944:
want more nuanced dialogue, or who attempt to enter the debate are automatically silenced by claims of "wumao". Even those who are critical of China but otherwise prefer nuance are slandered. Such accusations number in the thousands, if not millions, daily, on the internet, and rumour-mongering articles like this are to blame. One example of the casual use or abuse of the term "wumao" is
Johannesvdp. I don't think an encyclopedic article ought to give credence to rumors, and which make life difficult for millions of Chinese using the internet every day. As a result of the term bandied about so casually, many Chinese people end up self-censoring in order to avoid being harassed by other internet users.
818:
to dig up dirt on China (see Adrian Zenz). Some of the media sources quoted are not reliable by any stretch of the imagination - e.g. NPR? Only one article seems to approach the standard of direct evidence - that is the one by Ai Wei Wei, and that is only a single article. The admission of the absence of "ground information" by Yang and of the lack of "systematic empirical evidence" by King are completely damning. The evidence you cite consists of a chorus of journalists making claims without direct evidence, with the exception perhaps of Ai Wei Wei - and that testimony alone is not sufficient.
375:
470:
449:
480:
365:
344:
558:
991:
yourself are doing. You were the one writing that doping in china was all a conspiracy by the US and
Australia.. You are just doing whataboutism in a crazy way, and then the people that try to correct the article back to an objective form, you accuse them of being racist, and anti-chinese. It's insane. Thanks again to all wikipedia contributors. I'm seldom on here, but to have to deal with these people. Nothing but awe and respect, once more.
911:
yourself are doing. You were the one writing that doping in china was all a conspiracy by the US and
Australia.. You are just doing whataboutism in a crazy way, and then the people that try to correct the article back to an objective form, you accuse them of being racist, and anti-chinese. It's insane. Thanks again to all wikipedia contributors. I'm seldom on here, but to have to deal with these people. Nothing but awe and respect, once more.
276:
203:
640:
and posts about 448 million social media comments a year." and "we adopt this widely used term to denote social media comments posted at the direction or behest of the regime, as if they were the opinions of ordinary people." This suggests ample evidence of the existence of the 50 cent party and its aims, the primary contention of the article is merely that their strategy has changed.
233:
313:
817:
The sources are all media articles written at the height of an ongoing geopolitical rivalry, so excluding bias is impossible. These articles do not have the same authority a peer-reviewed academic paper or book written by an expert would have. BBC has been proven to engage in paid fishing expeditions
690:
but is only one of many (TBH it's not very important to the argument but there you have it). The quote you picked is, in context, about the difficulty of gathering direct evidence but that does not mean there isn't any, your interpretation of the quote directly contradicts the abstract of the article
878:
This is the Gary King (Harvard
University) article which is relied upon in proving the existence of wumao. Do note that Gary King does not provide any systematic empirical evidence for their existence, but while acknowledging there is no systematic empirical evidence for their existence, presupposes
654:
The articles in question explicitly state that there is no direct or systematic evidence for the phenomenon, and that there is no ground information about the wumao. How much more explicit does it get than that? These qualification was made clearly and explicitly in the articles. No reason why these
990:
Ming, you should do comedy! Your false victimhood and whataboutism routine are hilarious. Just to clarify to people reading this, Ming was vandalising the 'doping in china' page and this one, and I just asked him to stop.. You also accuse people, in the same sentence, of exactly the things that you
935:
There are no peer-reviewed articles and independent studies on the topic either, and those which pretend to be studies quickly acknowledge the limitations of their approach (i.e. lack of ground information and lack of systematic empirical evidence) upfront. These are facts, and I hope other editors
910:
Ming, you should do comedy! Your false victimhood and whataboutism routine are hilarious. Just to clarify to people reading this, Ming was vandalising the 'doping in china' page and this one, and I just asked him to stop.. You also accuse people, in the same sentence, of exactly the things that you
639:
I would advise you to read the articles in question, which provide ample evidence of the existence of the 50 Cent Party, evidence includes leaked documents from the
Chinese government, witness testimony. In fact, the paper by King et. al. has this to say: "We estimate that the government fabricates
624:
The quotations I provided were obtained from the very same articles cited by the editors of this wikipedia article, without further interpretation. These two articles are indeed the main primary sources of the claims in this wikipedia article. News articles are often secondary sources which rely on
943:
Note: The existence of articles like these has led to verbal abuse being hurled at editors of
Chinese ancestry and false accusations that they are wumao, not just here, but on all Western social media platforms. The majority of Chinese people who have a good thing or two to say about China, or who
847:
I have not edited this page significantly, and the rationale for the edits has been given. I will allow others to come and discuss this page first, which obviously does not abide by WP:NPOV. The quotations I introduced are inline citations from sources already present in the article. Please do not
746:
Allan, could you please request protection for this page? I will also do it. But this guys is nothing going to stop with his horrible edits. He doesn't even do propaganda well, just places "alleged" in front of everything he doesn't like, and than mass copy pastes the same line (like the quote of
931:
The article relies preponderantly on the word of journalists at a time when media coverage on China is rather problematic. I have been informed that the media sources quoted are not deprecated. However, some of the journalistic sources are quite clearly informed by political motivations and use
731:
There hasn't been an RSN on China
Digital times, but the seem to be generally considered reliable. If you have any concerns about the site, I would advise posting about it there. Granted, it is only part of 1 of 5 articles so it doesn't really undermine the narrative here even if it were to be
747:
David
Wertime) , in every sentence. The 50 cent army existing is not disputed Ming, it is a fact. With many sources from China itself. The fact that you try to muddy all chinese pages like this, is very worrisome. Let's also address Ming himself, let's report this user.
939:
I will not edit this page further pending input from other editors. But I hope to draw attention to the violations of WP:NPOV and the representation of opinion as fact in this artlce, which has rightly been flagged as controversial and with disputed content.
713:
The material at is truncated and of doubtful appearance, especially when read in
Chinese characters. There is also no evidence for the authorship of that document. The whole document should be produced, not just what purports to be a
891:
Otherwise, readers of the articles will assume that the existence of wumao is something that has ground truth information (is something directly observed) and something for which systematic empirical evidence exists (it does not).
832:
Ming what are you doing? I aksed you on the doping in china page not to come and vandalise this page as well, and what do you do? You start to vandalise this page, they should ban you. I will also ask protection for this page.
848:
describe as vandalism what is a mere attempt to restore WP:NPOV. I think this whole page should be moderated, but I will let others who know more about the subject matter comment. Quite clearly, it is not objective.
153:
625:
these same two primary sources. I do not see why information from primary sources should be removed, since they introduce very important qualifications to the claims being made about the existence of wumao.
1030:
888:
These qualifications - the absence of ground truth information and the absence of systematic empirical evidence, are stated on page 1 of both articles, and therefore merit mention.
605:
194:
147:
282:
1025:
421:
253:. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them.
79:
1045:
536:
526:
1020:
1015:
1050:
431:
240:
85:
44:
669:
The purportedly leaked documents are neither accessible nor verifiable through any of the sources cited. Please post them here if they are.
603:
1035:
502:
1040:
601:
397:
256:
244:
99:
30:
493:
454:
104:
20:
168:
290:
135:
74:
599:
576:
324:
298:
190:
388:
349:
65:
396:
related articles on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
202:
185:
564:
868:
Issue #1 Existence of Wumao - "No Systematic Empirical Evidence" (King) and "No ground truth information" (Yang)
213:
951:
900:
853:
823:
808:
780:
766:
737:
722:
704:
674:
660:
645:
630:
614:
129:
688:
262:
109:
125:
961:
947:
896:
849:
819:
804:
776:
762:
718:
670:
656:
626:
996:
916:
838:
752:
330:
879:
the existence of something he proceeds to measure. He states as much, unequivocally and unambiguously.
992:
912:
834:
748:
479:
469:
448:
973:
175:
312:
733:
700:
641:
610:
294:
161:
55:
927:
Issue #2 - Objectivity and NPOV, Over-reliance and use of Media Sources with Political Motivations
501:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
692:
286:
218:
70:
964:, if there are cited sources that you believe are somehow dubious, you are free to head over to
775:
I did not mass copy the same line - the quote was simply relevant under the topic "existence".
597:
364:
343:
250:
51:
885:'Detecting the wumao is difficult because there is no ground truth information about them."
717:
The source China Digital Times also appears to be highly politically motivated and activist.
