Talk:Pearl S. Buck

message: I'm replacing the highly patronizing use of Buck's first name 'Pearl' in this article (except where contextually appropriate) with the impersonal neutral last name 'Buck'. Why? Who contributed all this information? - chances are (high) that they were no one with whom Buck was personally acquainted. Having said that, I appreciate the potential confusion in the text with Pearl Buck's husband's name John. L. Buck;  use of which being truncated to 'Buck' (a minor problem of text confusion). However, the more important issue here is the use of any persons' first name (family/first cultural conventions aside) which carries the immediate underlying implication of intimacy, OR, it is by default, extremely patronising. ALL Wikipedia articles/contributors should bear this in mind for future (and current) contributions.
Cheers,
Karl Gillies  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleetacon (talk • contribs) 01:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet More about "Good Earth" 

message: It pains me to see how little about the book is written in her Wikipedia entry. Its like a Salinger entry without a mention of "Catcher in the Rye". It's a HUGE part of why she's famous in the first place. I'd do it myself but I wouldn't even know where to start. Someone please add this. Thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenny Ice Cream (talk • contribs) 09:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  More about "Good Earth 

message: The long and detailed description of her house (Green Hills) seems like it ought to be on its own web page, linked from here. If there are no objections, I will move it. Dark Formal 20:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's split off "Home" 

message: "The family was sent to Zhenjiang, China in 1892 when Pearl was 3 months old. She was raised in California and learned the Chinese language and customs from a teacher named Mr. Kung. She was taught English as a second language by her mother and tutor. She was encouraged to write things at an early age.
In 1910, she left for America to attend Randolph-Macon Woman's College [1], "
How was she raised in California if she was in China from 3 months until 18 years?  Furthermore, to say that she "was taught English as a second language from her mother..." defies logic.  Is that supposed to mean Kung taught her Chinese before she learned to speak English? -by the mighty anonymouse—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.41 (talk) 14:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first paragraph doesn't make sense 

message: Were the adopted children Chinese? -- Error 00:45, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: They were mostly of mixed ancestry. She wrote in "Essay of Myself" that most were born of Asian mothers and mostly American fathers. --QueenStupid 21:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Adoption

message: "In her Lifetime original series, Pearl S. Buck would write over 100.5 works of literature"
huh?? --216.165.11.242 04:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Weird Sentence?

message: I'm curious as to why she divorced her husband.  I read this in an "about the author" from The Good Earth and thought there might be more info in the article here. 67.76.228.3 21:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divorce 

message: Are articles for biographies of Buck really necessary? Just wondering, since I just fixed a link for one, thus creating a red link calling for an article. QueenStupid 21:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am no expert to be sure - but my grandfather did know Buck in China so . . ....  so i think that these are biographies that Buck wrote - one, i think of her father or perhaps both parents.  The Exile is her dad and the Angel is her Mom - but please check it out.  Carptrash 22:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  From target: http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/pearlbuc.htm and from looking at a list of her works in one of her books at the library, I know now that they are written by her. The library didn't have those books, so I don't know if they are biographies. Anyway, I will change the section header to be under "Bibliography." Also, should this "Bibliography" be changed to "Selected Works" or something to that effect? QueenStupid 00:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I have both those books around here somewhere [maybe in the PILE] , but checked with Carpwoman - and they are biographies of her parents written by her.  I'll think about the section headers a bit. Carptrash 14:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Biography

message: Pearl S. Buck International has consistently received "A" ratings from charity watchdog groups, and PSBI receives particularly good marks for its child sponsorship programs, which are judged to be extremely efficient. Examples include:
The Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance
The American Institute of Philanthropy (As a Top-Rated Charity)
"Best in America" at Independent Charities of America
The statements about "Pearl S. Buck International coming under fire" run counter to the public perception and those of the nonprofit watchdog community, which is based on audited financial statements and significant oversight.
While an article was written alledging management misconduct at Pearl S. Buck International in 2004, it was considered poorly sourced (the primary source was a fired employee) and did not result in any penalties for the organization.  Furthermore, the wiki post suggests that it is inappropriate to "redirect" donations to pay for staff salaries (which is not true).  
The article about mismanagement at PSBI is misleading and contradicts the confirmed standing of her organization within the charitable and philanthropic community.  Considering also that there is no source listed for this citation, and that its claims have not been verified in any official way, I argue that it misrepresents her humanitarian contribution.  I suggest that it be stricken. 
--ChrisLeyda 19:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buck's humanitarianism and her organization coming "under fire"... 

message: I almost deleted the Chinese and Pinyan spellings of her name.  It would seem obtuse if every English Language Wikipedia article had the Chinese (and/or other foreign language) representations of people's names in them, as Wikipedia is not a language study guide.  However, after reading the article, and seeing that she spent significant time in China, and wrote about her  experiences, it seems contextually appropriate.  Perhaps it would belong in another section of the article, however, other than the intro, as the intro gives no clues as to why we are reading Chinese language representations of an American;s name.  I will leave it up to the regular contributors to the article to decide if and how to do that.  Jerry 15:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I almost deleted...

message: The Illustrator of her works is entirely relevant. It is factual, and referenced with the NY Times article. Undid JNW's deletion of this important aspect. Maxwell illustrated works for Pearl S. Buck for nearly 10 years. --Rocketsquirrel (talk) 20:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Illustrator of her works is entirely relevant

message: Factual, but not integral, unless your references make it clear that Maxwell maintained a special or exclusive relationship with Buck, which might be worth mention, i.e., 'Maxwell was the only artist to illustrate Buck's work for a ten year period, at the author's insistence'. Currently, the passage makes it appear as if Maxwell was the only artist who illustrated Buck's works, which was not the case. If this is a valid heading, what you have contributed thus far is a start---other prominent artists who illustrated her works included Dean Cornwell, Martha Sawyers, Benton Clark, Gustaf Tenggren, Kurt Werth, Charles Hargens, Esther Brock Bird, and William A. Smith. The purpose of an encyclopedia is not to promote particular individuals, and thus far that is the appearance here. JNW (talk) 02:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Illustrators, plural

message: I intentionally put the title "illustrators" on the section, knowing that there were more illustrators than just Maxwell, to avoid POV. If you have references for Cornwell, Sawyers, Clark, Tenggren, et. al., they should be added. Currently, the passage makes it appear as if Maxwell was the only artist who illustrated Buck's works... untrue. It says he illustrated The Exile and Fighting Angel. How can one infer otherwise? Maxwell illustrated more works for Buck, including "China Sky" and serialized magazine editions of The Exile and Fighting Angel in Collier's and Woman's Home Companion magazines. But I am still working on suitable referencing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocketsquirrel (talk • contribs) 14:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your invitation to add others. In the interest of fleshing out a heading you created in a biography on Pearl Buck, you might want to research other illustrators as well. JNW (talk) 17:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Then add them

message: Personally, I have to wonder about the relevance of such a section in what is essentially a biography of the subject. I know that the author does not necessarily generally select those who illustrate their books, so unless there is some clear evidence that the author chose the artists, or knew them in a significant way personally, I'm far from sure that the section really should be in this article. Now, if the works are significant enough to be mentioned in the biography of the illustrator, that would be a separate thing entirely. And certainly such content would be welcome included in the content relating to the individual book itself. But the essence of such an article like this is the subject of the article herself, not her books per se, so unless the illustrator made a significant, recognized contribution to the artist's life or work, I am far from sure that such content should be in this article about the author herself. John Carter (talk) 23:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To me the current placement is awkward and give it some undue weight. I would rephrase and move it under each of the two books in the bibliography section; if and when the books have their own articles they can be sent there. If there is more to the story/connection then possibly explore what that is as it may merit inclusion or prominent placement. Benjiboi 23:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the section should be removed entirely. It is not relavent to Pearl S. Buck. This is a biographical article, not a holding place for trivia and pet interests. Kaldari (talk) 23:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to a point, remove the section and add the info in the bibliography section instead, the whole article needs expanding so, to me, removing information is not the answer. Every article is an organic process with sections growing unevenly. If consensus is that it simply has no place in the bio then maybe document on the talk for future editors. Benjiboi 00:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: How are the illustrators of an author's body of work "trivia?" Decide how it should best be sectioned, sure, but to trivialize the relationship between literature, art and illustration and excise these facts from an organic encyclopedia seems a bit extreme. --Rocketsquirrel (talk) 12:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, it's a biography of Pearl Buck, not an entry to include those who worked with her in the fields of art or literature, from which hundreds of people would be included. An encyclopedic biography covers the essentials of a figure's life. To use it otherwise suggests an agenda. 69.37.21.94 (talk) 13:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. If the illustrators figured prominently in the author's life, then they could reasonably be included in the biography where appropriate. However, the illustrators of an author's work tend in general not to be particularly relevant to the author's life, which is the subject of this article. This is not saying that the illustrator's wouldn't deserve reasonable coverage in articles about the works themselves, but the policy of WP:Undue weight makes it very questionable whether such information belongs in an article about the life of the author. John Carter (talk) 14:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustrators section 

