Jump to content

Talk:Coco Lee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:CoCo Lee)

Place of Birth

[edit]

The commonly cited birthplace of CoCo Lee is Hong Kong in 1975. However, recent interviews with her elder sisters reveal a different story: she was actually born in Wuhan and brought to Hong Kong as an infant. If this information is accurate, it reshapes the entire narrative of CoCo Lee's life. She was born in Wuhan towards the end of the Cultural Revolution and experienced the absence of her father, who had passed away not long before.

I'm uncertain if it's permissible to share the sources here, as these interviews were recently released on Chinese TikTok by several Chinese media outlets. Additionally, her elder sister Nancy Lee's eulogy, delivered at a public funeral, also confirms that Ferren Lee was, in fact, born in Wuhan. This eulogy, recorded in Mandarin by a Chinese news agency, adds further weight to this claim. Plantton (talk) 18:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you’re right, it’s very likely that she’s born in Wuhan.
I believe these are good enough, though it doesn’t hurt to wait longer and see if there are more or better ones. BTW, I think Coco mentioned before that his father died from pneumonia before she was born. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. I concur with your insights. This further illuminates her tragic childhood, having lost her father before she was even born. The inadequate healthcare in mainland China during the 1970s might have contributed to her physical condition, particularly her left leg defect, which foreshadowed her difficult fate in the decades to come.
However, I lack a specific reference regarding her father's illness. Given the challenges of the healthcare system during that era, the true cause might remain elusive. Plantton (talk) 13:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
More than enough?
They are independent source and it’s likely that some of the reporters were invited to join the tour of the exhibition in Wuhan and had talked with the sisters.
I also noticed that at the Chinese Wikipedia you’ve mentioned a video on youtube originally released by her label Fancy Pie in the early days of her career [1][2], though it maybe somewhat marginal for inclusion in the article, in my opinion it does help clear much doubts and aids editorial judgement :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 15:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think Coco did say that she was born in HK (in interview, etc.). She had her reasons … --Dustfreeworld (talk) 18:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with your point. In her earlier interviews, she stated that she was born in Hong Kong, likely for clear reasons. However, during the initial stages of her career (as represented by Fancy Pie), she mentioned being born in Wuhan. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, I am unsure how to address this issue. My suggestion would be to create two separate entries for her birthplace: CoCo Lee was born in Hong Kong, while Meilin Li (Ferren Li) was born in Wuhan. Similar methods are commonly used in handling such situations in the entertainment industries of Korea and Japan. Plantton (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean we have Wikipedia articles of Korean and Japanese artists that have two separate entries for birthplace? If so can we look at some examples? --Dustfreeworld (talk) 23:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regrettably, I couldn't locate a precise example of citing multiple birthplaces for an individual on Wikipedia. The use of stage identities, such as stage names and birthdates, is more prevalent in the entertainment industries of Japan and Korea. However, these instances are typically documented in the press rather than on Wikipedia.
Perhaps it would be prudent to create a dedicated section describing the 'controversy of places of birth' for her. I've come across another resource authored by CoCo Lee's mother, currently housed in CoCo Lee's memorial in Wuhan.
https://photo.weibo.com/5849043024/wbphotos/large/mid/4966524106311452/pid/006nPZhCly1hjpyizb6cej31400u0tfr Plantton (talk) 14:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Please see my reply below. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the page to its long standing version (before changes were made by new users). [3] Thanks. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 17:16, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth issue

[edit]

