Talk:Michelle Kwan

message: Why is her name translated into Chinese characters? She is a natural born US citizen.--JOJ Hutton 02:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been well discussed. She's ethnic Chinese with Chinese-speaking parents. She's given a Chinese name at birth--in fact that's the origin of her legal middle name. Chinese is not an alphabetical language. Her Chinese name is not derivable from English, hence the relevance. HkCaGu (talk) 06:34, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well discussed? Do you mean that 5 year old discussion up top? Hardly reason not to research this topic again. Just about all Americans derive from some other place in the world. I understand that her last name is Chinese, but everybody has a last name that comes from some other country. My point being is that if she is an American, she should be American, not treated as if she is just part American because of her name.--JOJ Hutton 13:19, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Unwillingly repeating stuff from the old discussion: How does a Chinese name inclusion make her less American? How does the Chinese language (the third most used language in the United States and Canada) conflict with being "American"? And most importantly, one must understand that usages of most other immigrant languages (Hebrew, European languages, SE Asian lanugages and more) do not require the need and distinctness of a separate name like the Chinese language. And by the way, if she only has a Chinese last name but not given a Chinese first name, nobody would think of including Chinese characters and romanizations AT ALL. For each Chinese surname spelling, there are mostly one, sometimes two, rarely three or more, actual corresponding Chinese surnames. (End result: disambiguation belongs to the Chinese Wikipedias.) However, first name/given name possibilities are endless, therefore the relevance. HkCaGu (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Respectfully, all Americans have foreign names, and many have names that derive from alternate alphabets. Although this is much bigger than just this page as it appears that a vast number of biographies do the same thing, even among non Asian alphabets. Seems very very odd to do this. Seems to be giving undo prominence to the foreign spelling in the lead.--JOJ Hutton 21:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Respectfully, you are wrong that "all Americans have foreign names". Most Americans DON'T. A foreign derived name is not a foreign name. An American's name ADAPTED into a foreign language by those speakers is not intrinsically that American's name. Michelle's father and grandfather are legally 關 (Kwan) and named Michelle "穎珊" (pronounced Wing Shan and subsequently registered as middle name Wingshan), and years later the family informed the Chinese-language media here (U.S.) and abroad of those three characters being Michelle's name. Unless one understands how Chinese is not based on alphabet but ideographs and homonyms are plenty, and how Chinese and non-Chinese names are used and/or derived in Chinese-language publications, one cannot understand a Chinese name's relevance in English Wikipedia. (As one of many examples, a newspaper in Mexico will gladly accept a Mexican-American named Michael without a need to convert to Miguel. However, Chinese-language press anywhere will not convert Michelle to any combination of characters sounding like Mi-xue-er once she and/or her family confirms she's 穎珊.) HkCaGu (talk) 23:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how you are defining "foreign", but last time I checked, its anything not derived or native to the United States (at least for this argument it is). Even the popular surname Smith is not native to the United States. I was ready to accept that this is the way most of these articles are written, but then I just get crapped on. Nice! Of course if this type of discussion ever came up again in a more formal setting, say at WP:MOS, I would be emphatically against keeping these non English spellings, for American born biographies.--JOJ Hutton 02:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Case in point: zh:关颖珊 (Guan Yingshan); while Tara Lipinski's article is zh:塔拉·利平斯基 (transliterated, "Tala Lipingsiji").  I agree with HkCaGu, Chinese characters should be retained here. TJRC (talk) 20:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no longer convinced of my comment above, and am now striking it. TJRC (talk) 22:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

text: The original name/script/characters would be on her birth certificate or birth records. It is not "adapted". She may bot be commonly known as her legal name in foreign language sources, but that is irrelevant because we use her common names in English in the English Wikipedia as well as list her birth and legal names. 174.252.5.15 (talk) 07:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You simply do not have a case to EXCLUDE that information, which is encyclopedic because of the subject's descent. We are not arguing the naming of this article, or what to call her. The Chinese name of a typical Chinese American is intrinsically part of that person, whether given at birth or self-adopted at a later stage of life. Widespread use of it makes it encyclopedic, and non-usage in the English world does not make it otherwise. HkCaGu (talk) 08:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Do not use stereotypes or original research to justify the creation of a manual of style. Being a Chinese American does not make a Chinese name important and your use of the word "typical" indicates you are stereotyping. This must be taken on a case by case basis, and this article on Kwan does not warrant the inclusion of Chinese names.174.252.5.15 (talk) 13:19, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

