Anna At Ogilvy (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC) Hi Altamel,
I'm checking in to see your thoughts on the below:
1. Background: Propose changing the word "stated" to "claimed" in this sentence: “A 2011 report by the CIA claimed Yafang worked for the Ministry of State Security of the People's Republic of China and linked her to the Chinese military.[5]” The reason behind this is because words such as "stated", "noted", or "disclosed" are typically used to denote references to uncontested facts, but not to unproven charges or allegations (such as those made about Ms. Sun).
If this is not preferable, can we at least revise the sentence “A 2011 report by the CIA stated Yafang worked for the Ministry of State Security of the People's Republic of China” by changing “worked” to “had worked”? The use of the simple past tense implies that the 2011 CIA report alleges Ms. Sun was working with the Ministry of State Security when the report was released in 2011, where in fact, it actually alleges that Ms. Sun had worked with the Ministry at some point in the past, not that she was simultaneously holding down jobs at the Ministry of State Security and at Huawei. To leave the sentence written in the simple past tense is misleading.
3. Regarding Ms. Sun’s “cut and paste” bio entry: Since the information merely lists Ms. Sun’s various jobs and titles over the years, it is hard to re-phrase this content substantially. Obviously, we want to avoid closely paraphrasing a text, but given the nature of the content, do you think we can simply change a word words? If, for example, we changed the sequence in which her titles were presented, would that be sufficient to get around the copyright issues?
Many thanks!
Anna At Ogilvy (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)