I agree with you that Boxun is not a reliable source, for a want of solid editorial oversight, and the Reliable Source Noticeboard concurs. (Maybe then we can work together to remove citations to Boxun from articles like Chen Wei (dissident)!) Wen Wei Po, on the other hand, seems to be a mainstream newspaper with the usual editorial oversight. Its Wikipedia article says that some people accuse it of being pro-Beijing, but then again similar accusations appear on the article about the South China Morning Post, which we seem to regard as reliable; the New York Times, which in related discussions Wikipedians seem to regard as reliable, is often accused of having a liberal bias; few newspapers can claim that their coverage is not controversial to some group of people. I contend that Wen Wei Po is a reliable source, and if you maintain—as you asserted above—that Wen Wei Po is a "well known propaganda arm of the Chinese government", then prove it.