Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Li Chenggang

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Ff909 in topic quote contention

quote contention

[edit]

concerning the removal of this quote. reuters is know to be a generally reliable source(WP:REUTERS) and this undo removes content attributed by that reliable source by pointing to what amounts to original research in your edit summary: "The part I deleted was a wrong quote. This sentence was actually said by former Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, not Li Chenggang. For the author who does not understand Chinese and does not know Chinese politicians, it is very easy to think that it is the same person."

ive searched for other articles that can apparently back up that it is very unlikely reuters is misattributing a quote.

  • reuters states: "... supporting multilateralism will not change," Li said at a business forum in Beijing on Wednesday. “They go low, we go high," he said ...", and this is attributed to Li Chenggang earlier in the article.
  • msnbc states: "... Li Chenggang, an assistant minister at China's Ministry of Commerce, recently responded to tariffs by saying that when "they go low, we go high. ...", same part of the quote
  • bloombergarchive " “They go low, we go high,” said Li Chenggang, an assistant minister at China’s Ministry of Commerce ..." same

so a reliable source that says Li Chenggang said it, and other sources imply that reuters has not made an attribution error. if there has been an error that will require other reliable sources to prove, not original research. chinese language sources would be fine so long as they meet WP:RS guidelines. pinging: @Ff909 @Toadboy123. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 12:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

After reading your analysis and carefully reading the new article you searched for, I think you are right and I am wrong. Thank you very much. I will make the revision immediately. Ff909 (talk) 13:38, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply