Talk:Madame Tussauds Hong Kong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Hong Kong Portal This article is part of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project!
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Hong Kong To-do: edit purge Clean up all MTR station pages. They are literally all over the place. Two model pages are Tsing Yi Station and Sheung Shui Station. They each describe a feature special to the station, Station layout, exit, and connections, as well as neighbouring stations and the station "box". We will also need plenty of updated pictures (e.g. removing all KCR-related images except those on the KCR article). Check that all pages have basically the same language structure as Tsing Yi Station and Sheung Shui Station. Links to location maps are good too. (Should also perform these checks on Chinese Wikipedia.) Clean-up pages that link with TVB, especially its series pages.

A fact from Madame Tussauds Hong Kong appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 20 October 2007.

[edit] Note on new addition of celebrity in article

As per Wikipedia policy on 'Verifiability', all statements and facts must be backed up by adequate citations and references. Without exception, this rule is applicable should anyone include new addition of celebrity on the article itself. If its sources are not cited, such entries will be duly removed to protect the integrity of the article. -- Aldwinteo 06:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger proposal

Hi, I'm the original creator of the above article. I understand that a tag was recently placed on the abovementioned for a proposed merger with 'Madame Tussauds', but without highlighting any specific justification or constructive proposal on how to go about it so that its integrity and value is not compromised. As such, I've placed a notice inviting the proposer Rtphokie to discuss on this issue here. As the article is under the purview of WikiProject Hong Kong, I've also informed them on this matter for their comments and consensus too. -- Aldwinteo 10:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Madame Tussauds has a number of locations, the Hong Kong location is the only one with it's own article, I dont see much in this article that warrants it's own article. A merge was proposed because there is some good information here that would be more appropriate in the main article on the Madame Tussauds chain. The section on the history of the Hong Kong location, can be merged into a Hong Kong specific section in Madame Tussauds. Information on the process used to create the figures should also be merged into the main article as can the list of figures featured.--Rtphokie 11:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything particularly notable about the Hong Kong location? So far, the only sources the article has are from Madame Tussauds itself. I think if there are a few outside sources (unrelated to Madame Tussauds) that wrote about the Hong Kong location, then this article should stay. Otherwise, I agree with the merge. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank u for your timely feedback, guys. Moving forward, I'm OK with either decision as long as some concerns are fully addressed to ensure that its value is not compromised for the common good of Wikipedia in the long run. What I hope to see is that there is a due process in communication and accountability among the parties concerned, are done in a constructive manner. While I'm agreeable to two of Rtphokiet's earlier suggestions, I do not fully agreed with the merging of the HK figures list with the main article list. Fyi, the sequence & order of the HK figures list was painstakingly recreated according to the theme and on-site presentation at Madame Tussauds HK. As such, its listing should be separate & fall under the proposed HK section so that its informational value & purpose is not degraded. Also note that its earlier notes & references used must be intact after the merger to ensure its integrity. For archival reasons, attribution should be made on the main article on the source of the merge after it's done. If these concerns are fully addressed & follow-up actions agreed upon, I'll OK on the merger. -- Aldwinteo 01:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I have to respectfully disagree and oppose with the proposed merger. I believe that there is substantial external reliable sources available that support the existence of the Madame Tussauds Hong Kong article from the main article. Firstly, this is the first permanent Asia-based Madame Tussauds. And though the Madame Tussauds Hong Kong website provides content for this article, it also has a section in which it has collected over 20+ notable newspaper/magazine clippings that writers have independently written about the Hong Kong location over the years. This section is available for viewing here [1]. And I also believe that with these additional sources this article can stand on its own and is no different from the existence of, for example, an independent article about a notable hotel property within a larger chain. Luke! 02:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

To add as per notability sake, the lead paragraph & history section I wrote earlier, made much references on this issue why HK was chosen as the first outlet in Asia even though it had a successful run in potential venues like Singapore & Australia earlier. Besides this reason, I choose to write after its major renovation was completed in May 2006 as I believe that the article can be expanded over time by other native editors or myself later. Since my return to Singapore in March 2007, I'm currently much tied down during my limited free time contributing for SGpedia (35 new articles to date) in support for their requests for higher quality SG contribution and its GA drive. As a result, other non-SG articles that were written by me along the way, including this article slated for later research & expansion, were put onto the backburner. Despite that, I tried my best in doing some 'housekeeping' by monitoring the page for any spillover vandalism (which is highly rampant in Madame Tussauds) & updating the list for the time being. Fyi, the external sources mentioned by Luke earlier was used by me as the in-line citation to any new celebrity addition under the "Notes" section of the article itself. The hard copy reference I used earlier was the official souvenir guide (50 pages) published by Madame Tussauds HK, not by Madame Tussauds UK. To sum up my stand on this issue in respect to the concerns I've raised on the proposed merger earlier. I wld be most happy if this relatively new article, nearly 5-month old, could stand proudly on its own & given a chance to 'grow' in future. -- Aldwinteo 04:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

What about merging everything but the list out of this article and then renaming this article to List of figures at Madam Tussauds, Hong Kong or something along those lines?.--Rtphokie 12:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

u think that wld be meaningful? Think again. As what has transpired so far, I think we should adopt a different perspective & approach now. Both may be similar in origins but they are distinctively different in terms of its respective history & the make-up of its outlets. As for the HK outlet itself, it adopts a much more 'asian-centric' focus that is lacking from the rest — there are 29 Asians featured (34% of total), of which 15 are Hong Kongers such as Li Ka Shing, Jackie Chan, Andy Lau etc. If u have examined closely or visited those outlets in Europe & US, is there a comparable or higher concentration of Asian or HK personalities featured as compared to HK? My suggestion here, why not we treat both as complementary to each other and maintain the status quo instead? I wld like to mention a recent example here. I recently wrote a WWII history article named Battle of Kranji (currently under GA nomination) which is a subset of the (in)famous Battle of Singapore (aka 'Fortress Singapore'). If you check out the Battle of Singapore (BoS) article, u will find that most of its content is basically extracted from various separate articles that were written earlier or later by different writers (BoS consists of 4 major battles historically). As such, I would not be surpised that an extract of my latest article will be added into it in due course and I can safely say that the newly written article won't be merged and disappeared in the forseeable future. Why is this so? Cos it has been peer reviewed by WikiProject Military History and allowed it to be so like the rest before mine on the merit that a reader can choose to read the overall history as in BoS or the various separate articles via wiki-links for in-depth coverage. The same merit should apply on this issue now. As mentioned earlier, I'll expand its content further in the near future and since HK is part of the PRC now, I'll incorporate a section on the other Chinese outlet in Shanghai too. If you find the "making of" section useful, do copy and add it in 'Madame Tussauds' as per the example mentioned in Battle of Singapore. Isn't this arrangement a win-win situation for all parties concerned? -- Aldwinteo 18:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

As nearly a week has lapsed without receiving further comments or objections on my earlier proposal dtd 11 October 2007, I've proceeded with the necessary follow-up actions as follows:

• New addition of "Unique figures" & "Madame Tussauds Shanghai" section
• Cite additional references using more 3rd parties sources
• Content update
• Figures update

With the abovementioned completely done, the merger tag has become irrelevant which I've duly removed, so as not to cause any confusion on its status and to bring a final closure on this issue. Fyi -- Aldwinteo 05:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)