Can you please get your act together and stop bickering over the place of birth. It is clear that there are many sources saying HK, and now more recent sources saying Wuhan. Just say that in the article, in a neutral tone of voice. Ferren Lee was born on 17 January 1975,[16][17] the daughter of a Hongkonger mother whose ancestral home is Wuhan. Many sources specify she was born in HK[a][b][c][d][e]; other more recent sources specify she was born in Wuhan[f][g][h]. It is not for you or this article to make a judgement on which sources are correct, not to speculate on why HK was given if Wuhan was true. It is merely for you to reflect in this article what the sources say, and where sources differ, to construct sentences which convey the difference. Sort it out in the body first. Then decide whether and how you will deal with it in the infobox. Remember there is no law saying that ths infobox must have PoB data. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my question, but could you please provide more detailed references for your statements? From what I understand, her mother is from Wuhan, which became evident in her recent speech at the funeral. She spoke with a distinct Hubei accent rather than a Cantonese one.
As a newbie, probably I need extra guidance on attach references, especially the talks recorded online. Plantton (talk) 23:18, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are saying it must be written in full sentences because there are disagreements about the information. Lightbulb Specialist (talk) 18:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wuhan should be included because she is buried there, although I don't know whether this was Coco's personal wish. I am fine with also indicating Hong Kong. Doctor Henkel 23:32, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for your great input, Tagishsimon, Plantton and Doctor Henkel. I agree with you all (either shown in posts above or in your previous edits to the article) that we can have both HK and Wuhan in the article. I’ve edited the page to reflect the consensus and include both places in the article (not omitted in infobox cause it’s very likely that others, esp. IPs or newer users, will want to add that if the places are found missing :) Thanks again! --Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:28, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be in the infobox yet, since many of the sources for Wuhan are still primary. Even if true, Coco and her family left for Hong Kong a couple of months after her birth. She didn't grow up there. In the article we already adequately explain that different places of birth have been reported. Vacosea (talk) 20:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vacosea, thank you for your contribution. As far as I know, at least three users (me not counted) have shown their support for the inclusion of birth places (HK and Wuhan) in infobox, either by their post on talk (Plantton [4]), or by their edits (Doctor Henkel[5], Andro611 [6]), and Tagishsimon, while reminding that infobox’s inclusion of PoB data is not a must, didn’t show opposition either [7]. There is a clear consensus for the inclusion. Please don’t edit against that. Thanks again. Respectfully, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 05:27, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You do not have consensus for inclusion in the infobox because it needs to be reached by discussion. Vacosea (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vacosea, please do not use the Collapse top template to hide the posts related to current discussion and making them completely inaccessible under mobile view (and the Reply Tool in all views ceased to work as well).[8] That is DISRUPTIVE. The posts contain SOURCES and CONSENSUS. If you think the page is too long, you should consider archiving older posts instead.
Consensus can be achieved through editing. You are the only person who oppose. Please read Wikipedia:Consensus. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 01:29, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not CONFLATE the issues. This is a discussion about the infobox, not other parts of the article. I see one editor adding Wuhan initially but later joining the discussion. You have also reverted Wuhan before restoring it. There has not been a concensus for the infobox yet. Vacosea (talk) 23:00, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We are talking about your disruptive edit on this talk page on 15 Nov. that hides the posts related to this birth place discussion and making them completely inaccessible under mobile view (and the Reply Tool in all views ceased to work as well) [9].
As to the infobox inclusion of place of birth data, no matter what you said, the consensus of inclusion is very clear. You are the only one who oppose. People will know the truth if they read the diffs I posted. Further discussion like this one is just a time sink and again, disruptive to the encyclopaedia. And if other editors see that the PoB data is missing and add it back, and then others revert and edit warring, it’s even more disruptive. I don’t see any reason why we have to risk that while a clear consensus has already been archived.
Discussing with someone who doesn’t respect consensus and making disruptive edits can go nowhere. I have no interest in edit warring with you either. Just let the fact speaks for itself. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:15, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wuhan is in the article now. Is @Vacosea suggesting removing it? Doctor Henkel (talk) 02:45, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Doctor Henkel. We usually have the place of birth of a person mentioned in the article as well as the infobox (the box you see on the top right on the page Coco Lee). I have added “Wuhan” to both the article and the infobox per the above discussion and your preference (as shown in your previous edit which added Wuhan to the infobox; it had been reverted by me because consensus hadn’t been reached yet at that time).
Later Vacosea removed the birth place entry in the infobox (so both HK and Wuhan aren’t in the infobox now, but still in article). So they are not suggesting, they have already done so :)
--Dustfreeworld (talk) 04:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it from the infobox, which is supposed to summarize key facts. I did not remove it from the article. Vacosea (talk) 04:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The collapsed discussions were about the rest of the article, not the infobox. I did not go against them, contrary to what Dustfreeworld always seems to be implying. Collapsing them reduces the confusion of multiple sections with similar names and helps focus on the infobox debate, which does not have consensus yet. It worked well on my display. Any technical issue was not intentional. Vacosea (talk) 04:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Vacosea,
