victim of love - larvatus prodeo
relationship of its history, architecture and culture to Einstürzende Neubauten. Part Two: Andrea Schmid, Blixa Bargeld, Chris Bohn, Andrew Unruh, Erin Zhu, Alex. Hacke Blixa Bargeld is thanked for permission to quote Neubauten's lyrics. Blixa Bargeld and Erin Zhu photos, news and gossip. Find out more about Relationship Type, Unknown. After a longstanding relationship with Mute Records, the imprint responsible for . However, on the eve of their Australian tour, Blixa Bargeld argues otherwise, Bargeld and his wife Erin Zhu created rhein-main-verzeichnis.info and moved the focus of set you free,” she says, adding to a long history of great quotes about bike riding.
In fact I think the whole article ought to go.
Blixa Bargeld and Erin Zhu Photos, News and Videos, Trivia and Quotes - FamousFix
As explained in the attached article, these ventures are no longer limited to WebEx. This fact suffices to establish legitimate public interest in his felonious background, confirmed by his daughter's sworn testimony.
As to the issue of relevant categories, until and unless Wikipedia recognizes a separate classification for allegations of child rape and incest, the existing identification will do the job. Needless to say, nothing but the likelihood of being served a subpoena in the ongoing legal actions should be stopping you from registering as an editor and performing these tasks yourself.
Min Zhu has not been convicted of any crimes, nor has he admitted to any crimes, therefore to categorize him as a "rapist" and "child sex offender" is highly out of order.
If you would like to create a category for "Alleged rapists" - I invite you to do so. But to categorize someone as a "rapist" who has not been convicted of anything is absolutely not in keeping with verifiability standards. Shall we refer to categorization of Michael Jackson as our prototype? LiveJournal and usenet postings are not "sources" for such a serious accusation--if a newspaper or other reputable source covers a court case on the matter, then it could be repeated.
Recent events have taught us to be strict with sources, especially for biographical subjects, and it is not Wikipedia's job to provide a vehicle for people to get wider play for their accusations than they can get from blogging services and online forums.
Crap like that should be deleted immediately. Livejournal, blogs, livejournal, email, livejournal, myspace, and livejournal are not reliable sources. Original research that creates primary sources is not allowed. In fact, all articles on Wikipedia should be based on information collected from primary and secondary sources. This is not "original research," it is "source-based research," and it is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia.Erin Zhu Testifies About Her Childhood Sexual Abuse by Her Father Min Zhu, the Founder of WebEx
Every statement that you find objectionable is borne out thereby. This factual support by historical documents falls within the quoted Wikipedia definition. As referenced at the WebEx discussion page, it has been independently verified by other Wikipedia contributors. In summary, your beef is with verified, source-based research that Wikipedia defines as fundamental to writing an encyclopedia.
These are not primary sources. Please do not add back this information without a reputable source, as defined in WP: The accuracy of their reproductions in the referenced LiveJournal records has been independently attested. This satisfies the letter and spirit of the requirements defined in WP: NORas quoted above. Please do not remove this information without a good reason as per WP: NOR and other Wikipedia policy statements.
There is nothing available which substantiates any allegations of sexual abuse. I will note that you have reached your revert limit per WP: Further reversions today may subject you to being blocked under Wikipedia policy. Discuss the issue here. Reliable sources says personal websites and blogs may never be used as secondary sources. That is, they may never be used as sources of information about a person or topic other than the owner of the website. The reason personal websites are not used as secondary sources — and as primary sources only with great caution and not as a sole source if the subject is controversial — is that they are usually created by unknown individuals who have no one checking their work.
They may be uninformed, misled, pushing an agenda, sloppy, relying on rumor and suspicion, or insane; or they may be intelligent, careful people sharing their knowledge. It includes tangible things like court files and evidence contained therein.
Those are my primary sources, as referenced herein. Feel free to verify them personally, as others have done. Till then, you have no grounds for criticizing this article. What Wikipedia is not Wikipedia is not a propaganda machine. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Wikipedia articles are not: Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view.
You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views. From Jimbo Wales, Septemberon the mailing list: If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts; If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents; If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small or vastly limited minority, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia except perhaps in some ancillary article regardless of whether it's true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or not.
