This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment 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 This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance). United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Taiwan Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan 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.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Journalism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and drink Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles 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.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and Drink task list: To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

I have been following the career of Clarissa Wei for some time and have recently come across her Wikipedia page. While I understand that the section concerning the controversy over a video from The New York Times is noted, I do feel that the page could benefit from a broader representation of her work and achievements. In my humble opinion, this single event does not seem to reflect the full extent of her career, especially her contributions to food journalism and media. Ms. Wei has a considerable body of work that spans various facets of the culinary world, and I believe it would be helpful to highlight these accomplishments more prominently. A more balanced portrayal would do justice to her diverse talents and the depth of her contributions to both the field of food and the broader cultural discourse. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Warm regards, An Interested Observer Spanishcheese31 (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the undue weight, there are two sentences sourced from 3 reliable media. If you want to 'highlight her accomplishments more prominently', it would be great if you help to expand this article. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 10:41, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight isn’t just about length; it’s about prominence. Sure, the sentences are sourced. But when an article is relatively short, even a small section on controversy can loom disproportionately large over the subject’s career.

I’ve seen this pattern a hundred times—someone notable, especially in a niche field, gets an article, and suddenly, one controversy gets etched in stone while the rest of their work remains an afterthought. That’s not balance; that’s cherry-picking.

If a person’s accomplishments far outweigh a single moment of public scrutiny, then the controversy either needs to be downplayed or not included at all unless it had a truly lasting impact. Otherwise, we’re not documenting a career—we’re distorting it.

Just my two cents—well, more like two dollars, given inflation. Spanishcheese31 (talk) 11:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why would the decision to include or not include a controversy relate to an article's length? If they are only notable for a controversy, the article should be deleted per WP:ONEEVENT, otherwise the controversy is just as notable as other reporting on the subject. Consider this article, similar topic, the single controversy even gets an entire section, due to being covered more in depth by third party sources. It sucks if that is what people find when they google your name, but wikipedia is not someone's PR agency. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 10:57, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask you, why the controversy is essential to understanding her career?

Your comparison to another article doesn’t change this fundamental issue. Some topics may warrant an entire controversy section because the incident was central to the individual’s legacy. But if a subject has a long and diverse body of work, yet their article disproportionately highlights a single controversy, we aren’t serving neutrality—we’re amplifying selectivity.

As for Wikipedia not being a PR agency, that cuts both ways. It’s not meant to be a gotcha archive either. The goal isn’t to memorialize every misstep with equal weight but to provide a balanced and encyclopedic view. If an article is short, then yes, even a small controversy section can become disproportionate—not in terms of word count but in overall impact on how the subject is perceived.

The principle of due weight requires more than just checking if multiple sources exist. It involves contextual fairness—ensuring that coverage reflects the significance of an event in relation to the subject’s entire career per WP:ONEEVENT.

Wikipedia is not a tabloid. Spanishcheese31 (talk) 13:53, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a tabloid, but the three sources cited are not tabloids either. That passage is the best-sourced passage in the entire article, and it is not disproportionate. You have yet to explain how this one single event should not be mentioned, besides pointing at UNDUE. How was the event not all that important, if it is so well sourced? Drmies (talk) 14:41, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]