I noticed you edited some important content without discussing it first, which felt quite rude and dismissive. You also didn't follow the guideline to stick to the original resources as closely as possible. It's important to keep descriptions objective for future reference. Please discuss any significant changes with me before making them. Plantton (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you refuse to talk, and keep violating the resources right? Plantton (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you know you know  ;-)
[10] [11]
--Dustfreeworld (talk) 14:51, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, inclusion of any such information in the infobox has not reached consensus. Vacosea (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can repeat the misinformation whatever times you want in the hope that it will become truth, though I don’t think it will.
For the record:
  • 20:20 14 Nov 2023, User:Vacosea removed birth place “HK or Wuhan” from infobox with edit summary: “wikilink, premature for the infobox” [12]
  • I added them back on 05:34 15 Nov 2023 [13]
  • 15:39 15 Nov, Vacosea removed the birth place info from the infobox again with edit summary: “no consensus yet for the infobox”, despite the consensus shown above. [14]
I’m tired of thier edit warring and decided to let it be and not adding back the birth place info into the infobox, and I left the talk page comments above (19 and 21, Nov 2023).
Later on 08:41 7 Jan, User:TgoSurvivor added back the birth place Wuhan to infobox [15]
If memory serves, that version stood for months and hadn’t been reverted by anyone. Birth place “Wuhan” had been in the infobox since then until Vacosea suddenly removed it on 13:51 4 Apr, their edit summary: “discussion about no birth place in the infobox” [16].
After that, they continue with the edit warring and even started a thread at ANI against me. Note that they are the only user that keep removing birth place info from the infobox and claiming that there’s “no consensus” (I did removed that once in early Nov before the consensus in the above discussion had been developed, and just that one time, not any more, and not anyone else). This kind of slow edit warring with misleading edit summary is saping up the community’s time and patience.
Now it seems that they are trying to turn the infobox into something like a navigation sidebar, by linking to a section of the article in the infobox’s birth place entry... [17]. I’m going to revert it and restore the version that had stood for months. I’m posting this because 1) the misinformation needs to be clarified, 2) as a precaution that someone is going to go to ANI again 6 months later with diffs of untrue claims, 3) I hope the edit warring can stop. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 15:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should read more carefully where it says "an edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed or reverted". Here are some other positions disagreeing with Dustfreeworld that they ignore in order to pretend there was "consensus". Vacosea (talk) 11:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"She was born and died in Hong Kong." (13:22, 30 October 2023 Clear Looking Glass [18])
"Remember there is no law saying that ths infobox must have PoB data." (19:55, 9 November 2023 Tagishsimon [19])— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vacosea (talk • contribs)
I think it is time for you to stop the (endless) potential WP:PA using words like "pretend". If what you said is true, the other editors (whom you said disagree with the long-standing version) that you mentioned would have joined our discussion and spoken for themselves, and don’t need *you* to be their representative. You are still stuck in the discussion half a year ago, and still trying to edit war your (losed) preferred version into the article. This is a time sink that loops forever, and you seem to be very keen on that especially when you think I’m down. Yes, I would say you are really persistent, especially in holding grudges and adding potentially untrue content ... May I ask you to move on? --Dustfreeworld (talk) 23:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There has never been any consensus about the infobox, so you should stop acting as if there is. I don't have my preferred version. That's why I remove both places or retain both in the infobox, not biasing one over the other as you did. You should really pay attention to assuming good faith and stop accusing other editors of personal attacks when there isn't any. Vacosea (talk) 05:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think we are obliged to retain old information (that has been superseded by newer ones) in the article. That said, as I do aware there’s opinion to keep old info. (born in H.K.), I *have* kept both places in the body of the article. Obvious enough, I’m *not* “biasing one over the other“ as you said. I ask you one last time: Please stop spreading misinformation and untrue claims about me, Vacosea. Also, FYI, we don’t need “consensus” to add basic info. such as birth date into to the infobox of a WP:BLP.
I know you are somewhat obsessed about the phrase “no consensus”, as you have used it in at least Five of your edit summaries of this article:, since last year:
When the consensus is against what you want, you cry “no consensus”. It’s been over 6 months already, there should have been enough time for you to “build that consensus that you want” (after your so many “no consensus” cries), if that really exists. Obviously, it doesn’t. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 06:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your version [20] biases Wuhan over Hong Kong. There is no consensus regarding the infobox, so you should not claim that there is. [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] If you want to insert a POV fact in the infobox, you are the one who needs to build consensus. Vacosea (talk) 19:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you cry “no consensus” again. I repeat: Please stop spreading misinformation and untrue claims about me, Vacosea.. Please stop comment on editor, comment on content instead.
Also, your repeated (endless) attempts to start trouble border on harassment. Not this again. This has been discussed to death. The points you are making are no different to the points that you made months ago and other editors did not find them convincing. May I ask you once again to just drop this stick? --Dustfreeworld (talk) 22:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vacosea Hi Vacosea,
I suggest focusing on improving the quality of the article instead of repeatedly violating the rules and adding personal opinions without consensus from other contributors. This disrupts the Wikipedia record. Please make meaningful contributions to enhance the articles rather than harming both your reputation and the content. Plantton (talk) 14:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

