This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the William Cheung 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 |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It appears that a few people have difficulty with historical information regarding William Cheung. Why do I get the feeling that some of these people are based in the Wing Tsun or a variant of this? If you have difficulty with what Cheung and other's contend as historical, please do not summarily delete or revise. Merely, ADD to it with your non-POV refutations. On the other hand, however, if you attempt to refute a historical contention with merely another's POV, it does nothing for validity and accuracy to replace what you allege as an "opinion" with another POV. Please note that the Wing Tsun "Board" was ad hoc, they did not remain together (essentially fractionated and disenfranchised from one another), and claim that they were founded by among others, Yip Man in 1976, when he died in 1972. If you insist on a penchant for validity, please be consistent! Regards, KM
This section (or a section similar to it) should remain as an important part of the article. It is clear this has been the subject of a revert war already.
Can somebody site where there following came from: 'seminar that was possibly bogus and set up by Boztepe's students'Rpf 16:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
--Marty Goldberg 16:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Concerning the fight between Emin Boztepe and William Cheung, I think it is important a) to separate the agreed-upon facts from hearsay, and b) to nevertheless include the hearsay. Why? We need to do (a) to establish NPOV and (b) to explain why the fight and video are so controversial; to give a sense that the controversy is ongoing; and frankly to prevent edit wars with those who would otherwise insert the unverified claims into the body of the article.
Including the claims in bullet points makes it easy for people to add commonly held but unproved beliefs without starting a revert war. If someone does put something controversial in the body of the article, one can simply move it to the list of controversial claims rather than deleting outright, again hopefully averting war.
WT guy 19:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Dot points: I think the way we prevent the perpetuation of hearsay is to leave it out of an encyclopedia. It looks a bit too cynical but more importantly doesn't include sources (are these claims "independant research"?). A bit like when Fox news says "some people say" without actually saying who. If people are putting in unsourced claims, we will just have to deal with them. I can see what you are trying to do but unless you can quote a source for the bullet points, they don't belong there.
Speaking of unsourced, I don't agree with the personal view of infighting. A quick google will find you photos with the majority of senior first generation students having dinner etc. The tone is cynical towards kung fu in general and doesn't belong there either. Source it if you want it back. Rpf 00:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Removed the Bruce Lee paragraph from the controversy section, not much of a well formed point for claiming a controversy. Wong was before William, who was before Bruce - which is a fact. William introduced Bruce to Yip Man and Wong has verified that in interviews and in a translated article here (though William's last name is misstranslated as "Chang". Its also been verified by Wong protoge David Peterson here and here. Those articles also discuss Bruce training with William first and then Wong.
Regarding whether the fight is an internet phenomenon - 1, 14,500 hits for "william cheung" and germany. And regular discussions on the Usenet group rec.martial-arts dating back to at least 1992 when searching for "william cheung", germany and Emin. --Marty Goldberg 04:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Can we get a source that WSL started before him (and that Cheung said so?) -- Rpf 14:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
The entire episode of William watching Wong fight, seeing Wong join up and then deciding to join up himself was published in Black Belt Magazine in 1983 under a multi-part series entitled "The William Cheung Story". It was written by William and (his first U.S. student) Blaine Collins. A copy was up on William's site until a recent redesign, but can still be accessed through archive.org. Its the fourth article in the series that has the account in detail and can still be read here. He also repeated the description in detail during a taped interview that was conducted with him from which the Germany Incident article I wrote came from. Still have a copy of the audio somewhere, but the Black Belt reference should be enough. --Marty Goldberg 16:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
I think there is no need to put Grandmaster in quotations. It is noted that he is Grandmaster of what is recognized as his version of Wing Chun. Placing it in quotations connotates disputed or questionable information. There is no dispute within his system that his title is Grandmaster and he as addressed as such within his Kung Fu association. I am removing the quotes unless there is contention with this.--Hokgwai 02:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
It appears that a few people have difficulty with historical information regarding William Cheung. Why do I get the feeling that some of these people are based in the Wing Tsun or a variant of this? If you have difficulty with what Cheung and other's contend as historical, please do not summarily delete or revise. Merely, ADD to it with your non-POV refutations. On the other hand, however, if you attempt to refute a historical contention with merely another's POV, it does nothing for validity and accuracy to replace what you allege as an "opinion" with another POV. Please note that the Wing Tsun "Board" was ad hoc, they did not remain together (essentially fractionated and disenfranchised from one another), and claim that they were founded by among others, Yip Man in 1976, when he died in 1972. If you insist on a penchant for validity, please be consistent!
Regards,
KM
Just passing through and was thinking that the first two introductory paragraphs could do with some editing because they pretty much repeat the same information, surely they can be merged into one paragraph. I would do it, but I don't want to tread on anyone's toes as it were. 143.210.182.197 11:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. And have done. Hope you all like it. RF Red Fiona 12:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
The article is not neutral. Some specifications are deposited inexactly with inexact references.
These inexact references partially damage the reputation William Cheungs.
This contradicts the Wikipedia rules.
I suggest the deletion.
(Sorry, my english is not the best).
1. Challenge
It gives absolutely different witnesses for this "fight". The specifications are not protected. The references are not unequivocal. Read the Post "Boztepe, Giese Videos nur Kinderklopperei ?" Nr.53 in http://www.kampfkunst-board.info/ User AKED (it is Dieter Knüttel, ModernArnis a neutral observer.)
He was there.
Read the text after "Was also passierte, erst mal die Fakten, da war ich dabei:"
Or speak with Sifu Augustinus Yie (not Leung Ting and not William Cheung) he has supported the seminar.
2. Start Date
Where writes Wong Shun Leung personally "1954"?
The references are not protected.
3. Live-in status
Has the Author contact William Cheung?
Is with 1954 something else meant? Often shorttime living-in or overnight stay? (W.Cheung lived not by his parents in this time)
W. Cheung writes in his book city of Dragons on the page 25,26 and 29 that he has lived together permanently with Yip Man and Song Lian from Summer, 1955.
Not Chu Shong Tin has written these lines.
It is written about Chu Shong Tin.
The references are not protected.
The Text is not from Chu Shong Tin personally.
4. Letter VTAA
The Letter is not alone from Chu Shong Tin. Who knows, that he has formulated the word „intermittently”.?
The references are not protected.
I know that I am not neutral, too. I think the deletion is the best compromise. In Germany is the Emin Boztepe article delete. It was a workable solution.
Thank you Wingchun4fun (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
edit 9 Aprill 2009 better translation
Wingchun4fun (talk) 15:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
WSL don't know his own start date. See on WIKI Wong Shun Leung Interview in the references 84.129.71.160 (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
In "Letters of the dragon" Bruce Lee start date is 1953. Is that right WSL can not start in 1954. 84.129.60.50 (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
"presented by Linda" reference please. 1953 is in "Letters of the Dragon", "The celebrated life of the golden dragon" and other. „It was I who introduced Bruce Lee to Wing Chun School in the summer of 1954.“ Is this a new William Cheung controversy?Ng111Mui (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
My new edit is erased! Why? 84.129.71.160 (talk) 15:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
My words? No. The link after "phenomenon" is google ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.129.71.160 (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
The References from VTAA not fairminded. See on "http://www.vingtsun.org.hk/" History & development 1950-1953, Foto: Grandmaster Ip Man and his students at the Shum Shui Po Hotel on 25th April 1955. Third row! Count the people - read the names below. William Cheung is erased!
"A Comparison of Wing Chun and Jeet Kune Do" Volumes II (with Ted Wong) is not in the Library of Congress. Written? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ng111Mui (talk • contribs) 08:10, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
20. September 1986 From various german Martial Art forums. Ng111Mui (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
On October 10, 2009, Foshan Sports University in China officially appointed Dr. William Cheung, Grandmaster of Wing Chun Kung Fu, as Guest Professor in charge of Special Programs for Elite Athletes. [1] Ng999Mui (talk) 05:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
An image used in this article, File:William Cheung.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 22 June 2012
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:William Cheung.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC) |
Notability of Božidar Bobby Gabershek? In ictu oculi (talk) 10:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Consensus of a discussion on merging Wing Tsun to Wing Chun was that it is better to merge style specific information into the founder's article with an opportunity for further discussion. This would keep it in line with other styles of Wing Chun.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on William Cheung. 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 or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:48, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
This article is about William Cheung, but biographies of several other people have twice been inserted. If these people are worthy of Wikipedia articles, articles about them should be created, and linked to from this one if there is a connection. But they do not belong here. I have removed them again. Maproom (talk) 16:46, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The problem here, Australianblackbelt is that it's not just "Oram's name bieng mentioned once". It's a large paragraphs of information about people that are not the article subject. Continuing to re-add the disputed content without letting this discussion take it's course is called edit-warring and may very well result in you being blocked from Wikipedia. Please allow this discussion to take it's course before re-adding the content again. If we can't find a resolution through consensus among us, there are means to request feedback from a wider selection of editors in a neutral manner. Maproom and 4TheWynne are trying to work with you here, as am I. I thought our discussion on the IRC channel yesterday would have helped you understand more about what we're trying to accomplish here, but I was saddened to see that you continued on in this direction. Please stop re-adding the information to the article so we can work through this. To Maproom and 4TheWynne, User:Australianblackbelt obviously has a different idea of what is relevant here and isn't familiar with how to write a Wikipedia article. I think there may be enough source material about Oram that may actually be relevant to Cheung's biography (and Downey Jr's) that could warrant a short sentence at least - not sure about Arnett, though, haven't looked into that yet. I don't have time to look into this specifically now, but can in a couple days. Either way though, Australianblackbelt is definitely not helping matters with this edit warring. Chrisw80 (talk) 07:51, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Unlock the article please my email is jacobroozie@gmail.com 198.52.13.15 (talk) 09:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Traditional wing chun has been repeatedly adding names of non-notable persons to the "students" field of the infobox. As stated at Template:Infobox martial artist, this field is for "notable students of the person". "Notable" here, as throughout Wikipedia, means "the subject of a Wikipedia article". If someone creates an acceptable article about Rick Spain or any of the others, then his name can be added to the list. Meanwhile, I have removed the non-notable names. Maproom (talk) 08:47, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Note the user name Traditional Wing Chun is the name of William Cheung's style. User may be the too close to the article's subject or be the subject himself. Australianblackbelt (talk) 19:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on William Cheung. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
This edit added claims that much of the article is incorrect, "The article says he is still alive even though he's been dead for over a decade. Some of the things cited as reference material are incorrect and simply requotes of things he told people before he died, the news articles themself were written AFTER he died and were simply other people retelling stories Sifu Cheung had told them before he died. These cited proofs are not proofs at all only hearsay and stories from a man who was famous in the martial world for telling big stories...I don't know how to make notes for editing, but a lot of information on this page is incorrect. I studied Wing Chun with Sifu Cheung. He has been dead for over a decade now but every time I add his death to the page someone removes it. The relationship between him and Bruce Lee has been greatly exaggerated, and the only citation given for these fantasy stories is a newspaper article written after he was dead. I traveled to Hong Kong with Sifu Cheung in the early 2000's and he was not welcome in any schools. We were treated poorly/rudely even by people he referred to as old friends."
I have no information to verify any of these claims. The lead photo is dated 30 November 2011, inconsistent with the anonymous editor's claim that the subject has "been dead for over a decade". The official website gives no indication that the subject is dead. - SummerPhDv2.0 19:54, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Article states immigration to Australia took place in 1957. The following article states 1959. https://www.ewingchun.com/sifus/william-cheuk-hing-cheung#more — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.154.106 (talk) 13:21, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
ewingchun.com is not a reliable source as anybody can write on it without references. Australianblackbelt (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The photo of Cheung standing with Bruce Lee is a fake, featuring a photo of him pasted over a cropped photo of Lee: https://archive.ph/Rjric (Normally, we'd just remove such a thing and carry on, except that in this case, the fake photo is on Cheung's own site: https://archive.ph/BtvnY .) --2601:444:47F:F620:1069:2EB0:89C6:3A51 (talk) 01:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
I implore that some of the things William Cheung says to be taken with grain of salt -- and not as absolute truth. He seems to have bit of flair for self-promotion and controversial statements.
[Regarding Bruce Lee being taught modified Wing Chun by Ip Man's kwoon] Bruce Lee's teenage friend and fellow student, Hawkins Cheung (William's nephew)[...] "Modified, traditional -- it's all bullshit" says Hawkins. "That's just William making mischef." Hawkins implies that William has completely invented this historical divergences in the art, simply to promote his own teaching.
— Bruce Thomas, quote from Hawkins Cheung.[1]
TrickShotFinn (talk) 06:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)