message: I find I'm unable to get much past the first one or two paragraphs of this article because it reads like a fourth-grade essay.  Aside from grammar/syntax/punctuation errors (of which there are, sadly, a not insignificant number), the style itself is simplistic to the point of being almost nonsensical.  Examples (all from first paragraph, which, I guess, is an example all by itself):
She was raised in China and learned the customs from a teacher named Mr. Kung.
Buck learned ALL the Chinese "customs" from one person?  Did "Mr. Kung" have a bigger name? Or  did his close friends just call him "Mr."?   
She was encouraged to write things at an early age.
By whom?  What, exactly, are "things"?  And how does this encouragement differ from that provided to most children (of literate families) during their early-education careers?
“The streets [of China] were alive with rumors- many … based on fact- of brutality to missionaries …” 
What's with the punctuation here?  Not to mention:  Huh?
If no one objects, I'd like to clean up this article in a relatively massive way.  I'll check back in about a week, and will begin editing then.
Sugarbat (talk) 18:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and made some small changes to wording. Still far from a great article in particular the odd Historic site reference that seems detached. Is this her homestead? If so should it not move slightly up the page?--Vagon (talk) 22:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The 'irony' thing was fixed. In future, please feel free to make changes yourself. —Zujine|talk 15:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immature writing style of article 

message: When she returned to China until she resigned from the mission board in 1932, she was a missionary, but it hardly seems right that the missionary signboard take up all the space at the side of the page when she was actually so critical. ch (talk) 04:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  PSB A Missionary? 

message: A story on NPR, today, recounts how Chairman Mao's wife banned PSB from Nixon's China Trip by maligning her as an enemy of the Chinese state during China's Cultural Revolution. This should be worked into the article.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125682489
Buster (talk) 03:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent, thanks for the tip. I will work it in. —Zujine|talk 06:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PSB banned from Nixon's China Trip 

message: No mention to the movie "The Big Wave (1961)"? Based on the book with the same title, with the production described in the book "A Bridge for Passing" (1961). Or all the other movies?
The Big Wave (1961) - IMDb
--Cesarakg (talk) 22:51, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  You do that. Please. :) I'm not confident in my english writing skills --Cesarakg (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Big Wave - the movie 

message: I'm in a bit of a hurry, so don't want to spend time figuring out all the formatting for references. There is a recently-discovered novel by Pearl S. Buck, which is due to be published in October this year. I've added that to the article. The source is here. I'll add the reference to the article later, if nobody else gets there first. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 10:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newly-discovered novel 

message: Re:  Pearl Buck
I believe a very important item in her bio is missing.  Under her "Humanitarian" paragraph, there should be mention about the time when Pearl Buck advocated for Israel to spare the life of Adolf Eichmann after he was sentenced to death by hanging as a Nazi War Criminal.  
This is not a small thing.  It's not to judge her either way, but at that time in history, it was a very big issue.  Ms. Buck was very famous and it was contentious that she was making a plea for his life.  And since this was a segment in her life which was highlighted, I believe it should be incorporated in her Wiki page.
(As I'm studying Eichmann more in depth now, I ran across this issue and saw that it was not mentioned on Buck's Wiki page.  Whether it was a good thing or not, it matters not.  As I already mentioned, this is not a judgment issue; it's just a part of history.  Buck did involve herself into a part of this contentious historical period, and it should be incorporated into her bio.  Regarding human rights, was she known to be anti-capital punishment?  I suppose I'm suggesting that anyone who is an expert on Pearl Buck might know the reason(s) she petitioned Israel to not hang Eichmann (what was her particular interest in this one case, etc.)
As I'm not an editor (nor an expert on Pearl Buck's life), I thought I'd bring it forward to be discussed among editors on her Wiki page.  
Here is sentence in Wikipedia on that subject on Eichmann's Wiki page:
"Eichmann immediately petitioned Israeli President Yitzhak Ben-Zvi for clemency. Prominent persons such as Hugo Bergmann, Pearl Buck, Martin Buber, and Ernst Simon spoke up on his behalf."
Thank you,
C.S. Palmer  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.99.178 (talk) 01:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Seven years on, still no mention of her motives in making the appeal. The story makes no sense without it. Valetude (talk) 22:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Seven years is not true. The request was for making a mention in the Humanitarian section, and  in 2018. As for motives, someone who has access to the book Eichmann : his life and crimes, pp. 319–20, can try finding out. Jay (talk) 11:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pearl Buck & Nazi Adolf Eichmann  