[edit]

It appears that the erstwhile-reliable sources themselves do not agree on a birthplace, so putting one or the other in the infobox as if known fact is completely improper (failure of WP:NPOV and/or WP:NOR). It would be tempting to just use "China" as the birthplace in the infobox, but one of these locales (Hong Kong) was not part of China at the time of the birth (it was a British or briefly Japanese possession from 1841 to 1997). The proper thing to do here is a choice between: A) silently leave location off the infobox; B) give both locations or "or", and say the birthplace claims are disputed, and link to the section about this; C) give neither location, say the birthplace is disputed, and link to the section about this. I would favour option C for brevity, but any will do. What will not do is one camp or the other in this long-running "slow-editwar" putting in the location they like better. The bare fact of the matter is that after many months and several noticeboardings, there is no consensus to use one or the other, because there is no clear demonstration that sources X have been proven correct and sources Y proven wrong. If this is going to drag out and drag out, then just RfC it, perhaps with all three of those options plus the two locations alone, for a total of 5 options. It is possible that bringing this to a broader audience could turn up a raft of additional sourcing that demonstrates that one locale is much better sourced than the opposing claim, though that seems unlikely at this juncture. It's more likely that there will a firm consensus to stop trying to claim one versus the other.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for weighing in, @SMcCandlish. FYI, there is no “disagreement” between almost all of the latest reliable sources. The issue is, before Coco Lee’s death, she didn’t comment much on her birth place. In the early days she did say that it’s Wuhan, but later she mentioned much less. Since she lived in Hong Kong before migrating to the US, it’s understandable that media assumed she’s born in Hong Kong. After her death, in Octotber 2023, her family officially said (e.g. in her burial ceremony in Wuhan [30], and also with the TV interview [31]) she was born in Wuhan. Since then, there are no more new sources that said she’s born in Hong Kong. So, essentially this is an issue of “old sources superseded by new sources”. This is more obvious for people who understand Chinese though, since most sources are not in English. I believe Vacosea knows all these, I don’t know the purpose of their potential sealioning, which has been lasting for months. But I think most people (who understand Chinese and) have been watching the article and this talk page understand the situation, so almost no one resonates with them here (despite their many “cries”). For the many sources that *all* agree Coco Lee was born in Wuhan you can see discussion on the top of this page (most are in Chinese though). --Dustfreeworld (talk) 03:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That said, since old sources still mentioned H.K. as the birth place, I do believe we shouldn’t remove it all together. Basically your “option C” has already been implemented in the body of the article, with both places (HK and Wuhan) mentioned, after discussion involving multiple users. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 04:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't resolve the infobox issue. The i'box is all that many readers will every read of this article.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox doesn’t have issue ... there is no disagreement between reliable sources ... this is even clearer after months have passed ... the real issue here is, I’m afraid, a single editor persistently pushing their POV through sealioning ... (there maybe some IPs / new users / users who don’t know Chinese who haven’t read the many sources on talk and misunderstood, but they aren’t the main problem). --Dustfreeworld (talk) 06:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a latest source: a documentary produced by her global fan club, featuring her Mum and sisters, just released today (few hours ago), with English caption,
(From 01:18 to 01:41, the person speaking is her mum)
FYI, Coco Lee died one year ago (5 July 2023). Today is the anniversary.
Well ... I've got to find some time to update the article ... but my will to edit has waned ... and I think there are some sections that I can’t edit anymore ... I haven’t finished viewing the video yet ... anyway, RIP. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 06:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 06:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, picking one place over the other would be Dustfreeworld's POV, not mine. Second, articles in Chinese language such as the BBC have also reported Hong Kong. Her family said Wuhan only after Coco died, how would we know if the information is true this time around? You haven't provided any retraction of "Hong Kong", so we don't really know what happened. Vacosea (talk) 11:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Vacosea,
However, from a medical and biological perspective, only a mother truly knows where and when her children were born. A birthplace is determined by this, not by a news agency. Isn’t this common knowledge? As I mentioned earlier, I hope you can make meaningful contributions to Wikipedia by providing accurate information, thus preserving valuable knowledge and objective historical records for future generations. Thank you. Plantton (talk) 11:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is different from which place is "true", given that Hong Kong has been the birth place in publications since at least Los Angeles Times (2000) South China Morning Post (2013) and many reports even after Coco died. There was never any retraction, correction, or objection from her family that I have seen. Vacosea (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get me wrong. My focus is on making meaningful contributions to the article. By this, I mean improving the quality of the content, correcting grammatical errors, adding appropriate images, and organizing the storylines systematically, etc. However, for the past several months, your changes have focused solely on altering her birthplace, disregarding the Lee Family's statements, other contributors' suggestions, and even scientific facts. Please provide evidence that you are committed to making valuable contributions to the article. Plantton (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, @Vacosea, that sea-lioning behaviour of yours is getting more and more obvious now. Let’s get it straight. If all you want is to distract people from Coco Lee’s mistreatment in the Sing! China incident (and the potential corruption) [32] [33] [34] [35] by trying to make something not controversial at all into something that looks like a hot debate, i.e., her birth place, well, may be you are quite successful. I hope you are paid, and well-paid. Otherwise it doesn’t worth the time and effort you’ve devoted. But, may I ask you not to do that at my expense anymore? That’s so annoying. I suggest you read Sealioning, WP:GAME, WP:Personal attack, etc. IMO you are clearly NOT here to build an encyclopaedia.
(Every time they expect there will be more discussion on Coco and/or her mistreatment they play that trick. That sea lion and their bait are really disgusting.)
May I suggest you to distract people into focusing on the achievements of Coco instead? Just STOP spreading untrue claims about me, or anyone else. Please be more “professional” in doing you job, and I hope you’ll never dream of Coco. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so "there is no disagreement between reliable sources" is obviously not correct. As long as Dustfreeworld continues to engage in this pretense and in calling people names ("sealioning", etc.) if they disagree, then this is obviously not going to be resolved by normal, civil discussion and should just be RFCed.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  10:43, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They know the language and they know that almost all new reliable sources said Coco Lee was born in Wuhan. Evidance has been shown to them many times since last year but they just ignore and won't drop the stick. Besides sealioning in order to mislead I really can't think of better explanation. FYI, someone has been calling my names ("POV". etc.) many times already since last year, both on this talk page and at other venues. Further escalation of this not-interested-by-many discussion may be just helping them to fulfil their sealioning purpose (distracting people, shifting people's focus to something they want to). It's also a timesink for the community. As for “There was never any retraction, correction, or objection from her family that I have seen.", her birth place is not controversial at all actually. None of the RS said it is. Not that everyone enjoys arguing/bickering, and that’s why there’s no “objection”. Also, what is expected for a “retraction from the family”? Should the family be retracting what a dead person had said? The family has shown their position (born in HKWuhan) clearly in multiple instances already, and it is endorsed by multiple reliable sources as well (see the lists at the top of this page). Respectfully yours, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 18:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 08:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC about the infobox specifically

