Talk:Meng Qingshu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. Track your hook after promotion. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

(
)
Meng Qingshu
Meng Qingshu
Moved to mainspace by Robert Motecinos Holda (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

R. M. Holda - (talk) 04:55, 26 April 2026 (UTC).

  • New enough, long enough, hooks are interesting, particularly the first two, and I can't see any COPYVIO or TSI issues based on machine translations of sources (perhaps that some say 28 and a half Bolsheviks. Image is freely licensed, clear, and used. QPQ is done. I would like to hear a bit about why the sources should be considered reliable; the 163.com source in particular seems effusive, which goes to neutrality. Whonting (talk) 10:39, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
    • @Whonting: The sources do seem to be effusive, but mostly when talking about her love life/romantical relation to Wang Ming. Some sources, from what i investigated, are mixed in reliability; i would not use them for controversial topics but aside from those they seem ok, especially since i cross-checked them and aside from dates they mostly check out (so reliability would have to be in a case by case basis). One of the sources is the news agency from her hometown (Shouxian info), but it does not seem they exagerated any aspects of her life (it seems merely biographical). Another is the government from her hometown (sxgov.cn), which seems to overly romantizise her relation to Wang but aside from that it seems good. And with the 163, my opinion is that in this case the facts (aside from the obviously romantisized relation to wang) seem to be correct. Neutrality-wise, they do not seem to exagerate any feats or things from her life (aside from, again, the romance, which i tried to ommitt in the article unless it cross-referenced with other sources). So i would say that the sources are reliable and at the least halfway neutral (take it with a grain of salt since Meng was the wife of a major political figure, and that is why the romance was exagerated in some parts).
    • I can provide a second source to the claim of working as a nurse (The military academy se attended alumni page / http://www.huangpu.org.cn/hpzz/hpzz201901/201901/t20190125_12135758.html, a quote would be: "In July 1927, he was assigned to work as a nurse in the Military Medical Department of the General Headquarters of the Second Front Army of the National Revolutionary Army") and the marriage/release dates seem to check out in a cross-reference. Hope this helps, R. M. Holda - (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
      • I'll push you a bit more on why we should consider 163 reliable: what informs your perspective that the facts "seem to be correct"? My only concern with source neutrality here is that given they all are to some extent interested in romanticizing, whether there's anything being omitted (controversies etc) and whether we are reproducing a biased narrative on the front page. Bit difficult to address those concerns, but I would like this to pass so I'm interested in whatever you can offer. Whonting (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
        • @Whonting: What informs my perspective is the cross-examination with other sources, which yield the same or similar information. Now, to be honest, i do see how neutrality can be a problem; from my little understanding of Mainland Chinese media, media there does seem to be at least slightly biased towards a more positive view of people like Meng. In this case, i personally feel that possibly the biggest problem with neutrality could be the omission of certain facts (like controversies). I do not however feel that the article is changing the existing details (again, from cross-examination) or that is too heavily biased. Again, although i would not trust 163 with major controversies or with information about the current Chinese government, i do feel that at least in this specific article the source is at least reliable enough. I do not know Chinese, nor do i know a lot about Chinese media or history, therefore, i cannot confidently state that the source is reliable, but i personally feel that in this case it is. If it makes you more comfortable, you can delete/cross out the hooks with the 163 source. R. M. Holda - (talk) 01:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Thanks Robert Motecinos Holda, sorry for me having forgotten about this. With some distance from this, I would really appreciate if you could replace the 163 source, and then I will be happy to pass. Sorry for the incovenience here. Whonting (talk) 06:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
  • @Whonting: I have removed the source from the article as requested. All hooks with the 163 source are also backed by the source i mentioned earlier (the military academy alumni page, or source 4 in the article), with an exact quote being “ In July 1927, she was assigned to the medical department of the Second Front Army of the National Revolutionary Army as a nurse, and followed the unit to Jiujiang. After the failure of the Nanchang Uprising, she moved to Shanghai, serving as a CPC organization officer and branch secretary. In November 1927, she was sent to the Soviet Union to study, accompanied by Liu Ying (later Zhang Wentian's wife) and Tang Yizhen (later Lu Dingyi's wife).” R. M. Holda - (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
    • GTG, thanks for your work on this and patience Whonting (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI