Talk:Wong Kiew-kit
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wong Kiew-kit article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
'Claims' vs 'is'
editBefore an edit war starts this can be resolved by citing sources for the claims. Have fact tagged for now if no sources turn up then it's just a claim.
- The problem is that Wong Kiew Kit is a notorius fraud and his students will be on here claiming that because he says he is the grandmaster, then any source with his claim establishes it as a "fact." (RookZERO 21:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC))
- I agree but if you add the fact tags wait a week then change it, it's a lot harder for some one to argue it should be the other way. If you have a newspaper article or something showing him as a fraud you can use that to cite the other version. it might also be good to add a 'criticisms' section listing why he's a fraud however best to read WP:LIVING 1st to check what you can say, or to phrase it carefully. --Nate 08:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Will do. (RookZERO 15:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC))
It is true!!! He is one but not the only one. I know that it is not the right section but What about the supposed Huang Chien-Liang Grandmaster of "Tien Shan Pai". I really think that he is the most biggest fraud in Chinese Martial Arts. Imagine 64th Grandmaster of Tien Shan Pai. People call him now "Grandmaster Liar"
- At least the Stub connection on Chinese Spiritual writer is delinked.202.82.204.158 01:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
does wong kiew kit have any skill? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.121.235 (talk) 19:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- The biggest problem is there is no conclusive proof of the southern Shaolin Temple existing!Simonm223 (talk) 21:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes Wong Kiew Kit does in fact have Skill. As for all of you claiming Wong to be a fake why don't you try out what he has to teach before making any false Assumptions, As I have personally went to many of his Intensive Courses, and can atest to his Skill and Prowess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davyou5 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi all, regarding the issue of proof of the southern Shaolin temple, a place to start could be this article: The Holy Land Of Martial Arts Southern Shaolin Temple
- "On Sept. 14, 1991, the Chinese Martial Arts Association, the Fujian Sport Committee, and the Fujian Martial Arts Association co-organized a conference to expound and prove the existence of the Southern Shaolin Temple. More than 30 experts in martial arts, history, religion and archeology firmly asserted that the central temple Lin Quan Yuan of Southern Shaolin Temple was built around 557 A.D during the Nan (South) Dynasty."
Dear Sir/Madame,
My name is Wong Kiew Kit and I am the founder of Shaolin Wahnam Institute. As you consider the "Shaolin Wahnam Institute" page not worthy to be listed in Wikipedia, please remove the "Wong Kiew Kit" page from Wikipedia with immediate effect.
Personally I would not like to be listed by an organization where my school is not welcome.
Thank you.
Wong Kiew Kit.
30th September 2013
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.134.151.236 (talk) 04:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)