message: Since they IP doesn't seem to get it, it might be time to involve an admin for semiprotcting this side and/or admonish the IP and its related fresh accounts.--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is time for ANI, yes, but it is not just an IP. There are two other accounts associated with this individual (User:WV NYC and User:USS SF NYC). And this is not the only article affected. Paul B (talk) 13:38, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is semi-protected for one month, but it won't help much. Zerotalk 13:39, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I blocked WV NYC for one week and will block any apparently related accounts making the same edits.  This has gone on long enough. Zerotalk 11:48, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Request protection

message: It's a shame that, when it comes to the role that Pearl S Buck and her Welcome House Adoption Agency played in Canada Scoops/60's Scoops in USA, that what started out in 2012 as a really good, cooperative-compassionate relationship with the people at Pearl S Buck International - Welcome House Foundation is now becoming tainted by these denials within the Wikipedia page of Pearl S Buck, i.e., the attempts to minimize her role in bringing Canada Scoops victims to USA and the simultaneous scapegoating/making a former Arthur Murray dance school instructor, Theodore Harris, culpable is misleading and leaves a question mark over the validity of the entire page. 
If there is any value placed on accuracy and full-context then Pearl S Buck's role has to be admitted. It can even be admitted along with a description of the context of the times during which it happened, i.e., most of these victims are relieved to have been taken out of the poverty marked by severe malnutrition that they were being raised in and which never would have provided them with the opportunities that they were given in USA by the smart placement decisions made by Pearl S Buck Welcome House adoption agency, and which allowed several of them to achieve real material and reputation success, millionaire status, national championship titles, etc. 
This page needs a fresh crop of Wikipedia administrators working on it, certainly not all but a good portion aren't well intentioned, aren't informed, aren't capable of doing a good job on the Pearl S Buck page, they are doing more harm than good.4.35.92.19 (talk) 11:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pearl S Buck "Under Fire" - Canada Scoops Victims Placed In USA By Pearl S Buck Welcome House Foundation 

message: this Pearl S Buck Page is more public relations tool than periodical reference. Why is that? In particular Pearl S Buck's unique and integral role in the transiting of Canada Scoops Victims-Children to USA via her Pearl S Buck Welcome House Adoption Agency. After editing and allowing this information to stand for several months it was deleted by Wikipedia administrators with China ISPS (china investors funding the Pearl: The Musical premiering at Lincoln Center in NYC In August 2015, i.e., the promoters were very disturbed to have their US production team be upset upon learning of Pearl Buck's involvement in Canada Scoops). Now after realizing that denying what is well cited isn't a smart strategy they are allowing references to Pearl S Buck's involvement to be published on Wikipedia but only if another person is stated as being responsible for her involvement. it's a ridiculous manipulation of the US involvement in Canada Scoops that was initiated with the 'China ISPs' 64.134.240.40 (talk) 12:31, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is not a true sentence in this paragraph, except (perhaps) "Why is that?": Wikipedia is not a "periodical reference," Buck had no role in transiting, "Wikipedia administrators" did not delete "this information" (I did, and I am an "editor" not an administrator"), I do not have a "China ISP" (whatever that is), there is no way of telling from an IP whether anyone is an investor in "Pearl: The Musical," and.... what!? ... "China ISPs" initiated the Canada Scoops? ch (talk) 23:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The next edit after he added the text was by an editor with a Chinese name . Needless to say, the edit was not a deletion. It was a simply a minor change in another part of the article. As CWH says, the deletion was much later  Paul B (talk) 04:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Page Is More A Public Relations Fact Sheet Than A Periodical Like Reference