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 sourcedmust 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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
Latest comment: 11 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I have moved the description from the New York Times from the lede to the body of the article. [1] This is because I don't believe it's strong enough to warrant a spot in the lede. (1) The description is attributed only to one article in the NYT; (2) the article was not specifically about her: she was one of 70 artists whose recent recordings (one recording only) were previewed. In short, it was a description made by one editor in one article in one newspaper about one recording. It doesn't represent a widely expressed opinion on her wider body of work. Just not lede material. My two cents. signed, Willondon (talk) 19:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Any quote regarding a person or public figure is made by a single editor in a newspaper. There is no democratic consensus in journalism - period. Targeting of Han's page when living contemporary pianists include quotes from newspapers is not a valid justification of the description move outside of personal bias. Riker7193 (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
The question is whether or not it merits placement in the lede. The lede is meant to summarize the content that appears in the body. The statement is not a summary of anything, least of all a summary of various assessments of her entire body of work.
And assume good faith please. My edits do not come from personal bias. In fact, in assuming good faith myself, I didn't once question the account "KhanTonesMusic293", curiously named in light of this article (C. Han, get it?), and the zeal with which they fought to put this in the lede despite disagreement from other editors. Nor did I question the fact that your account was created about an hour after the above account was blocked from editing this article, and that you've since edited nothing in namespace but this article. signed, Willondon (talk) 21:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