[edit]

Should the infobox indicate Wuhan only without Hong Kong as Coco Lee's birth place? Add threaded replies to the discussion section only, thanks. Vacosea (talk) 23:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey (infobox)

[edit]

Discussion (infobox)

[edit]
  • Notable sources have indicated Hong Kong as Coco Lee's birth place since at least 2000. Los Angeles Times (2000) SCMP (2013) SCMP (2014) CBC (2023) BBC (2023) BBC Chinese (2023) The Guardian (2023) RTHK Chinese (2023). This was shown in the article's infobox from at least 2019 [36] to 2023 [37]. Only after Coco passed away, her family indicated that her place of birth was Wuhan. Apple Daily (Taiwan) SET News (2023) UDN (2023). I don't think we can determine which version is true yet and what's going on behind the scenes. Due to decades of coverage that indicated Hong Kong only, readers should be made aware that Wuhan is a new revelation and not the only version. The Early life section of this article has been agreed upon to include both places. To be neutral, the infobox should indicate both or neither (blank or with a link to "Early life"). Notifying Clear Looking Glass and Tagishsimon who had commented last year. Vacosea (talk) 23:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC) I might have missed a couple Lightbulb Specialist and Doctor Henkel. Vacosea (talk) 23:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If memory serves, I remember I’ve told you that I don’t have a very strong opinion about this. But you’ve never initiated a discussion to propose how you want to edit the page (while you did focus on commenting on other editor). And now you start an RfC (Oh I still remember the DEAD RfC you started last October). How many more time sinks are we going to have, after the lengthy discussion above and the ANI case you started?
    I hope my vote help. Respectfully, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 23:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If memory serves, you opposed my attempts to either indicate both cities or indicate none when editing the article and during discussions. Respectfully, --Vacosea (talk) 23:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If memory serves, your edits were opposed by other editors. I don’t think your memory serves. But yep, I can easily be wrong, and what if my memory doesn’t serve? After all these months of ?!?!? I think it’s normal if my memory doesn’t serve. I don’t know if it serves or doesn’t serve, but what do you want? My apologies? OK, you have it. Respectfully, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 00:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm fine with both mentions right now. Doctor Henkel 23:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for weighing in Doctor Henkel, although I think the RfC had ended a long time ago; and Vacosea had added HK to the infobox again in August already [38].
    For the record, I don’t think the RfC is necessary. According to the discussions and sources listed above [39][40][41], it’s very clear that Coco Lee was born in Wuhan. That ended RfC with only two votes, with one from mine, isn’t reflecting that; and with just two votes, it doesn’t representing the views of the community either. Further, that vote of mine was a compromise after getting tired of the endless unnecessary discussions (and don't want to have the community wastes any more time on this :-)
    Anyway... --Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best evidence is a birth certificate from hospital or government in her likely birthplaces. 2001:D08:2945:333E:1807:CB47:E7DF:FAE (talk) 09:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Primary school she attended

