Talk:Kevin Vuong

Proposed deletion

AjayTO has begun a Proposed Deletion discussion, so I am here to talk about it. I am not the creator of the page, I began following it to prevent disruptive editing. It appears although Vuong is the projected candidate to win the riding and he has released a statement: [1]. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Further Bearcat suggested maybe the article should not have been created in the first place. However at this point it's notability seems imminent. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:37, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

It is true that this article should not have been created yet in the first place — we're supposed to wait until the person has actually been declared the winner of the election, not jump the gun based on the presumed winner of the election because of his lead in the vote count. But since the prod process lasts seven full days, and the final declaration of victory in SFY is far, far less than seven days away, the prod process is pointless. There's also been an acknowledgement that his NDP opponent won the day-of votes on Monday, while Vuong won the advance stuff that was cast before the announcement of his removal from the Liberal team — and the only thing still outstanding is advance mail-in, so there's just no real path for Norm Di Pasquale (fortuitous initials!) to overtake Vuong in what's left. In the (now unlikely) event that Vuong doesn't win, then we can deal with making the article go away — but for now, regardless of the fact that the article should not have been created when it was, it's best to just leave it alone and then cross the deletion bridge only if and when we get to the point when that's necessary. Bearcat (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

And it's done and dusted now, less than 24 hours after I posted that comment. Bearcat (talk) 12:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Native name

I noticed An Macanese added a native name in Chinese... is Vuong Vietnamese or Vietnamese of Chinese decent? I'm confused by this edit. CaffeinAddict (talk) 17:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

according to the Sing Tao Daily, Vuong claims that his father came from Fujian while his mother is a Hoa refugee from Vietnam. You can have a look at the interview through this link (it's in Chinese though) — An Macanese 09:25, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Saw a sign in Chinatown that he printed with his Chinese name, think he might be Chinese descent. I know Vuong is Viet spelling of Wong… Fishfiltergold (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2021

Vuong doesn't hold an LLM. His degree is a 'Global Professional Master of Laws' or a 'GPLLM'. Change the abbreviation in the infobox to 'G.P.L.L.M.'. 2607:FEA8:81F:FB70:905A:849B:5C51:68A2 (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

It would be preferred if we had a source for this. CaffeinAddict (talk) 21:40, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:21, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Changing the lead

The calls for resignation discussed in the opening paragraph of this article should be moved lower down in the lead. Most politicians who face any degree of controversy face calls to resign, and I don't think a single opinion piece justifies including this in the opening paragraph of the article. It seems more natural to include it at the end of the second paragraph, where it would fit chronologically.

Additionally, it later says in the lead that he speaks to a "far-right" media outlet called True North Centre, but the article cited does not describe this outlet as far-right. I'd also question the relevance of this designation even if a source were added to support this claim as in the True North Centre for Public Policy article. This article is about Kevin Vuong, not True North Centre, and Kevin Vuong is not accused of being far-right by any sources in this article. 2607:FEA8:5399:A400:F83A:E445:D457:25A2 (talk) 20:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Actually almost his entire constituency has tried to get them to resign, but he instead has run away and hasn't been seen in the constituency or tried to represent them in years. This isn't a slight controversy, it's an almost to a person call to resign and an absolute fact that it will be impossible for them to get re-elected in the riding. MPs don't normally face that level of opposition. And as for the far right outlet, it is a far right outlet and Vuong has made it quite clear he's only interested in whatever politics will get him to another term somewhere so he can get a pension. And yes it's relevant if a person is willing to sit down for a tell all interview with a far right outlet. Yes this isn't an encyclopaedic response, but it is what it is. Canterbury Tail talk 02:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

If it's relevant enough to include in the opening paragraph then it should include a better source than an opinion piece, but my point is more that it's weird to describe the fact that he faced calls to resign before it describes the actual events that led him to receive these calls to resign. Very awkward way of writing. As for True North, this characterization is not supported by the CBC article cited. If no source discussing his interview with the outlet describes it as "far-right" then it shouldn't be included since it is not considered a relevant fact about Vuong by reliable sources. 2607:FEA8:5399:A400:842:A45B:F605:A483 (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

The sources are provided to confirm Kevin Vuong's support of Israel and the Jewish community, not as a notability factor. The notability factor doesn't apply to edits within an article; it applies if the topic merits its own article. Therefore, notability only applies when determining if a topic merits its own standalone article, which is not the case here. Edits within an article have their own guidelines: verifiability, neutral point of view and sourcing. Regarding the sources, Toronto Sun is considered to be highly credible and factual, and it is only included to verify Kevin Vuong's support of Israel and the Jewish community. "Honest Reporting reviews news articles and op-eds regarding Israel to check for and respond to any bias or fake news" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HonestReporting. Therefore, these edits provide factual and verifiable information. Kitcher22 (talk) 01:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay firstly yes things need to be notable to be in an article. We do not list everything someone does, that's not what we're here for we're an encyclopaedia not a resume. We do not list someone's position on every little thing, or where they shop, what they dress in or many of thousands of other things. We don't list every photo op a politician decides to set up. Yes individual actions need to be notable in order to be included. It could be considered notable as it was probably the first time in years he turned up in his constituency, so if you can get sources for that combined with this it would make it notable enough for inclusion. Secondly Honest Reporting is very very biased and not a reliable source, it's literally a pro-Israel advocacy group that has been shown to trade in falsehoods and even the link you put above states that as do the references inside of it. Canterbury Tail talk 01:25, 15 August 2024 (UTC)