text: We're not talking about an obscured middle name. This is a name that is so widely used that a simple internet search will produce millions of results. HkCaGu (talk) 19:48, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Which would be enough to say something like "Kwan is frequently referred to in Chinese media as 關穎珊." It's even enough to create a redirect at 關穎珊 that points to Michelle Kwan, because the standard for that is simply that Michelle Kwan be the likeliest target of an editor searching for 關穎珊. If you want to make the statement that it is her name, and include it in the infobox as such, you need to have a source that directly indicates that Michelle Kwan uses those characters as her name.—Kww(talk) 20:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. That is her name, period. Chinese media could not have "figured out" her Chinese given name without asking her parents or herself. I can't see any reasonable grounds for a BLP challenge. So far all the cases have been from people who do not understand the Chinese language or its usage in America (or any Western country). To add a reference for such a widely-known figure is beyond WP:POINT, but for the sake of BLP "burden", I'll reference two versions of the same press release by the Committee of 100 (United States), a "by invitation only" group of prominent Chinese Americans. If you can't trust the million media outlets or what the Kwan family told the press decades ago, there should be no reason to argue against an elite organization, at least in the BLP sense. HkCaGu (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry ... that source simply shows that Chinese media and press releases use that as her name. Do you have any sources that verify your assertion that that is "what the Kwan family told the press decades ago"? Remember: WP:BLP prevents the inclusion of controversial material, and the very fact that the insertion has been challenged by multiple editors makes it controversial. If you have an issue with this, take it up at WP:BLP/N.—Kww(talk) 23:50, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You know well that family telling a name is not news that would be documented, just like a cop spelling his name at a press conference, but the secondary evidence is unquestionable. An announcement from an elite, bilingual organization of her joining as member is also unquestionable--they have 100-odd members and they're not super-careful on names? Your demand is simply feeding the troll. HkCaGu (talk) 00:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read up on WP:3RR, WP:BLP (and WP:OR, which is what comparing an English and Chinese version of the same press release is). If you make that edit again, you will undoubtedly be blocked from editing.—Kww(talk) 00:24, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, HkCaGu is doing original research. 174.252.31.243 (talk) 01:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

text: Calling that "OR" is a pure and simple disruption of Wikipedia. I'm simply providing a non-media, reliable (and highly respected) source as you requested. Should I instead post a link to a Google search of 關穎珊 which shows images of her and millions of links about her and links with the name in both languages? Wikipedia is a place where everyone contributes his knowledge, not a place where everyone challenges about things he does not know. BLP challenges have no legs to stand on, and the only argument is whether the information is encyclopedic. HkCaGu (talk) 02:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I asked you to provide a source that indicates that Michelle Kwan herself uses those characters as her name. To my understanding (and feel free to point at a source correcting me), the type of source you provided would have used a phonetic transliteration of any Western name: if Robert Redford had been mentioned, his name would have been written 勞勃瑞福. That would in no way indicate that Redford used that transliteration or that the transliteration was in any way relevant to him. I'm certain that the distinction can be made: I'm not debating that. I'm saying that using your expertise and knowledge is WP:OR. Again, we have a whole noticeboard devoted to this: WP:BLP/N. If you want to include it, go there and make your argument. I'll abide by the consensus.—Kww(talk) 02:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese Characters 

message: Why isn't information about her being ambassador on her infobox? Normally if she were a nominee, that'd still be listed on the infobox. Now that she's been confirmed, I think it's a little overdue to add her ambassadorship to her infobox. 38.106.246.199 (talk) 19:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Because she's not ambassador, at least not yet. See #Nomination as ambassador to Belize, above. TLDR: she's been nominated and confirmed; once she's sworn, she's ambassador, and that has not yet happened; as of the time I write this, the U.S. State Department's Belize page still shows the ambassadorship as "vacant" and Leyla Moses-Ones as running the show as Chargé d'affaires; that will change if/when Kwan takes the oath of office and actually becomes ambassador. (I say "if/when" only out of an abundance of caution; I see no reason to think she won't be sworn.) TJRC (talk) 00:25, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambassadorship on infobox