This article is written in Hong Kong English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
The Group claims to strife for "Democracy without Chaos", followed by a long section criticizing the group. The citation's article titles have more neutral tones, and content the article titles suggest aren't even mentioned. This reads like a one sided article. ηoian‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 12:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
Not at all. The article mostly states simply and clearly what the group stands for. I have removed minor elements of bias both for and against, including a malicious link from 'chaos' to the 'Occupy Central with Love and Peace' article. 58.152.150.23 (talk) 05:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
The article still fails NPOV, it doesn't state what the group is for without implicitly criticizing what they stand for. It claims what the group stands for, contains a section from their critics, then another section that clearly is intended to criticize the group about a youtube ad they had. There is nothing but negativity in the article and does not present a NPOV, nor defensive statements at all. ηoian‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 12:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
