Talk:Zhang Hongbao

Latest comment: 7 months ago by 97.102.30.205 in topic Removed unsourced details from Death

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhong Gong edit

FYI. Ikip (talk) 02:19, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Regarding the recent edit[1], I would like to know where this text came from. It doesn't seem exactly lifted from Palmer, but maybe elements of it. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 09:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it is copied from "David Palmer's book "Qigong Fever"" I think his view is more close to the true —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.246.40.54 (talk) 16:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Good to know. I would be happy to paraphrase and summarise it later. Or you may wish to do that yourself. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 03:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Zhang Hongbao. 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, 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Removed unsourced details from Death edit

Zhang's death in a suspicious car accident in the United States at the age of 52, was a non-event which went unreported. At a highway intersection in northern Arizona, his car was crushed by tractor-trailer truck travelling towards it at 60 miles per hour on 31 July 2006. Both he and his female driver, who was also his secretary, died. After Zhang's death, Zhong Gong almost disappeared from the public eye due to the internal friction. - Most of this was cited to Chinaview (reference 12), but the linked blog post makes no mention of these details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.30.205 (talk) 19:55, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Also, that website is obviously very pro-Falun Gong, and potentially anti-Zhong Gong, so their opinion is unlikely to be NPOV regarding the death of Zhang Hongbao. 118.160.30.252 (talk) 08:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
My initial edit noted that the claim that his death was "suspicious" has been attributed to The Epoch Times. (Although I did fail to note that it is a Falun Gong publication, as I assumed someone familiar with the subject matter would know that - that was a mistake on my part.) However, Chinaview was correct about Zhang being persona non gratis in the Western media; I still can't find an obituary or even a report about the crash in any American news source. I did find some further information here: https://bitterwinter.org/zhonggong-the-cult-that-refused-to-die/

"Zhang died on July 31, 2006 at the age of 52, when his car collided with a large truck on the Arizona highway. His followers suspected foul play, and accusations of a Chinese conspiracy to kill Zhang were mostly relayed by the Falun Gong-connected Epoch Times." I'm not certain whether we would consider this a reliable source. But at the very least it is a Western source so it is a step removed from the direct rivalry between the CCP and the religious sects. But in any case, I can't see why it would be considered biased to simply note that The Epoch Times called the crash "suspicious". 97.102.30.205 (talk) 21:04, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply