Jump to content

Talk:Guo Wengui

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

description as "exile"

[edit]

if he's fleeing criminal prosecution for crimes he allegedly committed, he's not "in self-imposed exile", he's fleeing criminal prosecution. recommend removing biased and inaccurate language — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdasxdrfgse456 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CCP attempts to use Interpol to censor criticism of CCP

[edit]

Financial property

[edit]

How much financial property he owns? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.4.85.149 (talk) 10:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:22, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change to Miles Kwok?

[edit]

In the English media, I've seen the name Guo addressed as "Miles Kwok" much more than Guo Wen-gui. Should we move the page to Miles Kwok? --Daviddwd (talk) 07:34, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As my routine comment on other WP:RM, please provide external link and article as evidence. NYTimes use Guo Wengui, SCMP use Guo Wengui, Bloomberg use Guo Wengui. More (sarcasm) ? Matthew hk (talk) 07:37, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first page of google results for "Miles Kwok" are all news stories from various sources about "Guo Wengui (also known as Miles Kwok)", so I would say that this page should not be moved. BabelStone (talk) 01:29, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:11, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hatchet job

[edit]

I claim POV and non-RS on this bit: 

The proceedings state that in May 2017, Guo Wengui publicly offered rewards for so-called "confidential documents" of the Chinese Government, which was deemed a profitable opportunity by Chen Zhiyu and Chen Zhiheng. The former reached out to...

Scary quotes, too detailed, etc. Please check or remove. Zezen (talk) 06:17, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times

[edit]

This story from The New York Times is very informative:

--Guy Macon (talk) 13:38, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/chinese-businessman-with-links-to-steve-bannon-is-driving-force-for-a-sprawling-disinformation-network-researchers-say/

Here is more on allegations that Guo Wengui is connected to Steve Bannon in the COVID-19 and Qanon conspiracy rants2601:640:C600:3C20:D1A5:7BEA:EE37:5254 (talk) 01:35, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of his career as a musician

[edit]

There are several songs credited to Miles Guo (as singer and songwriter) on YouTube; should this article mention his side career as a musician? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 05:34, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy Section wording and sourcing

[edit]

Earlier today I reverted two unsourced edits [1][2] by @CatchBias. They again reverted my reverts and then tripped Cluebot NG's filters. CatchBias then added their edit again but with a wall street journal opinion article as the source. That edit was reverted by @Novem Linguae. I believe my initial reverts fall under Wikipedia's policy for unsourced material in the biographies of a living persons without question. I believe @Novem Linguae's edit falls under Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons section about sources that are challenged or likely to be challenged. Furthermore, the article sourced by @CatchBias is clearly an opinion piece which falls under Statments of opinion. As far as my feelings on the matter, I say we leave the section as is, because it was already properly sourced and the language before the edits adhered to the manual of style. I'd be interested to hear other's opinions on the matter as well! Thanks, Philipnelson99 (talk) 00:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably falls under WP:NPOV too. Saying that a media publication "spread truth" in Wikivoice is a major tone problem. That was the main reason I chose to revert and warn. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2022

[edit]

None of this is cited. "In April 2020, Guo wengui began to sell all illegal products of G series, including G dollar and G coins. He advocated private placement and asked everyone[who?] to invest. He promised 17.5% annual income. The majority of investors found that it was a fraud and reported it." Googling +"Guo wengui" +"g dollar" does not result in any reputable results. Tmpst (talk) 05:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Seems reasonable to remove it. The citation given for that paragraph doesn't mention G currency. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch! — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 08:49, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I recovered some of the information to the GTV Media Group with a source from Bloomberg. — BriefEdits (talk) 17:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2022

[edit]

Add source about his spouse, as cited from the BBC."涉案金額高達329億 郭文貴家族香港「洗錢案」曝出更多細節" [The amount involved in the case is as high as 32.9 billion. More details of the "money laundering case" of Guo Wengui's family in Hong Kong have been revealed] (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). 16 August 2018. Retrieved 2 March 2022. According to public information, Guo Wengui's wife is Yue Qingzhi... An unimportant person (talk) 14:35, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2022

[edit]

Change "Guo is a member of former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and Mark's Club in Mayfair, London." to "Guo is a member of former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida."

Remove the mention of Mark's Club in Mayfair as it is a private members club and membership is strictly not public information. I am the PR Executive of The Birley Clubs, please email me at kyosumi@birleyclubs.co.uk if you want to discuss this further. Knysm (talk) 12:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: This is reliably sourced, and Wikipedia has no obligation to observe the rules of a private club. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation campaign against him

[edit]

In the section "Misinformation campaign against Guo Wengui", it is stated that government controlled accounts are publishing misinformation against Guo wengui, citing an ASPI report. However, the report does not mention "minsinformation" and explicitly states that they can't be sure whether the government is involved or not AAAAA143222 (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possible affiliation with China's Ministry of State Security

[edit]

Has Guo Wengui acknowledged that he had been a longtime "affiliate" of China's Ministry of State Security (MSS), which is said to have tasked him with "handling things for them" and connecting with "sensitive figures" abroad, traveling on 11 different passports and employing the code name Wu Nan? Source 173.88.246.138 (talk) 02:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 June 2023

[edit]

To change 2023 fraud, to 2023 fraud lawsuit, to indicate the status of the case as unresolved. I'd also like to add on that topic that: 'M. Miles Guo will be held in federal prison until 2024, that's 10 month jail minimum, after being denied bail, and thus before any judgment was rendered.'

Cordially, Jean Merlier Merlierj (talk) 15:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do I need to define innocent until proven guilty ? Mr Miles hasn't been convicted of a crime, he is been investigated for a crime. The modification I proposed just changes the article to reflect the status of the case. The second modification however that I agree with you and will provide the proof of said case these are two different issue and should be treated as such even if connected. To me the problem is the weird connotation of the article at it is written right now which suggest to uninformed readers that he is guilty of said crime, without however any conviction for said crime. Merlierj (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
here is the link for the refusal for a bail:
https://www.reuters.com/world/chinese-businessman-guo-wengui-appeals-bail-denial-fraud-case-2023-05-04/#:~:text=U.S.%20District%20Judge%20Analisa%20Torres,to%20the%20community%20if%20released.
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3228543/inside-chinese-run-crime-hubs-myanmar-are-conning-world-we-can-kill-you-here?module=perpetual_scroll_1_AI&pgtype=article&campaign=3228543 - second source
https://wtvbam.com/2023/06/06/us-trial-for-exiled-chinese-businessman-guo-wengui-set-for-april-2024/ - third source
You will be able to find many more if you look for them on google.
There was a fourth source by gnews which is biased since affiliated with mr miles yet it isn't written anywhere why it is in said blacklist, it just is, seems arbitrary to me, am starting to not be surprised seeing how wikipedia operates.
you will also be able to see in those article that he is gonna be held in prison for 10 month minimum without a final judgement rendered, since he was incarcerated late march and that the judgment wont be till 2024 that's 10 month. I believe I wont have to prove more stuff for this minimal edit requests. There is a lot missing and or wrong in this protected article I did appeal a small part of the worst section ! Merlierj (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Partly done: I've changed the subtitle to Fraud Allegations, and updated the section to include info on bail and charges. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 21:33, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
awesome thanks ! Have a good day :) Merlierj (talk) 20:27, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guilty plea of Yvette Wang

[edit]

Should we add the information that Guo's former chief of staff, Yvette Wang, just pleaded guilty to swindling hundreds of thousands of victims around the world out of US$1 billion? Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/03/guo-wengui-chief-of-staff-pleads-guilty-to-1-billion-fraud.html 98.123.38.211 (talk) 19:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Article reads like a hatchet job in some places

[edit]

In the section about "Credibility of documents". Only one paragraph(the shortest one) cites a relatively reliable source. The second paragraph has no source, and the other two use Chinese state media(which is a propaganda mouthpiece for the Chinese government). The entire section is written in a heavily slanted way, too. 70.162.238.140 (talk) 05:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read it, and concur. It's unsourced in parts, but more seriously it is written with a slant and the sources are not the most neutral. I'm sure there are better journalism sources that can unpack what happened. Stuff like "he was arrested by Chinese police and admitted to being guilty" sends up red flags. -- GreenC 15:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding new categories for "criminal"

[edit]

There should be categories added to Guo, following his conviction:

Windywendi (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he qualifies for it after stealing 1 billion dollars from people who trusted him. It's about time people stop claiming he fled China because of political prosecution. He was escaping criminal charges in China but lied about it, and now somewhat humorously, he is convicted of different criminal charges in America by defrauding his native followers who all believed he was a high level dissent. One got to be in incredible amount of denial to think that he is not a dishonest conman. 49.179.45.160 (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Critical thinking needed

[edit]

His recent conviction for defrauding followers out of a billion dollars underscores the need for skepticism. It's time to question his dissident status and treat his claims with caution. 49.179.45.160 (talk) 11:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And by that, I mean the irony is that the Chinese government has labeled him a conman and fraudster. Yet, Wikipedia and the media have largely dismissed these claims, instead granting him significant legitimacy over the years. This legitimacy persists despite these accusations being rooted in denialism. He builds trust and credibility by presenting himself as a dissident and promising his followers that he knows how to hide money from oppressive governments, who are purportedly "terrified of what he knows." This conspiracy angle helps him continually attract followers.
Wikipedia's role in this scenario is especially concerning. There is an entire dedicated chapter just for the Twitter campaign against Guo. However, it is not confirmed that the Chinese government is genuinely interested in him; the attacks come from anonymous Twitter accounts targeting both protesters and him. But for all you know, he might just be a billionaire scammer using a confidence trick to fool people into thinking he is a dissident.
The crucial point is that the authenticity of his claims is not verified. But his recent conviction by US courts under die process, for defrauding a billion dollars from his naive followers highlights the need for skepticism and no more just giving him the benefit of the doubt. The Wikipedia article still portray him as some top level dissident despite now he is convicted by the US legal system for defrauding investors and supporters of around $1 billion.49.179.45.160 (talk) 11:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The CCP spam account network that was attacking him is a well-known operation engaged in coordinated inauthentic behavior. If anything, that section should be expanded as there are many other groups who have analyzed the operation. It should also link out to https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Spamouflage.
The idea that there's some non-state-affiliated group that runs massive influence operations using fake accounts on social media to promote narratives that so closely align with CCP interests is not credible at all at this point. 136.24.98.182 (talk) 07:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you should re-read that ASPI source. If we consider ASPI as reliable, they themselves don't even claim this as a hard fact. They explicitly acknowledge that this is an assumption that they are unable to verify as a fact. Yet the current Wikipedia article takes their unverified hypothesis and make it seem like it's proven when even ASPI doesn't say that. Read their part about research limitations; ICPC does not have access to the relevant data to independently verify that these accounts are linked to the Chinese government; this research proceeds on the assumption that Twitter’s attribution is correct. [3] 49.180.3.12 (talk) 14:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hence should add in what ASPI researchers actually said; Their ASPI article never said those accounts are controlled by Chinese gov. Rather that it assumes they are "linked to the Chinese gov" but acknowledge it's unable to verify that as a fact but proceeds on the assumption that Twitter’s attribution is correct. In other words, Twitter was the company that had labelled them as "linked" to the gov but ASPI states Twitter doesn't release the methodology of how it came across that conclusion. 49.180.3.12 (talk) 14:11, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 December 2024

[edit]

In the chapter for "Twitter campaign against Guo"

ASPI articles made it very clear they lacked evidence to know for certain that the Chinese gov allegedly cared more about Guo than apparently the entire HK protest movement and a lot more than any other legitimate dissident. ASPI investigating those Twitter accounts, admitted they are they are unable to verify those accounts as being linked to the Chinese gov but was merely assuming that Twitter was correct for their attribution. That is context should be made clearer in the chapter.

Hence change only the first sentence to this;

According to 2019 ASPI study, a network of Twitter accounts, attributed by the platform as linked to the Chinese government, was found to primarily prioritize the distribution of propaganda attacking Guo Wengui, more than other Chinese dissidents, including Hong Kong protesters. While the network also targeted other dissident figures, such as Gui Minhai, such attacks occurred at a relatively significantly lower rate. However, the ASPI researchers who examined these accounts acknowledged that they were unable to independently verify the connection between the accounts and the Chinese government. Instead, they proceeded on the assumption that Twitter's attribution of the accounts to the Chinese government was accurate."

Source; https://www.aspi.org.au/report/tweeting-through-great-firewall 49.180.3.12 (talk) 14:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Guo_Wengui&oldid=1265362366"