981:
215:
141:
485:
696:
301:
exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
1009:
969:
965:
684:
607:
24:
380:
803:
That appears to be an opinion piece by Tessa Wong rather than factual reporting.
977:
475:
370:
265:
when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
498:
217:
1000:
985:
955:
920:
904:
857:
842:
827:
812:
784:
770:
756:
741:
726:
708:
683:
The suggestion that the BBC is not a reliable source is not backed by
678:
664:
649:
634:
618:
932:
dubious evidence. Anyone with a modicum of common sense knows this.
875:"Yet almost no systematic empirical evidence exists for this claim"
761:
Report me for what? I have only made 2 edits that you did not like.
687:
and, frankly, absurd. An example of a leaked document is from here
691:
you drew it from. Finally, I would strongly suggest you check out
572:
393:
275:
552:
306:
270:
227:
219:
15:
699:. They may prove informative as per your discussion conduct.
563:
On 9 November 2021, it was proposed that this article be
293:. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If
497:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
596:
The existence of the 50 cent party is well documented:
568:
160:
392:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1031:C-Class China-related articles of Mid-importance
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
655:should be suppressed in the wikipedia article.
289:while commenting or presenting evidence, and
174:
8:
443:
338:
972:. Also, I would recommend you check out
445:
340:
310:
1026:Mid-importance China-related articles
7:
491:This article is within the scope of
386:This article is within the scope of
329:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
872:I reference the article cited at
14:
1046:Low-importance Internet articles
556:
478:
468:
447:
373:
363:
342:
311:
274:
231:
201:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
895:Please address these concerns.
531:This article has been rated as
426:This article has been rated as
255:Content must be written from a
239:The subject of this article is
1021:C-Class China-related articles
1016:Knowledge controversial topics
511:Knowledge:WikiProject Internet
1:
1051:WikiProject Internet articles
514:Template:WikiProject Internet
505:and see a list of open tasks.
400:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
291:do not make personal attacks
406:Knowledge:WikiProject China
249:When updating the article,
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1067:
1036:WikiProject China articles
1001:12:01, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
986:19:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
956:12:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
921:12:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
905:03:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
858:12:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
843:12:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
828:16:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
813:03:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
785:12:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
771:12:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
757:12:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
742:22:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
727:17:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
709:16:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
679:16:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
665:16:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
650:15:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
635:03:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
619:01:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
537:project's importance scale
432:project's importance scale
409:Template:WikiProject China
1041:C-Class Internet articles
530:
463:
425:
358:
337:
251:be bold, but not reckless
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
936:will agree that this
412:China-related articles
319:This article is rated
243:and content may be in
75:avoid personal attacks
257:neutral point of view
195:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
494:WikiProject Internet
105:No original research
325:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
882:Furthermore at :
609:, I could go on.
587:
586:
551:
550:
547:
546:
543:
542:
517:Internet articles
442:
441:
438:
437:
389:WikiProject China
305:
304:
269:
268:
226:
225:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1058:
575:. The result of
560:
559:
553:
519:
518:
515:
512:
509:
488:
483:
482:
472:
465:
464:
459:
451:
444:
414:
413:
410:
407:
404:
383:
378:
377:
376:
367:
360:
359:
354:
346:
339:
322:
316:
315:
307:
297:is not reached,
278:
277:
271:
235:
234:
228:
220:
206:
205:
196:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1006:
1005:
929:
870:
594:
557:
516:
513:
510:
507:
506:
486:Internet portal
484:
477:
457:
411:
408:
405:
402:
401:
379:
374:
372:
352:
323:on Knowledge's
320:
299:other solutions
232:
222:
221:
216:
193:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1064:
1062:
1054:
1053:
1048:
1043:
1038:
1033:
1028:
1023:
1018:
1008:
1007:
1004:
1003:
988:
968:and propose a
962:MingScribe1368
948:MingScribe1368
928:
925:
924:
923:
897:MingScribe1368
869:
866:
865:
864:
863:
862:
861:
860:
850:MingScribe1368
820:MingScribe1368
815:
805:MingScribe1368
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
788:
787:
777:MingScribe1368
773:
763:MingScribe1368
734:Allan Nonymous
719:MingScribe1368
715:
701:Allan Nonymous
671:MingScribe1368
667:
657:MingScribe1368
642:Allan Nonymous
627:MingScribe1368
611:Allan Nonymous
593:
590:
585:
584:
577:the discussion
561:
549:
548:
545:
544:
541:
540:
533:Low-importance
529:
523:
522:
520:
503:the discussion
490:
489:
473:
461:
460:
458:Low‑importance
452:
440:
439:
436:
435:
428:Mid-importance
424:
418:
417:
415:
398:the discussion
385:
384:
368:
356:
355:
353:Mid‑importance
347:
335:
334:
328:
317:
303:
302:
279:
267:
266:
236:
224:
223:
214:
212:
211:
208:
207:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1063:
1052:
1049:
1047:
1044:
1042:
1039:
1037:
1034:
1032:
1029:
1027:
1024:
1022:
1019:
1017:
1014:
1013:
1011:
1002:
998:
994:
989:
987:
983:
979:
975:
974:WP:WALLOFTEXT
971:
967:
963:
960:
959:
958:
957:
953:
949:
945:
941:
937:
933:
926:
922:
918:
914:
909:
908:
907:
906:
902:
898:
893:
889:
886:
883:
880:
876:
873:
867:
859:
855:
851:
846:
845:
844:
840:
836:
831:
830:
829:
825:
821:
816:
814:
810:
806:
802:
786:
782:
778:
774:
772:
768:
764:
760:
759:
758:
754:
750:
745:
744:
743:
739:
735:
730:
729:
728:
724:
720:
716:
712:
711:
710:
706:
702:
698:
694:
689:
686:
682:
681:
680:
676:
672:
668:
666:
662:
658:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
638:
637:
636:
632:
628:
623:
622:
621:
620:
616:
612:
608:
606:
604:
602:
600:
598:
591:
589:
582:
578:
574:
570:
569:50 Cent Party
566:
562:
555:
554:
538:
534:
528:
525:
524:
521:
504:
500:
496:
495:
487:
481:
476:
474:
471:
467:
466:
462:
456:
453:
450:
446:
433:
429:
423:
420:
419:
416:
399:
395:
391:
390:
382:
371:
369:
366:
362:
361:
357:
351:
348:
345:
341:
336:
332:
326:
318:
314:
309:
308:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
273:
272:
264:
260:
258:
252:
248:
246:
242:
241:controversial
237:
230:
229:
210:
209:
204:
200:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
25:50 Cent Party
22:
18:
17:
946:
942:
938:
934:
930:
894:
890:
887:
884:
881:
877:
874:
871:
595:
588:
580:
532:
492:
427:
387:
381:China portal
331:WikiProjects
281:Please stay
254:
238:
198:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
993:Johannesvdp
913:Johannesvdp
835:Johannesvdp
749:Johannesvdp
693:WP:BLUDGEON
148:free images
31:not a forum
1010:Categories
732:correct.
714:fragment.
592:Existence
581:Not moved
295:consensus
263:citations
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
508:Internet
499:Internet
455:Internet
261:Include
199:365 days
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
697:WP:IDHT
535:on the
430:on the
321:C-class
245:dispute
154:WP refs
142:scholar
978:Amigao
970:WP:RFC
966:WP:RSN
685:WP:RSN
327:scale.
126:Google
573:Wumao
567:from
565:moved
403:China
394:China
350:China
287:civil
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
997:talk
982:talk
976:. -
952:talk
917:talk
901:talk
854:talk
839:talk
824:talk
809:talk
781:talk
767:talk
753:talk
738:talk
723:talk
705:talk
695:and
675:talk
661:talk
646:talk
631:talk
615:talk
579:was
285:and
283:calm
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
571:to
527:Low
422:Mid
176:TWL
1012::
999:)
984:)
954:)
919:)
903:)
856:)
841:)
826:)
811:)
783:)
769:)
755:)
740:)
725:)
707:)
677:)
663:)
648:)
633:)
617:)
197::
156:)
54:;
995:(
980:(
950:(
915:(
899:(
852:(
837:(
822:(
807:(
779:(
765:(
751:(
736:(
721:(
703:(
673:(
659:(
644:(
629:(
613:(
583:.
539:.
434:.
333::
259:.
247:.
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
