Jump to content

Talk:Radical pro-Beijing camp

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These references are a disgrace

[edit]

When doing a thorough reference review not a single one has indicated the radical pro-Beijing camp exists at all. In some cases the search term radical "pro-Beijing" is returning any result that contains either radical or pro-Beijing even when such terms are entirely distant from each other within the source. This is not how we cite an article on a political bloc. Simonm223 (talk) 15:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far I've found ONE citation that even vaguely asserts there is a radical pro-beijing group: it's the SCMP - which describes the "Defend Hong Kong Campaign" as radical and Beijing loyalist. But there is no indication that the Defend Hong Kong Campaign contains any politicians. The article describes them as a grassroots activist group. Simonm223 (talk) 15:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Vickers quote is entirely irrelevant as it's about academia, not politics, and such bad scholarship that it makes me question his reliability regardless of relevance. Simonm223 (talk) 15:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, some politicians, including Junius Ho, have a source of "radical pro-Beijing". It is necessary to distinguish between main pro-Beijing conservatives and extreme pro-Communist ultra conservatives. ProKMT (talk) 08:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No it is not necessary. You need reliable sources that indicate that other people make this distinction. So far the sources you have do not do so. Simonm223 (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After finishing reviewing the sources this is really quite an alarming piece of WP:SYNTH - it seems largely to be tying [[1]] and various affiliated politicians to political violence that, according to at least one of the sources used, they actually decried (and were subsequently criticized for supporting online censorship.) I have left up the failed verification links and the statements they're tied to so that a third party can check my work. I deleted one source that was from a subsequently shuttered publication that I could not validate the reliability of in any way. Simonm223 (talk) 12:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]