This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
deletion section LAWSUITS Holmes767 ( talk) 03:33, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. -
FlightTime (
open channel)
03:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)I've moved the quote added to the "Lawsuits" section by EdiK2016 here for further discussion because I think it would be better to take a closer look at it. There seems to have been a lot of editing to this articles by WP:SPAs who may be either connected to Wang or involved in a real world dispute with Wang, things that might indicate that their interests and Wikipedia's interests are not one and the same. Some prior comments made to this talk page by EdiK2016 had to even be revision deleted because they pretty much were a violation of WP:OUTING, and the article has been protected because of the disruption; so, this is probably a good time to try and sort through things and see if a consensus can be established regarding this.
The quote which was added by EdiK2016 is as follows:
Wang Zheng has not provided evidence of her global flight in accordance with the bonus requirements. So far, we do not know whether she has completed the global flight... At that time, awarding her prizes was a mistake and should not be confirmed before the evidence was obtained." (original texts in Chinese: "“王争一直没有按照奖金的要求提供她环球飞行的证据,到目前为止,我们不知道她是否完成了环球飞行……当时给她颁奖是有失误的,不应该在没有得到证据之前确认。") [1] [2]
References
There are few things that I think should be resolved before the source is re-added.
|quote=
parameter with {{
cite news}} (see
Template:Cite news#Parameters), or even an
explanatory footnote like {{
efn}} to provide the original Chinese text to the reader; it doesn't need to be directly added to the body of the article. Moreover, any English translation should be made as carefully as possible. Machine translations or Google translate are fast and easy, but there accuracy can be a bit iffy which is generally why Wikipedia advises not to use them in
WP:MACHINETRANSLATION (that's about translating entire Wikipedia articles but I think it also applies here). It would be much better to have someone competent in Chinese unconnected to Wang to check the translation and make sure it's good enough for Wikipedia's purposes. Once again, perhaps someone at WP:CHINA or maybe even
WP:TRLA can help with this.Feel free to add any comments below. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:52, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
References
Search Zheng Wang at Florida 15th circuit court: https://applications.mypalmbeachclerk.com/eCaseView/search.aspx
Two ongoing litigation against Zheng Wang/James Frechter/CGA.
PLANE SMART AVIATION LLC sues Zheng Wang/James Frechter/CGA for unpaid aircraft rental in her 2016 circumnavigation over 60k USD. (50-2017-CA-010573-XXXX-MB) SARASOTA AVIONICS INC counterclaimed Zheng Wang/James Frechter/CGA for unpaid avionic installation service for her 2016 circumnavigation over 58K USD. (50-2017-CA-004444-XXXX-MB)
Search James Frechter at Florida 15th circuit court: https://applications.mypalmbeachclerk.com/eCaseView/search.aspx
Chen sues James Frechter/CGA for libel and promotion of faking Wang's record. (50-2019-CA-005290-XXXX-MB)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Dear Wikipedia Editors,
I am Wang Zheng, the subject of this page. Earlier this year, as you can see from the history, this page was vandalized with the result that there was a tit for tat of revisions until the page was locked.. Much of the content has now been restored -- the photos to which there is no copyright issue still need to be replaced -- but there is now a section entitled "Lawsuits" that is the result of one person alone manipulating Wikipedia with the specific intention of injuring my career as a professional pilot . That person, or her proxies, alone have been contributing or editing the "Lawsuit" section of my page, contrary to Wikipedia's rules on BLP and COI intended to protect living persons from abuse, and perhaps others.
This person, who was editing as "EdiK2016" or other names or proxies- her friends perhaps, has been using this section deliberately to smear me and my husband in violation of WP rules on BLP and COI. Why COI? The woman was my competitor in the around-the-world flight event in 2016. She has never gotten over it and has sued me twice in China, the first time resulting in the Court dismissing her action for failure to prosecute and the second resulting in a trial and verdict 100% in my favor, with final judgment dismissing her complaint against me. Strange how there's no entry to my page about that. The point is that the comment from Chen Wei that a few of your editor's spent so much time on in the spring is rank hearsay and nonsense and without the background that makes the comment and source unreliable. Chen wei himself vetted and approved the bona fides of my flight in November 2016, but never funded or paid the $160k cash award that attached to winning the flight event which I did. ChenWei appears in many photos on the internet presenting me a giant replica check for one million yuan but the real money was never paid. Finally, in March 2018, my attorneys sued Chenwei to recover the cash prize. ChenWei's response -- his defense to the lawsuit -- was the lie that he wasn't sure whether I'd flown around the world or not. Chen Wei died several months later, having crashed his private jet on 12/20/18. How does EdiK2016 fit in? Once Chenwei made this statement, she started using it in the hope of disqualifying me from receiving the cash prize so that she can claim it after my disqualification. You needn't take my word for it; that it what she wrote in the complaint she filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court against my husband for libel, claiming that my husband promoted a fraudulent story about my flight, and that once she proves that my 2016 circumnavigation flight is a fraud, she will become the "first" Chinese woman to fly around the world (through my disqualification). This is not a joke. I am an active 3,500 hour regional airline captain, certified flight instructor and FAA-designated chief pilot of an FAA supervised flight training provider. In June, I published a fairly comprehensive multimedia archive of my 2016 circumnavigation flight on the internet so that anyone could see for themself the bona fides of my flight. www.flywithjulie.org/beta The GPS tracking data itself confirms my flight, from two different transponders. She remains a several hundred hour private pilot who counted her eggs before they hatched.
You folks know these rules much better than I ever will and so I'm asking you to apply them in the spirit and letter in which they were adopted, namely, to protect people like me from being abused by people like her on the WP platform. Personal vendettas have no place on the platform and the rules are in place it seems fairly obvious to prevent them from migrating from the real world on to WP. Honestly, the way I read the BLP and COI rules, the entire "Lawsuits" section should come down. The source material is only from or created by EdiK2016 or her proxies and so not only is the information not reliable or properly sourced, but she has an interest in discrediting me and is actively making the case that the prize money should go to her. The article she's citing to most recently, from the Palm Beach Post, was arranged by her lawyer and he's quoted in the article extensively. She did the same thing in China by getting a reporter in her hometown in China to write effectively the same article with nearly the identical title: "Who is the First Chinese Woman to Fly Around the World?" But to be clear, it is literally she alone pushing this. At one point someone asked, well, there is a lawsuit, right? and the answer is yes, there is a lawsuit by the only person in the world not only challenging my accomplishment but trying to wrest it away from me so it can be theirs. It is as if the 10 people who believe that the moon landings are fake got the New York Times to write an article "NASA Alleged to Have Faked Lunar Landings: Were they Real or Not?" and then Congress called in the NASA chief to testify.
Look at what's there. It's cherry-picked nonsense -- almost unintelligible without any context -- unsubstantiated, unfoundfed allegations, and all of it posted by someone who has an interest in discrediting me -- clearly an interest opposed to Wikipedia's -- and is or should be conflicted from editing my page. That's not even the BLP prohibitions, which by their clear directives are to weigh very heavily against allowing contentious material that could be libelous. She keeps posting about lawsuits against my husband, moreover, on my page, and his private information. Another editor flagged her for "OUTING." Again, it's just deliberately to smear us, with no other motive.
I'm raising these issues here so that they can be hashed out calmly and rationally. Please carefully consider what I've written here and don't hesitate to ask any questions you may have. Zheng Wang 65.210.8.4 ( talk) 02:56, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Dear Wikipedia Editors,
This is Wang Zheng again, the subject of this page. I am writing here to request that material recently added to my page must be taken down as violative of WP policy.
The recent edits to this BLP’s page by Dtool97 and JaneLoo1996 – the 2d through 6th and 9th paragraphs of the “Flying” section of the article, and the 3d paragraph of the “Lawsuits” section – appear to be sock puppetry and/or undisclosed COI by an “avowed rival” of the article’s subject, and must be immediately removed for multiple violations of Wikipedia’s content guidelines and policies. This appears to be the same person(s) who previously attempted edits as EdiK2016 which edits “made to this talk page by EdiK2016 had to even be revision deleted because they pretty much were a violation of WP:OUTING, and the article has been protected because of the disruption,” among other violations of WP policy. The suspect editor is engaged in various active lawsuits with the subject and has added content in violation of the biographies of living persons policy that provides: "[A]n editor who is involved in a significant controversy or dispute with another individual – whether on- or off-wiki – or who is an avowed rival of that individual, should not edit that person's biography or other material about that person, given the potential conflict of interest. This is an instance of actual undisclosed COI editing a BLP page. [COIBLP] The recent edits to this page also violate other BLP rules including those governing: • Court cases (“editors should not write about court cases in which they or those close to them have been involved, nor about parties or law firms associated with the cases” [BLPLEGAL] • Using BLPs to continue off-wiki disputes (“Wikipedia is not a forum provided for parties to off-wiki disputes to continue their hostilities . . . Therefore, an editor who is involved in a significant controversy or dispute with another individual—whether on- or off-wiki—or who is an avowed rival of that individual, should not edit that person's biography or other material about that person, given the potential conflict of interest. . . .”; • Contentious material (“Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices should be removed, deleted, or oversighted as appropriate”) [BLPRS, BLPSOURCE, BLPSOURCES, BLPTALK]. • Tone (“Do not label people with contentious labels or loaded language”); • Challenged or likely to be challenged (“all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. This policy [under BLP] extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. The material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism.” The edits also violate Wikipedia's three core content policies Neutral point of view (NPOV), Verifiability (V) and No original research (NOR).
