Talk:Xiaxue

message: please no... AFD!!!! __earth (Talk) 12:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you serious? She's definitely not unknown, and is internationally one of the best known female bloggers. Check out the links on the page, and realise that she doesn't qualify for deletion on any instance. Hauser 09:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The above is subjected to various opinions. While she is not unknown, she is surely not notable. There are other "internet celebrities" out there who does not have a wikipedia entry. 180.180.95.225 (talk) 08:32, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: AFD

message: Xiaxue urged her readers earlier to update her page, and resented the fact that Wikipedia editors "can't be bothered to upload a chio photo of me despite me splattering them all over the place."
To all of her readers that may follow her link here and happen to see this, I draw your attention to WP:FU, which states that "any non-free media used on Wikipedia must meet all of these criteria: 1. No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information ... if the subject of the photograph still exists, a freely-licensed photograph could be taken." Thus, grabbing one of her "chio photo[s]" that she did not license under an acceptable free license or release into the public domain is prohibited. Please do not do what Xiaxue seems to want us to do, that is, grab a photograph off her blog and upload it onto Wikipedia. Instead, wait for someone else to take a photograph of her and license it under an acceptable free license or release it into the public domain, do this yourself, or wait for her to license her photograph(s) accordingly.
I'm saying this because her blog supposedly attracts up to 20 000 readers per day, many of whom would probably not be familiar with Wikipedia policies and are immediately marshalled to upload a photograph of her. —Goh wz 02:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alternatively, someone could ask her to provide a photograph that she agrees, in writing (e-mail or whatever), to release under the GFDL. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xiaxue urges her readers to update her page 

message: Should the article refer to her as "Xiaxue" or "Cheng"? I personally prefer "Xiaxue", but I'm not familiar with the Manual of Style. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Xiaxue, since most people refer to her by that name usually. Keep it the same for now. Terence 14:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Xiaxue" or "Cheng"? 

message: In my opinion the statements contained in this section are not written from a neutral perspective and thus do not belong on Wikipedia. Thank you Deconstructhis 04:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Impact of Xiaxue on youths in Singapore

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Unconvincing. What is she usually called? We should use that, as we do Atrios. The Chinese phrase is not a problem, unless we (rather than Wiktionary) should have an article on it, which I doubt; compare Cher, although cher is a French word. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: There's no serious question that she's a notable blogger.  See http://www.xiaxue-media.blogspot.com/ for her "media center" which includes a couple dozen instances of coverage in print media and television.  Outside of what she's collected herself, http://www.straitstimes.com/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=1f435ce1e874c110VgnVCM100000430a0a0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=19e4758920e39010VgnVCM1000000a35010aRCRD is an article in the Straits Times documenting the controversy with Lang.   I'm deleting the  tag. TJRC (talk) 08:01, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: How in the name of F*CK does this person deserve a wikipedia page? OK, she blogs, she tweets, then what? There's tons of internet personalities who are much more famous and still not found in wikipedia. Whoever started this page is either an idiot or herself. Please dont pollute the environment for true useful information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.199.250.253 (talk) 08:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability, again

message: I think this page should be deleted. This meets Wikipedia's policies for speedy deletion. Please feel free to contest with my motion. She's just an ordinary blogger. Other much more prominent and notable blogs like TOC and Minister for National Development's blog were not added in Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee480 (talk • contribs) 03:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the Speedy.  The article clearly does not qualify for A7: "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines." If you still believe it should be delted, see WP:AFD. TJRC (talk) 03:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: With multiple Best Asian Blogs awards and an inclusion in the Technorati Global Top 100 Blogs list, her notability extends beyond Singapore, where she has worked for national newspapers and television. By the way, Wikipedia does have an article on The Online Citizen. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for deletion

message: I've looked at the article, which seems generally well written. A few tips for language:
*No need to link Singapore(an).
*:Not done The country that she is from is relevant to her notability and many readers would be unfamiliar with the Little Red Dot. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks so much! 谢谢你！ --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome; the changes are looking fine so far. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ]  03:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions from Wikipedian Penguin 

message: Hi- I don't want to commit to conducting a GA review right now (though I may later) but I am not convinced that the current structure is ideal. I'd recommend something like
 [Lead]
 -Early life
 -Media career
 --Blogging
 ---Controversy
 --Other media
 -Personal life
 -References
The "controversy" seems to all be about blogging, while the other media is obviously still a part of her media career. Meanwhile, there seems to be something a little odd about running together her life pre-career with her personal life during her career. J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've also added a number of categories- I hope none of these are controversial. J Milburn (talk) 22:45, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the category additions, all of which were helpful and uncontroversial. Restructuring the article would require a significant rewrite, followed by another round of copyediting, thus rendering the article unstable. Several different structures have been proposed, but each (including the current one) has its weaknesses. Splitting information about her early life into a separate section would create two very short and disjointed sections. The Controversy section reflects that she is as notable for controversy as for her achievements. Nevertheless, merging the Controversy section into the other sections may give a false impression of the reception towards her blog and other media. Not all the controversy originated from blog posts; the iPhone video was from her Guide to Life series and Tomorrow.sg is, as mentioned, a blog aggregator website. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 16:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested restructure 

message: It seems as if  is making the photo much smaller. HYH.124 (talk) 11:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Or this edit. HYH.124 (talk) 11:40, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo display 

message: Persondata template, add place of birth as "Singapore", alternative names as "Wendy Cheng". 175.156.242.240 (talk) 09:31, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Thanks for the improvement suggested. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 00:30, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request in August 2014 

message: Volunteers, please merge peer review template with article history template, thanks! 175.156.242.240 (talk) 10:24, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  peer review template on this talk page 

message: Hey, would the gush cloud saga be valid for inclusion? http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/social-media-marketing-firm-gushcloud-refutes-blogger-xi Thegreenspade (talk) 11:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Difficult to evaluate its importance when the saga is still ongoing, but probably valid for inclusion since mainstream media reported about it. After the saga dies down, I may add a sentence about it in the Controversy section. --Hildanknight (talk) 14:42, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gushcloud saga 

message: Multiple times this article mentions that her blog stats are 50,000 daily. While that may have been true 10 years ago, she updates the blog a couple of times a year at best and it's highly unlikely that this statistic is even remotely true. I would suggest removing it entirely. The sources that are being sited are articles that are ten years old. Additionally, under "Blogging," you site that Xiaxue has ten blogs. She has one blog and you offer zero sources that site anything other than her main blog, so I would also like to suggest removing implication that she's juggling multiple blogs, when she has always only been known for one blog.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:36B5:F270:713E:5EEB:EC8C:728D (talk) 05:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding blog stats 

message: Update age to 38 2600:1017:B8A0:D0F6:4449:C353:2935:6C04 (talk) 13:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update age 

message: look up the entry of Sarong party girl on wikipedia. Xiaxue should be labeled an SPG slut given she only dated white men.
why nothing about that? 122.11.237.26 (talk) 04:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xiaxue is a Sarong Party Girl