Please show some evidence of understanding these points by responding to them in your next contribution to this discussion. What Wikipedia is not Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. It is not our job to expose people's wrong-doing, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. Min Zhu was driven into an allegedly voluntary exile from the U. This sentence is not acceptable in Wikipedia. Biographies of living persons Wikipedia: Biographies of living personsWikipedia: Neutral point of viewWikipedia: No original researchand Wikipedia: Verifiability are the standard for Wikipedia articles.
I suggest that you step back and let the community develop this article. It is verifiable, and has been independently verified, from primary sources. That is all that counts in this matter.
In this regard, it is no different from the case of Michael Jacksonexcept in so far as the King of Pop had the guts to answer his accusers, whereas Min Zhu tucked tail and ran off. What Wikipedia is not Wikipedia is not a propaganda machine Wikipedia is not a soapbox, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Subjects that have never been written about by third-party published sources, or that have only been written about in sources of dubious credibility should not be included in Wikipedia.
One of the reasons for this policy is the difficulty of verifying the information. As there are no reputable sources available, it would require original research, and Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research.
Insistence on verifiability is often sufficient to exclude such articles. This statement has not been verified by a reliable third-party such as a media outlet. It can stay on the talk page but not in the article. This notice read as follows: Francis in San Francisco yesterday afternoon. A Russian rifle and ammunition were found in his car, and he was then detained and let go without his weapons. Evidently, the 'protester' in question has had a grudge against WebEx, and WebEx thought it best to cancel the remainder of the conference, attended by about WebEx users.
WebEx pointed out that security was of prime concern to its customers, partners, and employees, and indicated that it would continue the rest of the conference via WebEx within two weeks. Zhu is relocating to China and will become a WebEx Fellow.
- scott sandell
- selected mementoes of true love responding to hard-earned cash
With our seasoned management team in place, Min is free to retire from day-to-day operations. WEBX stock board . I am amending the article accordingly.
In the conferencing news archives for May there is no such headline. However, it is referenced in the posts made by various shareholders on the Yahoo!
WebEx's corporate counsel David Farrington,has been reported to confirm this turn of events in response to inquiries by the shareholders and the press.
Neither of which are considered reliable sources per sourcing guidelines. The rules are quite explicit: I think the most we can say is that it was following allegations made by Michael Zelney, who was in dispute with Zhu. And the links to Zelney's livespace blogs do not belong here because thay are the equivalent to a POV forkjust off-site.
Stephanie Downs at ConferZone reports that the day her presentation was scheduled at the WebEx User Conference in San Francisco, organizers had to cancel because "a protestor with guns was outside the event and was consequently arrested Monday night.
But the truth of the protester's allegations has not been asserted in the articles at issue. Are you acknowledging the fact and the content of allegations as properly verified?
If not, why not? ISNOT a soapbox or a propaganda machine. Put it this way: If I decide to publicise the allegation that you are a paedophile necrophiliac who raped his sister's corpse, and insisted on inserting that in your article even though there is absolutely no corroboration from any reputable external sources, how would you feel about that?
We other editors can verify that a legal dispute exists between you and Zhu. We other editors cannot verify that abuse allegations have been made by anyone other than you.
All the toher sources you cite are falsifiable. It is close to inconceivable that this could be true without there being a single reputable secondary source reporting it: You are not neutral, we therefore treat your claim with some scepticism.
So, link to the police reports or the newspaper reports of the alleged incident. It should be trivially easy, the guy is according to you a fugitive from a federal offence. Link to the FBI's "wanted" article. You now have the relevant parts of these records at your disposal. They include Erin Zhu's legal complaint against Min Zhu for chilhood sexual abuse.
This complaint is complemented by the interview notes that served as its basis. As to your scenario, let us suppose that you decided to publicize the allegation that I am a paedophile necrophiliac who raped my sister's corpse.
Min Zhu then proceeded to rape [Erin]. All this was, of course, after my father oh-so-impolitely deflowered me himself. Amazing how well he was able to deceive himself about his motives and actions.
Min Zhu opened our meeting by describing to me his experiences in China during the Cultural Revolution. He stated that he and his wife had been sent to a remote camp and had had to struggle very hard just to survive. He said that he had been in many fights. He then told me he had come to this country and succeeded in building a billion dollar corporation, but if he lost it, he would not be troubled, because he had already undergone such hardships that any such loss would be nothing in comparison to what he had already suffered.
He said he looked forward to a new experience, fighting in the American court system, and it could not do anything to him that could compare to what he had already endured. I will not be a monster like my father; I am determined and sure of that much. I wanted to die; I tried to kill. I did not succeed in either.