[edit]

Does anyone know which primary school did Coco attend when she was in Hong Kong? Would there be any information about this in the exhibition in Wuhan? --Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Although the elementary school information for CoCo Lee in Hong Kong is still unavailable, I have acquired valid information regarding her elementary school in the United States:
Redding Elementary School,
1421 Pine St, San Francisco, CA 94109.
This school information is documented in her memorial in Wuhan, and I have recently requested her fans in Wuhan to provide a clear picture of her diploma. Plantton (talk) 11:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Plantton! That’s valuable information!
I’m not sure if a photo of her diploma can be used as source though. If it’s mentioned in a published source (no matter it’s a book or a website) that would be grand. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve added the info to the page :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 02:52, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have attached her diplomas in the "Early Life" section. I also hope to add another picture of her winning the 1991 contest later on after obtaining the copyright. Plantton (talk) 09:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That’s great. Thanks!! --Dustfreeworld (talk) 00:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On a side note, is there any info about his father (PoB, ethnicity, etc.) about her father in her memorial in Wuhan? --Dustfreeworld (talk) 02:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, despite inquiries within her fan community, there is currently no additional information available about her father. However, new materials are gradually emerging through her memorial exhibition. It is hoped that more personal stories will be shared with the public in the near future. Plantton (talk) 15:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again Plantton, looking forward to it :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 04:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some new resources were just released during her 30th anniversary in the entertainment industry. I’ve requested permission and high-quality images from the owners. I’ll add them here as soon as I get them. Plantton (talk) 14:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. :-) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 04:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Teen Chinatown 1991

[edit]

It is widely acknowledged that CoCo Lee achieved her initial public success in the Miss Teen Chinatown 1991 contest. I recently came across two images of her participation in the 1991 contest as a candidate.

And, I have two inquiries: 1. Should we seek permission from the picture holder for copyright in advance? 2. Can I proceed to edit the page, adding the pictures and await further consensus?

Ref:

[42]https://www.sfclc.club/1990-1991-miss-teen-gala

[43]https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/63642d13c889407af44e19d8/8173b562-cb07-4494-bb11-976e508ac830/20220905123914_00020.jpg?format=1000w Plantton (talk) 11:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The information of Miss Teen Chinatown 1991 is in the article now, so you want to add the image as illustration?
To answer you question, if you just want to cite the link (i.e., use it as source), you don’t need to ask for their permission, but you need to write in your own words (no copy and paste).
If you want to show the image on Coco Lee’s page, yes permission from the author is needed in advance, and the image has to be uploaded to Wikipedia Commons. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 07:34, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, we only cite reliable source (e.g. official website of a government department) and we don’t cite websites that contain materials violating copyright. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 07:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have contacted the owner of the picture, and I am hopeful for a positive response. Plantton (talk) 20:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh but please wait. I’m afraid that it won’t be a simple task. Make sure you read this page first. In short, it’s not enough that the copyright holder grands Wikipedia the permission, because content on Wikipedia may be reused by others. And I think there are some standard templates at Commons that help us ask for permission. I haven’t done that before myself (I usually use content that had already been released under a free CC-BY license), so I suggest you visit the WP:Teahouse if more help is needed. From my experience the people there are very nice and should be able to answer your questions :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 22:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've received a positive response from the picture holder, the San Francisco Chinatown Lions, who organized the contest in 1991. However, as you mentioned, sharing the image on Wikipedia with the proper permission is not a straightforward process :). I am currently working on determining the correct license to attach to the image. Plantton (talk) 18:35, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for the work! Plantton :)
Yes the copyright concept here maybe somewhat different from the other parts of the internet (or from real life use in the East), and it took me much time to understand that when I was a newbie ...
When finding images on the web I usually search for CC BY or CC BY-SA.
And here are some readily available images of Lee that can be used:
--Dustfreeworld (talk) 01:54, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, this has raised more questions for us. We are currently attempting to reach a key photographer in San Francisco who captured several early images of a young CoCo Lee. If our efforts prove successful, we aim to secure the copyrights for additional pictures to be published in public domains such as Wikipedia, Baidu Baike, and her memorial in Wuhan. This prompts us to consider the issue of sharing permissions at this juncture. Plantton (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Any news?
It seems that Flickr would be a good image source too. [44] --Dustfreeworld (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delayed response; my schedule has been quite busy recently. Last month, a senior fan of CoCo visited San Francisco and collected additional information about CoCo's early days in the city. However, the final decisions are awaiting further input from the Lee family. :)
At a ceremony honoring CoCo's birthday in Wuhan this morning, Li MaMa, expressed their intention to establish an information hub to provide more details in the near future. Let's stay optimistic, as I believe that additional resources will become available soon. Plantton (talk) 21:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dustfreeworld , I’ve added a new picture of CoCo Lee from the 1991 Miss Teen Gala. Feel free to enhance the article’s quality. I’ve also uploaded more pictures from this pageant here: More Pictures
Also feel free to use them here in the article :) Plantton (talk) 19:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I forgot to mention that all the pictures were authorized by her family, and managed by her official fan club. The originals are in her memorial in Wuhan. To make everybody's lives easier, I just simply claimed the copyrights myself on Wikimedia. :D Plantton (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality

[edit]

@Dustfreeworld - What "well-sourced" information are you talking about? Descriptions of Lee's nationality/identity, including from herself have varied widely depending on the source. I'm not sure if she herself has been open about her own citizenship situation (it's unlikely she held both Chinese and American citizenship simultaneously given the former's laws on recognition of dual nationality) and how to describe her opening sentence seems to change every once in a while.[45][46][47][48] I see no actual consensus on what the opening sentence should state.

She has been widely described as "Hong Kong-born" (though Hong Kong-born seems dubious given the conflicting sources on her birth)[49][50][51][52][53][54] or simply "Hong Kong"[55][56] Other sources describe her as "Chinese"[57] and she once claimed to be from Singapore.[58]

She personally called herself "Hong Kong-American" on her own website[59] Coco Lee [...] is a Hong Kong-American. Now, I see that several also call her "Chinese-American" but all in all, it seems that her identity and nationality are a rather contentious situation. IMO, I don't see why we can't omit nationality in the opening sentence and use the subsequent sentences to explain her life as was done with notable people like Elon Musk and Paulina Porizkova and can be sometimes done per MOS:CONTEXTBIO. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a requirement, although "Chinese American" usually just refers to the ethnic or ancestral origin of an American national. Vacosea (talk) 20:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware @Vacosea what "Chinese American" means, and that is why terms like that are typically omitted.
Again, I don't see any sources provided that clearly state her nationality situation (it's unlikely she simultaneously held both Chinese and American citizenship); nor do I do see any actual consensus in her talk page archive,[60] and the wording of her opening sentence seems to have changed every so often. A user claimed that sources show no conflict on how to describe her, yet I have found this to not be the case, including from Lee herself. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 20:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there more coverage about her American citizenship or only mentions? Vacosea (talk) 21:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CLG, I may not have time to response to your points shortly. While you’ve mentioned before that “sources on her death describe her as "Chinese American", I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean”, I think this is a good read for the moment that may help clear the doubt,
Regards, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Clear Looking Glass,
1) From all the sources I’ve ever read, none of them said that “her identity and nationality are a rather contentious situation”. None.
2) The reliable source currently used to support the first sentence (the well-sourced information “Chinese-American”) are:
  • Sun, Celine (2 Apr 2005). "Coco Lee exposed to US market". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 17 Oct 2023. Retrieved 4 Sep 2023. (SCMP)
  • "Pop diva Coco Lee savors new tour in China". People's Daily Online. 1 Jul 2017. Archived from the original on 7 October 2021. Retrieved 4 Sep 2023.(People’s Daily - the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party(CCP))
- The RS cited now are already the most reliable ones, and they said “Chinese-American”. We should say what RS say.
3) Per WP:ETHNICITY:
  • The opening paragraph should usually provide context for the activities that made the person notable.
  • Ethnicity ...should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability.
Her ethnicity is relevant to her notability, of course,
  • New York Times:
    • ”Coco Lee, a Chinese American singer and songwriter best known for performing an Oscar-nominated song in the hit film “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” ... Ms. Lee had built a successful career as a pop singer in Asia ... In their statement, Ms. Lee’s sisters noted that ... Ms. Lee was “known to have worked tirelessly to open up a new world for Chinese singers in the international music scene,””
  • SCMP:
    • ”Lee had a ‘special place’ in the global Chinese community that was larger than her mainstream career success ...With her worldwide stardom and infectious personality, the Chinese-American singer became a cultural ambassador”
    • ”To this day, she remains the only Chinese singer to have performed at Hollywood’s most prestigious awards ceremony.”
    • ”She made a name for herself in the US as well with Just No Other Way (1999), the first English-language R&B album recorded by a Chinese singer.”
- She had devoted her whole life in “opening up a new world for Chinese singer in the international music scene”. She had been striving for and working hard on that, otherwise she won’t get so many “firsts”. That SHOULDN’T be omitted.
4) I don’t think describing her as “Hong Kong-American" (as in her official page and some other sources) is the “opposite” of describing her as "Chinese-American", as you mentioned on my talk page. No. Absolutely NOT. There’s NO “disagreement” between them. She’s a Chinese living in HK, CN.
5) You said this report, mentioned “she once claimed to be from Singapore”, this is NOT true. She didn’t really mean it. She’s just rapping and singing and if you read carefully: “the background track Coco and Nancy were dancing to is actually a remix that’s used for a popular Douyin dance challenge. Many other users who took on this challenge can be seen mouthing along to “I am from Singapore” as well, regardless of their actual origins”
6) I don’t think “how to describe her opening sentence seems to change every once in a while” has anything to do with our discussion. You have changed it, I have changed it, and Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia that EVERYONE can edit.
7) I don’t really want to discuss the nationality laws here, as we are no expert, and as I’ve said in my edit summary, our role is not being a “detective” to “investigate” on her citizenship or to interpret the laws. We only need to stick to the RS. But if you really want to know more, I would suggest a deeper look into this article, and please note the special status of HK being an SAR.
Thanks. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 20:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is widely believed that she immigrated to Hong Kong as an infant, a fact also documented by CoCo Lee's mother on the memorial wall in Wuhan. While I am not a legal expert, I've heard that in the 1970s, all immigrants to Hong Kong, regardless of origin—be it mainland China, Taiwan, Malaysia, or Vietnam—could legally obtain citizenship as naturalized British Hong Kong citizens. Hong Kong, historically, has been tolerant of its citizens holding dual citizenship. However, specific details remain private. CoCo Lee consistently identified herself as a Chinese Hong Kong citizen (with numerous online resources supporting this claim; I'll forgo citing them here).
Regardless, I am not here to officially represent her fan club. Still, those who have loved her and continue to do so simply wish for her to rest in peace and strive to preserve her legacy to the best of our ability. Plantton (talk) 21:56, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Like your last sentence :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

length and order of Sing ! China events

[edit]

A lot of that section's information is not related to Coco. The part that is took place in 2022 and should not have been placed after her death. Previous discussion was archived accidentally. Vacosea (talk) 21:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that never-ending DEAD RfC. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's very long and feels like her death has become a place to denounce the show. Doctor Henkel 23:37, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are right the stock price of the producer of the show dropped from around $130 to below $10 in the past few months since the disclosure of the incident.[61] Perhaps we should have made it more clear in the article. I don’t think it’s too long though. Other parts of the article (e.g. legacy, awards, etc) needs to be expanded. Feel free to help :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 04:36; edited 13 January 2024 (UTC) 10:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, inclusion and placement of Sing ! China information have not reached consensus. Vacosea (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your persistence in digging up old posts and promoting your preferred version, but I don’t think the community’s time should be wasted. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 11:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is your preferred version that never gained consensus in the first place. Vacosea (talk) 18:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From the recent talk page edit summary and your post above I can’t see much desire in committing into collaborative editing. I hope I was wrong. (Please comment on content instead of editors.) Thank you. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also see my reply above: [62] --Dustfreeworld (talk) 15:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Love Before Time

[edit]

A Love Before Time is a very (the most?) important song of Coco Lee IMO. The article was created in 2003, but was reduced to a redirect in 2013. I’ve expanded it to a stub yesterday. I hope someday more people can help expanding it to a more full-blown article. The song is closely tight to her influence as well, and the related section in Coco Lee needs expansion too.

As one can see from the current stub, the love song has both English and Chinese versions, and was written by two Westerners and two Chinese. Coco Lee was a Chinese-American born in Mainland China, raised in HK and US, and she had her career started in Taiwan. She spoke fluent Mandarin, Cantonese and English. She got married to a Westerner. In short, she’s really a cross-culture ambassador. The movie was about Chinese martial-art. It was nominated at the Western Oscars, and Lee was the first and only Chinese who had performed there. All these show how “international” the song is, and give the cultural context and special meanings to it. These should be reflected in the articles. I’m sure that sources exist, and hopefully they will be added someday. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 20:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to you ;) I will participate in that project as well. Plantton (talk) 20:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Coco_Lee&oldid=1257324411"