Talk:David Oei

message: Is his Chinese surname 黃, 韦, or 卫, or something else?  And does he have a Chinese given (first) name?  Badagnani 07:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the first one. It's actually Wong spelled Oei. davidoei.weebly.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.115.222.103 (talk) 02:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

text: It's from the Amoy province.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.59.7.139 (talk) 17:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

text: There is a given first name. How can one send Chinese characters? (Carlylewines (talk) 17:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

text: My surname Oei is pronounced Wee (as in bee, see, etc.) It's the closest approximation of my native southern  Fujian dialect. The biography of my great grandfather Oei Tjoe confirms this and for 14 years touring with The Intimate P.D.Q. Bach I was introduced loudly as David Wee. 173.115.88.213 (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Surname

message: Is he a U.S. citizen and, if so, in what year did he obtain U.S. citizenship? Badagnani (talk) 05:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am a citizen. Will have to look up the year. Thanks for everythig. How can I send a photo to you? davidoei.weebly.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.115.222.103 (talk) 02:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Only my Mom came with me. Brother and Mom now live in SF. Relatives mostly in Hong Kong and around the globe.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.59.7.139 (talk) 17:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  U.S. citizenship 

message: Regarding  and other edits on this same information: This is nothing more that a link to a site created by Oei's wife about herself.  It's not being used as a source, but rather was added to promote her website. --Ronz (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I had requested such a link only because my wife was linked erroneously to Eriko Sato the model/actress. It was only to clarify and prove that my wife was not the model/actress but indeed Eriko Sato the violinist. She's a totally successful individual and certainly needs no promotion from my article so I have absolutely no problem with this decision. That cannot be said for the other deletions made by different editors as explained further below. Finally remembered to sign my post.(72.60.23.88 (talk) 16:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure we can find a reference that meets WP:RS if this confusion needs such clarification. --Ronz (talk) 16:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

text: http://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/11/nyregion/music-dawn-upshaw-in-recital-at-sarah-lawrence.html mentions Oei and Sato as husband and wife. --Ronz (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Glad I could help.  Sorry about the drama that's occurred in response to my trying to fix this. --Ronz (talk) 00:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Linkspam

message: Regarding  and other edits on this same information: Given that Oei no longer owns this shop, and no sources have been provided that show how his past ownership of this shop is an important part of Oei's life, I've removed it as overly promotional for the shop itself. --Ronz (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no advertisement, as such is not permitted at Wikipedia. What there was was insistent and repeated deletion, quite against consensus, of important content and sourcing--something that has become a hallmark of the above editor (in addition to WP:STALK, in which he has engaged for months, and continues to engage in to this very day). Kindly cease insistently removing, against consensus, important, sourced data from our articles. The shop's ownership was clearly sourced, quite properly, by this source, which was removed again and again quite against consensus. Please restore it.  Badagnani (talk) 02:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For one thing, Badagnani, please don't engage in personal attacks and baseless threats. Second of all, directories and blatant ads don't count as sources and have no place in an article. Therefore it should stay removed. There does not have to be consensus for every single thing that is removed; rather, it should be for questionable items that are added. WP:BRD, WP:OWN and WP:DRNC apply here quite nicely. GraYoshi2x►talk 02:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

text: For editors new to these problems, Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Badagnani includes documentation of many similar issues. --Ronz (talk) 02:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm curious how the inclusion of a store that completely occupied my life for 10 years can be considered promotional material when that store was closed FOREVER by me back in 2004. How can it be promotional material when the store no longer exist? Please explain to me what the benefits are with this PROMOTION. 173.114.8.111 (talk) 03:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe to promote the shop with the same name that currently exists?  Who cares?  It's irrelevant.  Until we have a source that demonstrates otherwise, It's of no importance to Oei's life.  See WP:UNDUE. --Ronz (talk) 16:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

text: On the contrary, it is of fundamental importance to an encyclopedic coverage of this individual's life. Mentioning it in a single sentence does not promote it any more than we are trying to promote Pepsi by lovingly documenting this currently-sold beverage, produced and marketed by PepsiCo, about which we also have an article. Finally, I believe the editor insisting on removing text, as seems to be his primary interest at Wikipedia, found this article via WP:STALK, which is a very big no-no at our project, in fact against our policy. Badagnani (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this bio from the Notice board posting. Advertisements are considered a form of self publishing so they are generally not allowed. Why not just use a better secondary source? In this NY Times article from 1999,  Oei discussing the shop's preference for Campogrande. He sounds like a very hands on proprietor.--Eudemis (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd found the same article, but decided against it because it's such a brief mention. --Ronz (talk) 20:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement

message: When my friend told me I was in the Wikipedia I was stunned. I couldn't believe someone would find my life interesting enough to write an article about me. To this end I will always feel tremendously humbled and privileged. Since then the backsniping and the disputing of facts of my life have soured this honor noticeably. It completely boggles my mind that there are strangers out there deciding what my life is about and even having the unmentionable gall to decide how my name should be pronounced. My life is not something you can play around with, just as I would never do that to somebody else. It's a simple life that touched someone enough to create this article and I will forever be grateful to him. But if this continues I must request that this article be removed forever. This time I actually remembered to log in and sign. And for the last time, this is David Oei, pronounced Wee. (Carlylewines (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Ronz, kindly stop pushing, pushing, pushing, until the subject of a WP biography, a distinguished concert pianist, no longer wishes to have his biography at our encyclopedia. The fact that this has nearly occurred means that something is very wrong. Please check yourself and think if what you are doing (insistent blanking without consensus), not only here but at dozens of pages, nearly 100 located via WP:STALK. This is simply behavior alien to our fundamentally collaborative, constructive, and collegial project. I ask in all sincerity that you contribute to our project in a manner in line with our founders' vision, always maintaining this all-important sense of collegiality and thoughtfulness, eschewing any form of aggression in one's editing. Badagnani (talk) 18:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a great comment to make if you want Ronz to do the opposite of what you ask. If you want him to do what you ask, a different approach would be the intelligent choice. Your post here is not likely to produce a resolution. Do you understand? -GTBacchus(talk) 22:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection rights and the joys? of Wikipedia 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]]