Here are the specific problems: • “Lawsuits” section, 3d paragraph is deliberately and falsely misleading the audience to conclude that Wang Zheng lost the lawsuit because her complaint was “dismissed.” The editor omits that the dismissal was not on the merits but only on issue of proper forum. The California court judge’s “dismissal” sent the lawsuit to China for trial and determination of the merits. The China court has now refused to accept the case deciding that it lacked jurisdiction and the case is going back to California. This is flagrant misrepresentation and inherently biased. It is hardly balanced and dispassionate treatment of the content. It violates WP COI, BLP, BLPLEGAL, NPOV policy among others, as does most of the content of the "Lawsuits" section as it is completely one-sided and cherry-picked, giving the audience a totally misleading impression. • “Flying” section, 2d through 5th paragraphs are irrelevant and the use of “self-reported” “self-announced” “self-submitted” are intended to disparage the subject and her credibility without any foundation. Again, violating WP COI, BLP, NPOV, among other WP policy. • “Flying” section, 6th paragraph, is an improper attempted “synthesis” of the prior paragraphs, seeking improperly to imply the conclusion that there were “discrepancies” in the subject’s around-the-world flight. (“The discrepancies of Wang's flying facts arose arguments on her flight record . . . ) There is no source/support of any kind for the assertion that there are “discrepencies” in the subject’s flight record. The editor is trying to fabricate those discrepancies here on WP. There is no inline source/support for the assertion “Wang never provide "evidence to support her claim to the prize",” and Wang filed a lawsuit against Chen.[20] [see more in Section Lawsuits]. Chen’s supposed statement about Wang not providing evidence was previously the subject of discussion in connection with this page and the statement already appears in the “Lawsuits” section and there is no need to have it repeated here This is in violation of WP COI, BLPRS, BLPSOURCE, BLPSOURCES among others. • “Flying” section, 9th paragraph, the statement “In November, 2019, AOPA China withdrew its prize granted to Zheng Wang in 2016 [22], has no source and must be removed. (Footnote 22 refers not to any revocation of Wang’s accomplishment but to the November 1, 2016 award ceremony at which Chen proclaimed Wang the first Chinese woman to fly around the world). Again, this is in violation of WP COI, BLPRS, BLPSOURCE, BLPSOURCES among others.
WP states that it is not a forum on which to continue off-Wiki disputes. That is exactly what these prohibited edits by or on behalf of someone with an actual COI are designed to do, specifically to bring the ongoing litigation on to this page, not for the purpose of informing the audience in a balanced way but to smear the subject. I have no problem with balanced, dispassionate journalism about these lawsuits and there have been real news articles that reported the litigation professionally, in a balanced and dispassionate way. But the edits to this page are biased, unbalanced, piecemeal, cherry-picked and deliberately written to disparage the subject and to have the audience to draw unwarranted conclusions, all against the strong WP policies intended to protect victimization of living persons on WP. 8.34.172.6 ( talk) 23:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
This wiki term was added, closely monitored and maintained by Julie Wang (Zheng Wang) and her husband or so-called attorney James Fechter (Kigen). The two persons abused Wiki's trust and influence to advertise themselves for their own interests.
On Oct 23, 2020,IP address 12.21.15.66 submitted intensive edits to this term. This IP address is from Florida where Julie and her husband live. The editor shows a strong and subjective tendency to delete all content not favoring Julie Wang while adding misleading, flattering and corky content, including content not known to public.
Examples submitted by Florida IP address editer (12.21.15.66):
-"Deleted earthrounders fault report. It was submitted by someone but not Julie Wang. "
How do you know? In real life from Julie her own?
-"earthrounders website has involved of making fake record in Julie Wang’s lawsuits. It became an unreliable source."
Really? When and where? How do you know? In real life from Julie her own?
-" Deleted the article about her casual local flight. It’s a wrong article reference to her flying around the world"
Why? Who to decide which report is right or wrong? WIKi is supposed to be neutral.
-"Deleted Faux statement. Julie Wang does not own any business, She is an airline captain. And before her departure the round world flight. several different flight plans doesn’t make her actual flight different versions."
How do you know? In real life from Julie her own? Again, Who to decide which report is right or wrong?
-"Make it clear by attach an good source of media report."
Again, what is good what is faux and what is wrong? By the standard of favoring Julie the most?
Who is behind this IP address?? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
JaneLoo1996 (
talk •
contribs)
04:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
For most of the lawsuits that Chen sued Wang, Wang had won, but there’s no statement in this section. As a Wikipedia editor I want to add such truth.