Gong people but not normal Buddhists in re-education camps.
Add this sentence in after the second paragraph in introduction chapter:
The Chinese government alleged that Falun Gong was an 'evil cult'" or "'heretical sect'" and used that official rationale to justify to "educate and transform" Falun Gong practitioners in re-education camps to remove their beliefs in Falun Gong in order to eliminate the movement.
Cite Sources for the above statement.
https://www.refworld.org/docid/563c6fb94.html
https://www.hrw.org/news/1999/11/09/china-uses-rule-law-justify-falun-gong-crackdown
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2001/08/the-gong-show.html ArrowSake ( talk) 02:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template.
Lightoil (
talk) 02:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)And I am putting it on myself and you can feel free to give an actual reason why people should be in the dark. Which I very much find difficult to believe there's ever a valid reason. Who can argue that such information is irrelevant or untrue? ArrowSake ( talk) 10:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I saw that their book is cited as a source but the part that talks about requiring a "certificate" stating that you are not part of Falun Gong to be enrolled in a post-secondary education is straight up false. 2804:7F7:A08A:7035:51D4:7672:9659:6CDB ( talk) 20:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Persecution of Falun Gong 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, 4Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
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. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 October 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 20, 2014, July 20, 2019, and July 20, 2020. |
This article was nominated for merging with Organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners in China on 6 December 2022. The result of the discussion ( permanent link) was Not to Merge. |
I've noticed that the "Rationale" subsection of "Statewide Persecution" does not list any sources from China itself or its foreign offices which have covered this subject intensively. The Chinese government and the CCP has stated their rationale for banning Falun Gong multiple times to many different countries, however, the "Rationale" section does not include ANY of these translated Chinese sources. For starters a something should be added that states:
"The Chinese government and the CCP have stated that the persecution against Falun Gong is justified because the group denounces the use of science, denounces the ability of any government to rule, promotes the leader Li Hongzi to a messianic and infallible figure, and organizes its followers against the Chinese state apparatus."
This might be a bit condensed, but it reflects the accurate sentiment of the Chinese Communist Party on why Falun Gong is undergoing persecution. At the moment, the rationale listed in the subsection is something guessed at by "foreign observers". The "Rationale" subsection should contain the rationale of the Chinese Communist Party as they themselves state it and not the guesses of "foreign observers". There are multiple sources to back up the aforementioned statement as well, all sites are the official Chinese embassy websites for a variety of countries:
Though some of these pages are older, Falun Gong was outlawed in 1999 and the rationale presented in these articles is likely the same rationale used to ban the group and is likely the continuing framework that the Chinese Communist Party uses to justify its persecution.
Cincinnatin ( talk) 16:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
References
Fewsmith, Joseph and Daniel B. Wright. "The promise of the Revolution: stories of fulfilment and struggle in China", 2003, Rowman and Littlefield. p. 156
The purpose of wiki is to give information, it's ok to quote Hitler in an article about Nazi policies and viewpoints, how is this any different? Quoting CCP sources isn't suggesting they are right, it is just showing what they say and leaves space for what response has been made on those statements. Czarnibog ( talk) 04:43, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Isn't it possible to use the words The Chinese Communist Party Claims and summarize or paraphrase, surely there are third party statements out there. Refusing to even infer what CCP claims is a form of propaganda that puts Falun Gong in a strange position among fringe religious movements of being validated on exempt from any form of criticism. We don't have to justify any of the persecution to be free of bias, but outright refusing to cover part of the issue is extreme lack of impartial reporting.
Czarnibog ( talk) 17:41, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
They called it an "evil cult" and honestly, I am starting to see that too. It's funny how the allegations against the gov, are all deemed to be true despite the real world difficulty to prove such numbers especially when much of the evidence is hearsay. Yet according to many scholars [1] including even Ownby, Li indeed promises his practitioners that they can have supernatural powers and external youth by following him. And that he has supernatural powers. That sounds obviously like a brainwashing cult yet people can't even mention in Wikipedia that it's a cult due to political biases nowadays against China. Despite Wikipedia shouldn't take political sides and mention at minimum what the Chinese gov reasoning was for ridding Falun gong. ArrowSake ( talk) 01:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
I would like to connect some dots and investigate the legitimacy of Lewis's claims when it comes matters related to FLG and the Chinese Communist regime.
In this link, it shows that James Lewis is a professor at Wuhan University in China [2], and Wuhan University is under the leadership of (Communist) Party Committee secretaries [3].
What does this entail? It makes clear the agenda of Lewis’ narrative: his perspective must align with that of the Chinese Communist regime's, otherwise he would not have been able hold any position at Wuhan Univeristy, due to the Communist Party’s persecution and mass propaganda campaign [4], as well as the party's leadership of that University. These facts make Lewis's claims unreliable and our reference to him a violation of WP:SOAP.-- Thomas Meng ( talk) 17:26, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
@ Binksternet: Nice to see you again. Recently I've compiled some academic sources explaining Falun Gong's teachings. They all seem to contradict the Lewis-cited sentence in the background section. But let's first put that aside. The Lewis-cited sentence currently says that FLG practitioners are "instructed to lie" about their practice. Is there a specific sentence in the source saying this? Thomas Meng ( talk) 03:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, the rapid proliferation of Falun Gong websites and other online information supporting Falun Gong helped shape international opinion about the conflict. However, it should be realized that, with Li Hongzhi’s encouragement, practitioners intentionally left out certain essential information about the movement that paint a very different picture of Falun Gong and its conflict with the People’s Republic of China.
While definitely a note-worthy subject, it may be better suited to being a section, if not more than one on the already existing persecution page Heyallkatehere ( talk) 18:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose The subject of the Organ harvesting article is so shocking that it’s removal to part of another article cannot IMO be justified. If this was done, it would get lost in the other article. Not justifiable! Boscaswell talk 23:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose It's not just Falun Gong. China harvests organs from prisoners generally. [8] Adoring nanny ( talk) 02:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Victims of communism is a state sanctioned and biased source and is not reputable for this article. It’s an organization who’s explicit goal is biased reporting. 128.119.202.242 ( talk) 18:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The introduction needs to state the Chinese gov allegations. Other qigong and taichi groups, or Buddhism etc weren't banned in China despite they are spiritual practices and mass popular religions too. The Chinese government narrowly called Falun Gong as a cult. It was their official reasoning why they banned it and their reasoning why they put Falun Gong people but not normal Buddhists in re-education camps.
Add this sentence in after the second paragraph in introduction chapter:
The Chinese government alleged that Falun Gong was an 'evil cult'" or "'heretical sect'" and used that official rationale to justify to "educate and transform" Falun Gong practitioners in re-education camps to remove their beliefs in Falun Gong in order to eliminate the movement.
Cite Sources for the above statement.
https://www.refworld.org/docid/563c6fb94.html
https://www.hrw.org/news/1999/11/09/china-uses-rule-law-justify-falun-gong-crackdown
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2001/08/the-gong-show.html ArrowSake ( talk) 02:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template.
Lightoil (
talk) 02:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)And I am putting it on myself and you can feel free to give an actual reason why people should be in the dark. Which I very much find difficult to believe there's ever a valid reason. Who can argue that such information is irrelevant or untrue? ArrowSake ( talk) 10:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I saw that their book is cited as a source but the part that talks about requiring a "certificate" stating that you are not part of Falun Gong to be enrolled in a post-secondary education is straight up false. 2804:7F7:A08A:7035:51D4:7672:9659:6CDB ( talk) 20:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)