Talk:Chen Zhonghua

My name is Jonathan Bluestein and I created this page. I am a friend of master Chen Zhonghua, but I am not his student or disciple, and I do not practice his martial arts. Master Chen is one of several dozen key figures in the world of Internal Martial Arts in modern times, and I felt that he's well known enough to deserve his own Wikipedia page. Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 11:54, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

References

In Wikipedia Youtube and personal statements are not considered references. I removed a few. I would suggest that you move the Youtubes to external links for both the articles you created. I also put an essay tag in your newest article - it does not need a re-write but I do think the language needs some tightening.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:12, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Tell you what... you following each and every one of my edits on Wikipedia is kinda creepy and annoying. But I guess that's your thing. Seriously man, even though you mean well... Creepy.

As to your comments - My email references are very much appropriate! The first was a statement by the man himself - Chen Zhonghua, as to the validity of dates that relate to his life and lineage. His is the best source for that sort of info. You mean to tell me that some article someone wrote would be a better source? That's ridiculous. No one can get a better source, and that was a valid source.

The second reference you deleted wasn't even an email! It was a screen capture from Google Maps that shows the road between Da Qing Shan and Chen Village. It is important both as reference to claims made on the page, and to illustrate to readers where those places are located at, since most of them are not familiar with the geography of China. These two places have become important focal points within the worldwide community of Taiji practitioners, and I have added info on them on Zhonghua's page since they relate to his life and work, and not yet have pages of their own.

Given these arguments, I'm bringing back the references that you deleted. Wanna delete them again? Make some reasonable claim for it. Can you prove that one can get a better reference to the dates mentioned on this page than a person other than Chen Zhonghua? Can you explain why the map of the two locations and the road between them is not relevant to the page? If not, please refrain from deleting them again. Thank you. Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 16:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Nothing creepy about it. I search for new articles related to the martial arts and help bring them up to standards. There is a whole community that does the same thing. That's how I came out across your articles - no more than that. Emails (which can be faked), blogs, and Youtube (especially with no text)are not considered reliable references and will be challenged. Paranoia wont get you anywhere.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:35, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Why would a person who created such a page fake that email? The email was meant to support birth and death dates. What motive can one have to fake them?... As for Youtube and other things - that's exactly the reason why such pages should be edited by people who actually know something about the martial arts being discussed - then they could know from simple observation if a person who appears on a video is who he's claimed to be. There's no lack of Chen style practitioners to ask... There are probably dozen thousands of them worldwide. Chen Zhonghua himself speaks fluent English and can be easily reached if there arises any suspicion to a problem with this page. This fact, again, would only be known to someone from within that community. I have no understanding whatsoever of American Football, but you won't see me going into articles about people related to that sport and deleting 'suspicious things' without checking them in depth. Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 17:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

By the way - you ARE following me. On Wang Xiangzhai I made a small edit on May 13th, and immediately a few hours after that you add a 'personal essay' tag. Coincidence?? I don't think so http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wang_Xiangzhai&action=history Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 08:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Of course it is - I was following links like people happen to do on Wikipedia. If an article needs something added I do it. All the timing suggests is that we probably live in a similar time zone. It was related to your articles - just not your edits. With respect to the references - what we are talking about is the structure of Wikipedia and how to make the articles better. No one has made any comments on content with respect to the subject. Tags are there to draw attention to what needs work for other editors that are inclined to help along those lines. Now my edits on the page were intended to help you avoid future problems but your responses to all edits by anyone seems quite confrontational. Good luck with that.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:03, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Fixed according to Wikipedia standards ottawakungfu (talk) 20:14, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

"This reads like a Personal reflection or opinion essay"

Does anyone who knows anything whatsoever about the current state of Chen style and 'Practical Method' history and politics care to enlighten us on how this claim has any validity? I wrote this page in the most unbiased and professional way possible. There are no claims in favour or against anyone, in any way. It tells the history of a person and his martial arts the way they are. Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 18:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Reworded to a more neutral tone ottawakungfu (talk) 20:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Lack of notability claim

How is a man with schools in over 20 countries not notable? You guys serious? All the geniuses adding tags to this page have not read the citations and references. I am removing the notability tag. Under 'external links', there are already links to websites of 4 different schools under Chen in 4 different countries. If required, one could put up links and references for the rest of the school. I believe though, that 4 are enough. Had I put links to more schools people would have claimed this page is a commercial. Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 09:06, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I did read them, but running schools and holding seminars does not show notability. I don't see independent sourcing to show he meets WP:GNG or WP:MANOTE. I'm just asking you to show me how he meets either of those standards--do that instead of insulting other editors. Please note that I voted to keep Shang Yunxiang--all you need to do is show the subject meets WP notability criteria. Jakejr (talk) 02:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I think the demands of WP:GNG are absurd for 99.99% of martial arts teachers throughout history. Very few of them, alive or dead, have received 'coverage' as such. In terms of WP:MANOTE - again, you just wouldn't know. Chen Zhonghua arranges competitions on Daqingshan - but all the info is in Chinese. I was there. I saw it. I met with the guy. I saw hundreds of his students with my own eyes. When there are many thousands of people who are this person's students worldwide, it's ridiculous to ask for more proof. I don't see how this makes one 'less notable' when this is the case, as compared to some no-name kid with a 12 fight MMA record who never taught anyone and got covered by some greedy commercially-infested magazines. The current model for 'notability' certainly favours such people over well known and respectable teachers. The real martial arts community was never about who gets more coverage. The most influential people in martial arts across the centuries were usually not the most famous. Is this out of the know of Wikipedia editors? Are they all detached from that community?... It's no secret that most of the martial arts worldwide don't get proper coverage at all, in any media. What is readily available in text format is but a tiny glimpse of the wealth of knowledge that exists in that field of study. Even youtube does not offer substantially more, in comparison to the amount of material that's out there. So, what do you want to do? Are you asking me, Jonathan Bluestein, to help you guys delete or modify everything that's 'not notable' according to these silly criteria? I'd rather put as much info as possible out there, and wait for people to take the initiative to improve upon it. Martial artists are usually lazy and awful writers, and such things can take decades. In the meanwhile though, it's better to have something rather than nothing. I ain't gonna sit by the wayside and watch how ignorance is maintained by things like wikipedia's 'notability standards'. If knowledge is ought to get out there, it would. I'd help it spread. That's the purpose of this entire website. It's not meant to be a bureaucratic hell, but a garden of knowledge. How about you and all the other editors do some work yourselves in this regards? Cause I took my ass to China to do research, twice already, and I spend a lot of time on improving my knowledge and understanding of martial arts - partly for me, and partly for the benefit of all martial artists worldwide. I actually sit down and write useful stuff. Things that people can learn from. Frankly, I cannot give less of a $#%#@! about silly criteria that no one in the world can supply or provide. You wanna have more information on people like Chen Zhonghua? Then I suggest you get on a plane and check him out and write an article and a wikipedia page about it like I did, cause I ain't seeing how your bureaucratic demands are helping anyone. This isn't personal - this is just me being tired of people who mostly criticize but do nothing themselves to help mend the situation they're criticizing... You mean well, and end up causing trouble and pain to the people who actually try to spread quality information. Here's your citation: Jonathan Bluestein got all the info directly from the source! No bullshit magazine articles, no forum posts - all from the man himself. Got issues with that? Call me: 972-54-6888992 jonathan.bluestein@gmail.com . I ain't hiding behind no nicknames or got no privacy issues, and Wikiepdia would've been a better place if people were just discussing things like rational human beings and not like lawyers quoting from law books. Jonathan.bluestein (talk) 22:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Chen Zhonghua is indeed notable. Jonathan, you can use Chinese sources as well - any article that mentions him that isn't published by him. I too am often frustrated by WP and the quasi-rules that govern it - don't let the wikilawyer bullies get to you, BUT, the vast majority of people on WP are very dedicated to the idea of every edit being backed up by a reliable source. I use my personal knowledge of Chinese medicine to suggest changes to articles and it generally gets little respect here, just kinda the way it is.Herbxue (talk) 16:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Not really an issue. Consider it resolved after edit. ottawakungfu (talk) 20:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)